How did British officers live in the scorching heat of India? - <AUTHOR> http://archive.ph/Zykqs <comment><USER2> Uh... but how had the Indians been doing it for thousands of years?

<comment><USER3> Plenty of melanin, and habits that didn't involve being out in the direct sun at its hottest probably helped.

As for the British officers of the time, I assume a key factor was having people (slaves and/or other subordinates) to order to do work while they stayed out of the direct sun as much as possible, in their relatively luxuriant accommodations.

<comment><USER4> Does melanin help with the heat, though? I thought it just protected from skin cancer.

<comment><USER5> It doesn't. Fairer skin would reflect more radiation, than darker skin, but it gets burned in the process.

I don't think skin color has much of an impact when withstand heat, as sweat is a much stronger temperature regulator. If it's humid heat, it becomes a matter of circulatory efficiency, body mass and plain endurance, as sweat can't evaporate and actually makes it worse.

Source: grew up in tropical coastal region.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Apparently Britishers had snow pits for refrigeration in Shimla (a northern hill station) that are being revived now for tourism [1].

[1] [https://m.tribuneindia.com/news/archive/snow-pits-to- breathe...](https://m.tribuneindia.com/news/archive/snow-pits-to-breathe-life- into-shimla-give-push-to-tourism-859060)

</comment><comment><USER7> Gin. Lots and lots of gin and tonic.

[https://slate.com/technology/2013/08/gin-and-tonic-kept- the-...](https://slate.com/technology/2013/08/gin-and-tonic-kept-the-british- empire-healthy-the-drinks-quinine-powder-was-vital-for-stopping-the-spread-of- malaria.html)

<comment><USER8> from The Restaurant at the End of the Universe:

>>>

It is a curious fact, and one to which no one knows quite how much importance to attach, that something like 85% of all known worlds in the Galaxy, be they primitive or highly advanced, have invented a drink called jynnan tonnyx, or gee-N'N-T'N-ix, or jinond-o-nicks, or any one of a thousand or more variations on the same phonetic theme. The drinks themselves are not the same, and vary between the Sivolvian 'chinanto/mnigs' which is ordinary water served at slightly above room temperature, and the Gagrakackan 'tzjin-anthony-ks' which kill cows at a hundred paces; and in fact the one common factor between all of them, beyond the fact that the names sound the same, is that they were all invented and named before the worlds concerned made contact with any other worlds.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> For every officer living the privileged life described in this article there were dozens of rank and file British troops, who certainly had no servants, or any of the other described comforts and luxuries. No mention of them?

<comment><USER10> A dead comment mentions even rank and file troops had servants. In previous centuries it was much more common for middle status people to have hired help.

<comment><USER9> That is definitely true, however I would hardly classify a private in the army as "middle class".

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Very interesting. Also seems to apply to African ex-colonies: I live just below the "Hill Station" neighbourhood of Freetown, Sierra Leone.

</comment><comment><USER10> When he says temperatures were 5-10 degrees lower, he means fahrenheit, correct?

<comment><USER12> The author is a history professor from the US, I would say, yes you are correct, Fahrenheit.

<comment><USER13> It's also what was used for much of the colonial period in India because of the British, so it's not exactly off-base. Fahrenheit is still often used among older populations in many ex-British colonies.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Humans are good at acclimating to different climates, it's one of our unique adaptations. The ability to perspire and regulate body temperature in extremes is somewhat unique to humans, as few mammals share this ability. Other mammals do perspire, but only primates and horses sweat as much as we do.

</comment><comment><USER15> British had separate Summer and Winter capitals e.g. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ooty](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ooty)

</comment><comment><USER16> Why so much concern of British officers in India, Better question would be how did common Indian population survived British Raj, when American Native populations did not.

<comment><USER17> Native Americans had no exposure or resistance to smallpox, cholera, diphtheria, influenza, malaria, measles, scarlet fever, typhoid, tuberculosis, etc etc. There are a lot of accounts of cities and towns being completely depopulated very rapidly during the early colonial period just from disease before there was large scale immigration to the Americas from the old world.

<comment><USER18> Follow-up question: why did the disease exchange only affect native Americans. Why didn't the _colonists_ perish due to contact with deadly _American_ diseases they had no exposure or resistance to? Why were the European diseases so deadly to Americans, but not vice versa?

<comment><USER19> Interesting question. I found this: [http://www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2014/03/native- ameri...](http://www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2014/03/native-americans- didnt-wipe-europeans-diseases/)

Fun tidbit:

> But contrary to popular belief, it wasn't all one sided. It's believed that > one Native American disease did slip on to the European ships and sailed > onward to Europe doing some major damage in the process. That disease was > syphilis.

<comment><USER20> It is one theory, but things are not completely clear: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_syphilis#Origin](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_syphilis#Origin)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> Hindu Stuart is well worth reading about

</comment><comment><USER22> What a euro centric oblivious type of pseudo academic indulgence. I guess what we need to take from that is that colonialists we're really busy people, entrepreneurs doing really important things, so this is the kind of perspective into their legacy that we're missing. You do tend to deal with the heat rather well when someone else is doing the hard work and producing the staff you're stealing from them.

I wonder if there's a follow-up article on how the nazis kept their uniforms so tidy considering how many ditches and mass graves they stood around.

<comment><USER23> I wonder why you sound so snarky regarding this article.

It's not that the author defended them or said anything positive about them (except maybe "I've been there and can relate"). Nothing I read here surprised me, really. And it's not that he didn't mention that the burden was basically shouldered by the people there.

<comment><USER24> A lot of folks from countries ravaged by the Britishers really detest the Raj. Its understandable. I myself am from India and i too get a twinge of anger whenever the Raj is mentioned in a non negative way. I guess 70 years aren't enough to forget all that the colonials did.

<comment><USER23> I understand that. But I read it as a relatively neutral and only slightly negative view on historical living circumstances.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment> lota-putty Makes you wonder if Europeans had collaborated wisely/fairly between themselves couple of centuries ago, what kind of world it would've been today.

`Greed` got to them before `Envy`, driven by `Pride`</comment>


Are there any good cloud-based email clients? - <AUTHOR>

In need for #cloud #email #client --> https://www.google.com/search?q=cloud+email+client
Think "ThunderBird for the cloud" --> http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic.php?p=11509055&sid=4f36eacd9f9262efa238ca00d176ca59#p11509055 --> "I'm also interested in a ThunderBird cloud service. There is the other practical issue which is I have several email accounts and not all of them are with Google."
Nice to have: - 2-step auth - open source - mobile app (mobile first design) - reliability - labels / filters / priorities
Are there any active projects in that field? --> would like to issue pull request, send money on kickstarter or just talk with founders... Generally, how people solve this issue these days?
<comment></comment><comment></comment><comment>
### Current workflow: I own domains and have catch-all feature forwarding all incoming messages to intermediate gmail account.
### Issue: when hitting "reply" it gets messy - https://support.google.com/mail/answer/22370?hl=en-GB&ctx=mail - kind of works but I would like something more robust (and not breaking ToS), designed from the ground up for 20+ email accounts.
</comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment>
Thank you for any suggestions! </comment><comment><USER2> zimbra? [http://www.zimbra.com/](http://www.zimbra.com/)

Community (open source) edition: [http://www.zimbra.com/community/](http://www.zimbra.com/community/)

Not exactly a "cloud based email client" in that it is an email server (you provide the cloud or use someone else's cloud) that has a web-based client.</comment>


Self Studying the MIT Applied Math Curriculum - <AUTHOR> https://www.harshsikka.me/self-studying-the-mit-applied-math-curriculum/ <comment><USER4> I did Strang's linear algebra course[0] (link goes to Youtube playlist of lectures) several years after graduating and recommend it highly. I was looking for refresher but I gained a deeper understanding of several important concepts; in particular it's fair to say I barely understood, or perhaps even misunderstood, SVD until Strang. If you're not sure if you need something like that, I suggest doing something like testing yourself on this video[1] or the MIT problem sets[2] it's easy to tell yourself that you "know" linear algebra when it would be closer to the truth to say that you _used_ to know linear algebra, but can't answer even basic questions today. After Strang, Golub's book on Matrix Computations is also really incredible.[3]

[0]: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZK3O402wf1c&list=PL49CF3715C...](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZK3O402wf1c&list=PL49CF3715CB9EF31D)

[1]: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cll03FUxjuk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cll03FUxjuk)

[2]: [https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/mathematics/18-650-statistics- fo...](https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/mathematics/18-650-statistics-for- applications-fall-2016/assignments/)

[3]: [https://www.amazon.com/Computations-Hopkins-Studies- Mathemat...](https://www.amazon.com/Computations-Hopkins-Studies-Mathematical- Sciences/dp/1421407949/ref=cm_cr_arp_d_product_top?ie=UTF8)

<comment><USER5> Another great "intermediate" textbook (in my opinion) is Trefethen's Numerical Linear Algebra [1]. Much more readable than Golub's I would say, which is more like a reference than a textbook.

[1]: [https://www.amazon.com/Numerical-Linear-Algebra-Lloyd- Trefet...](https://www.amazon.com/Numerical-Linear-Algebra-Lloyd- Trefethen/dp/0898713617)

<comment><USER6> Strongly agree. This was actually the text book when I took numerical methods at MIT. As far as math texts go, it is definitely a joy to read.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Speaking frankly, it's ambitious to complete even one of these courses in a single summer. Most students would be taking one or two of these in 12 - <USER2> weeks while doing nothing else but being a student. Accomplishing the same in about eight weeks from video lectures will be more difficult. I would strongly urge the author to slow down, choose a single course they have the background for and work from there.

I can't tell if the author has done a real analysis course before, but if they haven't that's the one they should choose next. If they already have that under their belt they should go to probability or complex variables. I don't see the utility of re-doing calculus or linear algebra if the author is already strong in both.

I appreciate the enthusiasm for math that's evident here, that's great! But if you're learning math the "right" way - by actively engaging with the material - there's only so much of it you can learn at once.

<comment><AUTHOR> Hey, author here, I really appreciate the feedback. Are there any specific prerequisites to Real Analysis?

<comment><USER7> Technically speaking, no. Real analysis is pretty self-contained. You basically start out by constructing the reals from scratch and deducing continuity as a consequence of the completeness of the real field. You use a tiny bit of set theory to establish notation and define bounds, and then from there you go into limits, derivatives, integrals and maybe the Lebesgue measure. I wouldn't expect a real analysis course targeted at applied math majors to do much other than that.

The reason real analysis is useful is because it's (loosely) a deeper calculus course with proofs. Since probability theory becomes more proof-based (and ventures into measures), real analysis is good preparation for it.

<comment><USER8> > You basically start out by constructing the reals from scratch

Not necessarily -- a lot of books just take the existence of a unique set with certain properties as an axiom and call it R.

The main topics of basic real analysis IMO are differentiation, integration, (uniform) continuity, compactness, convergence, etc.; how to construct the reals from the rationals is a side point at most.

This could be personal bias as I just don't personally think that the exercise of constructing the real numbers is very interesting.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I've been doing more machine learning for work, and I've realized a) how much calculus is involved in it and b) how much calculus I had forgotten since I took the courses as an undergraduate almost 30 years ago. I happen to still have my old calculus textbook (I couldn't sell it back to the bookstore back then), so I dusted it off and started working through all the problems. I'm about halfway through right now, and man I get strange looks from people when I start working calculus problems. Good to know that I'm not alone, although I'm about halfway through the equivalent of 18.01 (1/10th of the poster's coursework) after 6 months. It doesn't look like there are that many sample exercises in the online course, though - that may make it harder to really absorb.

<comment><USER10> Look into dual numbers and automatic differentiation, it's like Calculus on steroids.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> It's awesome to see more & more devs getting interested in math & stats as machine learning, optimization & sequential testing (what you folks call a/b test) becomes more mainstream.

The obvious benefits are, much of math literature is currently written for consumption by math grad students & profs, so all of this will get a much needed rewrite. I foresee a surge in material like Jeremy Kun's popular "math for programmers" book that so many of you loved on HN. Much of math lit is imo unnecessarily dense & terse. Speaking as a phd student, I really appreciate atleast 1-2 numerical examples with answers, not just plain theory. Maybe if there was a Linear Algebra for programmers text with some code in python to accompany the theorems, it would be a huge hit among applied ML researchers & programmers. Graduate linear algebra is actually quite hard & very few phd students pass the linalg quals in their first attempt ( Grad linear algebra, not basic shit like matrix algebra, linear maps & decompositions). This material should imo be rewritten ( "dumbed down" ) so regular folk can also sample some of the magic.

In my previous work at an adtech corp, I built a whole bidding algorithm straight from Strang's linear algebra book (the chapter on Lagrange optimizers). It's still running, 5 years & counting. I once joked if they gave a nickel out of every dollar that algorithm made to Prof Strang, he'd be a multimillionaire.

<comment><USER12> The Coding The Matrix textbook is exactly the type of book you've described that is tailored for programmers. I've read only the first few chapters and found it a joy even if a little wordy in some parts.

[https://codingthematrix.com/](https://codingthematrix.com/)

<comment><USER11> it's a good undergrad book. also on that page he says lights out game is a "linear algebra problem". It's actually not. incidentally I worked on Lights out for my thesis, and my advisor made a whole career out of lights out! That game relates to Fibonacci polynomials, studied in Combinatorics - [https://www.unf.edu/~wkloster/fib.html](https://www.unf.edu/~wkloster/fib.html)

<comment><USER13> How would you compare coding the matrix to strang ?

I'm going to be starting out on one of these and coding-the-matrix is very python centric (which is super helpful and practical) versus MATLAB in Strang's book.

<comment><USER11> this is classic "mistaking the map for the territory".

whether the code is in python or matlab matters little. the code is just a supplement to the main material which is still math. trying to understand that math by reading code is actively counterproductive and actually quite foolish. my professor gave a symposium talk on this topic, so i will use one of his examples -

At 0 minutes you have 0 dollars. suppose each minute you toss a coin. if it's heads you make a dollar. if it's tails you pay a dollar out of your pocket. What are the chances you'll have $30 in an hour ?

This is the sort of classic problem that can be coded up in python or matlab under 5 minutes. it's just a for loop & an if statement. It won't tell you much about the actual probability because that number is so small your code will have to run for a long time to get a meaningful answer. Whereas it's trivial if you just do the math by hand.

<comment><USER13> it just happens that i dont want to download and install matlab on my computer (which is company provided) and i'd rather work on python if there is an equally good course.

not what you thought though.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Good luck man. I did a similar kind of thing at one point. A lot of the material is extremely boring and it's really easy to skim it and pretend you know it in principle. You'll see... it's one of those things. The unbridled enthusiasm won't let you acknowledge it but you know ifs true :) So IMO you've got to find some way of doing some exams somewhere.

In the end the only way I could find enough motive to get through a whole applied maths syllabus was to book myself for exams so that I could panic about failing and study.

</comment><comment><USER15> Suggestion: Set aside complex variables and do measure theory instead. For the Fourier and Laplace transforms, cover those via measure theory. For measure theory, H. Royden, _Real Analysis_ and the first half of W. Rudin, _Real and Complex Analysis._

Then take a course in _graduate probability_ which is based on measure theory. Good authors are Loeve, Neveu, Breiman, Chung, among others. So, learn about the cases of convergence including almost sure convergence, a good version of the central limit theorem, proved carefully, the weak and strong laws of large numbers, ergodic theory, and martingale theory.

Learn stochastic differential equations.

Learn some potential theory.

Then do some work in optimization and optimization under uncertainty.

<comment><USER16> Personally, I think complex analysis is important. I really like Serge Lang's book "Complex Analysis." It is supposedly a graduate level text, but the first half of it covers the basics at a level suitable for upper division undergrad class. Ahlfor's book is also really really good, but a little harder to read in my opinion.

I didn't like either Royden or Rudin. I really like Folland's book "Real analysis: modern techniques and their applications." His Fourier analysis book is also pretty good IMO.

<comment><USER15> Yes, I've got a copy of Alfors. And at one time I started a course from a student of Alfors. And I have a book by Hille.

I just never could see much utility in complex variables: Complex valued functions of real variables. Sure. Complex valued measures? Sure. Fourier theory making a lot of use of complex numbers? Of course. A vector space where the field is the complex numbers? Certainly. Hermitian and unitary matrices with complex numbers? About have to like those due to the fundamental theorem of algebra, that is, roots of polynomials and, thus, complex eigenvalues. Functions of a complex _variable_? Never could see the utility.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Can someone please explain how MIT course numbers work? I get that "18" means maths, but why do specific courses sometimes have two digits after the "." and sometimes three, and if the level of study is encoded in it, why does it seem to jump to starting with "6"?

<comment><USER18> Two numbers like 18.XX means that it is intended for non-math majors so 18.02 is the basic multivariable calculus that every MIT alum needs to graduate, 18.022 is multivariable calculus with an emphasis on theory and 18.023 is with an emphasis on application and usually taken by people considering math majors (though also fulfill the core requirement) The class numbering schema is by field: [http://math.mit.edu/academics/classes.php](http://math.mit.edu/academics/classes.php)

18.1XX Analysis / Calculus

18.2XX Discrete

18.3XX Applied

18.4XX Computational

18.5XX Logic

18.6XX Probability and Statistics

18.7XX Algebra and Number Theory

18.8XX Just project lab

18.9XX Topology and Geometry

<comment><USER17> Thanks!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Is there a place to find answers to textbook questions? I get that this is discouraged, because it means paying students can cheat. But for people who are self studying, there are many times you _think_ you understand, but you're not sure and would like to see.

In particular, I'm hoping to self study the Structure and Interpretation of Classical Mechanics, but can't find the answers anywhere.

<comment><USER20> If you post a serious attempt to math stack exchange, they are usually very helpful in telling you if you are right, or where you went wrong.

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> This is a cool thing to do. I followed a slightly similar path in that my undergraduate degree did biochemistry up to 3rd year, but at the expense of third year pure math courses. (I had a kind of applied PDEs and modelling course but applied to biological problems like gene flow, disease modelling and population modelling.)

I ended up doing honours in bioinformatics, but then took a year to do third year pure math (and the honours course in lattice theory and topology). After this I ended up doing what I really wanted to, which was an MSc in pure mathematics.

I also did probably the first 1/3 of Strang's course (even though I had already done linear algebra formally in my original course). I think online math courses are a mixed bag and it could even be that it works better when you have an idea already of _why_ you want to do it and the applications thereof. Applications need not imply applied math—you can apply mathematics to other branches of mathematics.

The more difficult thing for me is to independently find research topics and subtopics. Mentorship in mathematics is very important.

</comment><comment><USER22> 7 non soft classes in a single summer is ambitious to say the least.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yeah, it is, its more of a loose goal, I'm doing research and working on finishing 2 Master's alongside it, so we'll see what happens! I really just want to learn and grow, so if it takes months or if it takes years, I'm in!

<comment> barry-cotter What are you Mastering in? What's your research on?

<comment><AUTHOR> I'm studying CS and Biology, and I'm currently researching disentangling object representations using brain inspired auto encoders

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> I studied a very similar curriculum over ten years ago during my Physics undergrad. While it's not strictly "useful" in a day to day sense, nor do I remember much of the details of these courses or methods, I can tell you that studying applied math has served me very well during my career as an actuary.

Studying applied math gives you the skills of being able to approach problems in a logical, analytical, and above all PERSISTENT way (because let me tell you will you ever have some late nights banging your head on the desk trying to wrap your brain around these problems). These skills are crucial in any field where you need to create mathematical representations of a system - <USER3> break apart and understand someone else'a models.

Also - partial differential equations are just cool! They are like a mathematical rubick's cube. Solving them will legitimately make you smarter.

</comment><comment><USER24> One question for all the self-learners here (I have immense admiration). Do these courses inform your day to day job in some way? Or is this for personal knowledge (even more impressive)? How do you find the damn time? Need some suggestions. My goals are infinite and my time is so short.

<comment><USER25> If learning is part of a well-rounded set of activities that you are doing in your life, then it will lead to several positive effects. One, learning new things, by itself, with nothing else, reduces cognitive decline and increase brain health. But optimal learning and brain health also derives from physical activity and sleep, so it's a small part of the puzzle.

EDIT: Brain health also derives from a healthy social life, I forgot to add that to the list involved. Having friends that are interested in learning the same things as you, and discussing it with them, help you to develop self- checking techniques.

Also, Alan Kay pointed out in a speech in the last few years that our economy is doing really poorly right now producing researchers, and people who understand research, and you really can't get there without a good education.

I'll go one further and suggest that 'Transfer', which is the application of understanding of one topic to another, is one of the prime sources of what we consider 'innovation' or 'paradigm shifts'.

I feel as if that should be enough proof that education is an end to itself, but I need to be really clear: continuing education doesn't need to have a goal, and I would strongly discourage you from adding one. I go to the gym all the time without goals. I go for walks everyday, without goals. Each of these items are basic maintenance. Learning new things _well_ is basic maintenance for your brain. If you want to do continuous learning then you should install Anki, get a notebook and learn Cornell notes, then go out and take a quick class, lecture, or study material.

If you are learning something new, the fastest way to learn and retain the material is to move to self-testing as quickly as possible. I can go over this in more detail, but perhaps the first class I would recommend would be "Learning How To Learn" (Coursera), which produced a serious attitude shift in me about learning and what I am capable of as a human.

<comment><USER24> Thank you for the great reply and apologies for dropping out. I would like to know more about self-testing and how it helped you.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> Great idea! I've used OCW to "re-take" a class I last had 25 years ago, plus a couple I never took, but never through to do a whole program.

A suggestion: 18.01 and 18.02 are typically taken in the first two semesters of freshman year (and many take 18.03 the first of sophomore year, or even the semester before). As you're well past the high schoolers who push up at MIT, I suggest 18.014 / 18.024 / 18.034 for more theory (those weren't available when I was a student).

It's funny: when I was an undergrad Math was quote popular because it had so few requirements and on your page it still looks that way (compare to course 6). I wonder if they same dynamic still applies?

</comment><comment><USER10> While at it pick up Julia, another MIT product.

esp for applied math it's invaluable compared with python or matlab.

Juno is a nice ide, it's gotten a lot better over the last two months.

<comment><USER27> Why is Julia better than MATLAB or Python? Most applied mathematicians I know are in MATLAB all the time.

<comment><USER10> I mean julia is much younger. The main strengths are that it's open source, it's a much nicer language, you can actually ship things in it (good luck doing that in matlab), package manager, etc etc. Matlab is legit not great.

<comment><USER27> Ah ok. The reason I like MATLAB is cause I want a "numerical experiment" and I don't want to have to learn a lot to get it to run

<comment><USER10> Check julia. Its not unlike matlab.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> A lot of these earlier courses are available on edX, too. The platform won't grade you unless you pay, though.

</comment><comment><USER29> It's amazing and wonderful you can get an MIT education from watching youtube videos of their lectures. I've used them to fill in gaps in my education. Highly recommended, and it's to MIT's great credit that they're doing this.

<comment><USER30> To really get an MIT education, you should team up with one or two other folks and work through the labs and problem sets together. There's no substitute for the learning you get by explaining your understanding of a problem and hashing out how to approach it with someone else — and by building things!</comment></comment>


D.C. Council approves 'living wage' bill over Wal-Mart ultimatum - <AUTHOR> http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/dc-politics/dc-council-approves-living-wage-bill-over-wal-mart-ultimatum/2013/07/10/724aab6e-e96f-11e2-a301-ea5a8116d211_story.html

<comment><USER4> This article almost willfully leaves out a pretty crucial detail: the living wage only applies to businesses that have non-union employees. So let's be clear what this is: it's an effort to give union-run stores a labor advantage and protect them from non-union competition. Safeway and Giant foods don't have to worry about competing with WalMart or Target's rock-bottom prices[1]

[1] [http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142412788732439940457858...](http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324399404578583650562822608.html)

<comment><USER5> Safeway and Giant (and Kroger and Supervalu etc) are forced by the UFCW to pay high wages ($18/hour in Seattle), and fully fund medical insurance for every employee working more than 20 hours _per month_.

As a system admin, it's taken me 6 years after college to get back to the wage I made as a grocery store checker.

<comment><AUTHOR> The west coast stores and east coast stores must have different unions. When I worked at non-union Kmart I made more per hour than I could have made at union Safeway (east coast).

<comment><USER5> As far as I know, they're all the same union (UFCW), but they have regional contracts. I'm pretty sure Portland (Oregon)'s grocery workers have a lower top pay.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I like to think of governments as old software programs. When they are first built, they are built with enthusiasm and passion to create the next new shiny thing. After a couple hundred years, they evolve into a giant pile of organic hacks for features to satisfy their users, and changes to fix existing bugs just result in regression. This is one of those patches, and it will regress.

</comment><comment><USER7> Why stop at living wage? Everyone deserves to be comfortable, no? They should pass a 'comfortable wage' bill. Heck, it should be illegal to work for anything less than $50 an hour. What we need is politicians with the leadership necessary to outlaw poverty.

<comment><USER8> Hopefully you're being sarcastic?

If not, my response to that there should never be a 'comfortable wage'. Everyone needs that crappy job they hate - dishwasher, ditch digger - <USER2> pays nothing in order to motivate them to get out of said situation.

We all (most of us) worked that crappy job when we were younger, and hated it, and one of many reasons I stay motivated to provide value now is, well, because I don't want to be a dishwasher.

That's the beauty of The Market.

<comment><USER9> That's disgusting. We should make sure people have the chance to suffer because suffering makes us better people? That's moralistic crap. If we have the resources to diminish suffering without causing harm, it is wrong not to do it. If all work could be automated, it would be wrong to have people who don't want to work working.

I think there is a reason for not having a mandatory comfortable wage; some people would simply not find jobs if we raised the minimum wage to a point were it becomes unprofitable to pay it. But that's the only reason for paying less. Not some BS sanctity of hard work thing.

<comment><USER10> No, you have it all backwards...

Working at a crappy job causes suffering. Not having ANY job causes MORE suffering.

The solution you put forward (making crappy jobs illegal) is not somehow going to magically make poor people suffer less.

<comment><USER9> I didn't put that solution forward, another poster did. I don't really agree with him, because I think under the current circumstances, making all crappy jobs illegal is bad, as you say. I do believe some of the crappiest jobs should be illegal (that's why I agree with minimum wages as long as the amount is well thought), because that keeps the worst abusers in check. However, I think justifying it with "the market" and "Everyone needs that crappy job they hate in order to motivate them" is wrong. The only reason for that jobs to exist is that we can't provide better ones right now.

<comment><USER11> So what are the "crappiest" jobs then? What metric would you use to measure them? Should all jobs (or most) seen on the show Dirty Jobs be outlawed? How many of those being outlawed would it take before society collapses due to no garbage being collected, maintenance being done on bridges, fishing not happening, etc. And are those jobs actually crappier than working at Wal-Mart or K-Mart? Which should be outlawed, under your scenario?

<comment><USER9> No. No particular job should be outlawed, probably (that is, nothing that is legal to do for free should be illegal to do for money). But the point of minimum wage, as I see it, is to keep potential employers from abusing people who are not in a position to demand better wages, because if they won't work for almost no money, they won't get to work at all. The idea is that if you need someone to do work for you, you are generating profit from that, or you wouldn't hire them. By having a floor on how much you must pay, you are trying to keep people in bad situations from being abused by those who would exploit them.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Why is this targeted at large retailers? If the DC minimum wage is insufficient for "living", shouldn't it be raised, instead of a somewhat arbitrary law forcing only retailers to raise their wages?

<comment><USER13> oh, it's horrible. When I lived in the DC area, I used to volunteer for this organization: [http://www.foodforalldc.org/wp/](http://www.foodforalldc.org/wp/) \- and I delivered food to the worst parts of the city, where people are very much unemployed and living off of far less of an income than the minimum wage. This law does nothing to help them, whatsoever.

I have no particular love for walmart besides their knack for being good at delivering things efficiently (their aggressive use of eminent domain makes me angry). But laws should be fair and applied equitably. What this law is - <USER3> nothing but political posturing, demagoguery masked in the language of helping the less well off. I wonder, do the DC council members actually lift a hand to help out the people they say they care about, when a camera's not rolling?

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> This is smart and it's just DC protecting itself. When the full-time (actually 39 hour/week, so they don't get health insurance) Wal-Mart employee making $8.25/hour still needs food stamps to live, who do you think gets stuck with the bill for that? The DC government does.

<comment><USER10> Fantasic! Now these potential Wal-Mart employees are back to making $0.00/hour. Oh, and they have to pay more for their groceries now, too.

Congratulations on a job well done, DC Council!

<comment><USER14> Assuming Wal-Mart actually sticks to its ultimatum.

If one of the most successful businesses in history can't find a way to turn a profit in one of the most populous, affluent areas in the country while paying employees enough to live in the same area, then maybe they shouldn't be in business after all. Like the article says, Wal-Mart needs DC. DC doesn't need Wal-Mart.

CostCo has no problems here and they pay around $15/hour.

<comment><USER12> CostCo and Wal-Mart have pretty different business models despite being competitors. It should be noted that CostCo's retail business, without the membership fees, is actually not profitable. It's the membership fees that put them in the black.

Source: [http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/11/26/why-can- t-w...](http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/11/26/why-can-t-walmart-be- more-like-costco.html)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> If 40 hours working at minimum wage is not enough to live on, shouldn't the minimum wage be raised?

<comment><USER10> Why are people so eager to make it harder for poor people to get jobs by forcing price controls onto employers?

footoverhand: I want as many people to be able to work as possible. If you think it is too hard for people to live on the salaries that are available at their skill level, then by all means we can talk about improving the social safety net... but forcing companies to lay off people to maintain their salary budgets through salary controls is NOT a good way to help poor people.

<comment><USER16> I don't necessarily agree, but couldn't this same rationale be used to argue against any minimum wage whatsoever?

<comment><USER10> Yes, I believe minimum wage is in general bad for poor people.

No, I don't have a PhD in Economics and am willing to accept I could be wrong in this assessment.

<comment><USER17> what do you think of the idea of a maximum wage. the most you could make if you are not an owner or partner in a for profit company?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> I feel like I read this somewhere before... Pretty sure it was Atlas Shrugged, not the best literary work, but paints a pretty clear picture of a world where people get money they don't earn.

<comment><USER19> For all of its critique, Atlas Shrugged surprisingly seems to predict where our government is headed.

<comment><USER18> I've posted something twice citing that book and it always gets down voted, on the other hand when I state some of the ideology of the book it gets up voted (strange). Just thought i'd share.

Also, I agree it's where the government is heading. People need to learn that life is what they make it, not what is handed to them.

<comment><USER10> It's overall a lousy book that happened to get some obvious things right.

The fact that people in her time disagreed with these obvious things does not mean Ayn Rand was particularly prescient, it just means lots of people believe obviously wrong things.

<comment><USER18> Personally I agree, although I have had many friends who enjoyed the books romantic style, they also like Jane Eyre, Wuthering heights, Frankenstein, etc. Its just a style that I (and most) do not find enjoyable I guess.

I do however enjoy her non-fiction. Her arguments are much more concise (12 page explain her entirely philosophy as opposed to 1025 or w.e Atlas Shrugged was).</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Smaller Than a Laptop, but Bigger Than a Phone - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/05/technology/personaltech/05basics.html?8dpc

<comment><USER2> I found this article informative not for the information about the computers but rather for the glimpse at how clueless the analysts were.

It's amazing that someone whose only job is to know an industry inside and out can be so out of touch with its customers.</comment>


Costco gained a cult following by breaking every rule of retail - <AUTHOR> https://thehustle.co/costco-membership-economics/ <comment><USER2> The fact that I can trust Costco to have good quality products with low prices and great return policy means that I never have to buy day-to-day items from Amazon.

Amazon is where I go to buy books (and obscure one-off things that I can't buy from anywhere else). When buying from Amazon, I have to read the reviews, analyze them to figure out if the reviews are fake, read the return policy, research the seller, figure out the shipping dates etc. Given how broken the search is, I am not even sure if I am buying the best item in the category. Most of the time I end up reading wire-cutter reviews before buying from Amazon.

Amazon has billions of items at this point, and it is on me to figure out the right stuff that I should buy. I don't have that kind of time or patience to read hundreds of reviews before buying every single item.

Compared to this, Costco is a breeze. If they carry it, I just buy it assuming that it is going to be good quality. For me, the value they provide is curation of selection and filtering for quality. I am willing to pay the membership fee for this.

And this is anecdotally true for almost all of the families in my friends group in the Seattle area. I can see the perspective that if you don't have a family, the savings are probably not a big deal. And I also agree that there are people who don't want to drive to a store to buy stuff. But, I for one, am glad that Costco exists.

<comment><USER3> I disagree here. Costco is now often trading on its reputation for getting you a bulk discount, but when you compare them to Aldi, or even to a larger supermarket, you're often getting things in large quantity for the same price or more than you'd pay in small quantity. This is especially true for things like cheese. Meanwhile, you're giving up the opportunity to get a superior product. In the cheese example, Costco stocks Belgioioso mozzarella, which to me is about store-brand quality. Popular because it doesn't taste like cheese. For a decent price, you can buy much better mozzarella which has some flavor. And you don't have to buy 3 lbs at a time.

<comment><USER4> I was doing price comparison just yesterday and was pretty disappointed in what I found for Costco prices. I thought they were better.

Kerrygold butter is cheaper at Walmart.

Organic chicken stock is cheaper at _Whole Foods_.

Organic diced tomatoes at Costco however are very well priced.

<comment><USER5> Since this is an item I get regularly - it's $9 for a 4-pack of Kerrygold butter at the Mountain View Costco ($2.25/ 8oz bar). Same 8oz butter is almost double at Safeway or Whole Foods. The local Walmart is $2.83 per bar.

I have rarely found Costco items more expensive than other local stores, at least for my regular items.

I discount Trader Joe's since they don't carry branded items other than wine and beer.

<comment><USER6> _I discount Trader Joe's since they don't carry branded items other than wine and beer._

They carry a variety of branded items including Kerrygold, Tilamook, Rouge et Noir (Bay Area cheese maker), those kringles, Spindrift, Columbus (lunchmeat), those organic herbs, and Tom's of Maine (hygiene). There's probably a few more.

<comment><USER7> It's funny that you mention Rouge et Noir; I think they've been re-branded to "Marin French Cheese". I miss the old name.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Cult following is a good choice of words.

It's one of the few businesses where I feel like they get most things right. It's always a good experience going in there and walking out with a cart full of things. I'm happy to see them be successful.

I usually buy frozen meats and things that don't expire quickly in bulk and then they last for months. I reserve vegetables and fruits for a local grocery store since their quality is good and those things tend to go fast.

But at Costco sometimes you get lucky with clothes too. They were overstocked on Puma sneakers in my exact size. Each pair was $10 and they are exactly the style I like (low cut / not flashy) so I bought 2 pairs of them. I legit walk 3-5 miles a day with one of the pairs and over a year later of walking on concrete they are still fully in tact (no holes, good looking enough to wear them out to dinner, etc.). It's mind boggling. I've never had a pair of sneakers last this long while still looking presentable after that much usage. The 2nd pair I bought is still brand new.

Those sneakers alone cover the cost of like 2-3 years worth of membership fees.

<comment><USER9> Costco has better quality meat than the grocery stores -- although I don't find their prime grade meats to be significantly better than the choice cuts. The vegetables and fruits are high quality too, but I live with enough people to make it worthwhile.

I live across the street from a grocery store. Over the last 30 years, I've seen it transformed from a slightly upscale supermarket to a glorified mini- market. After every remodeling or floor space expansion, the selection and service would get a little worse. Now that Albertsons bought all of the supermarkets in the area they've significantly cut the quality in the last bastions of why I would shop there at all -- produce and bakery. They do have a large enough alcohol section that I get to see shoplifters running out of the store all the time.

So now I'm driving ten miles to Costco to get quality ingredients when I live across the street from a supermarket. The clerks read their script, "Did you find everything you need?" and I respond, "Well, I didn't find X and Y." Their response: "Oh." And people wonder why they're all losing ground to big box stores.

In retail you can compete on service, selection, and/or prices. Fry's Electronics chose the last two, but were undercut on both by Amazon. Local supermarkets seem to have yielded on all three to Costco which is freaking crazy.

<comment><USER10> I disagree about the meat. Publix has much better quality chicken and pork, especially their Greenwise brand. Costco chicken is freakishly big, even compared to Tyson or Purdue at Kroger. I used to find weird spots on the chicken breast and thighs I haven't seen elsewhere. The chicken is tougher as well.

The wild seafood is great. Choice Beef is the same as anywhere and I have no complaints. Prime beef is a great option but I rarely buy it.

<comment><USER11> Publix is a southeastern U.S. exclusive. I pity all the smug Bay Area folk who will never get to experience how wonderful this little grocery chain is.

<comment><USER10> Publix is opening a Greenwise Market store next to me. Can't wait to see all the good stuff.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I love love love Costco. Just an anecdote, but I reinforced my love for Costco yesterday in fact. Back in February, I bought new flooring for my entire house at Costco. Since I was doing my entire house, I over purchased to ensure that I wouldn't run out. I work full time so it took my a long time to finish installing the flooring, about 8 months. Yesterday I returned all the packages of flooring I didn't use to Costco. The person working at the return counter didn't even bat an eye at the fact I'd bought the flooring so long ago, she just handed me a wad of cash back. Absolutely great return policy. It would have been impossible to do something like that at Lowes or Home Depot, both of those stores give you a hard time after 90 days. I try to do all of my shopping at Costco and this is why. They just treat customers so, so well.

<comment><USER13> Bought a TV that died at 5 years. Costco had a 5 year warranty, so they gave me cash back, which I promptly bought another.

The new one has a seven year warranty, which is a combination of manufacture, Costco, Costco credit card, and Square Trade. Just can't beat that anywhere else.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> Fun fact about Costco. More than 100% of its profits come from membership fees. The actual selling of goods loses a small amount of money.

See this super interesting twitter thread:

[https://twitter.com/investing_city/status/117997425777998233...](https://twitter.com/investing_city/status/1179974257779982336)

<comment><USER15> No wonder I got such a pushy hard sell to upgrade. I was flat out promised that the upgrade couldn't possibly cost me more, even if I didn't shop very often and never took any special action. This was a lie, I lost around $100, and I stopped shopping at Costco.

<comment><USER16> The upgraded membership is 60usd more than the normal, gives you 2% back on purchases, and they will refund it to you if you ask, so not sure how you could lose 100 on that.

<comment><USER15> Maybe it was 60. I literally asked the cashier: "I will not remember to request a refund. Will it be automatically credited to me if I do not meet the threshold?", and they told me yes.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> For anyone interested in how Costco works as a business, there was an interesting 150-slide deck circulated last year that had some good insights and observations about Costco's model. [https://www.dropbox.com/s/7hohqj3rl2uv43p/COSTCO%20Deck.pdf?...](https://www.dropbox.com/s/7hohqj3rl2uv43p/COSTCO%20Deck.pdf?dl=0)

<comment><USER18> This deck is very interesting, assuming the data it's based on is legitimate. I didn't expect that to be the extent to which they outperform their competitors.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> One thing not mentioned in many of the comments is that Costco also rotates inventory based on season. A huge percentage of the inventory will change depending on what time of year it is and that can lead to both a kind of scarcity buying ("who knows when they'll have these pants again?") and novelty ("I wonder what they have this week?").

That, plus the bulk savings, plus the membership benefits (an almost absurd return policy), plus a well curated inventory of mid-to-high quality items (plus savings of own-brand "Kirkland signature") means Costco shoppers buy a lot, they buy often, and they keep doing so for years and years and years.

It's highly fragile in the sense that it's so simple, but other competitors haven't made a huge dent in the same segment (Sam's Club, BJ's, etc.). Costco is doing some magic combination right and they'll be the study stuff of b-school grads for decades.

 _edit_ one other thing. Model #s for Costco are often unique to Costco. It also makes comparison shopping difficult. Try comparing a printer or TV model # at Costco to others on-line. Chances are it only exists at Costco, which means both exclusivity as well as an assumption of quality + price due to other in-store contextual buying. People think they're buying something that's both special and a good buy, which further validates their yearly membership dues.

</comment><comment><USER20> I love Costco as a customer and a shareholder.

High quality products. Less frequent shopping. Ethical practices.

Protip: for perishable items like produce, we have a "Costco buddy system" \-- a few nearby friends who we can split bags of limes or onions with. Huge savings on produce this way.

<comment><USER21> They treat their workers well. Or at least they did when I worked there 15 years ago. I was paid like $13/hr, time and a half on Sundays, 401k, health benefits, and regular raises. Which is pretty fantastic for someone making pizzas and slinging hotdogs.

<comment><USER22> They still do. Trader Joes does too. I love both stores, and do most of my shopping between the two. It's nice to know that 99% of the retail people I interact with are being treated well by their employers.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> FTA:

> Costco has found immense success by prioritizing the interests of its > customers and employees over those of its shareholders.

I always hate articles that are premised on the above because the article always ends up contradicting this point. The truth is, Costco has been great for all of the above over the last 5yrs. I wish people would stop making it seem like the core of any successful business and what is taught in B Schools is screwing over everyone except yourself. It's just not how the world works and that's proven over and over again.

</comment><comment><USER24> Well-paid workers, a limit on markup and careful curation of quality products get my dollar-vote every time. Thank you, Costco!

On the other hand, maximizing exploitation (treating workers with no respect and no humanity, paying them as little as possible and having my taxes cover the difference), maximizing profit (manipulating me and anyone using the platform as much as possible as to extract more) and peddling an avalanche of crappy and fake products... do not take my dollar-vote, Amazon.

</comment><comment><USER25> Costco's average selling price is also quite high. Very few items sell for less than ~$10, and anything that would normally go for significantly less gets sold in Costco-sized bundles to keep the unit price up.

One of their limiting factors for revenue per store is how quickly they can scan products at checkout. Higher ASP means more revenue for the same number of scans.

</comment><comment><USER26> I don't remember where I read the following analysis (maybe from someone here on HN?) but it goes something like this...

Costco's membership fee (minimum is $60) has several benefits that the media don't like to talk about -- because it's unpleasant to mention it. _The membership fee charged by Costco helps keep the riff-raff out._ Although the cheapest Costco membership at $60/year looks like a trivial amount to middle- income people, even that tiny cost is enough to be an unreachable Mt Everest for the poorest segments of society. Therefore, the membership fee acts as a _socially acceptable way_ to keep out the undesirables.

Often, you'll see a thread on reddit showing photos of "Walmart shoppers" with tube tops and loose pants with butt cracks showing. That's not the type of clientele that shops at Costco. Walmart also has a huge problem with shoplifting and employee theft (what the retail industry calls "shrinkage") and therefore, there's often a police car outside to arrest somebody. Costco's membership requirement is the hurdle that helps them avoid all that.

Costco makes money on the membership fees itself, but they also _save money_ by not having to deal with shrinkage because their higher-income clientele has less problems.

The above advantages only adds to the other positives such as simpler logistics of ~4000 SKUs at Costco vs 40000 SKUs at Walmart.

<comment><USER27> Sounds like an erroneous analysis to me. The cost of a $60 membership pales in comparison to the cost of the space needed to store bulk items, especially refrigerated, and the cost of travel to and from a Costco, which are not located in the poorest areas.

Most importantly, $60 cash upfront for a membership fee is nothing compared to all the cash you need to buy bulk items upfront. Is selling bulk items a way to keep "riff-raff" out?

<comment><USER26> _> Is selling bulk items a way to keep "riff-raff" out?_

Yes, bulk size prices can act as a secondary filter but an interesting mechanism is the membership cards are _checked at the door_ and _physically keep people out_ whereas bulk prices (even if low-income people don't buy them) don't accomplish the exact same effect. Membership gatekeeping at the entrance keeps the undesired shoppers away from the loss leaders of cheap $2 hotdogs & pizza, and taking advantage of the various free samples of food demonstrated at the aisles without buying anything. The door-based gatekeeping (as opposed to bulk prices gatekeeping) also minimizes customer shoplifting, etc.

There are also multiple levels of what "bulk" supply is. Is it restaurant- sized bulk (e.g. a gargantuan 4-gallon tub of mayonnaise) -- or a more modest family-sized type of bulk (e.g. 35-cans of Costco brand Kirkland soda for $7.99). Walmart sells 20-can pack of Coke for $16.00.

There's a lot of stuff that Costco sells that poor families could buy. Their bread is very cheap and one can buy 1 loaf for $5.00 instead of buying in bulk. Another person mentioned Costco gasoline is often the cheapest in town and poor people could save money refilling their car there. Their Kirkland clothes are really inexpensive. I just bought a 6-pack of Kirkland tshirts for $12.97. Walmart sells 6-pack FruitLoom for $16.00. (I think you'll agree 6 count of tshirts is not a bulk supply.) However, to save $3.00 on tshirts in that one transaction and similar subsequent ones, one has to plan ahead and spend $60 upfront. If you look at businesses for poor people like cash checking services, payday loans, and "Buy Here Pay Here" used-car lots, a lot of low-income people really can't scrape together $60 and pay it _now_ for the purpose of saving more than $60 in the _future_. Their budgeting is so day-to- day (literally "paycheck-to-paycheck") that they have to shop at Walmart which is often _more expensive_ than Costco.

EDIT add for clarity: when you say _" , $60 cash upfront for a membership fee is nothing compared to all the cash you need to buy bulk items upfront"_, you're using a middle-class income lens. E.g. I'm also middle class and I spend $7000/year at Costco which dwarfs the $60 membership fee. Yes, poor people can't spend that same way. Instead, I'm saying that poor people can spend much less (say ~$500/year) and still get more than $60 savings back _without tying up lots of cash in bulk purchases_ like you and I would do.

<comment><USER28> Slight clarification, I'm pretty sure you can eat at the hotdog bar without a membership.

<comment><USER29> In a lot of places, their pharmacy isn't allowed to require a membership, so just say that and they'll let you in the store.

<comment><USER30> It's a federal law, so its all places (in America.)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> I find going to Costco in an urban area really painful. Lines just for parking 3 blocks away. Crowds of pushy unpleasant people and lines. If you value your time and well being, it ends up not so much of a bargain. Now using Instacart to get Costco delivered, love it.

<comment><USER32> The Costco shopping experience is atrocious. Huge lines, people running over you with giant carts, completely unmarked aisles and you have to run around trying to find an employee to ask where something is. And then there is the checkout gauntlet where a funnel of grumpy people has receipts checked by just one or two checkers.

The low prices and in some cases availability of certain products is the only reason I go.

<comment><USER3> I've never seen marked aisles aside from the number. I always assumed it's because Costco wants you to visit every aisle.

<comment><USER33> Agree. They also move items around. So you can't just zoom to the one item you need, you have to go hunt.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> The story seems to be more about the mythos of Costco than its actual business practices. Sure they work with suppliers to reduce costs but so do all their competitors like Walmart and Trader Joe's. And they pay better wages but they also have fewer employees per store. And at this point most stores have worked around the membership issue by using loyalty cards and digital discounts.

<comment><USER35> Most stores didn't really work around anything.

Costco performs a credit check when you sign up for a membership. It requires a state ID to sign up for a membership. Like voter ID requirements, this has impacts on the people who shop there. Previously, they also tied the membership to qualifying for their partnered credit card. It is true that you can pay with cash. Ultimately, I'm trying to explain why Costco shoppers look the way they do. It may affect the bottom line to put up these obstacles, because people who meet these criteria can and do spend more.

Walmart only relies ownership of a car to target a richer shopper. Whole Foods and Trader Joe's, often used for single people or non car owners, locates its stores nonetheless in certain wealthier urban locations. Loyalty cards do not achieve these ends.

The knock on effects are immense. Grocery stores, for normal people, are as much about the discounts as seeing your own kind there. That's not just economic stratification, it's also the ethnic groceries, some of them really big, expensive item enterprises (like H Mart).

These are experiences Amazon cannot provide. You don't get to see the other Amazon shoppers, and you don't get a sense of whether Amazon is a "cheap" or "expensive" store. And yet this is precisely an experience people want, just as psychologically important as 1 day shipping. Costco, like Amazon, occupies a valuable psychological niche. The question is if there exist any viable retail that does not.

<comment><USER36> I'm not sure what you're talking about. A Costco membership is $60 and you can pay in cash. There's no credit card needed. You don't have to sign up for their credit card either, and it's not really even pushed when you sign up for membership. What gave you the impression that you have to qualify for a credit card to shop there?

<comment><USER37> Until 2016, Costco and Amex had an exclusive partnership. You could pay either in cash or with Amex, usually the Costco Amex tied to your membership card.

Now they take any Visa card, and have converted Costco Amex cards to Costco Citi VISA cards.

<comment><USER27> The AmEx agreement was exclusive to credit cards, you could also pay with any debit card.

<comment><USER37> Oops you're right - Amex, cash, or debit.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> I quit Costco after I realized most items I needed from them were generally about the same or only pennies cheaper per unit, sometimes actually more expensive, and almost always cheaper when on sale at a normal supermarket. For example ground beef was usually about $3/lb, the same as my local supermarket has on sale every other week for the same quality/lean level.

Couple that with the inconvenience of having to go to a second location for normal shopping needs, and one that is usually a jam packed on parking and checkout lines... It just wasn't worth it for the small handful of things that were a good deal.

<comment><USER39> I'm sure it varies from area to area but here in the Seattle area I've found that as compared to the standard supermarkets (meaning Safeway, QFC, Fred Meyer), Costco sells prime grade beef at the same price as supermarkets sell choice grade and organic chicken at the same price as supermarkets sell conventional. But what really gives Costco's meat department the edge is that their meat looks so much better/fresher than the supermarkets.

It's a similar story for organic produce, eggs, and so on. Items like cheese, dried fruit and nuts are about half the price of comparable quality elsewhere. And then there's items like olive oil where Costco sells at a great price with the added bonus that you get actual olive oil and not some blend of unknown origin.

But if you live near enough to a Costco and own a car, the real killer-app is their gasoline. In my area, it is 50-60 cents a gallon cheaper than gas stations. From this alone my membership would more than pay for itself even if I never stepped inside the store.

<comment><USER29> > But if you live near enough to a Costco and own a car, the real killer-app > is their gasoline. From this alone my membership

Just clone the magstripe on a friend's Costco card for the gas ;)

What I don't understand is why no gas station other than Costco has hoses that can reach around a vehicle.

<comment> evil-olive > What I don't understand is why no gas station other than Costco has hoses > that can reach around a vehicle.

Regular gas stations rarely have a line of people waiting for a pump. Costco often does. Managing that queue becomes much easier if any car in line can take any open gas pump, without worrying about which side the tank door is on (or messing with the flow of traffic by trying to back into a spot).

<comment><USER29> > Regular gas stations rarely have a line of people waiting for a pump.

I can understand the rareness part, but some gas stations are known for being discounters, but I still haven't seen them use it, despite their traffic jams.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER40> Excerpt:

"When Costco comes across a product it likes, it often spends months working closely with the vendor and its factories to both reduce the price of an item and amp up its quality. In the 2012 CNBC doc "Costco Craze," a Costco buyer related one tale about a toy he found that retailed for $100. The company had the option of buying the unit for $50 wholesale and selling it for around $60 — but this wasn't good enough. Over a period of months, Costco ended up working with the vendor and its factory to redesign the toy from the ground up, analyzing every part of the process for ways to cut costs. In the end, Costco got the vendor to reduce the price by 50%, and sold it for $30."

You'd never think that a retailer could or would do that, but Costco apparently does!

</comment><comment><USER36> Costco really has an interesting business model, but the part that really hooks me is the quality/price ratio you get there. If you buy an item at Costco, you can absolutely bet it's going to be the highest quality item in whatever category you're shopping. You can also bet it's significantly more inexpensive than anywhere else you can get it. I spend around $10,000 at Costco every year and every time I walk out I feel like I got a great deal.

BTW, if you're a member and haven't tried the Kirkland (Costco's house brand) wines, prepare to taste an $8 bottle of wine that puts every $100 bottle you've ever tasted to shame.

<comment><USER41> > If you buy an item at Costco, you can absolutely bet it's going to be the > highest quality item in whatever category you're shopping.

> prepare to taste an $8 bottle of wine that puts every $100 bottle you've > ever tasted to shame.

Are you sure that Costco is in the "absolutely highest quality" category? Rather, I'd suggest they're in the "a little nicer than average, and definitely not garbage" category that most regular folks are looking for.

For example, our largest Costco purchase (besides our mortgage - btw, Costco has great mortgage rates!) has been our washer and dryer. The units are _certainly_ not "highest quality in category" but they are pretty nice. Similarly, Costco wine is good, but I have had $100 bottles that were better.

</comment></comment><comment><USER42> Both Costco and Trader Joe's have a winning recipe: keep a limited amount of any one item, and do tests to see what that best item is. I trust that the tortilla chips at Costco are going to be pretty good even if I haven't had them yet. Same with TJ.

Contrast to the traditional supermarket: throw spaghetti at the consumer and see what sticks.

</comment><comment><USER43> For our honeymoon we booked through Costco travel to Cancun and it was a great value, and one of the benefits was knowing they had our back if there were any flight cancellation/delays. My wife had used them a year previous to Hawaii which had a flight cancellation. The airline wouldn't make her whole on the hotels/excursions. But Costco went to bat and got all of her money back and some.

</comment><comment><USER28> One of Costco's biggest innovations was figuring out how to manage channel conflict for its everyday products.

<comment><USER44> What's channel conflict?

<comment><USER45> I make widgets, and contract with you to sell my widgets exclusively in some geographic region. Then I start selling my widgets on my website, and people from your region start buying things via my site.

We have a channel conflict.

They happen in other ways as well.

<comment><USER46> Thx. So how does Costco manage this?

<comment><USER47> Often by selling Costco specific versions of things. For example, Google Wifi is normally available in 1 packs and 3 packs, but Costco offers a 4 pack. It's literally just a 1 pack and 3 pack put into a bigger box, but it sells for $299 vs the 3 pack at $259.

<comment><USER48> Yes this specifically I bought the 4 pack and it was weird that it was packaged 3 & 1

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER49> It appears the origin of the idea was in a non-profit consumer organization called FedCo - [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fedco](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fedco). This company then inspired Sol Price to found the modern day bulk retail model.

From wikipedia:

"It was founded by 800 U.S. Post Office employees who wanted to leverage their buying power by purchasing goods directly from wholesalers, and eliminate the additional markup of a retail store"

</comment><comment><USER50> The one notable experience I have with Costco is with buying a Samsung TV. The Samsung warranty only lasted a year. Costco extended it free of charge to two years. They offered in-home delivery for a great price, and on the eve of the two year mark when the TV developed vertical banding they picked it up from inside our home for no charge and gave me a full refund -- which I then invested in a new TV from Costco.

</comment><comment><USER51> Great documentary I saw on CNBC about Costco:

The Costco Craze - Inside the Warehouse Giant

[https://www.cnbc.com/the-costco-craze-inside-the- warehouse-g...](https://www.cnbc.com/the-costco-craze-inside-the-warehouse- giant/)

My key takeaways: \- Costco orders at scale - any suppliers they work with has to be able to supply millions of items per week \- Costco procurement works with suppliers to optimize the suppliers' process for Costco (it's a conversation, not an order) \- Costco really thinks about their members' preferences. When they procure at such quantity, they don't want to be stuck with it!

Another thing I did not know: Costco has EVERY purchase each member has made since 2009!

The fact that they will honor (almost) any return of their item since then is mind-blowing. If you want to return something before 2009, just show them the receipt. The only thing they won't let you return is electronics past 90 days (dammit! :-) )

<comment><USER52> you used to be able to return electronics (even after years). people abused it

</comment></comment><comment><USER53> I don't understand all the love for Costco here. I recently rejoined and now remember why I canceled in the first place. I recently had a baby, so I joined for the diapers. Well, on my first trip, I learned they don't carry P or N sizes. Now that my baby is big enough for size 1, of course they are out of Huggies in size 1. But they have the Kirkland brand, which is a crapshoot in general.

I used to love some canned mushrooms they had, then they just stopped carrying them. I loved calzones they stopped carrying 5 years ago. Sometimes you can get Tide or kombucha there, sometimes not. Kirkland products can be great, then they suddenly change them. And nothing makes my blood boil like a line to leave the store for the receipt check while you have to fight off the Lennox, phone, and solar sales people.

At least my neighborhood King Soopers is consistent with stocking products and keeping their store brands the same.

<comment><USER54> Receipt checks are an instakill on any affinity I might have for a business. Once the items are paid for and past the register, I find it despicable that anyone feels the right to inspect my belongings. (I realize it's in the membership contract, and it is the reason I quit using Costco.)

<comment><USER55> I feel the same way; I know it's a bit irrational but it's really annoying and leads me to minimize trips. I especially don't like that they will insist it has nothing to do with LP and is only to make sure shoppers saved as much as they were supposed to; I resent being lied to so blatantly. Sadly, this practice will continue to push the transition to online ordering.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER56> When I regularly printed my favorite photos in large sizes, there was a Costco in my area well-known in the photography community for having a well- calibrated printer and knowledgeable staff, and their large sizes were crazy cheap (I think perhaps $3 for a quality 12x18 photo).

Much easier than keeping my personal printer running properly.

</comment><comment><USER57> No, costco does well because warehouse clubs target B2B markets as well as consumers. I used to work at a warehouse club, and generally people would come in to stock food banks, buy for restaurants, supply their vending machine routes and halfway houses, and more.

Thats why all the giant size packages. They lock in the small business market or nonprofits, because its far easier to buy in bulk there than navigate a grocery store.

</comment><comment><USER58> My wife will not allow me to go to Costco unsupervised. :)

</comment><comment><USER59> Costco's return policy is amazing. I bought a bidet once and after three years the thing stopped working. The warranty had long passed. On a whim I took it back to Costco and they accepted the return. I kind of felt ashamed to return a used toilet item.

For large ticket items, I now buy from Costco with their Citi credit card, which has 2 extra years for extended warranty on top of the manufacturer warranty.

</comment><comment><USER60> As a German, the way Costco operates is really interesting.

I guess the closest comparable thing to Costco in Germany would be something like Metro or Selgros.

Tho access to those isn't "gated" with a membership fee, but with a business license, as their target audience are actually other businesses and not individual customers.

Where do US American businesses go to buy their wholesale supplies?

<comment><USER61> Costco was started as a business supplies wholesaler. They shifted to a consumer orientation and not requiring a business license as they realized that most customers were buying significant amounts for their own personal use, and not just for business use.

There are still many other strictly business-serving wholesalers, too, of course, often specialized by vertical - e.g. Sysco is specialized in foodservice.

</comment></comment><comment><USER62> I want to know, how do Costco's sale prices (coupon book) affect the markup/margins on a product? If the normal markup is less than 11%, is the sale price markup less than say 5%?

Edit: Or alternatively, are Costco sales negotiated ahead of time with the product makers so the makers are taking the cut and Costco's margins remain?

<comment><USER63> Costco doesn't make a profit on most items it sells, and some times it even loses money. They get money almost entirely from memberships

<comment><USER64> I you apply membership revenue to operating costs, then all the profit comes from margins on sales.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER65> I really like the Costco locations with gas. That alone pays for the cost of the membership.

Diapers, paper towels, ziplock bags, dish soap are some of the other things I buy there.

The organic chicken, pork tenderloin, and baby back ribs are solid deals compared to other places I visit.

For smaller stuff like fruit, garlic, onions I stick with Trader Joes ( Aldi )

</comment><comment><USER66> They also pay their employees reasonably well, which makes for an efficient and pleasant shopping experience.

</comment><comment><USER67> I'm wondering how Costco has managed to hold out against the stockholders demanding more.

Bravo to them for doing it!

</comment><comment><USER68> My family has had mixed feelings about Costco. While it does sell bulk products, it makes local business struggle for clientele and sometimes runs them our of business. As someone from a family who has a locally run business it is difficult to support.

</comment><comment><USER69> I like costco, very much, however the contracts they have with home-services (water heater replacement, flooring install, solar install, blinds, etc.) are marked up 2x-3x what you can get elsewhere.

</comment><comment><USER70> A bit of hyperbole. Dark aisles? Stack of wooden pallets? Not in my Costco. Its almost too bright in there, and stuff is racked on custom high-volume plastic pallets?

</comment><comment><USER71> Costco is the saviour of small islands like Iceland, and Vancouver island.

Good video:

[https://youtu.be/4xOxXmyPD0I](https://youtu.be/4xOxXmyPD0I)

</comment><comment><USER72> I always thought of costco as the suburban lifestyle store. Where everything is costco sized for american sized suburban houses for american sized families.

</comment><comment><USER73> "Just what I wanted! A 4-pack of grand pianos!"

</comment><comment><USER74> If Costco doesn't have it, I don't need it.

</comment><comment><USER72> I always thought of costco as the suburban lifestyle store. Where everything is costco sized for american sized suburban houses.

</comment><comment><USER75> the only reason I don't shop at Costco anymore is because we could almost _never_ buy goods in quantities small enough to be feasible for our living space and rate of consumption.

Great store, otherwise.

</comment><comment><USER76> No one goes to Costco anymore, because it's too crowded, as the saying goes. It's become a victim of its own success.

<comment><USER33> from what I see, and do, people just go there early AM 5 min before it opens.

Avoids the folks who flock around the free handouts at lunchtime. Parking is easy. But you can't wait even 1/2 hour past opening. Get in right as it opens.

</comment></comment><comment><USER77> It is pretty amazing. A shop where I can roll up with a bag full of cash and ready to spend, and they say sorry, you're not a member, go spend that money elsewhere.

<comment><USER48> or become a member

</comment></comment><comment><USER78> Costco is the buffet model turned into a grocery store. Why buy 8 ounces of mayonnaise when you can buy 5 pounds. It caters to the American lust/love of bigger = better, when in practice it might just be better to buy less, and thus buy more often.

<comment><USER21> Except, for many things buying less frequently results in less packaging, fewer trips to the store, more economical purchases, etc. Lots of upsides to buy once, store for a while.

<comment><USER79> But it requires you to allocate personal space to store those purchases. A second freezer, or larger cupboard. So greater pressure on real estate. If I'm economizing my living space I won't be shopping at Costco.

<comment><USER33> I agree here. Second freezer and lots of space for storage is a must. Not for tiny apartments. A suburban phenomenon mostly.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Thoughts on AWS API Gateway - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/@peterbsmith/thoughts-on-aws-api-gateway-82c681e85d02#.2omaagzbu <comment><USER2> My short experience with AWS API gateway is that you can't configure it by hand even to expose a single GET request. I was putting it in front of an AWS Lambda function. It took about 10 curl calls bouncing long ids and tokens from one to the other and it didn't work. My fault for sure, I made some mistakes. Then I automated the process using one of the several tools that were born out of necessity, I suppose, and it worked. Amazon should take care of the developers of those tools or deliver their own convention over configuration tool to make the deployment at least as easy as writing a Rails route file, or a Flask / Sinatra one.</comment>


PS3 Users will get banned if caught hacking and running pirated softwares - <AUTHOR> http://itechvision.blogspot.com/2011/02/playstation-3-users-running-pirated.html Sony has just released an official Statement regarding PS3 Hacking and running Pirated softwares on it after such a long time. Months ago PS3 was hacked by fairflow team and Geohot. Sony filed a sue case against Geohot and some other hackers to cease hacking of PS3. <comment><USER2> Sony has the ability to win an attrition war by pushing frequent patches, unless the modders find a more automated way to conceal an unlocked PS3 on the PSN.</comment>


Yahoo's Incomprehensible Mission Statement - <AUTHOR> http://www.marksonland.com/2008/07/yahoos_incomprehensible_missio.html

<comment><USER2> The real problem with the new one is that it's circular. The old one was merely vague. The new one says "we do what we do."</comment>


It is not hard to edit Lisp code - <AUTHOR> http://yoo2080.wordpress.com/2014/07/20/it-is-not-hard-to-edit-lisp-code/

<comment><USER2> Automating the manipulation of S-expressions (i.e. via Paredit) makes quick, controlled edits feel almost like a second sense. I've found it to be the most painful part of going back to algol-style syntax.

</comment><comment><USER3> Please divide all your exercise numbers by 10, it was the thing that took my attention most while reading, which is probably not what you want.</comment>


Gaming on Linux Shuts Down, Plagurism and Hate to Blame - <AUTHOR> http://www.thepowerbase.com/2014/10/gaming-linux-shuts-plagurism-hate-blame/

<comment><USER2> Like CocaKoala, I have no idea what Gaming on Linux is, and the article wasn't at all helpful in explaining it. It must have been those "high editorial standards" getting in the way. Let's take this from the top:

* It's hard to know where to start with the primary image here. First, it's a terrible, low-res social network profile pic. Second, it's a crappy photoshop. Third, it includes a profanity that ranges from "very rude" in most of the English-speaking world to "extremely offensive" in other parts. Very bad on multiple levels.

* The article contains a large number of simple grammar and usage mistakes, making it all the more troubling that the author is apparently also the editor of this publication. Many nouns are capitalized for no apparent reason. The author appears to believe - incorrectly - that ellipsis is an acceptable substitute for the common period.

Linux distro names are italicized for some reason. Phrases are bold-faced for emphasis, as though on a teenager's LiveJournal. The list of mystifying errors is long.

* As if the basic mechanical problems in the piece weren't enough, the author's actual writing focuses heavily on childish invective and name-calling, to the near-exclusion of basic facts and narrative. He veers wildly among topics, stopping here to heap abuse on people who have nothing to do with the article he's writing, and pausing there to - unwisely - foreground his own editorial prowess.

In short - this is an amateurish, mean-spirited and frankly quite depressing excuse for a piece of online journalism, written with a breathtaking lack of skill by an author for whom the term "hack" is far too good.

</comment><comment><USER3> That Facebook popup makes me instantly hate this site.

<comment><AUTHOR> I hate it too. I just turned it off. Thanks!

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> The primary picture to go along with the article made me lose most of my interest; the edit made me lost almost all of the rest (when it turns out that the headline of the blog post is factually wrong, you should probably retitle the blog post) and the lines "I am not so much reporting the news today as I am speaking out against the rampant, virus-like stupidity that is the Linux Game Cast. The crew at Linux Game Cast are some of the most unhappy, loneliest, skill-less vagina repellants I've ever encountered on the Internet. And I'm mostly just talking about Pedro…" pushed me way over the edge to stop reading.

I don't know what the controversy on Gaming on Linux is; I'm not even fully aware of what "Gaming on Linux" is (a portal? a platform? a news distribution site?), but this blog post is clearly not the news article I was hoping to learn something from.

<comment><AUTHOR> There is a source link at the bottom.

<comment><USER4> There may well be, but if the blog post loses me as a reader by the time I'm finished with the first paragraph, there's no reason for me to scroll all the way to the bottom to see if there's more information.</comment></comment></comment>


100M Creative Commons Flickr Images for Research - <AUTHOR> http://yahoolabs.tumblr.com/post/89783581601/one-hundred-million-creative-commons-flickr-images-for <comment><USER4> One of the most incredible parts is that they've already run feature detection on all 100M images/videos and extracted 50TB of:

"SIFT, GIST, Auto Color Correlogram, Gabor Features, CEDD, Color Layout, Edge Histogram, FCTH, Fuzzy Opponent Histogram, Joint Histogram, Kaldi Features, MFCC, SACC_Pitch, and Tonality"

The good part about this for researchers is not only that this saves dozens of CPU-years of computation (back of the envelope, it would take 15 years for my laptop to extract those SIFT features alone), but that any differences in learning/recognition performance on the dataset can be attributed to the algorithms in question, uncomplicated by which researcher engineered the best features for the dataset. On the other hand, it's a challenging dataset to work with because you can't just download it and process it locally as has been traditionally done. I'll be interested to see how many take advantage of it.

<comment><USER5> Why the heck would you do MFCC on images? Mel filters try to replicate the perception of human ears on audio. This looks like buzzword soup to me (SACC_Pitch, Tonality? What the heck?!? These seem like audio features - <USER2> are the formulas!).

I also don't know about your other conclusion, there is no reason you couldn't download this dataset given enough time/bandwidth/storage to process locally. Most people who will work on this could reasonably store a large chunk locally, if not all (~10 TB). This also assumes that you can't reduce/compress the info any further than what flickr provides and that you require access to the entire dataset - if any of the images are 1024x1024 or larger most feature extractions do not need that kind of fidelity. Heck, you could probably make use of grayscale only to reduce the size by a factor of 3 - ~ 17 TB is feasible (though still pretyt insane) to store locally.

ImageNet (~1.2 TB) only took me 45 days on a residential (<20 MB connection), and I wold assume that this dataset would be downloaded by entities with much higher download b/w. I would also assume that many algorithms, like the type that attack CIFAR10 et. al., would also be willing to reduce the dimensionality and recompress, further reducing storage overhead. How big is each image?

Also, where are the hyperparameters they used to calculate all of these features? Extracted features aren't really that useful without context/reproducibility.

All that said, I think most of these features are decent and the dataset is amazing, but I would rather see them release the raw data set and its PCA/ZCA/other transform - maybe Gabor filtered etc. as well. Lower level preprocessing is more useful for doing representation learning IMO - <USER3> higher level features are not that useful for ML algorithm developers. SIFT is patented for heaven's sake! How are we supposed to build algorithms on top of things like that...

I am excited about the dataset but feel that there could be more done to truly enable researchers. This feels like a "look how much data we have/look how awesome and used flickr is" thing to me.

<comment><USER6> > Why the heck would you do MFCC on images? Mel filters try to replicate the > perception of human ears on audio.

First page of Google hits.

MFCC Based Face Identification [http://www.img.cs.titech.ac.jp/~akbari/pmwiki/uploads/Site/S...](http://www.img.cs.titech.ac.jp/~akbari/pmwiki/uploads/Site/Sangeeta- rep.pdf)

Identification of satellite images based on mel frequency cepstral coefficients [http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/login.jsp?tp=&arnumber=538327...](http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/login.jsp?tp=&arnumber=5383270&url=http%3A%2F%2Fieeexplore.ieee.org%2Fxpls%2Fabs_all.jsp%3Farnumber%3D5383270)

<comment><USER5> Frankly, both papers you linked give no justification for using the mel filterbank instead of any other filtering/frequency reduction before doing the IDCT to get the cepstrum. This is what I mean! Why take a filterbank designed for audio and apply it to images except to use the buzzwords? In any case, at least I know it is used by researchers (even if I don't agree with the why). Thanks!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> It seems like Yahoo is a little bit worried about possible exploitation. From the Terms of Use:

 _2.3. You may derive and publish summaries, analyses and interpretations of the Data, but only in a manner where it is impossible to reconstruct the Data from the publication. Small excerpts of the Data may be displayed to others or published in a scientific or technical context, solely for the purpose of describing your research and related issues and not for any commercial or anti-competitive purpose. Unless Yahoo! expressly requests no attribution, all publications resulting from research carried out using the Data must display an attribution to Yahoo!. This attribution must reference "Yahoo! Webscope," the web address [http://webscope.sandbox.yahoo.com](http://webscope.sandbox.yahoo.com), and the name of the specific dataset used, including version number, if applicable. This attribution should preferably appear among the bibliographic citations in the publication. If Yahoo! expressly requests no attribution, you agree not to mention Yahoo! in connection with the Data. Yahoo! invites you to provide a copy your publication to Yahoo!._

This[0] seem fairly restrictive, considering that I can just crawl flickr and get all that data and more, were I so inclined. Also kinda interesting, in this passage and the rest of the TOU: they repeatedly use `"` interchangeably with actual quotation marks ("), suggesting that _nobody at Yahoo has proofread their own live TOU_. Still, the dataset seems really cool.

[0] ...and other parts of the agreement, but I don't want to spoil it for you, nor post its entirety as a comment.

<comment><USER5> If you can crawl flickr and get 50TB of data, do it.... it is more than a "were I so inclined" situation. I have had a very hard time crawling and indexing large datasets like this - companies tend to protect their data!

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> "Yahoo is hosting a contest to build the system best capable of identifying where a photo or video was taken without using geographic coordinates."

Does this strike anyone else as being a bad idea?

<comment><USER9> I can't think of any general reasons this is bad, just very narrow cases on the individual level. What are your fears?

<comment><USER8> Because of the inevitable photolocationfinder dot com that will immediately come into existence if they ever succeed.

Then everyone who hates someone or likes someone way too much, will only need a couple of photos from twitter or wherever, to know where to look for that person in real life.

<comment><USER10> It's not likely that a computer vision system is going to be that much better than humans at the task. Maybe it will be able to guess your latitude by the color of the sky or something crazy like that, but not give you an exact address.

<comment><USER5> It is not unreasonable to believe that an algorithm could key in on architectural peculiarities of a given region. On top of that, if there are any people who _are_ in the photo who share their address on facebook, twitter, foursquare et. al. it is game over.

<comment><USER10> I didn't consider that. Reminds me of _What Makes Paris Look Like Paris_ : [http://graphics.cs.cmu.edu/projects/whatMakesParis/](http://graphics.cs.cmu.edu/projects/whatMakesParis/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> "From the old world of unprocessed rolls of C-41 sitting in a fridge 20 years ago"

Hey I still do that! :(

I wonder if my (or anyone's) film photos on Flickr are completely useless metadata-wise. Because they are all scanned so they just say "NORITSU KOKI EZ Controller". There seems to be a large portion of people (on Flickr) shooting film still but I wonder if it's only a small percentage overall.

</comment><comment><USER12> Just when I was happy using Flickr's API for creative commons image search - [http://www.outreachpanel.com/free-images/](http://www.outreachpanel.com/free- images/)

They gave me this huge data to play with :)

In past, I have had issues with CC images that were also tagged with 'getty'. I hope they have taken care of that issue.

</comment><comment><USER13> No access to non university based researchers. Useless for me.

</comment><comment><USER14> The data is only available to university researchers.

</comment><comment><USER15> Isn't this on torrent yet?</comment>