VoxieBox Displays 3D Images Just Like R2D2's Message from Princess Leia - <AUTHOR> http://techcrunch.com/2015/05/06/voxiebox-displays-3d-images-just-like-r2d2s-message-from-princess-leia/

<comment><USER3> I know (and worked with) the founder and inventors, who are based in Adelaide.

It's a real system, works just like the videos. They have been working on this for years, since at least 2008.

Well done Will and Gav!

Plenty more videos available from [https://youtu.be/hi1UiGr6Iow](https://youtu.be/hi1UiGr6Iow)

<comment><USER4> Thanks Nick!

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> I don't think R2D2 was projecting inside a little box.

<comment><USER6> Correct, i also first thought that the image was somehow floating in the air. The fact that there is a box around it makes this much less interesting.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> FYI, Ken Silverman [1] is involved in this project.

[1]: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_Silverman](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_Silverman) (he wrote the Build engine, which powers Duke Nukem 3D and other games)

</comment><comment><USER8> It looks amazing - almost too good to be true. The low lighting in the video make me feel like there is some kind of trickery happening here. I don't find it is surprising that their indiegogo campaign has been started without revealing technical details. It all just makes me a bit suspicious about the technology... I would love to be told otherwise.

<comment><USER9> It's definitely real. I've seen it, and no doubt so have many many others. As someone else here speculated it's a transparent screen moving up and down over a projector. It's pretty cool and worked in a reasonably light environment.

<comment><USER10> That doesn't sound as impressive as a thin-air holographic projection.

<comment><USER9> I suggest you stick with your current thin-air holographic solution if you have one :)

<comment><USER11> Well, this one _literally_ does it with thin-air:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KfVS- npfVuY](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KfVS-npfVuY)

<comment><USER12> That has minor issues. Such as ozone not being good for you. Ditto, lasers powerful enough to ionize air. Also, the noise created.

Still intriguing though!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Will from Voxon here. Thanks for the interest. I'm happy to answer your questions if you have any.

<comment><USER13> Eventually, will this work "out of the box"?

<comment><USER14> Of course not. But its also not reasonable to expect that.

Does your TV work outside of your TV?

<comment><USER15> My tv doesn't claim to work outside the tv. This title ("displays 3D images just like R2D2") does.

Still, it is amazing. This is something that makes me feel like I'm living in the future.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> It's not actually a new technique, this. You have a transparent screen (or LEDs or what have you) and move it up and down very quickly, and your persistence of vision makes it look like a single image. Just as a 1D line of dots becomes a 2D image by spinning it (you've all seen those LED fans[0], or heard of John Logie Baird's televisions), so too does a 2D matrix of dots become a 3D image by moving it vertically.

I assume what's new here is that the VoxieBox does a particularly good job of it.

[0] [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F_1X6M0PqG4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F_1X6M0PqG4)

Edit: Here's a YouTube video of another device using a similar technique, except it's layering LED fans!

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ey- eO-H2_Mk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ey-eO-H2_Mk)

</comment><comment><USER15> If you can show it doing Minecraft you'll get a lot of interest.

</comment><comment><USER16> Hmm the purple excited me for a second. I spent a while in my twenties and thinking about this, and one of the possibilities I came up with was 2-photon excitation of nitrogen to produce fluorescence - which would be purple. With two lasers you could draw a purple dot at any point in air. No idea if this would work, of course.

<comment><USER11> Something along those lines has been done successfully (ionising air): [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KfVS- npfVuY](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KfVS-npfVuY)

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> I would be interested in reading more details about the technology. How does it work? How much power does it need? What makes manufacturing expensive? Can you make it bigger (holodeck sized)? Does it track the user's head position somehow or does it work for N users simultaneously?

<comment><USER18> If you look at the images, they look very much like stacked planes. I'm guessing - and it's a guess - that there is some largely-transparent device which can generate light on points on a plane, and that it is being rapidly moved up and down like a piston head, creating a persistence of vision display much like LEDs on a bike wheel.

The low-light conditions the pictures are taken in support that I think - <USER2> might be that the "points on a plane" are some kind of florescent plastic and there's a scanning laser underneath drawing on it, so the amount of light being generated at any given point is probably very low.

<comment> david-given Bear in mind that this technique can only produce light, not absorb it --- which means no hidden line removal, so it'll be good for wireframe images only, where you can see all sides of the shape at once. That doesn't mean it's not awesomely cool, but it's going to have limited applications.

IIRC, the piston-head technique has been tried before, and has always had the drawback that it's hellishly loud due to air displacement. I wonder how they're getting round this?

<comment><USER19> A vacuum?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> A 3D ~~printer~~ display. Like when we first got display PostScript. Voxels aren't just for programs anymore.

</comment><comment><USER21> could someone explain why their indiegogo campaign goal is only $500?

<comment><USER4> An active crowdfunding campaign was required for us to exhibit at the TechCrunch Disrupt expo. It tied in nicely with a popup exhibition we have been talking about doing for a while now.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> 3D FIFA 2020 multiplayer is going to awesome if they used this!

</comment><comment><USER23> I'm having one of those SHUT UP AND TAKE MY MONEY moments.</comment>


Anatomy of a Crushing (2011) - <AUTHOR> https://blog.pinboard.in/2011/03/anatomy_of_a_crushing/ <comment><AUTHOR> My favorite line:

> In my defense, heavy write loads seemed like the last thing Pinboard would > ever face. It was my experience that people approached an online purchase of > six dollars with the same deliberation and thoughtfulness they might bring > to bear when buying a new car.

<comment><USER2> This is sadly true and a kind of "bikeshedding". It's why virtually all mobile games transitioned from paid-upfront to the current model of dangling progress in front of the user and offering to pay to relieve the artificial obstacle.

(My favourite line is "This is especially true in the world of Rails and other frameworks, where there is a tendency to treat one's app like a high-level character in a role-playing game, equipping it with epic gems, sinatras, capistranos, and other mithril armor into a mighty "application stack"". )

<comment><USER3> > It's why virtually all mobile games transitioned from paid-upfront to the > current model of dangling progress in front of the user and offering to pay > to relieve the artificial obstacle.

Yes, that, but also because people will pay a lot more for IAP, over and over again. (Total amounts paid for super-engaged users will run to 10s of thousands of $, far beyond what you can even charge for a single app.)

(And on the flip side, the developer has to continue to improve and maintain the game to keep the $ coming.)

Much of the time, in my experience, when you pay to download an unknown app, it'll end up being poorly implemented in some way, and never made better. It's like paying $2 for a cup of coffee, but 95% of the time, the coffee turns out to be dirty water.

<comment><USER4> Exactly. I'd pay to try many more apps if I could refund the crap. The best would be a 1 hour free trial. If I don't uninstall after one hour, bill me. If I do uninstall, don't. Apps could cost 10x what they do now if that was possible because I'd see the value, rather than gambling like today.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Fundamentally, Yahoo is a charity dedicated to the stealth funding of misanthropic single-founder Renaissance twitter accounts.

<comment><USER6> this is hilarious. don't know why you're being down voted ;)

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Given how events played out, I think this went exceptionally well.

Also, nowadays with the cloud and co. it's easy to forget / fully appreciate how much complexity is abstracted away for you.

</comment><comment><USER8> The main takeaway for me is that dedicated hardware is a nightmare when you have large traffic spikes. You could save a ton of stress by running this on a cloud platform with autoscaling, such as AWS or Heroku. You can always spin up a reserved instances on a long-term contract when you hit a certain baseline level of demand. And you should never consider dedicated servers or colocating until you hit that point.

AWS or Heroku could have easily handled the "freemium" traffic that would have crushed these servers, instead of only accepting paid users. And it sounds like that might have been a far more lucrative opportunity.

<comment><USER2> _If_ your app is designed to autoscale, _and_ you're prepared to have Amazon charge you an arbitrary amount for the privilege, _and_ your cashflow through the payments processor is faster than you have to pay AWS.

(How do people scale cloud DBs? Presumably you can't just keep increasing the write speed into a single DB?)

<comment><USER8> Autoscaling is free to set up on AWS [1]. All web server code should be able to scale, and there's nothing special about autoscaling. The easiest (and default) way is to just spin up servers based on CPU usage.

For Heroku, you can use a third-party service that costs $10 per month [2].

If you use Amazon RDS, it's pretty easy to scale your database both vertically and horizontally [3].

If you can use Amazon DynamoDB [4], scaling is something you will never, ever have to worry about. Not even when you have millions of daily users.

[1] [https://aws.amazon.com/autoscaling/](https://aws.amazon.com/autoscaling/)

[2] [https://www.hirefire.io/](https://www.hirefire.io/)

[3] [https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/database/scaling-your-amazon- rd...](https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/database/scaling-your-amazon-rds-instance- vertically-and-horizontally/)

[4] [https://aws.amazon.com/dynamodb/](https://aws.amazon.com/dynamodb/)

<comment><USER9> Eh, you "never, ever" have to worry about DynamoDB scaling in a perfect world where marketing is literally true.

If you read Amazon's documentation, there's quite a lot that you need to pay attention to if you want DynamoDB to actually perform _and scale_ well for your application.

You don't get scalability for free. Tradeoffs and effort are always required. In Amazon's case you can usually throw money at the problem, but even that has its limits.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> -

<comment><USER2> You've got them confused with Pinterest.

<comment><USER10> Well damn, so i did. Thanks for pointing out my mistake. :)</comment></comment></comment>


Anti-Stokes excitation of solid-state quantum emitters for nanoscale thermometry - <AUTHOR> https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/5/5/eaav9180 <comment><USER2> Laser cooling was an interesting thing in David Brin's sci-fi novel Sundiver [1].

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

</comment><comment><USER3> What are the applications?

<comment><USER4> A direct one is a thermometer, but I think a much more interesting one is a possibility of cooling things with a laser.

You shine laser on something with strong anti Stokes luminescence, and cool it by having reemitted photons carrying away more energy from an object than being absorbed.

Along the same lines, I suspect an efficient enough gas dynamic laser can be coerced into working as a heat pump. If true, that can revolutionize cooling in spacecrafts: ISS have to carry huge radiators weighting almost as much as its solar panels; imagine replacing them with relatively small lasers.

<comment><USER5> I've long thought that beamed power to spacecraft might be combined with laser cooling to achieve very high power/mass, which is needed for simultaneous high acceleration + high Isp.

<comment><USER3> How would the cooling help?

<comment><USER5> Any high Isp propulsion system is limited by the dissipation of waste heat and the need to radiate it. The mass of the radiators limits the acceleration. This is the defining difference between real spacecraft and Hollywood spacecraft.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> Eli5?</comment>


The Launch Roller Coaster - <AUTHOR> http://ugrokit.com/blog/?p=143

<comment><AUTHOR> UGrokIt was one of my favorite companies at LAUNCH this year, together with Local Motion and Minbox.</comment>


Path to becoming a back end Java Engineer - <AUTHOR> https://lodenrogue.blogspot.com/2020/04/path-to-becoming-backend-java-engineer.html?m=1 <comment><USER2> Yes, very much "Learn a database". That means "Learn JDBC" ([https://docs.oracle.com/javase/tutorial/jdbc/basics/index.ht...](https://docs.oracle.com/javase/tutorial/jdbc/basics/index.html))

In fact, I'd suggest installing at least _two_ different dbs on your dev box, for example Postgres and MySQL. (Or, if you're legacy-enterprise oriented, Oracle XE and MS SQL Server developer).

Then, select data from one, and insert into the other.

Bonus points if you avoid passwords in your checked-in code :-)</comment>


How good are you at programming? - <AUTHOR> http://staff.science.uva.nl/~poss/programming-levels.html <comment><USER2> It's actually pretty good and practical (unlike those "knows all sorting algorithms" assessments).</comment>


Ask HN: Burned out techies' search for meaning. What are the options? - <AUTHOR> I am a burned out, 36yo, single, software engineer based in Silicon Valley. I am tired of building products that create no real value. Products that make people waste time, products that just help companies show more ads and generate more revenue. I don't mean to completely give up tech I just want to apply my skills to build something that have a meaning. The only thing that comes to mind is something that directly reduces human suffering.<p>Sorry, I realize it's rather vague and poorly described, but I'm just writing in the hope that someone can send some random link or point at a direction that can eventually lead to an idea. Maybe non-profits that need to solve non-trivial tech problems? Even for-profits that are trying to solve meaningful problems? <comment><USER2> Never underestimate how much human suffering a good CRUD app can reduce in a small business.</comment>


Toolbar.js - <AUTHOR> http://paulkinzett.github.com/toolbar/

<comment><USER2> Neat - I can see this coming in handy for large tables or lists of data, for condensed views or when there are too many actions to show inline. Good job.

One thing I notice, on iOS there is a delay or issue where I had to tap three times to get the bars to appear...</comment>


What Happens When You Deactivate Your Facebook Account - <AUTHOR> http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/what_happens_when_you_deactivate_your_facebook_acc.php <comment><USER2> I did this yesterday, but ended up using the delete function instead. Wish I had taken a screen cap.

Interestingly enough, as soon as you log back in everything is back to normal. I haven't logged back in since re-deleting, but will try in about two weeks to ensure it's been deleted as promised.</comment>


3 easy steps for a European Silicon Valley - <AUTHOR> http://www.svirsk.org/blog/2007/06/3-easy-steps-for-an-european-silicon-valley/

<comment><USER2> Some thoughts:

1) Lower taxes on software companies, and make it easier to fire people 2) Lower capital gains taxes to let big wins offset losses for VCs 3) Less government involvement in companies. It was mentioned recently how governments giving hundreds of millions to companies will not replace google.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Yeah that hundred million idea sounded pretty amazing to me, hooray another scientific project funded to do a dozen year project..</comment>


Ask HN: What do you do to boost creativity? - <AUTHOR> <comment><USER2> I take a nap or simply walk away from a few minutes. It also helps me to play VR games for a couple of minutes just to refresh my memory and boost creativity. I find it effective for me, even though I only get to do it for about 20 minutes or less, depending on how busy my day is.

</comment><comment><USER3> Sleep enough.

</comment><comment><USER4> I dont to this often, but my best business ideas came when doing small doses of LSD

</comment><comment><USER5> Write down a problem, take a nap, wake up with the answer.</comment>


CS 007: Personal Finance for Engineers - <AUTHOR> https://cs007.blog/2019/09/24/cs-007-course-material-2019/ <comment><USER2> This seems like a great course for everyone, although when quickly skimming through the chapters it seems to be somewhat oversimplified.

The next course should be something like Company Finance for Engineers where you learn how companies manage their day to day finance and a little bit about longer terms.</comment>


Malformed private keys lead to heap corruption in OpenSSL's b2i_PVK_bio - <AUTHOR> https://guidovranken.wordpress.com/2016/03/01/public-disclosure-malformed-private-keys-lead-to-heap-corruption-in-b2i_pvk_bio/ <comment><AUTHOR> Note that this is a public disclosure of a vulnerability that was _NOT_ included in today's (2016-03-01) OpenSSL release.

</comment><comment><USER2> > "I reported this one on February 24th, and on February 26th, in response to > a different inquiry of mine, I was told that any reports submitted from > there on had to wait until the next release. This one apparently didn't make > the cut. I respect the fact that the OpenSSL team has to conform to > deadlines and schedules."

> "However, I've decided to publicly disclose this one because I think it's > not necessarily more secure to have vulnerable code running on servers for a > month of more while attackers, if any (for this vulnerability), are not > bound to release cycles and have the advantage of time."

So he's publicly disclosing this even though it's not patched in the latest version, and he only notified the OpenSSL team less than a week ago? That's irresponsible! There's room to debate how long you have to wait before disclosing an unpatched vulnerability to the public, but I think we should all agree it's longer than that.

<comment><USER3> For serious vulnerabilities, most people (including Google IIRC) would agree that 5 days is sufficient. More importantly, the fact that it wasn't scheduled to be in today's fix means that we have to wait until the next release to get this fix (which will take longer than a week). It's such a trivially exploitable vulnerability that it should be treated as serious.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> How would you exploit this? What can you gain if you're already able to supply OpenSSL with a private key? Is there a way to supply or tamper with private keys remotely?

<comment><USER5> I imagine you could exploit neighbors—if, for instance, a load balancer serves multiple clients and allows uploading private keys, this could allow snooping their traffic AS a client.

</comment></comment><comment> X-Istence No fix for this yet... great :/</comment>


Show HN: Abstract AI generated art on your TV - <AUTHOR> https://art42.net/tv <comment><AUTHOR> Author Here: This website has been shown before see discussions on [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22344254](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22344254) Now I'm introducing an easy way to display AI Abstract art on a idle tv / monitor. You can control the refresh rate and also the images being displayed via query parameters: [https://art42.net/tv?itemsCount=1&refreshInterval=360](https://art42.net/tv?itemsCount=1&refreshInterval=360) I'm curious if this is an interesting addition to the Online AI Gallery.</comment>


Anheuser-Busch orders 40 Tesla trucks - <AUTHOR> http://money.cnn.com/2017/12/07/technology/anheuser-busch-tesla/index.html <comment><USER2> How are they going to reduce emissions 30% by 2025 if the plan is based on non-existent truck with unknown specs and delivery time in like 5 years?

<comment><USER3> by doing other things

> this _is part of_ its strategy to reduce the company's carbon emissions by > 30% by 2025.</comment></comment>


Stop the Chaos in your Company Inbox - <AUTHOR> http://blog.frontapp.com/stop-your-company-inboxes-chaos/

<comment><USER2> Hey guys, loving the detailed preview, do you have any idea when the public launch will be?</comment>


OpenBSD fixes use-after-free race condition in OpenSSL - <AUTHOR> http://ftp.openbsd.org/pub/OpenBSD/patches/5.3/common/015_openssl.patch

<comment><USER2> Is than an if without a brace?

I guess heartbleed has replaced gotofail from the pedestal.</comment>


Working with CSS Positioning - <AUTHOR> http://mrbool.com/working-with-css-positioning/25507

<comment><USER2> > In absolute positioning, we define exact pixel for html element where it > will appear. This starts from the top left of the parent element.

This is quite wrong. Here is what the W3C specs say:

> In the absolute positioning model, a box is explicitly offset with respect > to its containing block [1]

> The containing block for a positioned box is established by the nearest > positioned ancestor [2]

> An element is said to be positioned if its 'position' property has a value > other than 'static' [3]

[1] <http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/visuren.html#absolute-positioning>

[2] <http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/visuren.html#comp-abspos>

[3] <http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/visuren.html#position-props></comment>


An Alternative History of Silicon Valley Disruption - <AUTHOR> https://www.wired.com/story/alternative-history-of-silicon-valley-disruption/ <comment><USER2> This article touches on an idea that I think many in the tech industry (myself included) continue to be myopic about: as disruptors we are held responsible for the negative social outcomes that we bestow upon society. I think many (not all) of us who work in software believe that the innovations we unleash, in-and-of themselves, make up for nearly any negative externality caused as consequence. We have brought services or experiences that have made life more convenient, faster, more accessible, etc.; that should be more than sufficient to legitimize our existence and effort.

Inside this framework, the driving factor is what Wired calls "techno- darwinism" the idea that software companies are "still standing post- disruption must have survived because they were the fittest". If you talk to people in SV, especially after the depression, the stereotype was that every startup was about to "change the world by becoming the [X] for [Y]" (Uber for cookies, AirBNB for laundry, etc.)

However, the outside world looks at us with disdain: they don't view our motivations as a desire for simple innovation or creativity, but outright greed and power. The folks that we have disrupted are often those who do not have the means to convert their labor to new industries; even when they do, those industries then get disrupted by some new actor.

Tech workers also have, stereotypically, been disdainful of government: it's too slow, too compromised/corrupt, too inefficient. However, engagement with the polity is the main vehicle by which the poor and disenfranchised are are able to find some kind of recourse for their lives, either by the ballot box or the ammo box.

I've been telling my non-tech friends recently that the great sin of our industry is not greed, its naivety and hubris.

<comment><USER3> > _However, the outside world looks at us with disdain_

The only people that view the tech industry with disdain are journalists and old media.

Regular people happily use their iPhones, Facebook, Uber, AirBnB...

Just because a lot of ink is spilled trying to keep outdated media models alive, it doesn't mean the general population feels this way. The success of all of these services is proof enough that people are not bothered.

<comment><USER4> Yeah, they are too busy being addicted to candy crush without realizing that was precisely the intention. My wife, who is not an engineer (she works in applied science) is disgusted with how the technologies have been used to take advantage of the general public. She hates how airbnb has caused a town we wanted to live in to now lie around 24% of homes unoccupied outside of summer while housing prices continue to rise because Airbnb has made it a better value to keep houses away from long term rentals. You are being incredibly naive to even have a catogory called regular people. I am an engineer who builds infrastructure and manages projects each day. I can code but I am not a "software engineer". I am baffled how people at google, facebook, and the like who are funded by ad revene (from ads no one really clicks on or views) can sleep at night knowing how their products have caused so much harm.

<comment><USER5> > take advantage

What makes it "take advantage" and not "serve"?

People want entertainment on their phone. So entertainment is provided.

People value seasonal rentals more than permanent housing. So seasonal rentals are provided.

What party is being "taken advantage" of? What coercive or dishonest elements at play?

<comment><USER6> "People want heroin. So heroin is provided."

<comment><USER7> There's absolutely nothing morally wrong with using heroin.

People want cheeseburgers, they're provided. People want marijuana, it's provied. People want alcohol, it's provided. People want sugar, it's provided. People want to gamble, it's provided. People want pornography, it's provided. People want violent movies and video games, it's provided.

You can outlaw so called sins, negatives, or you can properly regulate them and treat people that become addicts. Heroin is obviously an extreme example of that context. There is only one effective solution to heroin addiction: treat addiction, do not outlaw heroin use. It should be safely, legally provided to people that need it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> > For instance, the same year the government loaned $535 million to solar- > power company Solyndra, it also loaned Tesla $465 million. "Taxpayers footed > the bill for Solyndra's losses—yet got hardly any of Tesla's" gains, she > says. Solyndra has become "a byword for the government's sorry track record > when it came to picking winners," a story that has helped keep regulators at > bay, she says.

I'm no Tesla fan, but that's sort of how loans work. You get your money back plus interest. It's not a lottery ticket. And Tesla paid back their loan early. I don't think the program lost very much money overall.

<comment><USER9> That is how loans work. But in a free-market economy, loans also come from professional lenders, who price loans according to risk. Government loans made to further industrial policy are necessarily subsidies, which is not how loans work.

From the view of the economy as a whole, it can work out fine, in that we tax the profits of the successful companies. (Although a great deal less than we used to.) But it does rather put a hole in the myth of self-made men and the companies they built from nothing.

I'll also note that Silicon Valley has a university at the heart of it. We fund a great deal of research, and we should. We also subsidize education in a variety of ways. But the first version of Google was developed by grad students as part of their student work, and Google today hoovers up quite a number of recent graduates from schools are either publicly run or receive a great deal of government assistance. It's a highly interdependent system. I think that's great, but don't think our myths acknowledge that.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Books mentioned in the article:

\- How American Work, American Business, and the American Dream Became Temporary by Louis Hyman

\- The Value of Everything: Making and Taking in the Global Economy by Mariana Mazzucato

\- Winners Take All: The Elite Charade of Changing the World by Anand Giridharadas

edit: formatting, copy paste issues (argh)

<comment><USER11> The book by Mazzucato is "The Value of Everything: Making and Taking in the Global Economy"

<comment><USER10> Thank you

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Any additional evidence (either for or against) the claim that government pays for tech advances, while the private sector is who sees a return from that?

<comment><USER8> Federal spending accounts for 44% of basic research spending. at one point, it was as high as 70%.

[https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/03/data-check-us- govern...](https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/03/data-check-us-government- share-basic-research-funding-falls-below-50)

Generally, the pattern has been that government and university funded researchers make the early discoveries, and then corporations do the research towards applying them. Universities benefit from patents, but the federal government doesn't.

<comment><USER13> One of the things that makes research "basic research" is that there isn't an obvious financial incentive for it. IBM, AT&T and Xerox at the height if their monopolies could afford to do some, but in general it's a financial loss on the timescale of a human or a corporation.

But what we see sometimes (alternative energy, drug research, e.g.) is government funding of applied research, and that isn't good for the market or the science, and should be called out.

<comment><USER14> Locking up applied research at companies often creates a lot waste as several companies do the same research and don't share their results outside of patents/products.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> How can someone write a whole article about disruption but not actually use the correct, well understood meaning of the term? They literally just made up their own strawman definition of what "disruption" means (tech people getting rich I guess?).

Disruption has always been used to mean disrupting established market leaders via innovation. Guess what? That's exactly what has happened with Uber, AirBnB, Amazon...

If anyone wants to learn more about the actual meaning of disruption, I suggest _The Innovator 's Dilemma_: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Innovator%27s_Dilemma](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Innovator%27s_Dilemma)

<comment><USER15> > Uber, AirBnB, Amazon

Amazon, sure, but Uber & AirBnB? Wasn't their "innovation" flaunting the law to gain a temporary advantage before regulation leveled the field again?

<comment><USER3> Uber disrupted taxi companies.

AirBnB disrupted the hotel industry.

Both used technology to get there (there were no apps to hail taxis anywhere near feature parity with Uber for instance). They also leveraged the distribution mechanisms of the app store to reach scale.

> _Wasn 't their "innovation" flaunting the law to gain a temporary advantage > before regulation leveled the field again?_

Whether you view it that way or not (I don't) it doesn't change the fact that these companies successfully disrupted established players. It doesn't matter if it was "innovative" (again I think it was), the end result _was_ textbook disruption.

<comment><USER16> Uber and airbnb outcompeted them by offering lower prices and disregarded obviously outdated laws. The phone was what actually disrupted the industry not the actual services.

<comment><USER13> > disregarded obviously outdated laws

That's disruption?

<comment><USER16> Not in its technical sense but if you want to understand what they did its important to take into account as it obviously worked.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> > (One of the future Trump adviser's least favorite words? "Politics.")

What's with this unrelated off topic dig?

Secondly, what's the point they're trying to make? That Thiel is a hypocrite? If so, you can both hate politics/government and work to try to improve it. One strategy is to do so from within. Musk was trying to do the same for a while.

</comment><comment><USER18> Can confirm, was a contractor in Silicon Valley. The "narrative" these executives sell is little more than an opiate for their fleets of highly-paid engineers to feel like they're justified in having a salary several times higher than the contractors they work with on a daily basis.

<comment><USER19> Huh don't self employed contractors make more in terms of $ to cover the extra costs 3x is norm in the UK.

<comment><USER20> This is how I know it from Germany but in the US most contractors seem to make less than employees.

<comment><USER21> My contracting rate was double my hourly rate...

<comment><USER22> Given taxes, bench/beach time, risk premiums (unexpected downtime, search costs), that may well be too low.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> This article deeply disappoints me as Hacker news is the last place that I would expect to find Luddites.

> _They promised the open web, we got walled gardens_

Google doesn't give out its users data in the same way that a bank doesn't give out it's users balances.

> _...many of the dystopian business practices we associate with fast-growing > tech platforms [like] operating with a small group of well-paid engineers, > surrounded by contractors_

The implication here is that before Amazon, no company applied aggressive and unethical cost saving measures. When was Nestle founded again?

> _Uber did not cause this precarious economy. It is the waste product of the > service economy_

This is the kind of thing that makes you sound smart but means nothing. There is not an explanation of the "waste product of the service economy" that follows this quote. In fact this implies it is not Uber's fault at all for disrupting the taxi industry.

> _In the case of venture capitalists, [...] their real genius appears to lie > in their timing: their ability to enter a sector late, after the highest > development risks had already been taken, but at an optimum moment to make a > killing_

The implication being that nobody made a competitor company before the internet was around. The other claim is that being n+1 to the market gives you a guaranteed and significant advantage. If this was the case it would be trivial to overtake Google.

> _The tech visionaries' predictions did not usher us into the future, but > rather a future where they are kings_

This line tells me that the author has gotten used to modern day conveniences that tech has brought us and thinks its unpredictable that people who made companies that span the globe are rich and powerful.

</comment><comment><USER24> It's nice to see Wired still has their visual panache, but how do I get rid of the pop-up ad covering half the screen?

<comment><USER22> [https://outline.com/https://www.wired.com/story/alternative-...](https://outline.com/https://www.wired.com/story/alternative- history-of-silicon-valley-disruption/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> I'm not sure what this articles point is. Disruption as called by Christensen, Andreeson, Thiel, etc all talks about displaced jobs and industries. I don't think this is unknown. It's just that the benefits outweigh the costs (to some).

So this isn't an alternative history more than it is just a weird anecdote or two without follow-up.

I'm not sure what Wired is as a magazine any more. It really needs knowledgeable editors to plan and shape stories along some theme. I feel like these stories about rich and bad Silicon Valley is are pretty common and all boil down to the same reality that Silicon Valley has high margins and makes a lot of money for in demand employees and stockholders. This isn't relevatory though and I'm not sure what Wired's angle is.

<comment><USER13> > I'm not sure what this articles point is. ... > So this isn't an alternative > history more than it is just a weird anecdote or two without follow-up.

It's weird. The article seems to be a book review somehow cast as a news article or thought piece. Read as a book review it's a perfectly reasonable and informative.</comment></comment>


Facial recognition service becomes a weapon against Russian porn actresses - <AUTHOR> http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/04/facial-recognition-service-becomes-a-weapon-against-russian-porn-actresses/ <comment><USER2> This won't even work; facial recognition software isn't good enough match a given face to that large a set of faces.

<comment><USER3> How do you explain the examples (e.g. the photographers project) that did work? It won't have 100 % on-TV-police-drama accuracy, but it doesn't need to.

<comment><USER2> Unusual facial asymmetry [https://vk.com/wall66559_67051](https://vk.com/wall66559_67051) and luck for Mima. There's no evidence the photographer was actually finding the people corresponding to his photos.</comment></comment></comment>


Who will pay Puerto Rico's pensions? - <AUTHOR> http://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-puertorico-pensions/ <comment><USER2> This is the whole point of bankruptcy: when past mistakes collide with present reality, the best way forward is almost always a controlled restructuring of everyone's expectations. Unfortunately, there are various roadblocks in the way of sensible bankruptcies for government entities swamped with pension debt. The major problem is that there is no provision in the bankruptcy code for a state to file for restructuring. Furthermore, there are statutory and constitutional protections for pensions, which are usually the most unsustainable sort of debt for states and municipalities.

One state at the cutting edge of this situation is Illinois: the Illinois Supreme Court has in recent years struck down various measures to attempt to restructure the state's untenable pension obligations. Such measures will prevent the state from making a controlled crash landing and will instead result in the state flying straight into the ground at 600 mph.

<comment><USER3> Institutional lenders are in the risk management business. If they are seriously harmed by a realistic proportion of debtors defaulting, it's because they should have known better than to write those loans.

Are we really going to say that to sick and elderly people being thrown out of hospitals, evicted from their homes, and cut off from food and medicine? To their adult children who must now destroy their household finances to meet the government's obligations in its stead, or carry the guilt of letting mom and dad die of treatable conditions in a shithole?

>controlled restructuring of everyone's expectations

This euphemism seems appropriate when applied to banks and businesses for whom counterparty risk is a cost of doing business. For individuals who gave their entire adult lives to an institution in exchange for security in retirement, it seems tone-deaf.

Maybe taxpayers need to bite the bullet and pay what it costs to run the services they're benefitting from.

<comment><USER4> >For individuals who gave their entire adult lives to an institution in exchange for security in retirement, it seems tone-deaf.

When you put it like that it sounds like they had zero responsibility for the situation. It's usually populist policies that are democratically elected that lead to this situation in the first place - it's interesting how politicians always get the blame but the people who voted/campaigned/supported them because it was in their direct interest at the time aren't even considered.

Reality is _a lot_ of pension systems around the world are unsustainable and built on the assumption that population and economy will continue to grow. Even the mandatory "private" pension funds in my country (Eastern Europe) mostly buy government bonds and that ends up being spent by the government. And nobody is even talking about reducing government spending or getting a sustainable budged they are just worried their privileges don't get touched and throw around nonsensical demagoguery to rationalize their views.

I find it hard to be sympathetic with people that cause this kinds of problems in the first place and impose it on others trough democratic process.

<comment><USER3> > When you put it like that it sounds like they had zero responsibility for > the situation.

We have no evidence that government workers voted to defund their own pensions - presumably that was everyone else.

<comment><USER5> I don't get that such a thing is even possible. Those workers were offered compensation, including future compensation, in trade for work now.

Why does the state get to annul the future compensation once the work is done ?

Even weirder: why do libertarians here seem to be in favor of the state doing so ? You'd think breaking contracts would be a huge no-no for them.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Nobody, it seems. They committed to lifetime payouts of 75% of the average of a worker's three highest years of salary, retiring at age 55 after 30 years of service. And that's not for employees of a thriving/growing business -- but for government agencies that, over time, don't/shouldn't grow and profit.

I'd like to see the original calculations they used as a basis for these decisions.

<comment><USER7> The original calculations were pretty simple: "Will this get me more votes?"

Puerto Rico has always assumed that the economy would soon be turning the corner and everything would work out, with a healthy helping of cargo-cult New-Jerseyism.

<comment><USER8> This problem is widespread in all social states (democracies) all around the world. Electoral system and responsible management doesn't play very well together. Before 'shit hit the fan' is almost impossible to any government to have enough power to change anything unpopular.

I wonder what the solution for this is.

<comment><USER9> Usually, for constitutional provisions requiring that every such promise be accounted as (or better, _paid for with_ ) a government debt on par with their "real" bonds. Because that's what they are: the government _claiming_ it's putting its full faith and credit behind your pension. It's horrible that they can treat it as ultra-reliable when promising it, but can shuck it off like it's nothing.

It's also why I don't understand all the whining (here and elsewhere) about requiring the Post Office to actually _fund_ its pensions rather than just assume Uncle Sam will have infinite funds to cover it later, and we Totally Won't Renege or anything.

<comment><USER10> >It's also why I don't understand all the whining (here and elsewhere) about requiring the Post Office to actually fund its pensions rather than just assume Uncle Sam will have infinite funds to cover it later

Some people believe the post office is required to pay quite a bit more into those pension funds than is necessary for their financial well being. Nobody in that discussion claimed or assumed the government has infinite funds to cover the post office's obligations.

It's as if you were having a discussion with yourself that happened to occupy the same space as another, ongoing discussion on the same topic. Hence the way some tried to engage with you (unsuccessfully) and some just downvoted you.

<comment><USER9> I explained (with visible frustration) how it's eminently fair to expect a business to fully fund its obligations. If someone believes that the _way_ this is calculated is unreasonable, then their primary complaint needs to be about _that way_ , not (as every commenter does on this issue) complain about the mere requirement to fund the pension.

A complete argument would look like this: "It's unfair to require the post office to fund future benefits by X standard, when common, reasonable practice is to use more lenient standard is Y."

A complete but stupid argument would have X="include all obligations forever" and Y="ignore stuff after 75 years". This is because post-75 years can have non-trivial implications for its sustainability, and assuming them away _does_ require belief in a bottomless pit.

I'm interested in an exchange of ideas on this issue; I just wish people were capable of presenting a defensible argument about the Post Office pension requirement. Your own argument on the thread [1] does not meet that standard, as it was just "wow, that would be a lot of money". Well, yeah, if you've promised something with a (net discounted present) value of $75 trillion, then yeah, it's gonna be a pain to fund! Why is that an unreasonable requirement that you not just kick the can down the road?

I'd like to hear an intelligent answer to that question. "They hate the Post Office and want it to fail" doesn't count as one.

[1] [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11464618](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11464618)

<comment><USER10> > I explained (with visible frustration)

You're being entirely too generous to yourself by characterizing your attitude as "frustration."

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> This is why defined benefit pensions are a bad deal for everyone: employees, employers, and taxpayers. Pension plans encourage employers to defer expenses by over promising and under funding (moral hazard), only to stick taxpayers with the obligation later and force pensioners to take a haircut. Governments should terminate their pension plans and switch employees to defined contribution plans like 401(k) with contribution matching. That way the employee retirement funds will be safe even if the employer goes bankrupt.

<comment><USER12> Actually, pension plans are pretty good when the company/government funds them the way they are supposed to be funded.

<comment><USER11> Lots of things would work pretty well if everyone did what they're supposed to do.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Consider two individuals. One is a 65 year old Puerto Rican government worker who repeatedly voted for politicans who made promises that were mathematically impossible to keep. If anyone is responsible for the current mess, it's him.

The second is a 24 year old software engineer in California. He never had the opportunity to vote in any election prior to 2010 (when the mistakes were deliberately made) and never got to vote in PR.

A bailout would be a hugely immoral transfer of wealth from the second person to the first.

Puerto Rico and Illinois need to be made an example of. As the rest of the country watches PR and Illinois collapse they might demand that their politicians engage in some degree of fiscal responsibility.

<comment><USER14> it would be the height of immorality to renege on contractually agreed-upon compensation for workers.

<comment><USER13> California and NY have no contract with Puerto Rican or Illinois pensioners.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> The US has kind of lost track of the reason for having colonies. What exact benefit does it receive for maintaining control and responsibility for a low income quasi-country with its own separate ethnicity, language, and culture? Protecting the Panama Canal from the Kaiser's dreadnoughts?

<comment><USER16> What about protecting it from Chinese interests?

Not really sure if this is plausible, but maybe if you let enough Chinese capital into Panama, they can defacto control it, vs having the US impose restrictions on Chinese capital investments in strategic property or whatever.

<comment><USER15> With a very few exceptions, the US has been pretty adept at keeping foreign influence out of its hemisphere since the 1800s.

It also begs the question of why the US would care.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> This isn't just a problem in Puerto Rico. My state is dealing with this issue, and their solution was to cut pensions. I know several people who worked for the state for 30+ years, who were promised life-long health insurance and other benefits as part of their pension packages, who are not getting any of those benefits now. Even after all the cuts they have done, it still isn't working.

</comment><comment><USER18> Well if going on Greece's relationship to the EU as a guiding framework, where Germany ended up pretty much funding what got deployed, I'm going to have to go with the United States. It sure ain't going to be Puerto Ricans living on the island. Oh, and it ain't going to be Illinois either. They're the next name on the 'bag-o-crap' pension outlook.

<comment><USER19> I don't think that is an accurate thing to say. There seems to be a widespread misunderstanding of the word bailout which leads people to believe that what was given was a gift rather than a loan with a lot of strings.

And a lot of the motivation was self interest in order to prevent contagion and also to allow the banks with loans in bailout countries to recover their money. Much of the money that went in went straight out again in loan repayments and a lot of debt was transferred from private debtors onto the shoulders of the taxpayers in those countries.

<comment><USER13> Lets look at this in terms of resources. For years, Germans worked hard making things and Greeks reaped the benefits of German labor via imports.

Now Greece is unable to make enough things for themselves, and Germans are bailing them out. The bailout results in Germans making more things which then get shipped to Greece.

How is this not a gift from Germany to Greece? Will the Greeks ever provide goods and services to Germany which exceed what the Germans gave them? If so, when?

<comment><USER20> For years German and French banks gave massive amounts of cheap credit to Greeks and the Greek government. The so called bailout is nothing more than the German government giving money to Greece with strings attached so that Greece can then give the money to German banks. The banks don't pay for their bad loans. The Germans benefitted from the euro and the imbalances that monetary union has created. Greeks suffer for their dumb loans but not the German bankers.

<comment><USER13> I'm sure numbers in a bank computer might change. Who cares? In terms of goods and services, how does any of this benefit the Germans or French?

<comment><USER19> The ECB sets interest rates to suit Germany because it is the economic monster in the EU. So if Germany needs low interest rates to stimulate the economy, the eurozone gets them even countries whose economies are in danger of overheating. This is what happened to some degree in the early noughties. Cheap loans in Europe both boosted German exports and contributed to the later recession in the countries worst affected.

And as for breaking the eurozone rules, well even Germany did that when it suited them.

I am not an expert on the Greek economy but I'd imagine that tourism makes up a lot of their 'exports'. Otherwise I don't know. They are a relatively small country and so are unlikely have many indigenous multi-national brands that you or I would have heard of.

<comment><USER13> Interest rates are numbers in a computer.

As far as real resources, you seem to agree with me that the Germans worked hard to make stuff that was then sent out of Germany ("boosted German exports"). Germans work, Greeks consume.

I guess when the British empire stole stuff overseas for consumption in Britain, that was bad for Britain and good for the world? If production is good and consumption is bad, maybe we can tax the poor and make them work but give the proceeds to the rich?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> A: US states are nominally sovereign, they just don't pay what they can't pay.

Not sure about the nuance of a US Territory vs a state.

</comment><comment><USER22> Many states and municipalities will soon be facing their own pension crisis. We can all rest-assured that all our taxes will be going up.

<comment><USER2> There is a limit on the ability of states to raise taxes to cover pension obligations. There is already a net internal migratory pattern from northern states to southern ones. States like raising taxes to fund pension obligations will only accelerate that trend, gutting the tax base those states are counting on to make ends-meet.

<comment><USER23> This is already happening in New Jersey.

<comment><USER24> I was surprised when I heard that the departure of hedge fund manager David Tepper (worth $10B) from New Jersey to Florida is causing a legitimate fiscal planning challenge for the state.

[http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/billionaires-move-puts- je...](http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/billionaires-move-puts-jersey-tax- rates-spotlight-38288362)

<comment><USER25> Hmm, maybe delaware should jack up pensions.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> Applies to Sweden as well. Becoming the gender students and Middle East little collective pension fund.

Puerto Rico isn't alone nor anything apecial when it comes to blown up pensions.

If you want to read more about it Tino Sanandaji has done a lot of research on this and can make you wonder how dumb a nation and its people can get in such a short duration. [http://foreignpolicy.com/2016/02/10/the-death-of-the-most- ge...](http://foreignpolicy.com/2016/02/10/the-death-of-the-most-generous- nation-on-earth-sweden-syria-refugee-europe/)</comment>


AirPods Will Become the Screenless iPhone - <AUTHOR> https://snugsafe.com/2019/09/13/how-airpods-will-become-the-screenless-iphone/ <comment><USER2> AirPods becoming a screenless iPhone is much different than AirPods having cellular connectivity.

A screen provides significant bandwidth to the human. Simply reducing the bandwidth to pure audio is likely insufficient but for only a few use cases.</comment>


Ask HN: Do you have a personal copy of CV? - <AUTHOR> It seems strange to me that HRs are often asking for a personal copy of my CV when I'm sending them PDF from LinkedIn. I mean LinkedIn does a great job of formatting and aligning text, headers, links etc. My handmade variant wouldn't be so good and fancy, and I'll have to keep both in sync.<p>Do you have your personal CV? If you do, don't you want to automate generation of a portable version? Why don't companies like autogenerated CV's? <comment><USER2> Companies don't like auto-generated CVs because putting together a good CV is a sign of expertise in that field.

When I go through a stack of CVs, the ones that jump out to me are the ones in which the candidate seems to know exactly what I'm looking for--and you have to have experience in the field to know what matters. These are things like not listing a bunch of information under Education if you have 6 years of experience, or making sure to emphasize the right languages/frameworks you've used on projects.

The good CVs seem to exude both a skills confidence and the experience to know how to describe them well.

Generated CVs don't get that. They standardize every candidates background, making it difficult to know if the CV itself demonstrates expertise. Besides that, it's exhausting to look through a stack of the same document and try to distinguish candidates.

My best advice is to use LaTeX to create a personalized resume template you like and just keep that up to date. I originally stole this from jedberg [1], but you can find mine here [2], and there's a HN thread about it here [3].

[1]: [http://www.jedberg.net/hire_jeremy_edberg.html](http://www.jedberg.net/hire_jeremy_edberg.html)

[2]: [https://github.com/rickhanlonii/rickhanlonii.github.io/blob/...](https://github.com/rickhanlonii/rickhanlonii.github.io/blob/master/files/resume.tex)

[3]: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10502227](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10502227)

</comment><comment><USER3> I have several personal CVs. All about nothing, I made an unique CV for each job description I'm into. Only to try to fit as close as possible what I figure they want (no cheating, only highlighting what is more interesting for them).

But only when I personnaly ask for a job.

On contrary, when they come to me, I refuse to give other information other than publicly available : they are coming, I do not work for them yet.

</comment><comment><USER4> I've taken to simply screens-hotting my website (single long page), converting that to a PDF, and sending that.

Surprisingly, I've had a good response to it.

(Yes, it is basically a JPG embedded in a pdf.

</comment><comment><USER5> There are services that will take a LinkedIn profile and generate a PDF/document from it, you could use one.

I do have a personal CV.</comment>


NASA discovers blackhole one-third the size of the Sun - <AUTHOR> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/12/16/tiny_black_hole/

<comment><USER2> It seems that it's actually 3 times the size of the sun rather than 1/3

 _While GRS 1915+105 is a black-hole pipsqueak with a mass only 14 times that of our sun, IGR J17091-3624 is tinier still, estimated to be a mere three times as massive as Ol' Sol_</comment>


Xamarin Open-Sourced - <AUTHOR> http://open.xamarin.com/ <comment><USER2> It has been super exciting watching this all unfold over the last year, for those wondering where to get started in the new world of .NET open source - start here:

.NET CLR Managed Runtime - [https://gitter.im/dotnet/coreclr](https://gitter.im/dotnet/coreclr)

.NET Framework - [https://gitter.im/dotnet/corefx](https://gitter.im/dotnet/corefx)

.NET Compiler as a Service ("Roslyn") - [https://gitter.im/dotnet/roslyn](https://gitter.im/dotnet/roslyn)

.NET Orleans Actor Framework - [https://gitter.im/dotnet/orleans](https://gitter.im/dotnet/orleans)

Mono Framework - [https://gitter.im/mono/mono](https://gitter.im/mono/mono)

Xamarin iOS, Watch, Mac Bindings and Framework - [https://gitter.im/xamarin/xamarin-macios](https://gitter.im/xamarin/xamarin- macios)

Xamarin Android Bindings and Framework - [https://gitter.im/xamarin/xamarin- android](https://gitter.im/xamarin/xamarin-android)

Everything is licensed under the MIT license w/patent pledges.

<comment><USER3> Why do you link to gitter when you should actually like to the repos instead ?

<comment><USER2> Depends on how you learn. Some learn by being around others, social interaction, asking questions and absorbing knowledge. It's clear you fall into the latter category which likes to learn by diving right into the code, so here it is:

.NET CLR Managed Runtime - [https://github.com/dotnet/coreclr](https://github.com/dotnet/coreclr)

.NET Framework - [https://github.com/dotnet/corefx](https://github.com/dotnet/corefx)

.NET Compiler as a Service ("Roslyn") - [https://github.com/dotnet/roslyn](https://github.com/dotnet/roslyn)

.NET Orleans Actor Framework - [https://github.com/dotnet/orleans](https://github.com/dotnet/orleans)

Mono Framework - [https://github.com/mono/mono](https://github.com/mono/mono)

Xamarin iOS, Watch, Mac Bindings and Framework - [https://github.com/xamarin/xamarin- macios](https://github.com/xamarin/xamarin-macios)

Xamarin Android Bindings and Framework - [https://github.com/xamarin/xamarin- android](https://github.com/xamarin/xamarin-android)

<comment> the-dude You seem to be dodging the question. The question is why -you- are linking to gitter.

<comment><USER4> He answered it, he linked to gitter because he assumed people wanted a social link instead.

He's not dodging the question at all, he answered it directly. He obviously likes gitter and chatting with others.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Honestly, I am a little tired of all the articles (edit: I meant posts) claiming MS is suddenly in the Open Source camp.

To truly support Open Source, they should show a willingness to work against Software Patents. The essence of Open Source is the freedom for anyone with a computer to turn their imagination into code. MS remains one of the biggest obstacles in that path.

Instead here is what they do:

1) Directly attack the Linux kernel in Android through patents

2) Sell patents to trolls like Intellectual Ventures, and directly fund them via investments

3) Support the cartel called BSA, which includes other luminaries like Oracle ([http://www.bsa.org/about-bsa/bsa-members](http://www.bsa.org/about-bsa/bsa- members)).

Honestly, say what you will about Google, but I can't imagine them ever threatening another software company with software patents.

<comment><USER6> >Honestly, say what you will about Google, but I can't imagine them ever threatening another software company with software patents.

That is a naive fanboy outlook towards a company. Its a well known fact that Google bought Motorola only for the patents. Google has also managed to use the patents to sue other companies including Microsoft. Although I still believe it is the game that is flawed and not the players. Google has also done things that could hold back the Windows Phone ecosystem. However, none of that should discount how much Google has contributed to betterment of the web just like Facebook or Microsoft. Open-Source is open source, the only thing that matters is license here and it is as liberal as it could get MIT.

<comment><USER5> I am not a Google fanboy, I am merely saying they abide by the spirit of Open Source. I just used them as an example. RedHat is another example.

> Google has also managed to use the patents to sue other companies including > Microsoft.

Can you post a link to Google suing Microsoft first (not in retaliation)? Google was way behind in the patent game until they got hurt. Google bought Motorola to have a defensive patent portfolio. Also, see their Open Patent Non-Assertion Pledge [https://www.google.com/patents/opnpledge/](https://www.google.com/patents/opnpledge/)

> Open-Source is open source, the only thing that matters is license here and > it is as liberal as it could get MIT.

Open Source is where it is today from the decades of hard work by many, many people (in the early days, just for the love of it with no pay). MS is doing Open Source today because it really has no choice. There is no comparison between these two.

Open Source can welcome MS, but it should demonstrate a willingness to work towards the best interests of the movement. There are bigger goals here.

<comment><USER7> Google replaced their XMPP messaging system by Hangouts, a 100% closed protocol with no signs of even wanting to open source it.

From a FOSS pov, both Google and Microsoft have positive and negative sides to it. They're massive companies, you can't judge them as one giant blob.

What MS is doing _right now_ with .NET is fantastic for open source. Just like what Google is doing right now with Hangouts is frankly bullshit. Judge actions, not entities.

<comment><USER8> XMPP had a fair amount of shortcomings and the real issue is that federated systems don't solve spam. So everyone living in this "we'll run our own IM systems, just like email" is deluded, as spam in email is barely a solved issue. And much of the solution involves blocking "independent" servers.

<comment><USER7> You missed the part where Google is not open sourcing Hangouts.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> First thought: Xamarin is now open source—great!

Second thought: Every time I looked into Xamarin (and I do this every 6 months) there was a lack of killer apps created with Xamarin on both iOS and Android, users' experiences with Xamarin were either rare or negative and in total the community felt non-existent

Third thought: Ok got it, they open source to get PR, build a community; I hope that helps and it's not their last resort

So, _is_ Xamarin really a viable solution?

<comment><USER10> Couple billion dollars in revenue generated with it via Unity alone. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unity_(game_engine)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unity_\(game_engine\)) \-- and that was a HORRIBLE version of it. Way better now.

<comment><USER11> tl;dr. The success of Unity can't be used as an indicator that cross-platform frameworks are good for productivity/utility apps.

Xamarin and Unity don't have anything in common, other than the fact that Unity uses C# for scripting (on an ancient runtime).

Cross-platform app development frameworks are generally awful because they don't tightly integrate with the native look and feel of every platform. Video games don't even try to achieve native looks on any platforms. They're always full screen works of art, without any hint of a UIButton (iOS) or TextView (Android).

<comment><USER10> I too hate cross-platform schlockware but it sounds like you are not familiar with the technology.

"controls are mapped to platform-specific native user interface elements; for example, a Xamarin.Forms Entry becomes a UITextView on iOS, an EditText on Android, and a TextBox on Windows."

[https://www.xamarin.com/forms](https://www.xamarin.com/forms)

<comment><USER11> Interesting. I was unaware that Xamarin maps widgets like that. Thanks for enlightening me. :-)

How does it abstract away the more fundamental differences between platforms Activities/Fragments vs. UIViewControllers?

<comment><USER10> You win some you lose some. With Fragments Xamarin actually extends support to earlier Android devices. Less of an issue now, but there was a time when this actually extended platform reach, reduced code, and simplified training/upgrades.

For some things it's about the common talk-to-the-backend code, not true-code- once across iOS/Android...

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Quick question for .NET developers: is there a solution for totally command line driven workflows yet? I really don't want to mess around with .SLN files and IDEs like Visual Studio and MonoDevelop. I'm sure VS is fine for people who like it, but I really want something like `cargo build` or `go build`.

<comment><USER13> .NET CORE is exactly this ([https://github.com/dotnet/cli](https://github.com/dotnet/cli))

'dotnet build' to build it.

<comment><USER14> yes and no of course ... yes dotnet cli will be exactly this and it will be _GREAT_ (IMO)

but it isn't actually "out" yet (you can get your hands on it but it will be buggy)

still, will be 100% fantastic.

<comment><USER15> I've been using it on a production project. Life hasn't been smooth, but once Its totally functional.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> I just wish they didn't kill RoboVM. I get the warm and fuzzies when something big is open sourced just like everyone else. Then I snap back to reality and remember that it's ultimately the same organisation that close-sourced RoboVM then killed it, screwing over a lot of people depending on it.

<comment><USER17> Seriously, RoboVM could have been _huge_. An ingenious way to introduce app development to your existing hordes of Java devs. Great tech, killed because of business decisions...

<comment><USER18> it was most likely killed because it was seen as an invitation for a multi- billion lawsuit by oracle.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> I'm glad to see Microsoft embracing Open-Source, C# is such a wonderful language and easy language to use. In light of all the trouble Oracle has been giving Google, I would love to see them embrace it and provide a true alternative to Java on Android.

<comment><USER20> Microsoft will need to revise their patent pledge first. If you look at the way it's currently written, it's almost as if it was specifically meant to preserve their option to pull an Oracle v Google against a vendor who decides to pick up .NET and run with it.

Meanwhile, Google has switched away from their Apache Harmony derivative to the officially anointed sources, so there's not much incentive to make the move away from Java entirely, anyway.

<comment><USER21> How so?

<comment><USER20> I don't understand the question.

<comment><USER21> > If you look at the way it's currently written, it's almost as if it was > specifically meant to preserve their option to pull an Oracle v Google > against a vendor who decides to pick up .NET and run with it

how so?

<comment><USER22> > Microsoft Corporation and its affiliates ("Microsoft") promise not to assert > any .NET Patents against you for making, using, selling, offering for sale, > importing, or distributing Covered Code, as part of [...] any compliant > implementation in software of (a) _all of the required parts of the > mandatory provisions of Standard ECMA-335_ [...] and (b) if implemented, any > additional functionality in Microsoft's .NET Framework

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> Crazy seeing those Novell copyrights in the headers! I totally forgot about them and their relationship to Xamarin.

</comment><comment><USER24> This is amazing! But question - where is RoboVM? Please release to MIT license so it doesn't waste all of the work done so far.

<comment><USER25> IIRC, RoboVM is being dropped. No further development work. I could be wrong though, I'm half remembering it being discussed on a Reddit AMA with Miguel de Icaza.

EDIT: It wasn't in the AMA after all, but it has been dropped:

[http://www.linuxjournal.com/content/death- robovm](http://www.linuxjournal.com/content/death-robovm)

<comment><USER24> Perfect, so open source it so the community can continue, it's still #1 for the moment and libGDX might be better served by it than intel

<comment><USER25> Why would Microsoft open source a direct competitor to the Xamarin .NET platform?

The best option you're likely to get is to build on top of the older open- source RoboVM release:

[https://github.com/robovm/robovm](https://github.com/robovm/robovm)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> This is great news!

Last time I used it (more than a year ago) it was still felt quite buggy. That being said, has anyone successfully used Xamarin or have an example of a large and successful app built with it?

<comment><USER27> Slack and GitHub are mentioned on their customers page.

There's a list with some more companies here: [https://www.xamarin.com/customers](https://www.xamarin.com/customers)

<comment><USER28> That list is somewhat misleading. Slack, for instance, only uses Xamarin Test Cloud.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> Now only if .NET adoption on Linux would pick back up like when Mono was pushing it. .NET is a great environment for developing desktop applications and Linux really needs them.

<comment><USER30> GTK# could use some serious love, as much as I enjoy Vala I would much prefer to be able to use Npgsql for database access than deal with the crapshoot that is libgda. Unfortunately after the GTK3 transition it seems nobody has really felt like maintaining GTK# much, meanwhile plain old C and Vala have been getting all the cool stuff (GTK composite templates, in particular).

<comment><USER31> I tried Vala once and didn't really like it.

It's me not Vala. I enjoyed proper tooling: SCM (e.g.: maven), test automation (unit-test framework), some form of IDE.

<comment><USER30> GNU Autotools now has vala integration, just specifying .vala files in your source list will have automake run valac to generate the C files, which will then be compiled by GCC automatically. Going one further, the C files get packaged into your distribution tarballs so users don't need valac installed to compile your application.

The usual M4 headaches with autotools apply, but as long as you don't have some crazy build (just compiling libraries/binaries, linking with libraries, use pkg-config) it's not too bad.

As far as testing, GLib.Test [0] is part of the standard library. Since vala compiles to C at the end of the day there's no easy way to test other than just building a test runner, but it's not _too_ bad to work with.

GNOME Builder is finally getting support for Vala in GNOME 3.20, it's still young but hopefully we'll have a first class IDE soon. Still, Builder has a long way to go before it even catches up with MonoDevelop, but progress is good, right?

[0]: [http://valadoc.org/#!api=glib-2.0/GLib.Test](http://valadoc.org/#!api=glib-2.0/GLib.Test)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> Now RoboVM too please. It's almost criminal that they canned it.

<comment><USER33> There's BugVM[1], a maintained fork of the FOSS RoboVM

[1] [http://bugvm.com/](http://bugvm.com/)

<comment><USER34> It's a very bad and broken fork, i'd stay away from it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> Now my only remaining qualm with Xamarin is this: Having two garbage-collected environments interacting within the same program, as is the case with Xamarin on Android, just seems pathologically complex. Does anyone have enough experience with Xamarin on Android to know if this is ever a problem in practice?

Edit: I wonder if the Xamarin.Android developers ever considered compiling CIL to JVM bytecode (which would then be compiled to Dex bytecode), then reimplementing mscorlib on top of the Java standard libraries. So basically, IKVM.NET in reverse. Then there'd be no bridging between two environments.

<comment><USER36> That's what RemObjects does.

<comment><USER35> Yep, I've thoroughly studied RemObjects Elements and seriously considered using it. But it doesn't have nearly as big a standard library or surrounding ecosystem as .NET and Xamarin.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> Nice, I've recently been honing my C# chops, so I'm super excited to see this arrive at such an incredible (for me) time.

</comment><comment><USER38> With Forms we finally have native FOSS cross platform that we've been waiting for. See ya Cordova / React Native / etc!

</comment><comment><USER39> So, what does this mean for Unity3D? I'm tired of being limited to .Net(-sorta-ish) 3.5 and a stuttering garbage collector.

<comment><USER40> See their older blogpost here: [http://blogs.unity3d.com/2016/04/01/unity- joins-the-net-foun...](http://blogs.unity3d.com/2016/04/01/unity-joins-the- net-foundation/)

"For Unity developers, this means making sure the latest .NET APIs, tools, and language features are available to you."

– Support for C# 6

– Upgrade Mono Runtime and Class Libraries

etc...

<comment><USER39> I wonder when all that's actually going to drop. Like, when I can set VS's target framework to .NET 4.6.1, I'll be pleased.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER41> Of course Xamarin was built on top of earlier Open Source work in MonoMac, you still could do OS X applications without actually paying for Xamarin but it wasn't as easy as using Xamarin straight.

So this is also partly just giving back from where they took it.

</comment><comment><USER42> Cool. Now bring back RoboVM.

</comment><comment><USER43> Ok, so is there anything NOT being open sourced?

Is everything needed to actually be able to use it productively open source now?

Is Xamarin Studio open source?

<comment><USER44> No, Xamarin Studio is not getting open sourced.

For more details, you can listen to this podcast from founders of Xamarin - [http://www.dotnetrocks.com/?show=1276](http://www.dotnetrocks.com/?show=1276)

<comment><USER43> Is it possible to use it without it?

<comment><USER45> With Xamarin, you can use it with both Xamarin Studio and Visual Studio. I believe XS is free now and you can get VS Community for free too.

<comment><USER46> But not under Linux. XS is available only for Mac, and VS is Windows-only (of course).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER47> Is linux support for xamarin.android planned?

<comment><USER48> I'm not sure how credible this is but there might be comming something. [https://www.reddit.com/r/programmerchat/comments/4dxpcp/i_am...](https://www.reddit.com/r/programmerchat/comments/4dxpcp/i_am_miguel_de_icaza_i_started_xamarin_mono_gnome/d1vdfwz)

</comment></comment><comment><USER49> As an aside, has anyone here created a Xamarin android app using material design? I was recently trying to integrate their component for the design support library, but it seemed horribly buggy.

<comment><USER50> Actively working with it now, seems fine to me, maybe you're using an old version of the design support lib?

<comment><USER49> Hmm, its possible. I tried installing via NuGet and also the component store when that didn't work, but I'll just give it another shot, thanks!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER51> What I don't understand is why they had to purge the commit history. Did they not use Git internally? Do the commits contain sensitive information? Does it make it easier to clone the repo?

<comment><USER52> > _Do the commits contain sensitive information?_

Very likely.

<comment><USER53> Or, more likely, no one wants to spend the time to exhaustively prove that they do _not_ contain sensitive information.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER54> Looks like OS X only? (since I get a "download for OS X" link, but no reference to GNU/Linux). Or am I missing something?

</comment><comment><USER55> Now when will they make RoboVM open source?</comment>


Ask HN: Yes PHP or no PHP? - <AUTHOR> I have been working as a PHP developer for a few years. In 2019, I plan to dive deep into it and become its yoda. Is PHP dying very soon? <comment><USER2> No, it won't die soon. If you like it, have fun!</comment>


Software idea: using integrated webcam to detect bad posture - <AUTHOR> http://www.boxuk.com/blog/iposture-webcam-software-idea

<comment><USER3> How about using iSight to find my face, locate my eyes on the face, trace along the path of my gaze, _and place the damn cursor there_ , when I push a pre-defined button? Mousing is tedious. I'd much rather push a button and just stare at where I want the input cursor to be.

<comment><USER4> Canon had something similar to this back in the day on their camcorders and cameras. It was called Eye Control, and the camera would focus on where you looked. They need to re-implement that!

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Looks like I didn't thoroughly research the idea before posting about it - <USER2> similar solution already exists: <http://www.postureminder.co.uk/>

(I'm the author of the original post)

</comment><comment><USER5> There's hardware solution here:

<http://www.iposture.com/ip_howitworks.php>

</comment><comment><USER6> I can (cynically) see Big Corps somehow making this mandatory to avoid injuries and reduce their workman's comp insurance rates.</comment>


The challenge of geocoding Indian addresses - <AUTHOR> http://www.slideshare.net/lokku/savio-dimatteo-thegeochallenge Slides of a talk given by @darksmo of @nestoria at London's #geomob on 11 July 2013 <comment><USER2> This is very interesting, particularly since I'm working currently on a problem of turning shop addresses in Europe into Long/Lat. Anyone know if there are more technical bits and pieces somewhere?

<comment><USER3> PM me if you need ideas....I have done similar things and could point you in the right direction.

<comment><USER2> Mail sent. Thanks.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Slides of a talk given by @darksmo of @nestoria at London's #geomob 11 July 2013

<comment><USER4> Link to talk?

<comment><AUTHOR> unfortunately no video of the actual talk.</comment></comment></comment>


Nexus 4 stock shortage down to 'huge demand', LG explains - <AUTHOR> http://crave.cnet.co.uk/mobiles/nexus-4-stock-shortage-down-to-huge-demand-lg-explains-50009924/ <comment><USER2> Sidenote: Google's customer service is absolutely horrible. I was reading the horror stories, but now that I have experienced it personally, it seems worse than I imagined.

Basically, my unit is about to be shipped on Dec 19, and I have been trying to cancel it since last week; but they refuse to cancel it on the grounds that it is _only_ possible to cancel it within 1 hour of purchase.

I am leaving US on Dec 12, and this means the unit is going to get shipped to an address I no longer have access to, and I will have to ask the landlord to do a delivery refusal when the UPS guy appears at the door. I have emailed and called them about 10 times to cancel the order, or change the shipping date or address; and they won't bother to do any of that.

If you have been reading about Google not treating its customers properly on the net, rest assured that the situation is not exaggerated at all; they are very unprofessional.

Anyone have any advice for canceling the order, is it possible at all?

<comment><USER3>
        Anyone have any advice for canceling the order, is it possible at all?

Might your landlord allow you to post a sheet a paper to your front door stating that you refuse delivery? This is what I did to refuse delivery of a 16GB Nexus 7 (I found a 32GB Nexus 7 for a little over $200), and it worked. I didn't need to interact with a UPS driver.

That being said, the 16GB Nexus 7 I ordered was delivered to Google on Nov 29 and I still haven't received a refund or been contacted by Google regarding my order.

<comment><USER2> Thank you, this is what I am going to do, although in my case, the situation is a bit more complex.

The apartment complex I live in receives packages from UPS en masse, and then classifies it according to apartment numbers, so there is a possibility that they might not detect my package before accepting it, but I will ask them to keep an eye on it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> This doesn't cut the mustard and should not excuse LG and Google for the purchasing chaos. People who ordered just a few days ago have already received their phones, while others have been waiting for weeks. Some people are even ordering a second phone just to see if they get a shipping notification, and if they do, cancelling their original order. It's a bit of a farce.

[http://forum.xda- developers.com/showthread.php?t=1962514&...](http://forum.xda- developers.com/showthread.php?t=1962514&page=3614)

<comment><USER5> _> Some people are even ordering a second phone just to see if they get a shipping notification_

I got mine _before_ the shipping notification

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> My experience ordering a Nexus 4 was a bit of a farce: Google managed to trigger the anti-fraud block on both of my credit cards, each with different UK banks. It looks like they put through a small value transaction (£1) first to test whether the card works & only then put through the full purchase transaction.

Why they can't just put the transaction through in the first place & just report back if it fails I've no idea, but thanks to Google I had to phone up the respective banks to get the cards unblocked. Not the best use of anyone's time...

<comment><USER7> (entirely speculative)

They may be doing it precisely for that purpose.

Risk systems generally working on scoring mechanism, if the £1 transaction was enough to push you over the threshold then your cards may well be on the borderline for "this card might be stolen".

Google might be using it to test if the card is a borderline "stolen card" case because they want to be extra cautious about who they ship phones to.

<comment><USER6> Yeah, that would make a twisted kind of sense.

I never have this kind of trouble with other vendors though.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I wonder how many phones LG is capable of making at a given time? I know that Samsung can put out 5 million a month ([http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/05/18/us-samsung- idUSBRE...](http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/05/18/us-samsung- idUSBRE84H00X20120518)), but I would imagine LG cannot come anywhere as close as them, given the size differences in their mobile divisions.

</comment><comment><USER9> I have a theory :)

Nexus 4 was built with a "defective" qualcomm LTE chip that LG was able to pick up for a bargain. hence the great nexus 4 rock bottom price.

Now LG have exhausted their "defective" chip supply, they need to negotiate a new deal with qualcomm/google.

This is based on a random comment i read fsck knows where explaining how high spec, short run, chinese phones come in to being.

<comment><USER10> Perhaps the LTE radio was defective, but the rest was fine.

<comment><USER11> From a hardware perspective, the Nexus 4 uses the same SoC as the LG Optimus G, it just lacks amplifiers and antennas designed for LTE frequencies (one LTE frequency is in the UTMS band, so it can function in most phones unofficially). So you could be right, although I'm not sure if LG puts together the final SoC.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Back in November after the first batch sold out within half an hour, I wanted to get a Nexus 4 to give Android another go and check out Google Now and other new features of 4.2, as iOS6 felt a bit stale despite being a big fan of the black & slate iPhone 5's industrial design. But I got tired of checking the Google Play link everyday which always read "Out of stock". So I got the iPhone 5 instead.

When the second batch became available, I ordered one for a friend, still waiting for it to ship. (it said 1-2 weeks so it should ship this coming week)

From everything I've read so far, the Nexus 4 seems like a great phone at an unbelievable price, but Google and LG are really shooting themselves in the foot with customer service, shipping on a frustrating not-on-first-come-first- ordered basis and repeated delays.

I think a lot of customers would've been happier if they sold it through Amazon instead.

</comment><comment><USER13> I wonder what part LG actually plays in this shortage. When you are producing a device for somebody else that is strikingly similar (as in sharing the exact same hardware platform) to one of your own devices, which you are selling for way more (with of course small but nonetheless important differences)...well, something just screams conflict of interest to me. I am in no way accusing LG of doing so, I'm sure they have had their contract with Google on this and followed it to the point, but still, something just doesn't feal right.

Uhm, well, maybe just my paranoia distortion field kicking in, I for one hope I am completely astray on this one.

<comment><USER14> LG isn't selling their device directly to consumers, they are selling them to carriers and retail channels. For your statement to be accurate, you'd need to compare the cost to the reseller to purchase either device.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> They likely ran through their stock of replacement units for warranty issues, too. I reported mine defective and have an RMA to send it back, but it's been a week and they still haven't shipped the replacement.

</comment><comment><USER16> mm, I ordered one and it was pretty easy. Things just worked. Am I the only one with such a good experience?

I am guessing the ones for whom the ordering process failed rant the most :)

</comment><comment><USER17> I wonder how many they have sold. Does anyone have any concrete numbers?

<comment><USER18> Nope, Google doesn't give them out. If you're an investor, don't worry, they're "huge" -_-

<comment><USER17> Nah, I was trying to see if it's really a f-up, a marketing scheme or a mix of the two. Maybe demand is really unexpectedly high.</comment></comment></comment>


A call for a timeless way of building software (video) - <AUTHOR> http://vimeo.com/19124736

<comment><AUTHOR> I found this immensely interesting, but don't know what to do with what I just learned.</comment>


Google Takes Over Operations of Moffett Airfield from NASA - <AUTHOR> http://techcrunch.com/2014/11/10/google-moffett-airfield-nasa/

<comment><USER2> Does Moffit still remain a federal airfield that defense companies can ship sensitive cargo out of?

"Celli says his company ships satellites out of Moffett up to 12 times a year, and not being able to do so would mean a 160-mile trip to McClellan Air Force base, requiring 'cumbersome' and 'unsafe' travel down roads at night requiring special permits."

"Similar concerns are expressed by John Maguire, executive vice president of Lockheed Martin Space Systems Company. ... 'We have conducted a preliminary analysis considering a variety of facilities in the region, and have concluded that no single or combination of options provides a viable alternative to Moffett Field without adding material risk and cost to these critical programs,' Maguire writes. "

-[http://www.mv-voice.com/news/2012/05/22/concerns-about-job-l...](http://www.mv-voice.com/news/2012/05/22/concerns-about-job-losses-national-security)

Supposedly traveling to mcclellan would involve a literal armed convoy escort by National Guard or active duty troops, but i don't have anything I can quote to back that up.

</comment><comment><USER3> Driving down that way, I always had a "Yay NASA!" moment when I went by the field. Somehow, "Yay corporate jets!" is not quite the same for me.

They do talk about doing emerging tech research there, so I'll try to remain hopeful until I see what actually goes on there.

<comment><USER4> Hey, maybe they'll be launching googledrones from there too.

<comment><USER5> FAA rules require remote control aircraft operators to get permission from the airfield operator if within 3 miles of the airfield. Google could ask permission from themselves.

Google may still require FAA authorization for the drone flights as the FAA might not consider them "model aircraft"

<comment><USER6> Moffet airspace is congested for everyday drone operations. It practically shares class D airspace with Palo Alto airport and there is class C airspace for San Jose International right above it.

<comment><USER5> The 3 mile rule for model aircraft applies below 400 ft AGL only. I was thinking about small drones staying low.

GA Aircraft are restricted from flying below 1000 ft over populated areas except when taking off and landing.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> None of the articles I've read about this answer the one question that matters to me:

Will I be able to land (and base) my plane at Google-run Moffett Field?

<comment><USER8> No.

A while ago folks tried to have the airfield re-classified for general aviation (GA) and met a lot of resistance from the communities around the field. It failed, as I recall, in at least three ballot measures. So it continues to operate as a 'private' airfield and you can only land with permission of the owner, or in the event of a declared emergency.

That said, the more interesting question is whether or not Google will build their 'urban support area' which was basically code for providing housing for visiting employees (in the truest of 'company town' sort of ways.) A number of people spend significant time working for Google as 'visiting experts' (think professors on sabbatical) and that effort is hindered by the challenges of finding a nice place to stay, except there is housing for a few thousand people already at the airfield (formerly 'base housing') which could be repurposed for that.

Of course if they do that, then there will be a large inflated Google ball that will chase you down and smother you if you try to leave :-)

<comment><USER9> > A number of people spend significant time working for Google as 'visiting > experts' (think professors on sabbatical) and that effort is hindered by the > challenges of finding a nice place to stay, except there is housing for a > few thousand people already at the airfield (formerly 'base housing') which > could be repurposed for that.

I lived in that housing for about 5 years as a kid. I have lots of memories of the base (Hangar one, the movie theater, Baskin-Robbins, the community pool, McDonald's, the pea patches behind the housing), particularly since, as a Navy brat, that was one of the few places I lived for more than a year or two in my entire childhood. I like the idea of going on a trip to Google for some reason and being put up in the same townhouse I lived in then, or one of my friends' houses.

<comment><USER10> Remember the insane planes they flew on the early nineties? I have done crazy almost sci-fi memories from my childhood, admittedly some probably exaggerated by imagination of that age.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> This is _after_ they already built the Google private air terminal at SJC. ([http://www.forbes.com/sites/matthewstibbe/2013/05/06/googles...](http://www.forbes.com/sites/matthewstibbe/2013/05/06/googles- shiny-new-82-million-airport-terminal-in-silicon-valley/)) (Will Air Force One will still be allowed to land at Moffett? That's where the President usually lands when traveling to Silicon Valley.)

This sort of corporate excess is usually viewed as a sell signal. Google's profit margin has been declining recently; the last quarter was the second worst in five years. ([http://ycharts.com/companies/GOOG/profit_margin](http://ycharts.com/companies/GOOG/profit_margin)). Google's stock price has leveled off. Google isn't in trouble yet, but, despite major efforts, it's never been able to develop a significant source of revenue other than ads.

<comment><USER12> > it's never been able to develop a significant source of revenue other than > ads.

And Microsoft hasn't been able to develop a significant source of revenue other than selling technology.

Google's ad revenue comes from a variety of products.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> I wonder what will happen to the California Air National Guard and Army Reserve units at Moffett?

<comment><USER14> I would guess those will stay, though I don't really know. They just spent the last couple of years building a building for the Guardian Angels -- I can see it out the window of my office across the street. It would be a little odd to abandon it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> Is this actually "Google" or their executives holding company? While I don't doubt Google will use the space, it does not appear this is a Google deal.

The official news release does not make any mention of Google[0]. Planetary Ventures, LLC was formed in 2007 and a recent (2013) WSJ article does not list it[1].

[0] - [http://www.gsa.gov/portal/content/186071](http://www.gsa.gov/portal/content/186071) [1] - [http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2013/05/23/googles-long- list-o...](http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2013/05/23/googles-long-list-of- subsidiaries-gets-much-shorter/)

</comment><comment><USER16> Surely there is some bribery going on here for Google to repeatedly get so many exclusive perks from Moffet.

Google gets discounted fuel from Moffet, paid for by taxpayers:

[http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/12/12/google- executives-g...](http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/12/12/google-executives- got-discounts-from-government-on-fuel-for-private-aircraft/)

Google executives get exclusive rights to fly their private jets from Moffet for personal trips:

[http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/tech/150386125.html](http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/tech/150386125.html)

<comment><USER17> Exclusive Perks? My understanding is that Google was paying a lot of money for those things. Do you have any evidence that suggests otherwise?

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> Wonder if this will have any effect on the CMU campus there. That was a really unique place to go to school to. Maybe they can collaborate somehow?

</comment><comment><USER19> Looks like Google X has a new home.

</comment><comment><USER20> I really don't have an opinion on this one but when I see statements like this from the government "while reducing the government agency's maintenance and operation costs by $6.3 million annually", I can't help but think that's meaningless when you've got an $18 trillion deficit.

We could've cured cancer, gone the Mars, developed hypersonic flight, and probably about a dozen other projects that would have had a huge impact. The interest alone is 10x bigger than NASA's budget.

<comment><USER21> The US has poured tens of billions into cancer research, and much more globally.. is money really the biggest limiting factor?

<comment><USER17> Keeping in mind, that compared to the scope of the problem, over 500,000 americans year die of Cancer, our investment has been miniscule.

Compare this to EBola, which, even liberal estimates suggest we won't see more than 100 fatalities/year in the United States, and America has invested $1Billion.

Cancer is a multi-trillion dollar problem - but the technology required to effectively combat it (nanobots, protein folding technology, targeted molecules, rapid-dynamic DNA assessment) is still many decades in the future.

Of course, doing the basic research to develop those technologies is going to cost a lot of money as well. But the difference is, unlike many human maladies (Old Age) Cancer has a pretty well defined solution, we (perhaps appropriately) just haven't invested enough time and resources to deliver that solution yet.</comment></comment></comment>


An API for every city in the world - <AUTHOR> Because the world is moving into cities, and cities are built by people, we want to make the data that every city creates easily accessible to everyone. So we're building a real-time API for every city in the world.
https://www.geturbanlink.com/ is mostly a landing page right now, we're just getting started.
Would love everyone's thoughts on this. Terrible idea? Have been waiting for something just like this? <comment><USER2> There isn't anything to try out, here.

<comment><AUTHOR> Correct it's just to discuss the idea.</comment></comment>