The Last Astronauts to Fly to Hubble Talk About Their Wild Mission - <AUTHOR> http://www.wired.com/2014/12/sts-125-hubble-mission/ <comment><USER2> "He heard the clicking of the torque limiter, but the bolt wasn't moving. " I thought they were on space walks, not in the pressurized cargo bay.</comment>


IPhone Development: My Experience - <AUTHOR> http://www.slaterjohn.com/iphone-development-my-experience-b-72.html <comment><USER2> I just made a similar step. My first app is yet to be approved (it got rejected because I accidentally covered the Google Logo in the Google Maps API), but my opportunities for contracting work have skyrocketed (namely, I went from no work to more than I can handle alone). It's a bubble for sure, but as a poor student, I'm ok with some supplementary income. Especially since professional iOS devs charge so much, it's creating a nice niche for college students willing to work for less than $150/hour.</comment>


Bouncing back from losing $20 million - <AUTHOR> http://www.texasstartupblog.com/2008/08/04/layerone/

<comment><USER2> The main problem we had was lack of capital to fund our expansion. We were in a catch-22 at the time. Our investors didn't want to give us additional capital until we had leased the 'hard-to-get' spaces within popular telco- hotels around the country. The landlords didn't want to lease us space until we had the money to build out the spaces (typically $10MM per location). By July 2001 we had more than $1,000,000 in monthly lease payments for spaces we didn't have the funds to complete. It was a nightmare. Once we filed Chapter 11 we were able to immediately reject the leases that we had not built out. By cutting heads from around 60 to 16 I think and keeping only our profitable or breakeven facilities we were cashflow neutral almost immediately. It took a couple of months and we became profitable. Of course, it was easy without the leases.

At the end of the day, if I knew that I would ONLY have $20MM to build my business I could have done a great job. The problem was that I thought I was going to have $120MM to build it - I built an infrastructure to support a $100MM business, not a $20MM. Does this make sense?

</comment><comment><USER3> Give me $20 million to invest at the blackjack table. When I lose, you eat the cost. When I win, I get 2%.

</comment><comment><USER4> Enjoyable, but I wonder what changed about the business: how was it nonviable without a huge funding round in 2000, but then only viable with significant cutbacks from 2001 on?</comment>


Training Your Brain So That You Don't Need Reading Glasses (2017) - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/27/upshot/training-your-brain-so-that-you-dont-need-reading-glasses.html <comment><AUTHOR> There are presbyopia convergence exercises, no app required, the PDF can be printed or stored on your phone. Once you can fuse the images at a given distance, move the image closer to your nose and repeat: [http://www.robert- silverman.net/presbeninst.htm](http://www.robert- silverman.net/presbeninst.htm)

You can also use a "Brock String" (available on Amazon and elsewhere): [http://www.yourfamilyclinic.com/ND/vision/brock.html](http://www.yourfamilyclinic.com/ND/vision/brock.html), _" One of the most important pieces of equipment for vision exercises when working on convergence is the Brock String. It offers instant feedback to the participant if their eyes are working together to focus on an object at various distances. Children with reading problems or who are slow readers often have problems with convergence."_ Video: [https://youtube.com/watch?v=71o20wyPsR0](https://youtube.com/watch?v=71o20wyPsR0)

<comment><USER4> I learned to cross my eyes way back in the mid nineties during the "3d poster" craze (and man those posters were amazing, zo SO much better than the crap images found on the web). I remember they sold them in the tube in London, in gorgeous color and the depth was fantastic.

But anyway... do we know that convergence actually helps vision? How so? What is backing this up?

<comment><AUTHOR> We know that poor convergence affects near vision. Presbyopia also affects near vision. Are convergence and presbyopia related? Should you ask the person trying to sell you a pair of expensive progressive lenses?

[http://www.convergenceinsufficiency.org/](http://www.convergenceinsufficiency.org/)

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

[http://www.strabismus.org/](http://www.strabismus.org/)

The exercises are easy to try and have almost immediate (temporary) positive effect. They work for some people. There isn't an economic incentive to fund studies to determine why they don't work in others, since this could hurt various revenue streams. Standard big pharma vs. wellness dilemma. However, video game software subscriptions for vision therapy may change incentives.

<comment><USER5> [http://www.strabismusworld.com/](http://www.strabismusworld.com/)

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

And also, I'd like to point your attention to Aniseikonia, an EXTREMELY underdiagnosed issue:

[http://www.opticaldiagnostics.com/info/aniseikonia.html](http://www.opticaldiagnostics.com/info/aniseikonia.html)

Neither clinical neuro-ophthalmology, nor orthoptists, nor optometricians, nor opticians, commonly have the equipment to test this, let alone know about it. (I had to literally have a lens kit dusted off in my case. One that nobody besides one entire person in the city knew about besides me.)

And the fact that one must consider the current distance and measuring equipment used for vision tests insufficient:

[http://www.tedmontgomery.com/the_eye/acuity.html](http://www.tedmontgomery.com/the_eye/acuity.html)

To quote:

"Traditionally, optical infinity has been accepted to be 20 feet or, approximately, 6 meters. However, at this distance, there is an accommodative demand on the eye of about 1/6 D (one-sixth of a diopter). This amount of accommodative demand can be significant for some people. For very discriminating observers (such as myself), an accommodative fluctuation during an eye examination of more than 1/8 D can result in a variable endpoint in measuring a person's refractive error (resulting in an imprecise lens prescription), and 1/6 D is even greater than 1/8 D.

As a result, it is recommended that the viewing distance (d) in an examination room should be great enough to create no more than a 1/8 D accommodative demand on any patient's eyes. I maintain, then, that optical infinity, for purposes of examining the refractive error of the human eye, is at least 8 meters or 26¼ feet, rather than merely 6 meters or 20 feet."

This combines with the fact that that the human eye experiences "accommodative microfluctuations" which have a range of about 0,5 diopters (aka ±0,25 diopter), and it does so __even at true optical infinity __.

This then makes any assessment done without cycloplegia problematic, but assessment under cycloplegia also has its issues:

There exists a dissertation from a German Technical University (Well, "Fachhochschule", look the term up if you have an obsession with detail like I do) that beyond the shadow of a doubt proves that Schack-Hartmann sensor based Wavefront aberrometers can and will do better than humans when measuring the ideal prescription for a human eye. However, this dissertation, even as good as it was (they had a huge sample size and accounted for damn near everything), has several limitations and also points several problems out, and in addition to these, I'll add a few ones I've observed myself and that one can find in the literature (this is from memory and reading a lot of the literature, but keep in mind I can't find the original paper [in German] anymore, and some of this comes from other papers):

1\. The default setting of most wavefront aberrometers defaults to 3 eye measurement cycles per eye measurement. However, the study found quite clearly that at this setting, a wavefront aberrometers will very often do worse than an experienced human optometrist or orthoptist, even if they do account for the distance problem I described above, which nearly all of them don't. A 5 measurement cycles however elevate the wavefront

2\. Most wavefront aberrometers lack the capability to do a proper measurement of a fully dilated pupil as they expect a maximum pupil dilation of about 5mm, which is ridiculously tiny

3\. Wavefront aberrometers cannot compensate for deeply (or at all) cramped cilliary muscles, an extremely common issue

4a. To get a dilated pupil, one must apply a mydriasic (i.e. pupil dilating) agent such as cyclopentolate.

4b. To get a relaxed cilliary muscle, one must apply a cycloplegic (i.e. cilliary mucscle paralyzing) agent such as cyclopentolate.

5\. Most wavefront aberrometer measurements occur in the office of an optician, who legally may not dispense cycloplegic & mydriasic eye drops (such as cyclopentolate).

6\. This is a good thing, because cyclopentolate is an muscarinic antagonist. Normally relatively harmless, when given to people with various atypical neurological features such as for example some of (but not all of) those exhibited by some of (but not all of those) those diagnosed with schizophrenia, it can lead to acute psychosis.

7\. The above seems doubly unfortunate because schizophrenia seems to have an - extremely little researched - link to the previously mentioned Aniseikonia: [http://www.schizo-binoc.de/](http://www.schizo-binoc.de/) [Personally, I think some of the hypotheses on the neurological mechanisms of this link as offered by Hildegard Korn seem whack, but if you look at purely her quite empirical - albeit possibly anecdotal - data, you'll see that the pattern she describes along with the formal errors in commonly used diagnostical procedures she outlines quite flawlessly do add up to something and could probably get easily explained, in terms of neurological mechanisms behind the observed biophysics, by a more respectable theory on the neurological mechanisms behind it.)

And then there's the whole patent lockdown between all the big glasses manufacturers, but I cba to continue typing this out.

I truly despise the optical and ophthalmological industry. They still haven't heard Sue Barry's message although she's shouting it with all the force she can muster.

<comment><USER6> I've recently developed intermittent vertical diplopia (double vision) - <USER2> will happen out of the blue and last for a few minutes (closing eyes and relaxing seems to clear it up). I've been trying to wear my reading glasses more often and also when on the computer and it seems to have largely cleared up, but it still happens now and then. Do you think it's safe to consider it problem solved or should I be looking into it more? Went for an eye exam and she said everything was fine.

<comment><USER7> Do you have bouts of doubled vision with only one eye open? If so, that is likely astigmatism which can be temporary.

<comment><USER6> No, closing either eye clears it up thankfully.

<comment><USER7> Actually, lack of stereo synchronization can be more serious than astigmatism which is usually an optically correctable condition.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Hey, this is really cool to see natural eyesight topic on the hacker news.

I practice this for more than 10 years. Each day I work with computer for ~10 h., drive a car and do other things, and never wear glasses, even though the traditional ophtalmologic measures clearly indicate that I need strong glasses and I shouldn't see even the biggest letter on the Snellen chart, but I see not only the biggest, but sometimes even the 20/20.

Doctors can't explain this, and only congrats me on my achievement. Of course, the eyesight is not perfect. I see clearly in the daytime, but in the nighttime or low light conditions it becomes much harder to distinguish faces.

The best book I found so far is "Relearning to See" by Thomas R. Quackenbush. The originator of this theory was William Bates.

Actually, there is no clear unified theory on how to achieve this. Everyone interprets it differently and the results are inconsistent. There is also a lot of criticism from the medical establishment.

Natural eyesight improvement really works. And the unified theory, in a form of an app, or a good book, maybe including findings from neuroplasticity, would be a great gift for humanity.

<comment><USER9> I can say that I have negative 4 dioptri for sure (confirmed multiple times, contacts prescription is for this). Yet I can see street signs better than my friends with negative 2. I often asked eye doctors how this is possible and they don't seem to have a good answer. But that's what it is.

I also have trouble with low constrast settigs and nighttime, vs daytime. I think it may have something to do with the brain recognizing small things even if the image coming in is blurry, and it uses high contrast to do it. That's my guess.

But does Bates method really work, or is it all just placebo effect?

<comment><USER8> Actually, I don't even do any eye exercises.

Maybe this sounds to good to be true, but the main principle is that this natural eyesight improvement is not about exercises, but about re-learning the natural seeing habits.

When you re-learn to see things in a natural way (without strain, without fixation), you then see things clearly 24 h/day without any exercises.

It's all about habits, not exercises.

<comment><USER8> The exercises are needed only as long as you are in the process of re-learning the natural seeing habits.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I would be curious to know if anyone here who suffers from these issues finds my startup's software [1] to be helpful. We launched (on HN, as it happens) as a speed-reading tool, but we've heard from many people with binocular vision difficulties, including convergence insufficiency, amblyopia and presbyopia, that our approach makes reading easier.

Obviously this isn't a training tool like the ones mentioned in the article, but I'd be curious if it eases reading for folks who are affected by these issues. Also, if there are any vision professionals here, I'd love to hear expert opinions too.

1: [http://www.beelinereader.com](http://www.beelinereader.com)

<comment><USER11> I just spent 5 minutes (on my Samsung phone) trying to download the app from the link you provided. I clicked on the Chrome icon, the Android icon, and one or two others. The only one that seemed to work was the Firefox icon. But I don't use Firefox, so I gave up.

<comment><USER10> Yeah, it's confusing but our Chrome extension is only for desktop. This is because mobile Chrome doesn't support extensions, unfortunately. But thanks for the reminder that we need to make this clearer.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> This was a big thing in Soviet Russia. The thing is, to show good results required 1 - 2 hours of work per day. The author of this article notes that he, too, put in 1.5 hours a Day.

No credible study I have found has supported meaningful benefits when used the way real people are likely to: for 10-15m/d a few times a week, at best.

<comment><AUTHOR> A more realistic approach is to incorporate short exercises for a few minutes when taking a break from close-up computer usage. You should be taking a break every 20 minutes.

<comment><USER12> Yes, that would be realistic. But that hasn't been shown to work.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I remember Aaron Swartz telling me about his interest in eye exercises for myopia (not just presbyopia).

[http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/001083](http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/001083)

I'm pretty sure there's another blog post of his that goes further into the substance than this one, but I didn't immediately find it. (Other references, including one I wrote a few years ago, suggest he once thought the mechanism by which it could help had to do with oxygen levels rather than muscle development.) Does anyone know if this has been supported by clinical research?

<comment><USER14> More about it: [http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/000432](http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/000432)

<comment><USER15> "I hope to continue this practice whenever I have time to spare or take a break. I'm sure I'll report on my findings here."

Did he ever report his findings? This was posted in 2002, so I would expect (if successful in this important discovery) a larger publication by him finding results later on?

<comment><AUTHOR> Aaron's method has been refined by several people:

[https://gettingstronger.org/2016/03/faq-for-vision- improveme...](https://gettingstronger.org/2016/03/faq-for-vision-improvement- by-hormetism/)

[http://endmyopia.org/active-focus-links/](http://endmyopia.org/active-focus- links/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> There are also vision exercises on youtube:

[https://www.youtube.com/user/VisualExercises](https://www.youtube.com/user/VisualExercises)

It is totally possible to improve your ability to focus visually using these. Just doing them on occasion, or once a day for a few minutes can be enough to counter the negative effects of staring at a screen all day.

<comment><USER17> Wow. Thanks! Just one minute of each of the seven exercises has improved my vision to the point where I no longer need my 1.0 reading glasses to read hacker news on my iPhone 7+. The improved vision seems to be lasting at least a few minutes. Perhaps there's truth to the "use it or lose it" theory of vision?

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> "By middle age, the lenses in your eyes harden, becoming less flexible"

Do they harden for a specific reason? Any research underway on how to unharden them? A few drops of something?

[UPDATE]

I did a little research and found that Novartis bought a company that's working on a drug:

EVO6 - <USER3>

[https://www.novartis.com/news/media-releases/novartis- bolste...](https://www.novartis.com/news/media-releases/novartis-bolsters- ophthalmology-pipeline-through-acquisition-encore-vision-inc)

<comment><USER19> It might have something to do with a lack of vitamins/minerals, as for most things. Plus, as you get older, your absorption of vitamins/minerals is weaker, too, so you'd need more, even if you consumed the right amount of everything every day (most likely you did not, because it's impossible to get everything your body needs just from food ever day).

[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3693724/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3693724/)

[http://www.lifeextension.com/Protocols/Eye-Ear/Eye- Health/Pa...](http://www.lifeextension.com/Protocols/Eye-Ear/Eye- Health/Page-01)

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> Perhaps this is related: why is it that for several minutes sometimes after I have been practicing music, my eyes refuse to focus. This only happens when playing by ear, not when reading sheet music. And it doesn't seem to matter if I'm watching my hands or closing my eyes. Is part of my brain shutting down to give another part more capability?...

The effect can last from a minute to 15 minutes sometimes, and it only happens after playing music.

<comment><AUTHOR> Eyesynth ([https://eyesynth.com/media/?lang=en](https://eyesynth.com/media/?lang=en)) has done research on using sound fields to convey topological information to blind people. I don't have details, but they have done MRI studies and it appears that parts of the visual cortex are being retasked to process the audio signals.

<comment><USER21> That is so cool! I had thought of a similar system for blind people but someone had actually went out and built it already. I wish I could look at their source code as it seems like they are doing some really cool stuff under the hood

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> > "Neuroplasticity — the ability of the brain's processing functions to change > to acquire new skills — is most strongly associated with childhood. It's > still more pronounced in children than adults, but for some skills, > including vision, the brain is more malleable than once thought."

I'm reading the book "The Brain that Changes Itself." I'm not sure if it's The Best book on neuroplasticity, as it's 10+ years old. But I'm finding it very fascinating and am comfortable recommending it for those interested in a deep dive.

[http://www.normandoidge.com/?page_id=1259](http://www.normandoidge.com/?page_id=1259)

<comment><USER23> Oliver Sacks (in The Man Who Mistook His Wife for a Hat) also tells a great story of a blind patient with Cerebral Palsy that was so babied that she never acquired use of her hands. She had been carried everywhere and had everything done for her. She called her hands "useless lumps of dough". At 60 years old he and his team managed to get her to use her hands; she ended up going through all the infant stages of hand use _. Despite being 60 and never having used them she was able to become a sculptor, feed herself, etc. He thought it might be a one-off but he ran into another patient with a similar situation (babied, unable to use his hands his entire life) who also acquired the ability to use them.

There is a reduction in neuroplasticity with age but there is more and more evidence that it is a smaller reduction than once though and a lot of the supposed reduction is due to attitude, expectations, and technique.

_ There have also been fairly recent studies with kids and adults born blind who receive surgery to correct the problem later on in life. Not being infants, they don't naturally learn how to build up a system of vision. It was long thought that acquiring vision after early childhood was impossible but that turns out not to be true either. It requires intense therapy to walk the person through the infant stages of learning: detecting shapes, matching colors, learning about edges, inside vs outside, recognizing people vs objects, learning faces, etc. Eventually reasonably decent vision can be achieved. We appear to be primed as infants to learn these things automatically so we never really think about how much work it is.

<comment><USER22> Yes. This is the crux of the book. That is, the brain can adapt and age isn't a factor, most of the time. An exception, for example, is language. It is more difficult for an adult to learn a new language. Not impossible, obviously. Just far more difficult because some parts of the brain are less plastic.

FWIW I've been reading it as a form of self-help book, sorta. That is, knowing how the brain works how best can I unlearn things. One of the takeaways so far is that to ditch an old unwanted habit you'd improve your odds if you replace it (and not just try to avoid it).

Also, the book emphasizes "use it or lose it." That's actually not entirely accurate. He gives numerous examples that are closer to "use it or it will be taken away." That is, brain cells (neurons) in proximity to the unused will slowly creep in and reclaim the unused for something else. Stop using your hand don't "lose it". You literally take away those neurons from yourself for something else.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> In other words he's not improving his vision, but getting better at reading out of focus text.

<comment><USER25> Also as someone who has the issue themselves, you get better at reading out of focus text just by reading out of focus text. Although I have not tried the technique in the article I'm sceptical it would do much better. There are also limits to how well you can correct blurry images with any software or brain processes.

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> I am 40, with myopia. It is still unclear to me whether it makes sense to correct it with laser; and how this is going to affect my vision for the next... 60 years (I am an optimist!).

I've heard that laser (or lasic?) is essentially an unrelated decision to what happens to your eyes after age 40-45. But so far the three specialists I've spoken to over the last few years have given me conflicting opinions.

<comment><USER27> I've heard that having lasik can increase one's glare sensitivity. That is, it may make driving at night more difficult due to glare from the headlamps of other vehicles.

<comment><USER28> I have some glare at night post Lasik, but it is similar the glare I had from constantly scratched/abraised glasses. A wash for me in that department. The better than 20/20 vision however is a total win for me.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> As an almost-44 year old I find this to be very interesting. I don't know if I am really willing to commit to the full regimen, but I can feel my vision slipping a little every year. I'm pretty sure at my next appointment I won't be able to do 20/20 or better, it was a near thing at my last appointment a few years back. I really don't want glasses -- I wore them growing up and I _loathe_ them. Kids are jerks and I suffered enough abuse for having glasses that I'm irrationally opposed to ever wearing them again. Anything that can delay the inevitable is a huge win IMO.

<comment><USER30> Too late for you, but schools are full of kids with glasses now and all the pairs I've seen are seriously cool. I've heard kids asking parents if they could have a pair. It might be just the early levels of schooling, but at that level at least, there is no stigma.

<comment><USER31> Glasses may be chic, but corrective eyewear is a pain. Glasses need cleaning, can constantly slide off your nose if they don't fit right, and if you require them for driving you're screwed if they're broken or lost. Contacts aren't much better. Every Christmas various family members ask about a contacts case or solution (we now have a large stash). Both also suck for outdoor activities like surfing, camping, etc. It is much better than not being able to see. (As an aside, I'm curious if people who don't wear corrective eyewear are more likely to wear sunglasses?)

I feel like I've seen more people wearing glasses with fake lenses.

<comment><USER32> > corrective eyewear is a pain

In HN fashion, I'm afraid I have to proffer an alternative, contrary perspective. :)

I've worn glasses almost all my life. I do not find it remotely inconvenient, and if anything adds points to my perceived intelligence, an advantage that I find extremely useful in many social circumstances.

1) Glasses don't have to be cleaned that much (just a bit of soap and water during a shower suffices). Almost no one I know uses solution for glasses.

2) They never slide off your nose (if they do, they were incorrectly fitted).

3) They hardly ever break and/or get lost if you wear them all the time. Most frames are designed to be tough yet flexible. I only replace my glasses once every 2-3 years to get an updated prescription, and never because the frame broke or anything like that.

4) They are no impediments to surfing/camping or even swimming if you use straps. I've never had trouble being active with glasses on. Billie Jean King played tennis with glasses.

<comment><USER31> It sounds like you're just saying, "it's not too much of a pain."

The straps weren't the problem for me with swimming or camping, it was keeping the lenses clean and having a spot to keep them from getting crushed or scratched (the hard cases are bulky and tend to break after a year).

Glasses got way more annoying after having a young kid. They're his favorite toy and he has easy access when you hold him.

<comment><USER32> > It sounds like you're just saying, "it's not too much of a pain."

Yep.

But from the sound of it, I'm guessing you only wear glasses part-time, so perhaps much of what I said may not track your experiences.

Us full-time wearers of glasses don't tend to carry hard cases -- those get stashed away as soon as we get home from the optometrists. Our glasses are always on, except when showering and sleeping.

Babies love to pull glasses off your face. I've had to train myself to monitor and avoid grabs. Some babies are fast though.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> I have to try this. I did some eye exercises about 3-4 years back called Trataka. No scientific evidence of it's benefits whatsoever but I had nothing to lose. A few minutes of gazing a candle in a dark room. I have worn glasses from age 10 and the only time my eye power went down was when I was doing this Trataka. Now I have terrible eyesight, long sightedness + presbyopia, can't read without glasses. May be there is something to these unscientifically proven methods. It is a pain to find a totally pitch dark room in modern cities. Light creeps in from everywhere.

</comment><comment><USER34> His last paragraph shows how strongly app prices are anchored to $0.99. He describes how he used the app for tens or hundreds of hours and saw life- changing benefits. The training seemed to take 10 years off his eyes, maybe enough to delay reading glasses for years.

Then he writes:

> As apps go, GlassesOff is not cheap. I paid $24.99 for three months of use — > long enough to get me through the initial program. Upon completion, I was > invited to pay another $59.99 per year for maintenance training.

<comment><USER35> The key phrase here is "as apps go". I have never paid $25 for an app, and neither have most people. This pie chart sucks but it seems to imply that < 5% of apps are $19 or more: [http://blog.scottlogic.com/2014/03/20/app-store- analysis.htm...](http://blog.scottlogic.com/2014/03/20/app-store- analysis.html)

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> Since repetitive mental effort changes the brain, wouldn't the general decline in neuroplasticity itself be reversible if one put time and effort into learning and exercising new and different things?

It seems to me that as we age, we spend less mental energy on processing and analyzing new information and more energy on pattern matching and end-of- pattern refinement. It's an optimization of thinking which allows us to get more done quickly, but it means we strengthen the skills of, well, pattern matching and optimization rather than on gathering and processing broadly.

However, I don't understand how any mental effort can reverse a hardening of a physical material (lens). Maybe it allows us to process visual data based on different rules, such as how the right kinds of image processing can make sense of images that are totally "out of focus".

<comment><AUTHOR> There are various theories about the causes of decreased accomodation in presbyopia, hardening of the lens being one. Other possible factors are axial elongation and ciliary muscles, e.g. [https://emedicine.medscape.com/article/1219573-overview#show...](https://emedicine.medscape.com/article/1219573-overview#showall)

Like many things age-related, you want to be doing vision therapy _before_ there is irreversible damage. Use it or lose it. Since the decrease in accomodation is gradual, vision therapy can be done before reading glasses are strictly needed, at the current accomodation limit.

Behavioral optometrists take a holistic view: [http://www.mccrodanvision.com/vision-development- education-c...](http://www.mccrodanvision.com/vision-development-education- centre/what-is-developmental-or-behavioural-optometry/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER36> Anything for long distance vision? I noticed since I bought my first smartphone 3 years ago my eyesight has gotten worse.

Of course it could be age related, but glasses aren't in my family and my friends would ask me to read distant signs because I always saw furthest.

<comment><AUTHOR> Probably best to get an eye exam.

Read about ciliary spasm: [http://endmyopia.org/the-ciliary-pop-a-simple- trick-for-heal...](http://endmyopia.org/the-ciliary-pop-a-simple-trick-for- healthy-eyes/)

More info on eye health & computers/smartphones: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16146106](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16146106)

</comment></comment><comment><USER37> This related item got flagged off the front page back in November: [http://www.instructables.com/id/Eye-training- system](http://www.instructables.com/id/Eye-training-system)

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15631074](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15631074)

[http://hnrankings.info/15631074](http://hnrankings.info/15631074)

Unfortunately "Hacker News Transparency" is 500-ing. [https://hn.0x2237.club](https://hn.0x2237.club)

</comment><comment><USER38> Learning to deconvolve?

<comment><USER39> I went for several years without glasses for nearsightedness, which I needed pretty badly. The first day I put my prescription glasses on, there was a strange halo around anything with high contrast, like where a dark mountain meets the sky. It looked exactly like an artifact from this. It faded within 10 minutes or so.

There was an interesting page, maybe 15 years ago, that was experimenting with this method for vision correction when reading text on a display. I can't find it on Google anymore, but it was really neat, with working example images that became clearer when you would blur your eyes. From what I remember, poor contrast was the biggest issue, since you can't have negative light.

<comment><AUTHOR> MIT and UC Berkeley announced some work on vision-correcting displays in 2014, but nothing since.

[https://www.technologyreview.com/s/529191/prototype- display-...](https://www.technologyreview.com/s/529191/prototype-display-lets- you-say-goodbye-to-reading-glasses/)

[https://www.computerworld.com/article/2490626/emerging- techn...](https://www.computerworld.com/article/2490626/emerging- technology/vision-correcting-display-nixes-your-need-for-eyeglasses.html)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER40> Can anyone tell me if it's viable to use "collimator glasses" so eyes would be focused on infinity when using computer monitor? VR headsets use collimators.

<comment><USER41> Yes. This is exactly what reading glasses are. If you want to do it on the cheap, just go to a drug store and get a pair of weak reading glasses.

Otherwise, go to an optometrist and complain of eyestrain at a computer. You'll end up spending a few hundred dollars.

</comment></comment><comment><USER35> As a young person that cherishes his good vision, is there anything I can do to ward of presbyopia?

</comment><comment><USER42> Definitely interesting; I wonder how LASIK and PRK fit into the picture.

</comment><comment><USER43> So, I never post on here - but this made me very curious about whether anyone else here reads with one eye?

I'm 26 and have been reading with one eye closed for a long time. It seems like that would mean presbyopia wouldn't affect me, so perhaps doing exercises to read with one eye would also be a viable approach to overcoming the condition without using reading glasses.

<comment><USER44> I do something similar, when reading stuff around 15 feet (typically text on TV screens). In my case, it's because I have one long-sighted eye and one short-sighted (so I use one for close-up stuff like reading and the other for far stuff like driving, while effectively ignoring input from the other). In the cross-over zone, it's easier to close one eye than to let them compete for dominance.

<comment><AUTHOR> Are your eyes naturally like that, or are you wearing monovision contacts, [https://www.eyehealthweb.com/monovision/](https://www.eyehealthweb.com/monovision/)?

<comment><USER44> Naturally, always been like it. I got some glasses back in my 20's to correct it, but the effect was to put _everything_ into the zone where each eye would struggle for dominance (maybe I should have persisted, to see if my neural circuitry would eventually adapt and give me binocular vision).

Interesting link to monovision, thanks! That's pretty much describes where I am - entirely by chance.

<comment><AUTHOR> Take a look at Sue Barry's notes on Frederick Brock's work on binocular vision, [http://www.stereosue.com/brocks-lecture-notes-on- strabismus-...](http://www.stereosue.com/brocks-lecture-notes-on- strabismus-3/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER45> Traditional Yoga contains a set of exercises for the muscles surrounding the eye. Many problems seem to be caused in part by constantly focusing on the same distance/angle; which leads to lack of muscle tone, which in turn affects eye sight.

</comment><comment><USER46> It's clear now that the physical changes (deterioration) in the eye correlates to insufficient UV exposure. So that's a good place to start, particularly if you're young. Sunseekers live longer, too.

<comment><USER47> You are thinking of myopia. The article is about presbyopia. They are quite different.

The eye has a range in which it can focus. Myopia is a shift of the range due to the shape of the eye, while presbyopia is a shrinking of the range due to hardening of the lens.

                     zero        infinity
        </comment></comment><comment></comment><comment>--|</comment><comment></comment><comment>-|</comment><comment></comment><comment>--
        </comment><comment></comment><comment>----|            |</comment><comment></comment><comment>- < normal focus range
        ----|            |</comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment>- < range of myope
        </comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment>----| |</comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment> < range of presbyope

Only some people get myopia. _Everyone_ gets presbyopia.

<comment><USER46> Both are collagen disorders, both seem to correlate to UV light exposure (lack of same.) Do drop a study citation if you know of a study showing otherwise, I'd be most interested.

<comment><USER47> On the contrary, I'm not aware of any evidence for UV providing protection against presbyopia (though I haven't done extensive research). This article seems to suggest the opposite. [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/2677104/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/2677104/)

<comment><USER46> You may have flipped the meaning, or it's more complex. The abstract is unclear. To quote: "Of all factors reported to affect the onset of presbyopia, UVR has the most scientific support..." Of course, if this is similar to other effects, such as longevity, intermittent UV exposure will be harmful, and constant exposure helpful.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


CircleCI and Snapcraft: Everything You Need to Know - <AUTHOR> https://circleci.com/blog/circleci-and-snapcraft/ <comment><USER2> Article:

> The Snapcraft CLI snapcraft works extremely well in Ubuntu. However, if > you're trying to build snaps in other distros, a lot more work can be > involved

snap website:

> Snaps are containerised software packages that are simple to create and > install. They auto-update and are safe to run. And because they bundle their > dependencies, they work on all major Linux systems without modification.

Hmm, sounds like the usual "works on my (ubuntu) machine"

<comment><USER3> When you're creating a snap (using Snapcraft), at the moment, you have to use Ubuntu or something like Docker (although this will change soon).

Installing snaps works fine on any major Linux distro.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Is it OK to publish your YC application before submitting it? - <AUTHOR>

I am considering to post my YC application online to promote some useful discussion of my product in development, however I fear that it may be against some YC policy (i.e. maybe I can get automatically refused just because I get it published before YC sees it).<p>Are my fears grounded? <comment><USER2> As far I'm aware no.</comment>


The One Question to Ask Developers Before You Make a Hire Decision - <AUTHOR> http://thinkingcollective.com/2015/07/14/the-one-question-to-ask-developers-before-you-make-a-hire-decision/ <comment><USER3> What about young developers who haven't done any side projects, just trying to skill up at their company or spent all their time graduating?

What about older developers who worked before Github and so had their own projects dissolved to obscurity?

What about developers who don't do side projects but give 120% to the company product, even at home? (Some of us actually enjoy working on the products we build during the day :D )

You'll get exactly the same mileage by just asking the potential hire to tell you about something they built - full stop. You'll be able to gauge passion, if they actually did the work, how it solves a problem. You just won't be able to play with it, but I suspect the minimum of side projects is in any case live, and more about scratching an itch.

And even with non-disclosure agreements etc they'll be able to tell you enough of the technology to be able to make a call.

<comment><AUTHOR> "What about developers who don't do side projects but give 120% to the company product, even at home?"

Excellent point! I would hope that would be the response to the question... It would still provide the value the question seeks.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I've built up a solid work-life balance with an amazing girlfriend, a wide variety of interesting (and close) friends, and some cool hobbies. I'm content with not being considered by employers who don't respect that.

</comment><comment><USER5> I've been a paid, professional software developer since 1995. In all of that time, I've been between jobs for a total of 4 weeks. And during all of that time, I've had employment contracts that said my work was for-hire, and the company owned all of the software that I wrote, even on my own computer on my own time.

So, the answer to your question is, I haven't written anything I can legally describe to you without permission, since 1995.

Is that seriously the ONLY question you want to ask me?

<comment><AUTHOR> Your description of the companies you worked for - tell me a lot. Not that you are not a great developer, but the types of employers you like and filter you use to select your next job - that too is important.

<comment><USER5> So then the title should be "One of the Questions..."

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> /me sighs

Come _on_. Isn't this getting old for anyone else? Do you check if your dentist goes to dentist meetups, or extracts teeth in his spare time? All you're doing with this question is asking "are you one of us".

<comment><USER7> Yes I definitely do check if my dentist go to conferences, presents or teaches.

Ever since a dentist fucked up and caused me a lot of pain and to spend a lot of money to fix the damage, I've become very careful about how I chose health care professionals. And while I don't know enough about dentistry to judge seeing a dentist go to conference documents himself on the newest techniques and teach or present at conferences is a good signal to find out if he is good.

There are people who are passionate about what they do and they are people who don't care all that much in almost every case the passionate ones will be better.

<comment><USER8> You missed the important part of that statement, the "in their spare time".

Learning and practicing on the job is one thing, expecting it in the remaining 1/3 of your life is too much.

<comment><AUTHOR> If you LOVE something - you do it in your "spare" time. That was the core of my point. I will take a dentist, butcher, developer who LOVES their work in such a way that the line between work and fun is blurred over someone who is working for the weekend - any day!

You can be a fine developer who just clocks in and out. But if I had a choice (and sometime I don't). I would choose the guy who loves what they do and does it in their "spare" time.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> "It would be useful to keep a diary, but I don't like writing unpaid. I don't like writing checks without getting paid."

— Christopher Hitchens, 2010

I understand the rationale behind asking what you've built without being paid, but if you're hoping, by that question, to identify people who are really smart ... then isn't it really smart to figure out how to get paid for your work, rather than doing it unpaid?

<comment><AUTHOR> That is why I don't ask for "open source" contributions. Ideally, the candidate built their project to make money!

Christopher Hitchens- "Long describing himself as a socialist and a Marxist..." [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Hitchens](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Hitchens)

I am a hardcore capitalist so he need not apply for my gigs :-)

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> In my experience interviewing candidates, cultural fit largely outweighs other technical merits. I try to keep this in mind when I'm asked for my opinion.

While the questions in this article appear biased towards a 60/40 work/life balance, I would say they're spot on in detecting a very specific cultural fit. If nothing else, these questions would get a candidate talking. They're a little on the aggressive side for my interviewing style, but I imagine they're quite effective.

Keep in mind, the job candidate should also be interviewing the company. If someone were to ask me what unpaid work I have done in the past, I would consider the cultural ramifications of the question. In this case, I would need to be okay with an aggressive internal culture.

Come to think of it, it's important to realize that when you interview candidates you may very well be the first impression of the company. Articles like these offer a glance of a company/interviewer without having to go through the trouble of applying.

I would really like to find a way to study the effectiveness of interviewing styles. I wonder what metrics would even apply?

<comment><AUTHOR> Great comments! I agree. A number of commenters have said, I would not want to work for a company like that and I think that is good. Who wants to take a job to, only 6 months later, realize they did not like the culture.

However, the point about 60/40 work life balance is not 100% accurate.

I am constantly reading Product Management literature not for work - <USER2> because I love it. I am finishing the Disney Biography because I love learning about leadership styles. In other words, I do a job that complements my "spare" time activities... and ANYONE who manages that is a good hire.

This is not to say - go to these things FOR work - that is not the gal/guy I am looking for. You should not do things FOR work that you are not paid to do (that is not fair). But, if you love the work you do and that extends into your life - all the better.

<comment><USER10> My statement on the 60/40 work/life balance was a conclusion based on my own bias, which I forgot to specify.

Thank you for your feedback! You are correct that the best hires tend to pursue employment that complements their "spare time activities".

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> My answer to that question would be, when I am at work I give 120% of my effort to my job. I build skills and I do research the latest trends in the industry. However I believe a good work life balance is important. When I leave work, I spend quality time with my family and at the gym.

When I was looking for a job eight months ago. I had interviews with 10 different companies in the course of three weeks. I was not offered one job probably because of the attitude I expressed above. I accepted a job where the manager emphasized his belief in a work life balance.

It's a buyers market for qualified experienced software developers. I won't jumped through unnecessary hoops to get a job.

</comment><comment><USER12> > What are your interests?

> you don't care that they like cats – what you want to hear: they love their > hoodie and their code

Well, speak for yourself. I look for people with outside interests beyond just programming. If the only thing they have going for them is their code, their ego and emotions are way too wrapped up in what they produce. They can't take criticism about their work as well as someone who has other things going on in their life. I'm not saying passion is not valuable; it is, but there needs to be a balance.

I understand that hiring someone with no life or interests outside of code and your company is a great way to build a cult, but a great way to build a _company_ is by ensuring that it has a culture. That happens by hiring interesting people that have shared values _and_ outside interests.

<comment><USER13> It sounds like everything is just black and white for you too though.

I assure you that it's possible for someone to only have one great passion without being an egotistical narcissist.

<comment><AUTHOR> My hope that someone who is passionate - cares more about building the best product they can (than even I do). As a result, they should welcome "valid" criticism.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> The one question to ask interviewers: "Do you ever use the word 'passion' to refer to anything other than sex?"

...I'll make an exception for religious feelings too.

</comment><comment><USER15> This one weird trick to hiring great developers.

The manager asked the job candidate one question. You won't believe what happens next.

Startup hires an unemployed developer. The reason will shock you.

Sorry, I couldn't resist.

<comment><USER16> When I read #1? Wow.</comment></comment>


Engelbart's Dilemma: Design for Mass Adoption and You Get a Kazoo Not a Violin - <AUTHOR> http://web2.sys-con.com/read/536976.htm

<comment><USER2> Lower-noise version:

<http://web2.sys-con.com/read/536976_p.htm>

<comment><USER3> Thanks - that was the most annoying ad I have ever seen...

<comment><USER4> my god; how un-usable is that site? .. the odds of me bookmarking it 0% ;/

How much do ads have to pay; to convince you of alienating your users? .. sad. The ad space is more than the content space..

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> So... what's the maximum WPM one can achieve with this 5-finger piano keyboard thing? Of course, to be fair we'd probably have to double it if we were to compare it to that of a standard keyboard since it uses only one hand.

</comment><comment><USER6> Interesting article. I really want to try one of the 5 finger keyboards.

<comment><USER7> Various companies have tried to make five-finger chording keyboards over the years, but I have never seen one in person.

I strongly suspect that they don't really work very well. Hacking one together wouldn't be _that_ hard, and yet you never see anyone but the diehard wearable-computing hobbyists using them. (The wearables folks, of course, really _need_ the one-handed-typing feature.)

If they bought you so much as a 10% improvement you'd expect to find hobbyists using them and raving about them... just look at the adoption of Dvorak, or ask me about my awesome Kinesis keyboard.

The violin metaphor is a telling one: Despite their cost and the difficulty of learning to use them, violins and violinists aren't _that_ hard to find. People take the trouble to learn violin because it pays off. So if you invent the chorded keyboard and twenty years later nobody has adopted it, you have to ask yourself whether you've _really_ invented the equivalent of the violin. Perhaps you've invented the theremin instead: An instrument that is nigh- impossible to learn and that has no real repertoire beyond _Good Vibrations_ and late-night monster movie soundtracks.

<comment><USER8> Stenographers use chorded keyboards, but the demand for speed is much higher. I think the primary concern is that typing speed simply isn't the bottleneck for most users. The learning curve for a regular keyboard might level off earlier, but few really need typing speeds in excess of what's attainable on a keyboard.

What's surprising, though, is that nobody sells a chorded keyboard for cellphones.</comment></comment></comment>


API Authentication Examples in Swift and Java - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/h0n3yBadg3r/API-Authentication <comment><USER2> While this is easy to do, it is poorly documented. These examples are useful.

<comment><AUTHOR> I agree, API authentication is poorly documented. Good that these examples are useful to you.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Thanks, at some point I need to look into this for my project.

</comment><comment><USER4> Thanks, it is very useful and interesting stuff.

</comment><comment><USER5> Awesome service. Had fun playing with this.

</comment><comment><USER6> thanks... examples are useful...</comment>


'A Swiss cheese-like material' that can solve equations - <AUTHOR> https://penntoday.upenn.edu/news/penn-engineers-demonstrate-metamaterials-can-solve-equations <comment><USER2> This is pretty cool. I don't know the nature of the calculation performed, but if it's an integral that took say 1000 clock cycles on a single core 1Ghz digital computer, and if it's true that the meta-material will scale down 1 picosecond for the same calculation, then this is around a 1,000,000x speedup. Further, if you can create a set of say 100 integrators and differentiators into which you can decompose all your complicated math operations, then you have yourself a very very fast general purpose higher order math module.

<comment><USER3> Those 1000 clock cycles get you a perfect digital answer that is the same every time. This analog version gets you a faster answer with less accuracy and repeatability. This may be useful in some situations, but I would not call it general purpose.

<comment><USER2> I'm just speculating, but I don't see why you can't quantize the output electrically. I guess I'm suggesting a mixed mode system, where an electronic cpu sends an array of values to an optical system that performs a calculation and returns a result electronically.

<comment><USER3> Sure you can quantize the output but that is not going to help your accuracy. Today's Ghz CPU is 64bit, today's Ghz ADCs are 8 to 16bits. This gets you ~3 to ~5 decimal sig figs for analog and ~15.9 decimal sig figs for 64bit floating point. That's assuming your analog side is perfect, which is unlikely to say the least.

[http://www.ti.com/data-converters/adc-circuit/high- speed/rf-...](http://www.ti.com/data-converters/adc-circuit/high-speed/rf- sampling.html)

Also note the fast ones require 1+ watts per channel and cost $700+ each. Not cheap in power or in money.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Really reminds me of a special type of analog computer that wasn't mentioned, but was definitely used in old school engineering: using conductive paper to model all sorts of fields.

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

</comment><comment><USER5> Similar research using optical diffraction to build neural networks:

[https://arxiv.org/pdf/1804.08711.pdf](https://arxiv.org/pdf/1804.08711.pdf)

TWiML podcast of same: [https://twimlai.com/twiml-talk-237-deep-learning-in- optics-w...](https://twimlai.com/twiml-talk-237-deep-learning-in-optics-with- aydogan-ozcan/)

</comment><comment><USER6> Hey! I currently work on inverse design at the Nanoscale and Quantum Photonics lab [0], which is the approach the authors used in this paper.

If you have any questions (about the specifics of the paper, or, more generally, about the process), feel free to send them over :)

\---

[0] nqp.stanford.edu

<comment><USER3> How many sig figs can you get out of this microwave implementation?

In my experience trying to get RF measurements repeatable starts to become tricky at around 1% error. The dielectric constant of plastic parts changes constantly, capacitors age, etc. How sensitive is this device to temperature, humidity, barometric pressure, etc?

<comment><USER6> It's unclear. Depending on the fabrication constraints/robustness constraints they added to the inverse design procedure (which they don't really mention in the paper), it could be either extremely robust or extremely sensitive. Generally, in terms of measurements, if the conditions are controlled, it's pretty easy to get small noise (especially in the case where these devices are so large, as is their wavelength) relative to most perturbations that happen in the lab. Overall, this is not really mentioned in the paper (unless I missed it), so I'm afraid I can't give you a direct answer on what they do, just that it is possible (via this method) to design a device which is relatively robust to these changes.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> [https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/b4ceu9/new_pho...](https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/b4ceu9/new_photonic_calculus_metamaterial_solves/)

</comment><comment><USER8> Amusingly, the overhead view of their structure looks vaguely like an overhead view of the brain

<comment><USER9> Funny, it reminded me of the Plinko board from The Price is Right [0]. Strangely, this is almost exactly how I explain to myself in dumbed-down terms (armchair-quantum-physicising over here) of how quantum computation might actually work. I never imagined it could actually be mapped to a physical structure.

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

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Given that the future of computing seems to push more and more towards DSP, this seems like it could be an exceedingly powerful technique. Especially if the tech could reach the goal of on-the-fly reprogramming.

I've wondered when we will see FPGAs integrated on die with a regular CPU for a similar purpose.

</comment><comment><USER11> This work focuses on steady-state computing, but it could also be interesting to use transient physical behaviors to process time-varying signals

Maybe by modelling dynamical systems as "neural nets" as in: [https://arxiv.org/abs/1806.07366](https://arxiv.org/abs/1806.07366) and [https://arxiv.org/abs/1808.08412](https://arxiv.org/abs/1808.08412)

Or by using complicated physical systems we don't even understand to build Echo State Networks: [http://www.scholarpedia.org/article/Echo_state_network](http://www.scholarpedia.org/article/Echo_state_network)

</comment><comment><USER12> For a novice like me, it sounds a bit like quantum computing, where rather than "digitalizing" a physical problem like we do with classic computing, we use physical properties of elements (like the spin of an electron) to solve it. How far does this analogy go ?

<comment><USER13> About halfway between digital and quantum computers.

      Wholly quantum - uses both wave and particle behaviours and entanglement
      Wave computation like in article - just waves
      Digital computation - just impulses or currents in conductors.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> Very interesting, look forward to seeing this develop.

Reminds me of the analog delay-line memories from the 1940s to the late 1960s ([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delay_line_memory#Mercury_dela...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delay_line_memory#Mercury_delay_lines)) and bucket-brigade devices of the 1970s. ([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bucket- brigade_device](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bucket-brigade_device)) But in a whole-new dimension.

</comment><comment><USER15> Does anybody know how difficult these problems are to solve once you've already calculated the relevant kernel?

Let's say I had that kernel stored in a database, is it just a matrix multiplication or two to calculate the solution? If so, doesn't that kind of invalidate the idea that this is a bottleneck problem that requires a speed- up? Especially once you take into account read/write speeds on the physical structure?

I guess my point here is the correct benchmark is pre-memoized code. I'd be interested how it performs against _that_ benchmark.

</comment><comment><USER16> > but if you want to change the shape of the room, for example, you will have > to make a new kernel.

So you can't iteratively improve your room, unless you don't mind fabricating all the kernels.

<comment><USER17> > Scaling down the concept to the scale where it could operate on light waves > and be placed on a microchip

> "We could use the technology behind rewritable CDs to make new Swiss cheese > patterns as they're needed,"

Could be not much different from compiling and running stuff on an FPGA.

<comment><USER18> Assuming these structures can be changed like an FPGA.

It's not obvious how you can change the microstructure of a material to something you like in minutes.

<comment><USER19> Well, there are CD-RWs

<comment><USER18> For a 2D structure, maybe. What is the depth of the feature though? I saw those pictures as light shining along the plane, not across it (am I wrong?). If it's across it's not obvious that CDRW's features are deep enough and the "empty" space transparent enough.

How about 3D micro-structures? It's hard enough to make a one off 3D structure reproducible, never mind a changeable one.

<comment><USER20> >How about 3D micro-structures? It's hard enough to make a one off 3D structure reproducible

Well, there are 3D printers :)

<comment><USER18> Disclaimer: I find this _super_ cool. I love analog solutions to engineering problems.

This is about optical wavelength length scales -> feature sizes << 1500nm for infrared

3D printers' feature sizes work for giga hertz waves (as a guestimate) assuming:

\- The features can be printed - 3D have limitations after all.

\- the materials that can be 3D printed are optically suitable.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> I think there is a problem with this technique.

Computing a kernel is an inverse problem, which is more difficult than solving a system for a given right-hand-side.

Linear algebra tells us to never invert a matrix, and here we're actually fabricating the inverse physically.

Or, of course, perhaps I'm misunderstanding something.

<comment><USER18> You solve the inverse problem once. That's takes a while.

Then you build it. More time.

Then you run it for thousands of different inputs. There's the benefit.

For example:

You build a kernel describing the acoustics of a sound (ie a body of water) once.

Then you can solve instantly what and where sounds (acoustics) are coming from

<comment><USER16> Well, if the inverse is dense and the excitation as well, then I can see an advantage, because computing a solution by applying the inverse to the excitation would be O(n^2). But I suppose that usually the excitation would be sparse.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> Is something like this composable? For example, if they build a kind of lambda calculus for their 'hardware kernels' they can represent arbitrary calculations (by composing them)? Because having to create a different kernel for every calculation seems quite costly.

<comment><USER22> It seems like it could be. This thing sounds like it focuses on Fredholm integral equations, the solutions should be composable.

These are basically equations g(t) = Integral_t K(t,s) * f(s),

where K(t,s) (the kernel) and g(t) are known, but f(s) isn't. In physical applications, t is usually time. A solution f(s) could be fed into the input of the next device, at least mathematically.

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> Just curious: how is this any better than an analog circuit (possibly an IC) solving the same problem?

<comment><USER13> It's faster and can be miniaturised more than analog ic's, possibly using less energy. Version used in article is proof of concept, selected for being easy to manufacture with cheap equipment.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> Continuous variable quantum computing is going to be huge.

</comment><comment><USER25> This is the most clickbaity-y title I've seen in a long time! Not complaining, it definitely piqued my interest. As a Philly native, I love that uPenn is doing cool experiments like this.

<comment><USER26> For me, clickbait has a negative connotation, the expectation that the article won't deliver on the headline.

This article delivered. Such a cool experiment and field of study.

<comment><USER27> I agree - this article was not clickbait. The content delivered on the title.

Piquing your interest with the title is just good headline-writing. It only becomes clickbait when the title is a cynical perversion of the content.

<comment><USER28> Just as fishing bait entice fish to bite the bait, clickbait titles entice people to click the title.

If a title is interesting enough to get lots of people to click on it, it is by definition clickbait.

Titles for interesting articles should themselves be interesting, as boring titles for interesting articles would increase one's chance of missing them.

An interesting title is only objectionable is the article itself is not worth reading.

<comment><USER29> But the reason we call it bait and not just "fish food" is that it is there to _trick_ the fish into doing something it does not want to do. Something is not necessarily bait just because it's interesting or enticing.

<comment><USER28> But there is no term like "clickfood" which would imply that the title is interesting and the corresponding article is worth reading.

So people fixate on the title and call any interesting, well-written title "clickbait" regardless of whether the article itself is worth reading or not.

I'm simply pointing out that such an enticing title is not necessarily bad if the article itself is worth reading.

The alternative is a boring title, which is a disservice to any article worth reading.

<comment><USER30> > But there is no term like "clickfood"

That's supposed to just be called journalism.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> Can we ask one of these new types of machines, quantum computers etc, whether anti-gravity is possible ?</comment>


Subscription Payments with Bitcoin, Arf - <AUTHOR> https://www.arf.one/ <comment><AUTHOR> Over the past months we had the idea to build a subscription payment gateway for everyone looking for more integration of BTC to their daily lives. So we developed a technology over Bitcoin which allows merchants to get recurring payments. And for users, there are no transaction fees for subscription payments while private keys remain private. We think it has potential. What do you think, guys?</comment>


Undercover Cops Hired 118 Handymen, Then Arrested Them for Not Having Licenses - <AUTHOR> https://reason.com/2020/02/05/undercover-cops-hired-118-handymen-then-arrested-them-all-for-not-having-licenses/ <comment><USER2> This burns me up:

> _These 118 con men and women were posing as contractors & preying on > innocent homeowners in Hillsborough County, who were just looking to repair > or improve their home," said Hillsborough County Sheriff Chad Chronister_

I am almost certain that's not what happened. Unless they each lied about having a contractors' license when asked, they didn't "pose" as anything, and aren't conning anyone.

Based on the examples in this article, is there _anything_ that doesn't require a license to do? Unhooking a toilet is apparently an advanced skill in Florida.

I guess this is my reminder to give some more to www.ij.org

<comment><USER3> > Unhooking a toilet is apparently an advanced skill in Florida.

I am a former licensed master plumber, and I still hold a license to work as a plumber so I just want to weigh in here. I would never, Not Ever drink the water in Any industrial or commercial complex. Period. The reason is because although it is not technically difficult to "unhook a toliet" as you say it is even easier (especially now with the advent of Home Depot and Amazon selling all manner of "plumbing contraptions") to inadverntly create a potential cross conection. Here is the reason I do not drink the water (or or soda or soup or anything that uses their water supply): when I was a plumbing contractor one of my accounts was a wire and plating facility that made a lot of different automotive fasteners and what not (pretty cool mavhines btw), one day I walked into the plating room And I was Horrifired to see washing machine hoses attached to spigots literally laying in the plating solutions that contained Cyanide... no vacuum breakers no RPZ's (reduced pressure zone devices) nothing to protect the water supply from siphoning Cyanide back into it. Fuck that noise--never since have I drank the water, nor never will I again. And I have seen coutless cross connections since then in all manner of facilities.

Not to mention not having a clue about proper material and methods while working on on natural gas or LPG sytems and so on, and so on. You can do a lot of damage really really fast if you're clueless.

<comment><USER4> >The reason is because although it is not technically difficult to "unhook a toliet" as you say it is even easier (especially now with the advent of Home Depot and Amazon selling all manner of "plumbing contraptions") to inadverntly create a potential cross conection.

Please tell us how one can screw up hooking up a toilet so badly as to create a cross connection. It's not easy to confuse a 3" or better closet flange with a 3/8" compression fitting, and it would be pretty obvious to anyone who tried it.

<comment><USER3> > Please tell us how one can screw up hooking up a toilet so badly as to > create a cross connection

Sure: unless you understand potable water and drainage systems, proper appurtenances, proper methods and materials I don't want you touching my drinking water supply. It's the same reason you don't want me typing random characters into your code. I'm not a coder, you're not a plumber.

And to be clear I used domestic water as an example, you could just as easily mess up the sanitary connection and have raw sewage seeping into the building.

It takes 8 years of working experience before you are even allowed to take a Master Plumbing test... and we aren't stupid people. There is A lot know.

<comment><USER4> So, no then.

>It takes 8 years of working experience before you are even allowed to take a Master Plumbing test... and we aren't stupid people. There is A lot know.

Never said plumbers were stupid. But we're talking about replacing an existing fixture with a functionally identical replacement. If you try to tell me that needs a licensed Master plumber, I'll know exactly what your motives are.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> In my experience, licensed handymen and contractors aren't much better. It sure is good to know that, while cops in many cities are giving up going after "low level" property crime, they are now so bored that they've got conduct elaborate sting operations on people for using a wrench on someone's leaky pipe without a license.

<comment><USER6> Occupational licensing is bad for economy and people generally [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupational_licensing#Evidenc...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupational_licensing#Evidence_on_the_effects_of_occupational_licensing)

<comment><USER7> Can't agree there.

You definitely want your doctor, optometrist, dentist to be licensed. You definitely want your wiring to be done by a proper electrician. You want your new building signed of by a licensed Engineer. Etc.. General carpentry is a little bit different, but those with proper apprenticeships are considerably more likely to be better, but in that case, it's not a guarantee.

The wikipedia article you presented as evidence has some troubling issues. Much of it is focused on the fact that 'without licensing' there's 'more growth' in the given field of employment, which is obvious and mostly beside the point: the issue is competence. When measuring quality they mention "find that occupational licensing of dentists does not lead to improved measured dental outcomes of patients, but is associated with higher price" \- which is deeply disingenuous because it's likely related to specific kinds of licensing as oppose do the 'material issue of competence' which is the fact said dentists actually attended dental school. Can you imagine for a second someone giving you fillings, scrips, pulling out teeth, x-rays _without having gone to dentistry school_?

What the state needs to do is make clear which occupations are licensed, which are not, and the kinds of work that can be done otherwise. Replacing a doorknob or a water faucet may be a bridge too far for licensing requirements, but doing anything 'load-bearing' for example might be within the purview of regulation.

<comment><USER8> Please speak for yourself. I do my own electric work and I can use an app to create an eye glasses prescription, though electricians have to be licensed and optometrist are only ones that can write a glasses script. How about filling up your car with gasoline? Do you do it yourself or have a professional do it safely instead for you?

<comment><USER9> >You definitely want your doctor, optometrist, dentist to be licensed.

>>Please speak for yourself.

90% of any profession can be jury rigged by almost anyone. The remaining 10%, including the liability behind their actions, is why they get paid to do it for a living.

If you want to superglue your wounds and run your own electrical grid more power to you, but none of us are islands and you live within an insulated bubble created by the professional standards of those around you.

<comment><USER8> Superglue is used in medicine, including heart surgery, to bind tissues.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Things might be different in the US.

The reason why Sweden has similar regulations comes down to relative simple reasons. The state want homeowners to have home insurance in case something bad happen that would result in the state/city having to step in and pay for it, such as a fire.

Insurance companies want lower risks (and might also be pressured by the state to have lower rates). They want everything that is covered by the home insurance to be installed by a licensed contractor, and in the case the contractor is at fault, they want them to have insurance against mistakes.

And thus the government create licensed tradespeople to facilitate the above. Unhooking a toilet is not hard, but home insurance covers water damage.

Sweden also has a lot of social safety nets so in the case that someones home get destroyed the city is required to help them. Requirements for home insurance moves some of that risk onto insurance companies.

<comment><USER11> You don't necessarily need licensing for liability issues, just a requirement for contractors to carry public indemnity insurance and only work within its terms.

<comment><USER10> It is not necessary but the situation that the government sits at is tricky. Intervention like sending out fire trucks or giving health care is usually paid upfront by the government, as is social support aid in the case the homeowner become homeless. If neither the contractor nor the homeowner can pay it will be up to the government to foot the bill.

In theory, if insurance companies would give out public indemnity insurance to unlicensed contractors then it would lower the risk for the government, assuming the coverage is broad enough. It also assumes that the cost of getting such public indemnity insurance is lower than getting a license, or contractors would just get the license instead.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> > where undercover deputies filmed them performing or agreeing to perform > prohibited tasks like painting ...

Okay, electrical work I get but... painting? So glad we're protected from rogue... painters.

<comment><USER13> If you want the truly bizarre (read protectionist), check out lawmakers reasons for licensed interior designers.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> What bothers me most about this is the statement: "including several who had past criminal convictions". The whole reason to put people in jail is to punish them. After they did their time the original crime should not be held against them. Not so in the usa where it's once a thief always a thief.

<comment><USER8> Isn't a murderer who served his time still a murderer after release? Wouldn't you be careful around him?

<comment><USER15> So run a background check on the people you hire, if that's important to you. But it has nothing to do with technical ability.

And do you think licensed contractors aren't hiring ex-cons to work for them? Generally only the owner or supervisors are required to be licensed, not all employees.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> As the cities go dark, meddling bureaucrats will go to sleep hungry and cold, but warmed by the knowledge that they crushed someone who knew how those nasty hammers, wrenches and saws worked.

The world is a safer place.

<comment><USER17> It's not the bureaucrats that want this legislature, it's licensed tradespeople who want it, so that unlicensed tradespeople don't take work from them.

You should be turning your ire at the hammer-swingers, wrench-turners, and saw-operators.

<comment><USER18> Hammer swingers don't legislate.

<comment><USER19> They pay lobbyists to influence those who do. Also they might/can be very vocal, like unions. That is power to affect legislation.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Why should house and fence painting require licensing?

I hire people. If they are removing a tree, replacing septic lines, doing electrical work, I want to see they are licensed, bonded, and insured. If their lackey screws up and hurts himself I want their insurance to pay. If the tree falls the wrong way and destroys my house I want their insurance to pay.

This is why I always ask them about their bonding and insurance and need to see evidence of each. Many never come back after I ask for that!

But if I'm hiring someone for painting, it's different. Anyone can do that okay. Along with minor household repairs.

<comment><USER21> You're fine with lead paint nite being properly remediated and instead aerosolized through your neighborhood, then? And asbestos fibers?

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> Arrested? Good grief. This should be a fine, at most. Maybe if they claimed to be licensed and weren't, or forged documents that said they were... But this sounds like nonsense.

<comment><USER23> Prison industrial complex needs its ultracheap labour one way or another.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> In Florida, the following scam is common. A person obtains a bonafide General contractor's license. Using technicalities, he avoids insurance requirements. (This is trivial.) He sets up an office in a strip mall or his home. Then, numerous unlicensed individuals work "under" him. He may or may not make a specialty of obtaining permits.

<comment><USER25> Is that actually a scam? It sounds like a contracting agency.

<comment><USER24> It's totally a scam, but it's legal. If the entrepreneur has incorporated, he probably can't be sued. What's more, he doesn't have to pay a penny in workman's comp, because Florida has loopholes which permit multiple levels of "independent contractors" with only the top guy having a license, and a specific form letting the top guy absolve himself of responsibility for his "subs." One guy got so good at this scam that he had a LinkedIn page and an IOS app you could download. Florida's codes contain numerous devices like this. Most prominent is the "Notice of Non-Representation" that your buyer's agent will get you to sign, just just just before closing.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> Sigh. If only we cared half as much about real problems plaguing America.

</comment><comment><USER27> Sign that they are overstaffed. Imagine the resources spent to go after these guys.

<comment><USER28> Yes As I keep saying the expense of perusing crimes should be evaluated like you would evaluate any expense.

Blindly going after anything just creates more problems.

<comment><USER27> I don't agree 100% on that because some crimes terrorize communities and nothing should be spared to fight them. But to jail house painters without a license? When one can go to Home Depot, buy the stuff and do it by himself.

They need to prioritize and if they have come to this, it means that the county is very safe and xx% of cops have nothing to do. So fire them.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> Can I ask any legal expert to explain the difference between this and entrapment?

<comment><USER30> For it to be entrapment the government would have to have induced/coerced the actual behavior of operating without a license. These arrests are the same as if a cop buys drugs from dealer and then arrests the dealer: the dealer goofed and can probably be charged with a crime since there is no coercion from the officer for the behavior.

Entrapment is a defense to a crime, and in most (all?) states requires the accused to prove they would not have committed the crime but-for the persuasion of the government (usually a police officer/federal agent type, but not always). It is generally true that if the government merely sets the stage for someone to commit a crime that does not rise to the level of entrapment - there has to be more coercive behavior for it to be entrapment.

Here is a good background story on entrapment... and how the defense almost never works: [https://www.oregonlive.com/portland/2010/12/portland_bomb_pl...](https://www.oregonlive.com/portland/2010/12/portland_bomb_plot_case_likely.html)

Edit: slight clarity improvement.

<comment><USER31> Given this tidbit, it seems less clear cut:

 _Frequently, she says, officers will hire a handyman on the pretext of performing work that doesn 't need a license, and then during the course of the job ask them to do something that does, like unhooking a toilet or laying some tiles.

"When the handyman says no, then the undercover detective moves the conversation to something else and then comes back to the question later in a different way," says Sammis. "By the time the handyman gets to the location, they want to make the homeowner happy and end up agreeing to perform work that they didn't intend on doing when they first arrived. The undercover detective[s] are just creating a crime that probably wouldn't occur otherwise."_

<comment><USER32> I want to make you happy doesn't sound like an affirmative defense for committing a crime, especially when you are getting paid to do that crime.

<comment><USER31> I think the point is that they refused once, and only under additional pressure from the undercover officer agreed to actually do the illegal thing.

If you wouldn't have broken the law without the police's involvement, I think that's entrapment. It wasn't a lot of pressure, and you could say they are likely to break the law under pressure from other people, but I think we shouldn't be prosecuting people for what we think they might do in the future, and instead for what they've actually done. And in some of these cases it looks like the only thing they've done that we know for sure is allow the police to pressure then into breaking the law so the police can arrest them and bolster their arrest numbers.

<comment><USER32> That the police have to ask you twice to commit a crime before you do it, doesn't sound like a very good defense either.

A lot of people are implying that maybe the police bullied the contractors into submission, or formed some emotional connection and used that to twist them via friendship.

But there isn't any evidence of that.

I think it's way more likely that the contractors simply saw a way to make more money. They couldn't refuse the second time because it's hard to turn down cash that's sitting on the table. They probably think they do good work, so what is the harm?

Now if we think that they shouldn't be arrested, then we should stop this from being a crime, not castigate the police for actually enforcing the law.

Personally, I think this sort of thing is worth a small fine at most, and the law should be changed.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> How would one know ahead of time what requires licensing and what doesn't? Does applying wallpaper? What about cleaning the clothes dryer's exhaust pipe? Electric is obvious, but did the accused here actually know that tiling and painting requires a license?

</comment><comment><USER33> That's great and all but how was their work?

</comment><comment><USER34> Without looking, let's take a guess as to where this happened.

Florida?

<comment><USER35> I was thinking the exact same thing.

</comment></comment><comment><USER36> > prohibited tasks like painting or installing recess lighting

Does anyone have to add anything?

</comment><comment> ur-whale [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4tbVRC_oOTU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4tbVRC_oOTU)

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSLy3mtpq2Y](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSLy3mtpq2Y)

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1lFwAp8f5kU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1lFwAp8f5kU)

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2otD8mmZsyA](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2otD8mmZsyA)</comment>


DIY Projects - <AUTHOR> http://www.wired.com/magazine/2011/03/ff_makestuff_projects/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+wired%2Findex+%28Wired%3A+Index+3+%28Top+Stories+2%29%29&utm_content=My+Yahoo

<comment><USER2> > Prevent pet-food theft with a system that uses RFID-tagged collars and a > repurposed CD-ROM player to distinguish between pets. Your active cat gets > fed; your fat one gets denied.

The way this would work in our household is that the fat one would jostle the skinny one out of the way.

And thus, the fat get fatter.

<comment><USER3> I laughed out loud when I read this.

One of our cats was a big, fat lovable bully who would growl until the other cat moved away from the food.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> ick... 21 URL shortend DIY projects from other websites with no indication as to where the link will send you.

I understand shortening your URLs for Twitter and sort, but this is just silly.</comment>


Ask HN: My company is about to get acquired, how do I best manage this money? - <AUTHOR>

Hello.
I work for an Australian company based in Sydney. I'm not a founder, I'm just an early employee (engineer #2). I've been here since the start and we've been running for about 8 years. We are in data analysis area, providing analytics service. I've been given some shares when I joined over a vesting period, which is now well over.
Now, it looks like our company is going to be bought by a larger company in the near future. I don't really know the details. But if everything goes well, I might be able to cash in my shares.
Let's say, I will be in possession of $2M (a complete arbitrary number).
My main question is, what is the best way for me to manage this money? Where do I put it? What should I invest in? How will the tax (the Aussie tax system that is) affect me?
I heard that I should create a trust fund, but how does that work? Is there anyone I should talk to?
What should I prepare for? Are there any unexpected things that I should know about when you're all of a sudden given a large chunk of money?
(And how do the answers to my question change if the money becomes larger than $2M)?
Thanks for all your comments. <comment><USER2> My honest advice is to do absolutely nothing with it for a few months. Don't move it, don't spend it, don't invest it, don't loan it to friends...and most importantly don't tell anybody about it.

Just give yourself some time to cool off and get over the adrenaline-pumping feeling of "holy shit, look at all that money". This will likely take a while to wear off. Only once you're calm about it should you trust yourself making decisions.

</comment><comment><USER3> I was in a similar position a couple years ago, and I can pass on the advice that I was given from financial planners/etc.

Much of the advice that can be given is dependent on what you want to do with your windfall. If you do bring in $1 MM or more, you theoretically will have enough to live out the rest of your life in a 4/5-star hotel on a beach somewhere. You could travel for a while, or just hang out, or you could try to turn that cash into something much larger. Personally, I've done all three, with different levels of personal satisfaction from each.

Depending on your age (are you closer to your 20s than to your 60s?), most financial planners will advise putting roughly 50% into higher risk investments (startups, riskier stocks, Forex baskets), and 50% into more conventional assets (real estate, investment funds, etc), with higher allocations to lower risk as you grow older.

I would definitely try to invest a large part of your wealth into assets that pay regular, well defined returns. The most conventional of these are real estate and dividend producing stocks. In real estate, there's small apartment complexes, rental houses, small office buildings, and other commercial properties. Generally, you can purchase these types of assets with a 10% down payment and will see a return of 7-9% over the long term. Generally, you should be able to secure a 30 year mortgage on a property with interest of roughly 3-4%. There are other types of conventional investments that also perform regularly, such as purchasing under-performing small businesses like small tool-and-die shops, or other small manufacturing concerns.

Much of it depends on your taste for risk. For instance, energy and commodity stocks, which can usually pay out good dividends are in freefall at the moment (due to the low price of oil). However that freefall won't last -- a well- timed purchase or sale could mean a 20% gain in a relatively short span. Additionally, Forex baskets are showing extremely great growth at the moment, with the right split between currencies. If you start monitoring these markets, you'll start to get a feel for when the peaks/valleys occur, and can invest accordingly. Generally, it is wise to spread out your higher risk investments into smaller baskets that can be easily changed/converted into other assets. Also, be wary of any investment managers who claim they can beat the market. They likely can't, and if they did before, it was due to a combination of luck, timing, and being in the right place at the right time. I have yet to meet someone who can reliably outwit the market.

If you have a taste for riskier investments, and since you have an engineering background (and are a short plane flight away from most of South East Asia), you might consider joining a small investment fund (or VC firm) that focuses on technology in SEA. There continues to be huge growth all over SEA (Indonesia, Philippines, Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand, etc). Many startups require very small investments ($50,000-$100,000), and you could theoretically invest in 5 or 10 at the same time, with the intention of later selling one at 15-20x and the others either returning less than the investment or roughly breaking even. Attend one of the regional tech conferences as an investor, and find some teams/products that you have confidence in and invest!

If you have an idea for a product or service in any business sector, I would highly suggest starting your own company and "giving it a go." In my experience, these types of ventures tend to have far better returns than any other, so long as you are judicious with your spending, and keep your company small and lean enough until it is able to narrow down on the right product/market segment fit. Once you have found the right product, then you scale like mad.

Remember: there's no reward without risk.

<comment><USER4> after taxes he will take home just $1+mm, far from enough to live out the rest of hist life in a 4/5-star hotel on a beach somewhere. u need at least $10mm for that

<comment><USER5> If you scratch 4/5 star hotel and replace it with "fairly nice property" there's plenty of parts of Asia where he could live well off the interest on $1m for the foreseeable future.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Honestly if you are talking about considerable amount of money you should seek out to first and accountant (He will save you more money that he will charge) he will figure those things out cause even if you research on that a lot, my personal feeling is that you might do mistake that will catch up to you in the future.

For the were to invest it, well no one can answer that for you it depends on your attitude towards risk and where you are in your life. If you 25 no family and looking to risk more to (hopefully) earn more then invest back in yourself and start your own but if you have a family and looking to work in o a more steady environment, wait a bit because with over 100K in your bank account, you will get calls from portfolio managers! : ) Those guys will know who to invest your $$ better and at a risk level your will be comfortable with.

An personal opinion, fix everything with an accountant an then relaxe a take the time to answer those questions they will affect a lot how you will live your futur!

<comment><USER7> I'd hire a therapist first because the greatest threat to your money is you.

A lot of issues will crop up about your values, relationships, and life goals. Think of the therapist as someone who can help you know yourself, design your life, and above all, use your fortune as a tool to get what you really want. I say this having sold my first co at 32 and banked $10M.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> You don't want an accountant for this amount of money; you want a financial planner. Find someone who's an expert at managing wealth to grow it safely and conservatively. He/she will work with you to devise a plan, based on your life goals, to make the best use of that money.

Also, don't spend any of it for at least a month.

</comment><comment><USER9> Reduce expenses first, cover cash flow requirements then increase revenues without more risk than you can accept.

Begin by paying off highest interest debt and continue until you run out of money or have paid off all your debt. You always get rid of debt because debt costs you money on an ongoing basis. Better is to make money - which is not just a little better, it's double better. You get to keep cash you would have lost due to interest PLUS you get to make more money by investing.

Next you need to try and make sure you have enough cash flow to continue meeting recurring expenses, or make purchases that eliminate or reduce recurring debt. Buy a house instead of renting, that sort of thing.

After that the general rule of thumb is to invest in the highest-return investments you can find that provide an acceptable level of risk. If you are 40 years from retirement and can accept a very large amount of risk, then you might want to invest part of it in another startup that you think has a good chance of a very high rate of return. You might put part of it in stocks (high to medium risk), bonds (medium to low risk) or money market items like certificates of deposit (low risk, but some of these tie up your money for longer periods of time than others).

</comment><comment><USER10> First issue is, do you have to cash out your shares? Or can you exchange them for shares in the parent company? If shares, you may want to defer cashing everything, you can slowly sell shares as you need them, keeping yourself in a lower tax bracket (capital gains taxed as normal income in Aus). Or you can borrow against them.

You need a professional financial and tax advisor. Always go independent (not affiliated with a large bank/institution) and fee-based (not commission).

</comment><comment><USER11> It really depends on which stage in life you are at. Do you currently have a comfortable life (make good income, no major debt)? Then don't change anything, just place your money safely.

Piece of trivia: the first thing people in your situation buy is a new bed.

</comment><comment><USER12> You're going to pay 50% in tax. No way around that.

$2M in Sydney doesn't go that far these days, but if you want hassle free investment, put it into Vanguard.

Otherwise just throw it into a high interest savings account for zero risk.

</comment><comment><USER13> IANA expert but: [http://australiangovernmentbonds.gov.au/etbs/list-of- etbs/](http://australiangovernmentbonds.gov.au/etbs/list-of-etbs/)</comment>


Palindromic video. Sort of ... - <AUTHOR> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hKzxV0QLhRo <comment><USER2> Following YouTube's related videos trail - this is based on Argentinian political ad which won the silver lion in the Cannes Lions Ad Festival in 2006:

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lFz5jbUfJbk>

</comment><comment><USER3> It may just be that I'm British but I found that intolerably cheesy.

edit: <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Umq6ac5r5uM>

<comment><USER4> Its because you're British.

<comment><USER4> Cynicism is cheaper than empathy, so I guess I deserve that.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Palindromic music video: Sugar Water / Cibo Matto / Michel Gondry: <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EN9auBn6Jys>

<comment><USER6> Much more impressive.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> I like this video

I do not think

It is a lame trick

</comment><comment><USER8> We made a very similar video for our prom night. The audience was literally jaw dropping. Here it is (it's in Slovene so you probably won't understand it): <http://www.vimeo.com/10852791>

</comment><comment><USER9> "Sort of" = the _opposite_ in reverse, where as palindromes are the same in reverse...</comment>


Purported Video of HP Slate Running Windows 7 - <AUTHOR> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0IiKaa8v9M

<comment><USER2> As mentioned in the comments on youtube, the cntl-alt-del button seems like a strange addition.

You'd think they would have been able to manage to add a reboot into the power key, something like hold the power to the left for 4 seconds or something like that. A dedicated key for reboot isn't very confidence inspiring.</comment>