The Rise of Thin, Mini and Insert Skimmers - <AUTHOR> http://krebsonsecurity.com/2014/07/the-rise-of-thin-mini-and-insert-skimmers/ <comment><USER2> Skimming continues to highlight the inherent vulnerability of account information transfer mechanisms (such as magstripe), as opposed to fixed currency transfer mechanisms. The fact that every vendor I transact with has the ability to capture my account information and make future requests for my money with it is terrifying. I have to trust that every 17-year old that handles my card at a restaurant isn't going to copy it and shop online with it later. The fact that the system works at all in its current state is a miracle.

Even if Bitcoin never gains mass adoption, I _really_ like the idea of being able to encode a consumable transaction that both authorizes the transfer _and_ encodes the transfer amount. I can imagine a similar payment system (NFC payment with phones, perhaps?) that doesn't disclose arbitrary access to my account, but instead allows a transaction to be proposed, I accept the transaction on my trusted hardware (phone), and the transaction authorization with amount is then sent up the wire.

This seems like it should be trivially accomplishable via mutual asymmetric signing. Vendor generates a request for money and signs it, sends it to my phone. My phone validates the chain-of-trust, presents me with the transaction request, and I can authorize it. If I authorize it, then the request is counter-signed with my private key, and the signed authorization is sent off to the payment processor, who has pubkeys for the vendor and myself and can validate the request and process it.

Even if you could capture the transaction-in-transit, you wouldn't be able to compromise it, since you would need signing keys for both the vendor and the customer in order to forge the transaction, or to create new transactions with the signed account information.

Is there any reason this wouldn't work?

<comment><USER3> Chip and pin pretty much solves this. My understanding is that its much more difficult to intercept the transaction due to the cryptography involved. No one handles your card or walks away with it like in the US. They bring the wireless cc terminal to you.

These are coming to the US in 2015. I suspect a lot of the issues we have today will be minimized as we move away from magstripes and waiters walking away with your credit card.

[http://blogs.wsj.com/corporate- intelligence/2014/02/06/octob...](http://blogs.wsj.com/corporate- intelligence/2014/02/06/october-2015-the-end-of-the-swipe-and-sign-credit- card/)

<comment><USER4> Sadly that is not the case. Major problems with chip and pin:

\- the chips used (32kb 90s-style smartcards AIUI) are simple to read and save, making chip and pin readers susceptible to the same social engineering attacks as magnetic stripe cards (btw, in the UK there have been skimmers for chip and pin for some time)

\- most terminals on the market transmit the pin in the clear from one part of the unit to the other, so it is trivial to doctor a legitimate chip and pin unit

\- it is difficult for the consumer to verify the trustworthiness of an unfamiliar chip and pin unit

\- in the UK, people often still try to walk away with my card, just as when we had magnetic stripe

\- transactions can be conducted offline in most configurations (true for example in the UK, but not in Germany)

IMO the main selling point of Chip and PIN to UK retail banks is that they allow banks to reassign liability to for fraud to the customer. When your signature is forged, existing law clearly says you are not liable. When you PIN is discovered and used to send transactions, existing law is unclear and currently this allows banks to convince the customer to accept the liability. IIRC, American consumer fraud law is pretty strict, which is why the US has been slower to adopt the machines than eg the UK.

In the UK, Chip and PIN seemed to cut fraud for a while, until attacks like skimming were applied. Now fraud is back on the rise :(

There is good coverage of this in chapter 10 of Security Engineering 2nd edition by Ross Anderson, a book I highly recommend!

<comment><USER5> >> \- the chips used (32kb 90s-style smartcards AIUI) are simple to read and save, making chip and pin readers susceptible to the same social engineering attacks as magnetic stripe cards (btw, in the UK there have been skimmers for chip and pin for some time)

Erm, while it is simple to read public data off a smart card, you can't get at the private keys etc, this is pretty secure.

I work in this area and while I am aware of a couple of weaknesses in the scheme (Static Data Authentication is a big one, but only affects some cards), I am not aware that even a PoC 'skimmer' exists.

AFAIK (and as I said, I work in this industry) the only key-recovery attack so far involved an electron microscope.

>> \- most terminals on the market transmit the pin in the clear from one part of the unit to the other, so it is trivial to doctor a legitimate chip and pin unit

This depends on the card, not the terminal. All parts of the system in a terminal must be secure, we have stringent standards to stop tampering.

>> it is difficult for the consumer to verify the trustworthiness of an unfamiliar chip and pin unit

This is true. A fake unit could me made pretty trivially.

>> in the UK, people often still try to walk away with my card, just as when we had magnetic stripe

This is less of a concern.

>> IMO the main selling point of Chip and PIN to UK retail banks is that they allow banks to reassign liability to for fraud to the customer. When your signature is forged, existing law clearly says you are not liable. When you PIN is discovered and used to send transactions, existing law is unclear and currently this allows banks to convince the customer to accept the liability.

100% false.

The liability transfer was to the merchant, not the customer.

>> In the UK, Chip and PIN seemed to cut fraud for a while, until attacks like skimming were applied. Now fraud is back on the rise :(

Please provide sources for EMV skimming attacks, I'd love to read about them.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> The problem seems simple to solve from the bank side: Use transparent plastic on the card mechanism and surrounding areas.

If you see opaque plastic around reader, don't use it!

<comment><USER7> The whole idea of building hardware to be easily verified by the user is pretty interesting -- it's the intersection of industrial design/design for manufacturing, ee. computer security, in some cases crypto, etc.

We haven't gotten much beyond stupid stickers and hologram seals.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Ever more reasons to ditch magnetic stripes. Get with the program USA!

<comment><USER8> I wonder if it's maybe time for banks to stop printing magstripe cards by default and offer a "world" version of their card as an option for people who travel to places like the US?

<comment><USER9> I wonder if one could somehow temporarily disable the magnetic stripe? I wouldn't dare scratch it off completely, but I would love to cover it up as a precaution.

<comment><USER10> You could always get hold of a card reader/writer and do it your self. The magstripe is essentially just a small capacity magnetic disk. You can read the information off and store it, then proceed to wipe it clean. If you want to restore, just write the data back.

Not sure if it's allowed though.

<comment><USER11> It's not that easy, there are High Coercivity and Low Coercivity magstripes. HiCo cards need special writers because they're more resistant to external magnetic fields.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> "One of the simplest ways to protect yourself from ATM skimmers is to cover the PIN pad when you enter your digits."

As I understand the PIN is stored encrypted on the magnetic strip (salted with the account number) which allows it to be verified even when offline. I wonder how strong this encryption actually is, given some ATMs still run on 20 year old hardware it can't be that intensive.

<comment><USER13> Method that is used to store PIN on mag stripe is kind of weird, but reasonably secure. Idea is that card issuer has some unspecified algorithm that generates PIN from card number and what is stored on the magstripe is difference from this "default PIN". In essence this is weird formulation of counter mode of block cipher, more so that the unspecified algorithm typically entails encrypting card number with (Tripple-)DES or AES and BCD-reducing the result.

This offline verification of PIN is mostly only relevant for ATMs owned by card issuer, as whatever device that does this verification has to know secret symmetric key for this algorithm.

<comment><USER14> I don't understand this one: my card didn't come with a PIN and forced me to set it myself online (of between 4 and 12 characters) - and this from a major Australian bank (CommBank).

<comment><USER15> The OP described the original offline PIN system. My memory is a bit fuzzy, but my recollection is that the original ATM PIN system was designed for offline verification and didn't allow user-selectable PINs. There was a tamper-resistant chip that encrypted the account number with single DES (using a system-wide fixed key) and took the first 16 bits of the result. There was a 16 entry table that mapped nybbles to keypad digits, and this was used to non- invertibly map the 16 bits nyble by nyble to a 4 digit decimal number. The interface to the tamper-resistant hardware module took in the 4-digit PIN and the account number and spat back out pass/fail, to minimize the utility of stealing an ATM. I probably got some of the details a bit wrong, but that's the gist of the system.

Soon after rollout, enough customers complained about wanting to set their own PINs that they added a 4 digit offset field to the magnetic stripe. The offset from the stripe was added to the user-entered PIN, and the least significant 4 digits were sent to the hardware verifier. That way the hardware verifier didn't need to be changed. The only way to change the PIN was by physically bringing the card to the bank. As I said, the details are probably a bit wrong, but it went something like that.

I read about one attack where the 16 entry nyble-to-digit mapping wasn't authenticated very well, so attackers could steal an ATM, then trick the hardware module into loading a mapping that mapped 0-7 to "0" and 8-F to "1", then bruit force the PINs for a bunch of cards. Then they'd change the mapping to 0-3 -> "0", 4-7 -> "1", 8-B -> "2", C-F -> "3". After two more rounds of this, they could use the production mapping of nybles to keypad digits. For each round, it takes an average of 8 guesses and a maximum of 16 guesses to guess the PIN with the PIN. (Information gained from one round is fed forward to the next round's guesses.) There are four rounds, so an average of 32 guesses and a maximum of 64 guesses to extract a PIN. Once the PINs were bruit-forced using the stolen ATM, they could be brought to a real ATM, even though the attack wasn't able to extract any information about the DES key used by the system.

A later system had a tamper-resistant module that used 3DES to encrypt modem traffic between the bank and the ATM. Changing 3DES keys involved two different employees being physically present at the the ATM. Each employee would load their key-change info and enter their PIN. A combination of a master 3DES key and the employee's PIN would be used only inside the tamper- resistant module to decrypt the key change information. The key change info from the two employees would be XOR'd together to get the new modem 3DES key and a keyed cryptographic message authentication code (MAC) over the new modem 3DES key. Only if the new MAC checked out would the new modem 3DES key replace the old modem 3DES key. This way, no one employee ever had enough information to learn the new 3DES modem key, even if they somehow stole the master 3DES key used to encrypt the key change information. As I said, I may have had the details a bit wrong, but it's none the less very well thought out.

These days, I would hope ATMs use something similar to Kerberos tunneled over TLS with pinned certificates so that just breaking the public key algorithm or just stealing the Kerberos shared secret isn't sufficient to read the traffic or spoof communications. The bandwidth required for an ATM is so low that doubling the encryption overhead vs. TLS isn't a big deal.

Anyway, I'll try and dig up the paper on the attack on the poor authentication of the nyble-to-decimal mapping in the tamper-resistant chip. It was quite an interesting read. I'm pretty sure the paper was the main subject of a Slashdot article in the early 2000s.

<comment><USER15> The published attack [1] used a more sophisticated pattern of compromised decimalization tables, recovering the PIN in an average of 15 instead of 32 attempts. The naive pattern I described will work, but the published attack is more than twice as efficient.

Also, in the IBM 3624 + Offset PIN block algorithm, the offset is subtracted (digit by digit without carry/borrow) from the customer-entered PIN, rather than added. [2]

My memory has faded a bit in the 12 years since I read the paper.

      [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decimalization_table_attack
      [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_identification_number#IBM_3624_.2B_offset_method

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> I like Wells Fargo ATM machines, the thing you insert the card into is a transparent green glowing device and all the ATMS look the same and have touch screens. It's easier to tell if someone put a skimmer on them. I do not use non-Wells Fargo ATM machines. I only wish I had the option to type the password on the big touch screen and not the number pad.

<comment><USER17> I though that a big green thing just makes it easier for criminals to install a skimmer - they smash the original one off and add their fake version. Being big it has plenty o room for electronics.

I image searched "wells fargo atm" to find an example of the big green thing. I saw lots of older style machines, but the first link to the newer machine with a green thig was to an article about skimmers.

[http://www.thedenverchannel.com/money/consumer/skimmer- camer...](http://www.thedenverchannel.com/money/consumer/skimmer-camera-found- on-wells-fargo-atm-in-aspen)

<comment><USER18> Not just can they remove (or overlay) the big green thing to add on their own skimmer... once the presence of the big green anti-skimming device is normalised, you can add big green skimmers to all the ATMs that don't have them yet: [http://krebsonsecurity.com/2011/03/green-skimmers- skimming-g...](http://krebsonsecurity.com/2011/03/green-skimmers-skimming- green/)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Are customers really held accountable for ATM fraud? I have found credit card fraud to be handled well by my bank (USAA). The primary reason I use a credit card is because I am not sure how ATM/check card fraud is handled.

<comment><USER20> Credit card fraud has a LOT of federally mandated protections, giving you a lengthy window of time in which to report it, capping the maximum amount you're liable for to $50 (I believe), etc.

Debit cards tend to have fewer protections, though they still have some. And because the money has already been taken out, you can be more detrimentally effected; the bank has to investigate and decide to give you your money back, basically, which takes time (and hopefully you have an uncompromised account if you need to pay bills or whathaveyou) whereas with credit cards the bank has to investigate and decide it's not actually fraudulent behavior and re- charge you (not sure how all that works though). Just plain inertia works in your favor when it comes to credit cards.

<comment><USER21> Debit cards have the same federally mandated protections.

In addition to the required liability rules, VISA and MasterCard both add on their own bits which reduce the liability to $0 under most circumstances, for credit and debit cards.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I wonder how difficult would it be for banks to insert some kind of optical counter-measure which would detect tampering with the slot?

<comment><USER22> It's been tried (I was mildly involved in 2 such projects). Very hard to do within the constraints of a typical ATM.

One option that seemed to have promise was basically a coil around the card slot area that would detect signals from rogue electronics being placed anywhere on/around the cardslot.

<comment><USER23> So, there are these ATMs my bank in Germany uses and they have these new translucent green protrusions (dome shaped and weirdly organic) with a lock symbol on them. They also light up when you get your card back. Do you have any idea what that is?

I assume it's some sort of defense mechanism against skimmers, but I have no idea whether that's actually the case. (I mean, at first sight those weird protrusions seemed like skimmers to me because they definitely look like foreign objects. But they are not.)

<comment><USER18> Are these the things? [http://krebsonsecurity.com/2011/03/green-skimmers- skimming-g...](http://krebsonsecurity.com/2011/03/green-skimmers-skimming- green/)

They've been popping up over the UK as well, but the first few times I saw them they looked more like skimmers than security devices. As per the article, they don't really prevent skimming anyway.

<comment><USER24> That is an interesting quote:

"It [the skimmer] will immediately disrupt those wishing to operate via Russian ATMs: A majority of the BINs [Bank Identification Numbers] of Russian banks are hardwired into the chip; they are not processed."

I wonder whats behind that move; are russian banks more dangerous to have as an enemy? Did they pay ransom money to the developer?

<comment><USER25> There was a law recently passed in Russia that criminalizes development, production and distribution of skimming devices. So the Russian guy selling those is probably trying to make it less likely that authorities will go after him.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> So, in the UK I very rarely use the magstripe on my card - 99.9% of transactions I do are chip & pin.

The chip on my card broke recently, and I found out that it doesn't even work in ATMs any more. Does that mean ATMs are only looking at the chip? If I blank my magstripe with a magnet, will I have made my card skim-proof while retaining ATM capabilities?

<comment><USER26> Chip ATMs will generally only look for the chip and therefore work with the stripe missing. (Many ATMs have two slots, one chip and one stripe) So in most of EU you should be perfectly fine if you remove or otherwise disable the magstripe on your card.

You'll be screwed though if you end up in a situation where your chip doesn't work and need to pay with the stripe fallback (pretty much all cards allow this).

<comment><USER27> Unfortunately, it doesn't even matter. If the reader detects that you have a chip card, you _cannot_ use the magstripe even if your chip is faulty. The error you will get, after swiping the card, entering the amount and then pressing enter waiting for confirmation will be "PLEASE INSERT CARD". Quite vague but that's exactly what you get.

<comment><USER26> I do not know of any readers that won't let you bypass this. Many terminals have a button that literally says "bypass PIN" that'll let you use the stripe in case the chip fails.

<comment><USER27> Interesting. I was using my chip card in a country where chip cards were not really well known till last year. Surprisingly they already had chip-ready readers for easily two years before now so I have personally experienced the part where the cashier is completely baffled with the face of "I've never encountered _this_ error before". Then, I have to operate the terminal, and insert my card (again) and press enter. I do not remember seeing any way to bypass it. I would have loved to do that because by this time it'd already be in my wallet and I cba to remove it _again_.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> Chip and PIN is an improvement, but don't think that it's a silver bullet - [https://www.lightbluetouchpaper.org/2014/05/19/the-pre- play-...](https://www.lightbluetouchpaper.org/2014/05/19/the-pre-play- vulnerability-in-chip-and-pin/)

</comment><comment><USER29> Has anyone here tried overwriting their magstrip with nulls? It should at least make the immediate danger of these largely invisble skimmers go away.

</comment><comment><USER30> Can someone tell me how carrying a credit/debit card is safer than carrying cash? Thanks.

<comment><USER31> Hard to tell if you're being facetious, but just in case...

1\. If your cash gets stolen, it's goodbye cash. If your credit card gets stolen / cloned in the vast majority of cases you're not going to be liable for any of the charges.

2\. The more cash you carry, the higher the risk to you, whereas a credit card has a relatively flat risk profile.

<comment><USER30> My cash has never been stolen. I have never been mugged.

I've had my card cancelled multiple times though due to fraud and now have credit monitoring.

My card is far more likely to be skimmed or be stolen/copied in a massive database like Target than for my cash to be stolen.

If credit cards are used for risk mitigation, they are failing for the vast majority of transactions. A $10K transaction? Sure. But for a $3 coffee? It's not worth the risk.

<comment><USER32> >My cash has never been stolen. I have never been mugged.

If you can figure out how to make this scalable to everyone, there will be no advantage to carrying plastic. I have my doubts that this is possible.

>My card is far more likely to be skimmed or be stolen/copied in a massive database like Target than for my cash to be stolen.

Mine was, at Target, my account was drained of about $2K, and it cost me about six phone calls over two days. The only lingering effect was an example of how trivial an experience with false charges on your debit is, which comes in handy during my rants about how many politicians, news outlets, and credit card marketers scream about card number theft in order to grab eyeballs and push agendas.

I'm not a big advocate of slutting your card around, but that's because I don't feel like broadcasting every single minor purchase I make throughout the day, and because it's slower and more annoying (to you and everyone around you) than having your cash ready before you get to the register. I'm embarrassed if by some lapse of routine I get to the checkout and have to use a card for a $10 purchase, and the first thing I do is apologize.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Fake audio, such as deepfakes, could plague business, politics - <AUTHOR> https://www.bakersfield.com/ap/news/how-fake-audio-such-as-deepfakes-could-plague-business-politics/article_bc6b7a55-8a15-57df-90d2-5352d3980b00.html <comment><USER2> I'll VPN this later, as currently I live inside the EEA. Though the rise of digital-doppelgangers is one that will be the source of much debate in the years ahead as the technology matures and more so, becomes more accessible.

"451: Unavailable due to legal reasons

We recognize you are attempting to access this website from a country belonging to the European Economic Area (EEA) including the EU which enforces the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and therefore access cannot be granted at this time. For any issues, contact email@example.com or call (661) 395-7500."

That is a plague upon business, politics.

[EDIT ADD] Seems a few sites are running the same story and for those inside the EEA without VPN access: [https://www.arcamax.com/currentnews/newsheadlines/s-2334212-...](https://www.arcamax.com/currentnews/newsheadlines/s-2334212-p3)</comment>


How to Streamline Your Product Development with Tools Like Slack and HipChat - <AUTHOR> https://www.mindk.com/blog/streamline-product-development-with-slack-and-hipchat/ <comment><USER2> Except with hipchat, any files you upload to a chat room are publicly posted in an S3 bucket, forever.

If you know what the URL is to a bucket that would be owned/used by a given company, you can see every file they have ever uploaded.

Maybe that's just screenshots, or maybe that also includes sensitive information like passwords, etc....

Oops.</comment>


Windows 10 Design: Getting the balance right - <AUTHOR> http://blogs.windows.com/bloggingwindows/2015/04/29/windows-10-design-getting-the-balance-right/ <comment><USER2> > We want to deliver an experience that flexes elegantly across a continuum of > devices

And there's the punch to the gut. Just like with Windows 8, if you want to use Windows 10 on the desktop your experience is going to be degraded by sacrifices made for mobile. I was really hoping that Microsoft would learn their lesson, since DirectX 12 is going to be exclusive to Windows 10 and I'm going to have to upgrade.

They're killing Windows on the desktop (where they have 91% market share) for the sake of Windows on mobile/tablet (where they have 2% market share). Again and again I think how much more attractive Microsoft would be if they decoupled their titanically-successful cloud/enterprise world from their depressing, clueless consumer arm. Microsoft shareholders shouldn't be paying for Nokia, the red ring of death, or the Windows Store.

<comment><USER3> The Windows 10 UI framework is resolution-independent and built-in controls are responsive. App devs have everything they need to provide a good UI for every device type. Or you can use HTML/JS.

disclaimer: I work on Windows 10

<comment><USER2> Resolution independence is nice. Has Microsoft figured out how to scale legacy apps on HiDPI displays for Windows 10? I found Windows 8.1 unusable on my Retina MacBook Pro because so many apps didn't use the new fonts/rendering framework (even many built-in Windows tools like the MMC) and text was therefore horribly disfigured. I don't have such problems with any applications anymore on OS X.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Here's a bit of analysis by Paul Thurrot on this piece: [https://www.thurrott.com/windows/windows-10/3226/microsoft-e...](https://www.thurrott.com/windows/windows-10/3226/microsoft- explains-the-windows-10-design-changes)

</comment><comment><USER5> > _We started by exploring concepts to push the boundaries of our design > system, going from mild to wild variation, trying out new patterns and > controls, new type treatment and using color in bold fresh ways._

...and we ended in the smallest possible variation from an unimaginative merging of the classic start menu and the Metro style blocks...

<comment><USER4> That doesn't necessarily mean they made a wrong or otherwise bad decision, though. In a way, being _too_ imaginative was what made Windows 8 perform poorly.

<comment><USER5> Too imaginative? Again there all they did was add some blocks, as the minimal way to have touch targets for running apps and display info.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> For some reason since the release of Windows 8, I have not been able to shake this feeling that all Metro+ adaptations are unpolished. The original Windows Phone release, although lacking features, felt like a product that was well designed, with a clear philosophy. Since then, each adaption seems to bloat just a bit more. Slowly going back to what had already existed, it's a bit disheartening to watch.

</comment><comment><USER7> I'm going to lose it if Win10 does not integrate automatic time zone adjustment like OSX. What, does no one at MS mind having to manually change the time zone with 7 clicks every time they travel? Why is it not just two clicks to change the time zone at least? Maybe something like right-click time, select from list of preset "favorite" time zones. That doesn't even requite a time network, let alone being able to read time stamps on surrounding wireless networks.

Or there is no Outlook global search or no message threading.

That's not new or challenging stuff, Microsoft. WTF?

Can you think of anything else basic that is annoying as heck about Windows?

<comment><USER8> PDF viewer. Chrome is the only non-awful PDF viewer I've found for Windows. Requires third-party install.

Copying and pasting text causes weird characters to be carried around (e.g. emdash), and I haven't found a reliable way to sanitise it.

Does notepad handle \n separated lines correctly yet?

Something about excel breaks the behaviour of the alt+tab stack. (if you have multiple documents open)

Also, it's annoying the way that - by default - excel wants to open everything in the same parent window. Why why why why why would you want it to behave like this?!

Apps that minimise to the small-icon part of the start bar (next to time) don't go to the back of the alt+tab stack.

A bunch of NTFS features are not exposed to the user interface.

Not quite in the spirit of what you're asking, but I think Windows file locking is a bad design. You can't copy that excel file (in pscp), because you have it open in excel.

It'd be useful to be able to mute an application from the OS interface, and to see an indicator for audio activity ion something like the task manager.

No strong answer to sshd.

No TCP-check tool in the standard install. Why on earth did they get rid of telnet in the standard build? If anything we needed a better TCP-check mechanism - they got rid of the only trustworthy one that was in.

Similarly with shell scripting - they actually neutered a bunch of features that were in NT in subsequent versions. Previously you could (just) ship a single bat file that would act as a self-installer for binary content. I imagine they disabled this to discourage malware. But - how is a bat particularly different than an exe?

I think it's a shame Windows doesn't ship with devtools out of the box, also. If it came with devtools, would be one less hurdle to getting newbies into programming. Offer good tools at every level - an assembler, a C compiler, c#-level tools, javascript debugger, visual basic. Microsoft's grew from a successful devtool company.

They should bundle a python API to windows and a recent version of python also. Make it easy to create and ship python on Windows. A community would just grow around this, with no further effort from them.

Would be good if you could choose a filesystem that had strong performance with git. Either make git+NTFS fast, or else offer a well-support FS that git does want to work on.

Weak scheduler, init mechanisms. (from user perspective)

There's no nice IPC mechanism available for casual development. Cmd kind of has pipes but they're horrible.

This is kind of evil, but if I was Microsoft I'd be tempted to make Access more accessible (i.e. ship with base office). As soon as users hit a certain level of scale they'll find themselves needing SQL Server. Access has huge lock-in to the Microsoft world. Much like the way a manager will create a microsoft word or excel document, and then suddenly you find yourself stuck with sharepoint everywhere - ugh.

<comment><USER9> UNIX file locking is broken. Requiring all processes to play along. It suffices one process to ignore fcntl calls to corrupt files.

All non-POSIX OSes with proper file locking use the same approach as Windows does.

You can install telnet via the add features option from the control panel. Who wants to have such insecure program available anyway?

Commercial UNIX systems were know to charge at least $2000 for their SDKs, something that made many join the effort to improve GCC back in the day.

Windows NT family has had multi-threading since the day one, even at the kernel level. Which took ages for UNIX systems to catch up.

The only UNIX that matches Windows IO completion ports is Solaris.

The init is so bad that part of its design has been copied by UNIX systems, instead of using spaghetti init scripts.

<comment><USER10> > You can install telnet via the add features option from the control panel. > Who wants to have such insecure program available anyway?

There's no security problem with the telnet client, unless you're using it to log into remote hosts without encryption. But OP, and presumably many other people (like me), use telnet as a simple TCP client for troubleshooting. On Linux, one can use netcat (though I never remember to type nc, and always try telnet first), but of course Windows doesn't come with netcat.

<comment><USER9> There are better GUI tools for such purposes.

<comment><USER8> It's important to have something to be installed by default, and not require admin privileges. This is what you need need if you're supporting people over the phone. That is - something dependable that you can use to check that they don't have TCP obstacles for whatever they're trying to do.

Telnet-for-Windows was a terrible interface for this purpose (if it succeeds, you get left at a meaningless command prompt) but it was possible to talk people through that, and that was enough. (You can't trust the proxy configuration of their web browsers.)

<comment><USER9> Back when I was doing UNIX (big boys UNIX, not GNU/Linux) I remember there were lots of tools that weren't available on those systems.

And even the common ones lacked lots of useful options from the GNU land.

All comparisons of GNU/Linux distributions with Windows, have the fallacy of comparing a distributions with an OS targeted originally for consumers.

Normal users just don't go telnet into their local networks.

Server editions usually have the proper services in place.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I'm a bit skeptic about the direction of Windows (Phone) 10. It's not that its bad, it's just that it isn't great and they've missed the opportunity to but in substantial UX improvements.

Also having the same interface for Phone/tablet/desktop is a dangerous idea if pushed to far, jack of all trades, master of none. Of course they should share some common ground but they risk sacrificing an tailored experience for each on the altar of standardization.

They haven't made any greater strides in addressing thumb ergonomics on larger screens. Sure at least the buttons are at the bottom again but to make it truly next generational they should have utilized more gestures.

My guess is they don't dare make Win 10 "too different" for risk alienating developers from other platforms and "mainstream users". That might be the safe choice but it doesn't make for greatness. It feels more like design by committee.

There was certainly room for improvement, the old interface was a little too stark, but they're changing course instead of refining.

I also call bullshit on "people are circles" argument. The "old" metro was more about full bleed pictures which IMO is more timeles, the circles thing is just being influenced by a current design trend and makes WP less unique. Each to their own I guess.

<comment><USER12> I hate gestures, especially on larger screens. It 100% ensures I will need to be using two hands, at which point I might as well just have a button. Occasionally I'll try to swipe and find there is a smudge on the screen or maybe the humidity has gone up and my hands are a bit more grippy and whoops, there goes the entire phone out of my hand. On something the size of an iPhone 5, it's fine. On an iPhone 6+ (where you have less of a hold on the phone one- handed anyway), that's a big deal.

<comment><USER11> That depends on what kind of gestures you use and where. The closest edges for instance are more easily accessible. Also gestures doesn't necessarily mean swiping.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> "People aren't squares"... ergo they're circles?

<comment><USER14> If you ask a 4-year-old to draw a head, it's likely that the base shape is a circle.

<comment><USER5> Head, people.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> UX-wise, this an extremely basic (to avoid saying _lousy_ ) article. I ended up with the impression that their source of data is pretty much the feedback from beta users (which is great but highly skewed - to the technocentric pole - data).

I would like very much to know more on how they are working with end-users. Are they using ethnographic methods? Observing how Windows is used in the real world? How are they addressing cultural diversity? Are they having focus groups, interviews? What kind of telemetrics they gather? What have they discovered from their huge user base (and huge funding for their design project)?

This would be much more interesting - even to the layman, I think - than empty phrases such as, say, "people aren't squares".

</comment><comment><USER16> Or: Killing WindowsDesktop..WE HOPE YOU DO NOT NOTICE

</comment><comment><USER17> Are there no Redesign of Windows Media Player in sight? I love MPC-BE, but i see no reason why Microsoft cant improve their Media Player.

</comment><comment><USER18> I love the vertical menu bar in landscape mode.

</comment><comment><USER19> Big fan of all caps bold headers.</comment>


Call.me.maybe() - <AUTHOR> http://jsfiddle.net/6CkmH/3/

<comment><USER2> This is most definitely not HN material.</comment>


Dark Mode Is for Suckers - <AUTHOR> https://gizmodo.com/dark-mode-is-for-suckers-1838544708/ <comment><USER2> Some people have photosensitivity. Particularly people with light-colored pigment in their irises.</comment>


Proofread Bot makes you write like a pro - <AUTHOR> http://proofreadbot.com/proofreading/132

<comment><USER2> Amusing that it misses the wont in :

Also, errors are something that Proofread Bot wont put up with.

<comment><AUTHOR> Is the glass half empty or half full? :) It's a work in progress with easily extensible rules [http://proofreadbot.com/rules](http://proofreadbot.com/rules) Will put something up for wont. :)

<comment><USER2> Don't get me wrong, it looks like a great tool and I shall try and use it myself for my own studies, I just found that particular error amusing and shows you can't just trust even your own bot.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yep :) Grammar checking seems to be a never-ending story...</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Show HN: A simple script to make time-lapse videos from screencapture images - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/potomak/screencapture

<comment><AUTHOR> I used it for a while, but I think it works better with designer's work (example 2).

Example 1: [http://blog.drawbang.com/post/12887870450/the-making-of- new-...](http://blog.drawbang.com/post/12887870450/the-making-of-new-drawbang- animation-feature)

Example 2: [http://blog.drawbang.com/post/12887912686/the-making-of- new-...](http://blog.drawbang.com/post/12887912686/the-making-of-new-drawbang- animation-feature)

</comment><comment><USER2> What are the use cases for this product?</comment>


Polynesian Voyaging Society - <AUTHOR> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polynesian_Voyaging_Society <comment><USER2> If you ever have the opportunity, I highly recommend the show about Polynesian voyaging at the Bishop Museum planetarium in Honolulu. You learn a little bit about navigation by stars (in particular you get a taste of how unbelievably complex it is), some of the history of Polynesian voyaging and the recent history of the PVS, the Hokule'a and the amazing modern voyagers who've revived ancient Polynesian cultural traditions. It just leaves you in awe of Polynesian culture, knowledge, and accomplishments. I always make sure to catch the show whenever I visit Honolulu.

</comment><comment><USER3> I'm in Tahiti now and in preparation I started reading Sea People [1] which explores Polynesian culture and the westerner discovery of it. It's a truly incredible story, most of which I never knew. Highly recommend the read, and doing so with a map handy.

[1] [https://www.amazon.com/Sea-People-Polynesia-Christina- Thomps...](https://www.amazon.com/Sea-People-Polynesia-Christina- Thompson/dp/0062060872/)

<comment><USER4> Ia orana!

Hopefully you're getting off Tahiti and to some of the islands for some of your trip?

<comment><USER3> Ia orana!

A late reply because I wasn't really online. We went to Huahine, Bora Bora and Moorea. What a trip!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Disney's Moana already taught me everything there is to know!

<comment><USER6> Bring a chicken for snacking.</comment></comment>


What do I need to know before I start consulting? - <AUTHOR>

I'm currently strongly considering moving to consulting. I've got some work lined up (20 hrs/wk) but not enough to be stable 1) What do you do about health insurance?
2) How do you figure out your rate as a consultant? 3) How much work do you aim for? And then how do you get it? 4) How do you get the social interaction that you would get at a fulltime job? 5) What else should I be thinking about? <comment><USER4> 2) I assume you're charging by time. In that case do some research on what your _local_ competitors charge and find a balance between that average amount and what you're comfortable with based on your experience. Don't be afraid of increasing prices. Once you get some experience under your belt, look at value-based income[1].

3) I do a guesstimate on how much I can actually work in a week - a bit more than the 20 hours you have, but not 40 - and allocate clients to that time. Most of my current clients are people I have worked with in some capacity, but going to meetups and talking to people about your business helps get new clients as well. Always be selling, even to friends.

4) Ironically I get more social interaction now than when I had a full-time job, mostly due to compressing my work schedule which offers more flexibility for meeting with people (having lunch with others in my industry, going to meetups earlier and staying later to network, etc.).

I suggest just working your damn hardest during the day so you save enough time to get some proper social interaction after work. Co-working spaces are another avenue, but if anything I found people less talkative in these setups than an actual office (in Ottawa at least).

5) Think about getting an accountant, even if you think you don't need one. Sooner or later you'll need their help for some trivial thing you didn't account for, such as signing a new apartment lease and being able to prove your income.

And be open to collaborations if possible. Working with other consultants on a project that they can't quite get off the ground will help both of you than working individually.

[1] [http://breakingthetimebarrier.freshbooks.com/](http://breakingthetimebarrier.freshbooks.com/)

<comment><AUTHOR> Is there a reason why you don't do 40 hours a week? Also I really like your idea about working with other consultants. That may be what I try to do first (especially since I'm not a front-end dev)

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> I've been thinking about consulting myself, and have slowly been working out solutions to those problems. Remember this is from someone who _doesn 't actually consult yet though_. But since I seem to be the first one to comment here goes nothing:

1 - I'm in the UK so not a problem. But if I was in the US and didn't have a regular income, no immediate life-threatening diseases and was just starting out I'd be tempted to let that slide for a few months. Put it on the priority list for when you get stable.

2 - Think of yourself as your customer that's looking for a consultant. Find consultants in your local area-ish and ask them what their rate is. Make it a bit cheaper than that to start with and be honest with your customers that you are just starting out, "so you're getting an experienced dev for cheap but I would like to use you as a reference."

3 - As much work as you can get to start with! Never stop looking for business. Even if you're jammed with work right now (and you're not) you should expect to spend some of your time each week "feeding the pipeline". Also remember to sell support contracts to your customers as much as you can, this is where you're going to get your regular income. You charge more for "instant response" and on-the-day fixes. Free tech support is "I'll answer an email when I get a chance". It also makes sure that your customers know that just because you did some work for them that doesn't mean they now get 24/7 support for free for life.

4 - I've worked from home for 3 years and I like it. Some don't. Either way make sure to get some social interaction. I have a dog I walk to the pub :). Another good way to meet people is to join a gym but then do the sports clubs there - I've joined the squash club and we meet every Thursday and Sunday. It's good because you meet different people and it kind of forces you to get out. Also remember to put in a bit of effort to see friends and family. It takes a little more effort because it means you have to get off your arse and out of the house - but it's not _that_ much more.

5 - Sales, sales, sales. Who are your contacts? What business meetups are there in your local area? Is your website setup with your own domain and clean and professional? Do you have business cards? You're not just a dev now, you're a businessman/dev.

Hope this helps...

</comment><comment><USER6> Realize that you are going into business for yourself. Bread will only arrive on your table and the mortgage will only get paid through your blood, sweat, and tears (not speaking figuratively at all here). You have to hunt down that prospect, turn them into a customer. You do the work, you do the billing, you nag them until they pay the invoice, and gee wiz, you may have accounts payable before you have accounts receivable.

1) Health insurance: assuming you are in the US, you buy it - <USER2> ehealthinsurance.com, your state's health exchange, etc. 2) You figure out what your customers can afford relative to what your competitors are charging 3) As much as you can get, from any source you can find. Build a sales pipeline, you are in business for yourself now. 4) There's no time for social interaction, you are self-employed. Any time you aren't doing the work, you need to be doing sales, bookkeeping, marketing, updating your website, writing new work proposals, and half-a-dozen other things. Your only social interaction will be with customer and prospective customers. I'm only partially kidding.

I'm assuming the 20 hours/week that you are doing now is in addition to a full time gig. If that's the case, keep your day job. Keep doing these moonlighting gigs (and saving the money from them!) and use them as a test to help you figure out things like a) what to charge b) what it takes to win new business c) how much work you can handle. When you have enough work built up that it is overtaking your day job, then you'll know it is time to quit and go full time on consulting.

Good luck!

</comment><comment><USER7> Charge enough so that you can afford downtime and choosing your gigs rather than having to take whatever comes your way. Being short on money forces you to take whatever low paying work you happen upon. Low paying gigs make you short on money. It's a vicious cycle.

My consulting gigs where usually long term 9 months+ full time with 3 - <USER3> months of downtime during the year. You need to charge enough to easily last 6 months without a gig and still afford to be choosy, pay yourself retirement, healthcare, vacation, savings etc.

</comment><comment><USER8> Number one, above everything else:

Work is never lined up for a consultant. Either you have a signed contract and a cashed retainer, or you have a job you are chasing. There's no in between because lined up work doesn't pay the bills. People cancel projects. Consultants get underbid. Start dates get moved back. There's no paycheck on Friday.

As a corollary, clients are people with whom you have a contract. Paying clients have already written you checks. Great clients have written you lots of checks and done so quickly and without hassle. Everyone else is a potential client or a deadbeat. Don't work with deadbeats. Don't pursue potential clients that give you clues they will be deadbeats.

Insist on a retainer applied against final invoice. The arguments a potential client gives against a retainer will be based on their concept of business. If that model is that everyone tries to scam everyone else, take it as a tell about their future behavior.

Lastly, discount all future payments to zero. Don't plan around getting paid on a particular day. Don't plan on getting paid at all by any particular client until you really know their business model inside out and have done enough repeat work with the client that you can describe where your money comes from in their process. Even then you should discount to zero because outliers happen, but nobody can.

Good luck.

</comment><comment><USER9> Regarding insurance, shop around. Look to the government healthcare exchange, but also check with your credit union, home insurance provider, local agents, etc. Ask agents about the pros and cons of low/high deductible, coinsurance, maximums, etc.

Regarding pricing, price based on value, not cost. Don't come up with a rate by saying, well I used to make the equivalent of $30 an hour at my day job, so I'll change $40! Instead work on finding projects where you can build something that makes or saves a customer many thousands of dollars, and charge based on that value. As you gain business/industry knowledge, develop a pitch that communicates this. As you become more experienced with scoping and delivering projects, switch to weekly pricing or project pricing, in the $X0,000 range.

The other reason not to come up with a rate based on your day job is that you now need to cover insurance, time off, dry spells, non-paying customers, etc out of your own pocket. Make sure whatever rate you do settle on accounts for all of this.

Finally, talk to an accountant and a lawyer. You're going to want to know what's coming before tax season, and you're going to want to have signed agreements (preferably with cash down) with customers.

</comment><comment><USER10> In terms of time management- a solid idea to consider from David Maister, split the day into 3 categories:

1)Income Time (serving clients)

2)Investment Time (creating ones future)

3)Individual Time (everything else)

The essence of this approach is to start treating your investment time as serious as income time. This will significantly affect your future success-- and lifestyle.

Look up Alan Weiss on consulting > [http://www.amazon.com/Million-Dollar- Launch-Kick-start-Succe...](http://www.amazon.com/Million-Dollar-Launch-Kick- start- Successful/dp/0071826343/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1403276335&sr=8-1&keywords=alan+weiss%2C+start+consulting)

</comment><comment><USER11> You know you have hit the perfect pricing point when the client says to you: "You do great work but fuck are you expensive". This means they can't do without you but cringe paying the bill.

My other advise is don't be a consultant. No leverage, no building value, no holidays (trust me on this), no security (you're always first to go). My advise: find a pain point and build a product.

</comment><comment><USER12> A lot of great advice in this thread. My input is to get involved in organizations that are the most likely to help you find clients.

If you're a digital marketer, get involved in digital marketing meetups. If your clients are most likely lawyers, go to lawyer meetups. When I say get involved, I mean really get involved. Get a position on the board. Immerse yourself in the community where your clients are.

</comment><comment><USER13> Might I recommend Gerald Weinberg's _The Secrets of Consulting_ ([http://www.dorsethouse.com/books/soc.html](http://www.dorsethouse.com/books/soc.html))? Much of it is written in a light and amusing manner, but he hits a lot of the points people have mentioned here.

</comment><comment><USER14> I started consulting about 2 years back. The most important thing I have learned is Cash Flow management. Always keep in mind the 'earned money' is going to be in your bank account for a while. Sometimes for over a month. Make sure you stay afloat.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> I just want to thank everyone who replied. There is a lot of great information in this thread. Who knows, maybe in a while I'll have a blog post about going solo

</comment><comment><USER15> Watch the company you keep.</comment>


The worst truism in information security - <AUTHOR> https://alexgaynor.net/2018/jul/20/worst-truism-in-infosec/ <comment><USER2> > as long as identifying vulnerabilities and exploiting them without detection > is more expensive than the value of the assets the system protects, > defenders are winning.

I'm not sure what "winning" means or why it's valuable.

I don't have an interest in the payoffs of the attacker being small. I have an interest in the costs to myself being small.

<comment><USER3> In this context, "winning" means "not getting breached". I leave it up to you to decide why it might be valuable.

I believe the author's point is that would-be attackers are in essence economic actors. They seek some gain from compromising a system. If the cost in time, energy, money, or other resources exceeds the anticipated gains, then the attacker will tend to move on to seek easier targets.

You're absolutely right. You don't have any interest whatsoever in the attacker's payoff being small. You may have an interest in keeping it lower than the cost of compromising your systems, but only to the extent that you actually value winning.

If you don't value "winning", then you you can definitely guarantee that the costs to you will be small!</comment></comment>


Give Me My 21:9 Games - <AUTHOR> http://uncertainty.com/give-me-my-219-games/ <comment><USER2> I'm not so sure about the "increasingly common aspect ratio" comment</comment>


Show HN: Calculate changes in metrics by segments – Google Analytics-based - <AUTHOR> https://www.diffet.com

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks Gys, this is very helpful.

Yes it is a side project, so alpha then? :) Sorry I should have mentioned earlier. And looking to see if there's interest before I put in more work.

Thanks for the pointer on 'We'. It does give the idea that this is manual - <USER2> is not. It is done by machine.

The thought is user enters date ranges for comparison and changes in sessions etc by different segments are calculated automatically for easy exploring. Algorithm is very modest now. Just subtraction. But this can be enhanced to be more intelligent e.g. give the answer in English on which segment saw drops (hence the answers).

Thanks also for the pointer on examples. I think I should do a video.

Once again, thanks so much.

</comment><comment><USER3> No examples ? No pricing info; if its free then why ? Is this in beta ? Who is 'we' ? Why should you be able to find the answers ? Do you use an algorithm or do this by hand ?

Some of the questions that come to mind...</comment>


GitHub Repositories for Mobile Developers - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/better-programming/33-amazing-github-repositories-for-mobile-developers-c62cd8ea0e98 <comment><USER2> STOP trying to find ways to make money from other's open source work. They did all the hard work and you simply put it behind a paywall.</comment>


High-Quality Streamable Free-Viewpoint Video [MSR/SIGGRAPH] - <AUTHOR> http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/redmond/projects/fvv/

<comment><USER2> this startup is doing the same thing

[http://8i.com/](http://8i.com/)

<comment><AUTHOR> Looks like 8i is using fewer cameras with a narrower field. The processing doesn't look nearly as clean. The compression doesn't look as good as it didn't download realtime. The MSR video claims that they can deliver their content at 12mbps.

My guess is that the MSR set up is a pretty large array of kinect like cameras. Pretty cool how they clean things up and connect through time to drive compression. Also think it is cool that they detect where hands and faces are and make the mesh more dense there.

But, the 8i folks have a demo on the web and MSR has a pre-canned video.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Directory of JS Libs - <AUTHOR>

I see at least one new JS lib being announced via the front page of HN everyday. Makes me wonder if there is a central place for discovering all the libraries, like an app store for JS libraries.<p>How do you keep track of the latest in the world of JS? <comment><USER2> At the risk of stating the obvious, if you're doing server-side JavaScript/Node, there is <https://npmjs.org/> or simply `npm search` from the command line.

</comment><comment><USER3> <http://dailyjs.com/> and <http://microjs.com/> have been pretty useful for me.

</comment><comment><USER4> Right now I just bookmark its github/website as I find them. Not exactly the most efficient way to do things, but it does the job for now.

</comment><comment><USER5> You should have a look at <http://badassjs.com/></comment>


Google brought back oldest available index for their 10th birthday - <AUTHOR> http://www.google.com/search2001.html#

<comment><USER2> When I search for Perl, it seems like nothing has changed. When I click through to Perl.com and look at the archived articles, they look like they all could have been written today.

I'm not sure what this says about anything, but it is interesting.

<comment><USER3> I'm pretty sure this is meaningless as well, but interesting:

Then

      2,730,000 for asp code
      2,450,000 for java code
      1,730,000 for php code
      1,710,000 for perl code
      276,000 for python code
      224,000 for lisp code
      89,600 for ruby code
      9,580 for erlang code

Now

      64,700,000 for php code
      25,700,000 for asp code
      15,500,000 for java code
      1,540,000 for perl code
      1,390,000 for erlang code
      1,160,000 for python code
      711,000 for ruby code
      484,000 for lisp code

<comment><USER2> There are actually _fewer_ Perl sites now. That is sad :(

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> "Your search - _youtube_ \- did not match any documents."

What a crazy world we lived in.

<comment><USER5> Some other fun ones:

 _Your search - "sarah palin" - did not match any documents._ Makes me anxious that she is a vice presidential contender.

Top result for "iraq war" is a historical note on the Iran-Iraq War (1980-1988).

Top result for "myspace" is an online storage portal (a whopping free 50MB).

"LCD" refers to a webcomic, not an LCD display.

Top result for "china" is a web page whose title is "New Page 1".

And of course ycombinator is nowhere to be heard of. :)

<comment><USER6> I thought this one was pretty interesting:

osama bin laden - excerpt from the first hit:

 _Bin Laden has vowed to wage a jihad or holy war against U.S. forces in Saudi Arabia because of U.S. support for Israel. He broadened his threat to include all Americans, military and civilian, in the Middle East._

and

 _The terrorist said, "We predict a black day for America."_

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> The fifth result when searching for "wikipedia" has the text:

"WikiPedia is a new wiki site I have set up at <http://www.wikipedia.com/> . WikiPedia is an offshoot project of NuPedias OpenContent encyclopedia project."

There are only 681 results (3 pages), and all of the Internet Archive links go nowhere.

<comment><USER8> Some differences in how the Google index and IA crawls handled redirects and canonicalization may make it a little harder to click-through to the archives Wikipedia pages, but they're available. Try:

[http://web.archive.org/web/2001/www.wikipedia.com/wiki.cgi?W...](http://web.archive.org/web/2001/www.wikipedia.com/wiki.cgi?Wikipedia)

...or...

[http://web.archive.org/web/2001*/http:/www.wikipedia.com/wik...](http://web.archive.org/web/2001*/http:/www.wikipedia.com/wiki.cgi?*)

...or to see pages beginning 'J'...

[http://web.archive.org/web/2001*/http:/www.wikipedia.com/wik...](http://web.archive.org/web/2001*/http:/www.wikipedia.com/wiki.cgi?J*)

[FYI: I work at the Internet Archive.]

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> _The only product in our roundup that is solely vendor-hosted, Viaweb Store 3.0 shines brightly amid the e-commerce crowd. You don't have to install any ..._

[http://www.google.com/search2001/search?q=viaweb&hl=en&#...

</comment><comment><USER10> Weapons of Mass Destruction, Iraq: [http://www.google.com/search2001/search?q=Weapons+of+Mass+De...](http://www.google.com/search2001/search?q=Weapons+of+Mass+Destruction+Iraq&btnG=Search)

I have to say, for what it's worth, this data looked pretty worrisome...

</comment><comment><USER11> Want to buy or sell a used copy of On Lisp? [http://www.google.com/search2001/search?hl=en&q=%22Paul+...](http://www.google.com/search2001/search?hl=en&q=%22Paul+Graham%22&btnG=Google+Search)

</comment><comment><USER12> Hmm. This doesn't work for me. A search for anything takes me to a 404 not found.

<comment><USER13> That's because of the web's ever-popping foam of bubbles, to quote Ted Nelson. The web's main feature is a lack of permanency, because people either unpublish, have to pay for hosting which becomes economically unviable, or host for 'free' until the free host gets bought out and deleted.

<comment><USER13> Hang on, same result for me. You mean there's a 404 to the search query, not the resulting link. Odd!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> For those of you who have seen Startup.com:

<http://www.google.com/search2001/search?q=govWorks>

also, <http://www.google.com/search2001/search?q=webvan> and <http://www.google.com/search2001/search?q=kozmo>

</comment><comment><USER15> It's got the website I made in high school, but the Internet Archive only has the text of the main page, no images :(

I wish they had my very first "webpage" from elementary school, which was just one of those AltaVista or GeoCities things where you fill out a form (basically the predecessor of social network "profiles", without the network)

</comment><comment><USER16> Search for "SEO" brings up this : [http://www.google.com/search2001/search?q=seo&hl=en&...](http://www.google.com/search2001/search?q=seo&hl=en&btnG=Search)

First hit : Welcome to the Sponsors for Educational Opportunity Web Site

They practically later defined that market.

</comment><comment><USER17> Ha! Joel on Software was at <http://joel.editthispage.com/>

</comment><comment><USER18> _al qaeda_ turns up 1,670 results back in 2001, (Today is 20,400,000) and the first hit is for a Frontline episode on "Who is Bin Laden?"

[http://www.google.com/search2001/search?q=al+qaeda&hl=en...](http://www.google.com/search2001/search?q=al+qaeda&hl=en&btnG=Search)

</comment><comment><USER19> 1\. Searching in 2001 for: altavista google, the 3rd result is: "AltaVista launches Google competitor"

2\. Searching in 2008 for: google facebook, the 3rd result is: Google's Response to Facebook: "Maka-Maka"

If history can teach something, Google's future is doomed. :)

</comment><comment><USER20> [http://web.archive.org/web/20010413020517/www4.enron.com/cor...](http://web.archive.org/web/20010413020517/www4.enron.com/corp/jobs/)

"From stock options to 3 weeks of vacation--all the benefits that Enron employees enjoy."

</comment><comment><USER21> Impressive . . . they decided to forgo search driven ad revenue for the day.

<comment><USER22> Call it irony, but I think this produces higher quality results than paid results.

Interesting little quirk, search for 'gmail' and look at the results. Nostalgia of proportions only a true geek would appreciate.

<comment><USER21> haha.

You know, I didn't appreciate the magnitude of what they did until trying out your suggestion. I didn't realize that they'd literally gone back to the old search index . . . I thought it was just a superficial change.

<comment><USER23> _"... I didn't appreciate the magnitude of what they did until trying out your suggestion ..."_

Try "Al-Qaeda".

The index is pegged at ~= 9mth prior to 911. I know it's of questionable taste but it's an interesting exercise to see what public information google indexed. Or try [http://www.google.com/search2001/search?hl=en&q=pixar+Wa...](http://www.google.com/search2001/search?hl=en&q=pixar+Wall.e)

<comment><USER3> [http://www.google.com/search2001/search?q=%22Osama+Bin+Laden...](http://www.google.com/search2001/search?q=%22Osama+Bin+Laden%22&hl=en&btnG=Search)

Totally interesting.

<comment><USER23> _"... Bin+Laden... Totally interesting ..."_

Bin Laden is interesting all right. By '99 he was #456 on the FBI's most wanted list ~ [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FBI_Ten_Most_Wanted_Fugitives,_...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FBI_Ten_Most_Wanted_Fugitives,_1990s#Osama_bin_Laden) and now on the Tango watchlist ~ <http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/terrorists/terbinladen.htm>

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> iPhone?

[http://www.google.com/search2001/search?q=iphone&hl=en&#...

<comment><USER3> 4th hit "Cisco - iPhone Support"

Explains the settlment: <http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/02/22/business/cisco.php>

<comment><USER25> 10th hit:

> iPhone

> The revolutionary iPhone is a fully integrated telephone and Internet device > with a built-in touch screen to bring the world of the Internet into your > home ...

> <http://www.uioa.com/productcatalog/> \- View old version on the Internet > Archive

Wait, what??

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> Man 2001, feels so long ago. That was the year I finally got internet at home, and a few months later I built my first website on Geocities. Damn you Google, making us feel nostalgic.

</comment><comment><USER27> Search for "Bush":

"George W. Bush is running for President of the United States to keep the country prosperous."

"George W Bush -- not a crackhead!"

</comment><comment><USER28> Searching for "financial bailout" brings up links on the Russian bailout question years ago. Everything old is new again!

</comment><comment><USER29> I actually got results when searching for myself :-)

What a bunch of crap I wrote back then...

<comment><USER30> dot.com me:

[http://web.archive.org/web/20011107114829/www.efn.org/~david...](http://web.archive.org/web/20011107114829/www.efn.org/~davidw/jpg.html)

<comment><USER29> Thanks, I feel better now

:-)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> There is an older index. Why does no one use The Way Back Machine?

[http://web.archive.org/web/19981111183552/google.stanford.ed...](http://web.archive.org/web/19981111183552/google.stanford.edu/)

Perhaps this is when Google became google.com?

<comment><USER32> Google's index is the crawling information they gathered. You can actually do searches and get results as they would have been 7 years ago. The WayBack Machine just caches the HTML pages and would not provide this functionality.

<comment><USER13> Briefly in 2004, the Wayback Machine provided a search engine for its entire archive, back to about 1997. This is now gone. Probably Amazon didn't like it (Amazon owns Alexa and thus controls the WM caching).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> Wow, I was ungoogleable back then.

</comment><comment><USER34> google! - "yahoo!" wanna-be? :)

</comment><comment><USER35> Search for iPod gives this as 1st result: " Image Proof of Deposit Document Processing System" <http://www.aperta.co.uk/ipod.htm>

But the 3rd result is interesting...Page title - 'iPod' !! <http://www.vrex.com/apps/html/ipod.html> (page cannot be found..anyone knows what is this iPod?)

</comment><comment><USER36> Bootstrapping it: 3,780,000 versus 2,860,000,000</comment>


Hedge fund offers $1bn for Novell - <AUTHOR> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/03/03/novell_elliott_take_private/ <comment><USER2> "we believe the company's stock has meaningfully underperformed all relevant indices and peers. With over 33 years of experience in investing in public and private companies and an extensive track record of successfully structuring and executing acquisitions in the technology space, we believe that Elliott is uniquely situated to deliver maximum value to the company's stockholders on an expedited basis."

Translation: we intend to lay everyone off, sell off everything they're doing that's not netware related, put lipstick on the corpse and sell it.

</comment><comment><USER3> What will hedge fund do with Novell? Resell?

<comment><USER4> Yeah this is like house flipping.</comment></comment>


How to survive the recession - list of fastest growing jobs in US during the period 1929-1933  - <AUTHOR> http://www.myprops.org/content/How-to-survive-the-recession-list-of-fastest-growing-jobs-in-US-during-the-period-1929-1933/ <comment><USER2> >>Persons engaged in liquor stores: up 335 percent

Something tells me that that kind of growth had more to do with abolishing of prohibition, rather than with an economic depression. Although I can't deny that alcohol is attractive to those down on their luck.

<comment><USER3> Same goes for the gas station attendants and repair services. I suspect they had more to do with the rise of the automobile than the general economic climate. The analogous job today is "dot-com entrepreneur", not "gas station attendant". ;-)

<comment><USER4> Not to mention growth doesn't equal job stability. You want stability you become a mortician.

<comment><USER5> Or a job at a liquor store.

Anything with inelastic demand.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> This article is silly. For one thing, the economy has changed an enormous amount in the past 70 years. The jobs that did well during the Great Depression may well not be the ones that do well now -- the jobs that do well now might not even have _existed_ 70 years ago.

More importantly, choosing your career based on transient properties of the economy is a terrible idea. Do what you love, and make sure you're good at it; the rest will work itself out.

</comment><comment><USER7> I think that the one item that made sense was the growth in second hand stores. With more people hawking goods to get by, it makes sense that pawnshops would experience a boom. I doubt that this upcoming recession will cause a sufficient rise in hawking to make this profitable however.

<comment><USER8> stuff isn't worth as much now as it was then (relative to income, wealth, etc)</comment></comment>


Why Does the Neocortex Have Columns? A Theory of Learning Structure of the World [pdf] - <AUTHOR> https://www.biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2017/09/28/162263.full.pdf <comment><USER2> Jeff Hawkins gets shit on a lot in ML because his theories haven't produced models with results as good as the mainstream approach, but I'm glad they keep working at it and keep coming up with interesting ideas.

Too much of ML these days is about some NN model that does 0.n% better than SOTA on some specific task. Then you change one tiny parameter and he entire thing breaks, and it turns out we didn't understand why it was working at all.

<comment><USER3> >Jeff Hawkins gets shit on a lot in ML because his theories haven't produced models with results as good as the mainstream approach, but I'm glad they keep working at it and keep coming up with interesting ideas.

And also because Numenta's work isn't good, empirically-checkable neuroscience either.

<comment><USER4> Not sure whether that was a jab at Numenta or not, but I do think the combination of these two comments cuts to the heart of the PR problem for Numenta: they're _neither_ trying to do 0.1% better on the classic perception benchmarks than other algorithms do, nor trying to publish accurate, testable descriptions of the true details of meatspace neuroscience.

To me, exploring alternative network architectures and algorithms seems an extremely worthwhile goal even if it's only loosely tethered to actual biology, but from a PR perspective they really need to be better about priming the conversation if they want people to care.

Bad (neuroscience-focused): "We're doing a lot of research on neuroscience, and finding some really interesting stuff, so we built a model that doesn't exactly match the way the brain works but is still interesting. No, we haven't tried to make it work to classify ImageNet test cases, that's not our goal. But look, it's closer to biology, and we have working code that we're playing with!"

Better (ML-focused): "We're developing a novel neural network architecture that performs online unsupervised learning using only local update rules. Though it performs competently at classic benchmarks X, Y, and Z when a small WTA layer is thrown on top, it can also tackle problems A, B, and C that classical deep learning networks can't make any progress on."

To be fair, I'm not even sure if Numenta's networks _could_ perform competently at any classic benchmarks (I'm guessing that if they could, it would take some work to get them to do so), and I have no idea what new problems it could work on. But they really do need to reframe the conversation and emphasize that sort of innovation if they want to be taken more seriously - focusing on neuroscience underpinnings is not a great move if they're not engaged in research that can actually win over neuroscientists, and just pointing out that they're focusing on those things is not a way to win over industry ML folks if they don't have any results to point at.

<comment><USER3> >To be fair, I'm not even sure if Numenta's networks could perform competently at any classic benchmarks (I'm guessing that if they could, it would take some work to get them to do so), and I have no idea what new problems it could work on. But they really do need to reframe the conversation and emphasize that sort of innovation if they want to be taken more seriously - focusing on neuroscience underpinnings is not a great move if they're not engaged in research that can actually win over neuroscientists, and just pointing out that they're focusing on those things is not a way to win over industry ML folks if they don't have any results to point at.

It was definitely a jab, but I've also got some sympathy for their project. I genuinely agree that, well, theoretical and computational neuroscience need to become more _genuinely_ computational! We're seeing an emerging computational paradigm for neuroscience that isn't _just_ about jamming "network architectures" or "neural circuits" together and hoping something works; it supposedly has strong mathematical principles.

Ok, so where's the code? Sincere question. Some papers do simulations in Matlab, R, or Python that's just not shared. This includes even papers that purport to be applying these neuroscience-derived principles to robotics problems.

Computational cognitive science does a bunch better: _their_ custom-built Matlab gets shared!

If we really believe our theories, we should put them to the computational test. If we put them to the test and they don't work well, we should either revise the theories, or revise the benchmarks. Maybe ImageNet classification scores are a _bad idea_ for how to measure precise, accurate sensorimotor inference! New benchmarks for measuring the performance of "real" cognitive systems are a _great_ idea! Let's do it!

But that requires that we do the slow work of trying to merge theoretical/computational neurosci, cognitive science, and ML/AI back together, at least in some subfields. This is challenging, because nobody's gonna give us our own journal for it until a few prestigious people advocate for one.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Full paper here: [https://www.biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2017/09/28/162...](https://www.biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2017/09/28/162263.full.pdf)

I always enjoy reading analysis/ideas/intuitions about how the brain works, because it provides inspiration for machine learning improvements that can be applied in the real world.

That said, I'm still optimistically waiting for Numenta (and Geoff Hinton's capsule theory) to set the new bar at one of the many difficult image/speech/language/etc recognition challenges.

Ideas are great, but at the end of the day science moves forward when we measure our ideas against reality. (To the credit of this paper, it does make a series of predictions, though those seem extremely difficult to measure in biological systems for the time being.)

</comment><comment><USER6> Skeptical. Previously the brain was a machine consisting of drives and pulleys, just like the state of technology of the day. Now the brain is a computer that runs deep learning models. It would be one thing to just say the cortex has columns. It's another to go on and model what those columns are doing with linear algebra. The coincidence that this picture emerges at the same time as current fads in tech is too great to ignore

I am more interested in the work that is identifying different kinds of cells e.g place cells

<comment><USER7> > The coincidence that this picture emerges at the same time as current fads > in tech is too great to ignore

It's no coincidence, I see it as a kind of reframing the issue from a different perspective/approach and for that, we use whatever seems the best framework of explanation we have at hand during that time. Gotta start somewhere, can't try to paint a picture without a frame and at least some colors.

One can easily see the evolution how the frameworks we use keep getting more complex, from drives and pulleys to computers and NNs, so there clearly is some progress in how we are trying to describe the workings of the brain/consciousness.

In the end, it's also about what's the actual goal here: Trying to understand the human brain/consciousness or trying to artificially create "consciousness" or rather something resembling it. The later doesn't necessarily require the former.

<comment><USER8> Not consciousness, but intelligence. Big difference.

<comment><USER9> Is it? Personal theory is consciousness scales, like we're more conscious than a bug, but a bug still definitely conscious.

Then like A.I. overlords / borg hive mind more conscious still.

<comment><USER10> How far down does the scale go? Are brainless animals like oysters conscious? What about the mycelium network underneath a forest?

<comment><USER9> Well maybe better way to state, less 'conscious' and more 'things they're conscious of.'

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Great to see numenta in the news again. On Intelligence was the book that got me excited about biologically based machine learning. The methods that in that book is very different to anything else I've seen in current "trendy" ML.

</comment><comment><USER8> Here are some video resources to help explain this theory:

\- [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvJJn9VS4rk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvJJn9VS4rk) \- [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-h-cz7yY-G8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-h-cz7yY-G8)

<comment><USER12> Here's another very interesting talk from Jeff Hawkins about modelling the neocortex: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=izO2_mCvFaw](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=izO2_mCvFaw)

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> The world needs more work being done in the way Hawkins and co. are doing it, and less in the mold of most deep learning/ML work. Why? He's actually trying to connect building intelligent machines with biology. This is a huge problem, but so few are working on it. Rather, we are all distracted by deep learning because of its recent successes in very specific problem areas. In a few years, when we run into its limits, Hawkins and people doing work like this will have a chance to shine (if they produce something that works, of course).

<comment><USER14> Deepmind does a ton of work in meat neuroscience, and are actually publishing useful research in the field (a recent if somewhat controversial review at [http://www.cell.com/neuron/fulltext/S0896-6273(17)30509-3](http://www.cell.com/neuron/fulltext/S0896-6273\(17\)30509-3)) And they're about the most prominent deep learning group I can think of.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> There is also a summary at: [https://blog.acolyer.org](https://blog.acolyer.org)

<comment><USER16> ... probably not by pure coincidence.

p.s. specific dated link [https://blog.acolyer.org/2017/10/25/why-does-the- neocortex-h...](https://blog.acolyer.org/2017/10/25/why-does-the-neocortex- have-columns-a-theory-of-learning-the-structure-of-the-world/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> > Error! Problem, or Page Not Found

> Sorry, the page you were looking for does not exist.

Link is broken. From browsing, I believe the correct link is

[https://numenta.com/papers-videos-and- more/resources/layers-...](https://numenta.com/papers-videos-and- more/resources/layers-and-columns/)

<comment><USER18> The link works fine if you disable javascript. Still weird though

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> Understand how the brain works means understand how we the humans see and understand the world and ourselfs within it. The brain organically and selectivelly selects what to learn and which information shou ld be retained. Our brain receives training since birthdays. Then the family implements some of their own training then school and world. The brain never stops.

Great job Numenta !!

</comment><comment><USER20> I'm getting "Error! Problem, or Page Not Found Sorry, the page you were looking for does not exist."

Edit: Weird, I just closed my browser and tried again, and the article looks like it flashed into the screen then was replaced by the error message. Happens repeatedly on Chrome on Android...

<comment><USER21> I'm seeing that too. Ok, we'll change the URL from [https://numenta.com/papers/why-does-the-neocortex-have- layer...](https://numenta.com/papers/why-does-the-neocortex-have-layers-and- columns/) to the pdf of the paper. There's also a summary at [https://blog.acolyer.org/2017/10/25/why-does-the- neocortex-h...](https://blog.acolyer.org/2017/10/25/why-does-the-neocortex- have-columns-a-theory-of-learning-the-structure-of-the-world/) that other commenters have mentioned.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> I'm probably talking out of my ass but I'm somewhat suspect of a cortex having straight up columns. I'm curious whether these are artifacts of the fact that linear algebra seems to be the dominant algebra in ML/modeling of human perception. Recently I've been dipping my feet into geometric algebra which seems to be the superior algebra for just about anything you can think of (human perception but also like all of physics, Maxwell's 4 equations are reduced to a single equation in GA) and it's particularly better for reasoning about spaces which this seems to be all about.

And unlike linear algebra it actually makes sense (e.g. why is cross product only in three dimensions?, wtf are determinants esp. in the context of matrix division all about?).

This blog post introduces GA and talks about it's relationship to human perception.

[https://slehar.wordpress.com/2014/03/18/clifford-algebra- a-v...](https://slehar.wordpress.com/2014/03/18/clifford-algebra-a-visual- introduction/)

<comment><USER23> Cortical columns exist [1]; think perpendicular to the surface of the cortex [2, 2nd image, or just image search "cortical column"]. This is due to the morphology of cortical neurons. My understanding is that a column can be thought of as a functional unit, and passing information across columns adds complexity.

Of course biology is messy and there's tons of variation depending on which brain region you're looking at, but Visual Cortex was one of the earliest places this was observed. It gets complicated and detailed quickly, and I'm somewhat out of my element here.

[1] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cortical_column](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cortical_column) [2] [http://www.mbfbioscience.com/blog/2012/01/neurolucida- helps-...](http://www.mbfbioscience.com/blog/2012/01/neurolucida-helps- florida-researchers-reconstruct-a-region-of-the-rat-brain/)

<comment><USER24> There are, of course lateral connections between columns, but the columns are very real.

I dont see what geomettic algebra has to with it, as the grandparent suggests.

<comment><USER22> They are performing spatial reasoning and GA is a better algebra for that.

<comment><USER24> I mean I don't see why geometric algebra bears on the factual existence of column-like structure perpendicular to the cortical surface in real brains. Geometric algebra may bear on what those columns do, but it is not relevant to whether the columns exist. This is a matter of observing network wiring from brain preparations.

<comment><USER25> I think it has something to do with the power of building hierarchical layers of abstraction, to make increasingly precise predictions about the world.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


No evidence that TDD differs from a TLD - <AUTHOR> http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=2961111.2962592 <comment><USER2> It'd be great if the authors now compared TDD/TLD with TFD (Type First Development).

Side reading: [http://tomasp.net/blog/type-first- development.aspx/](http://tomasp.net/blog/type-first-development.aspx/)

<comment><USER3> That only works if there are many types.

I work with molecules, expressed as molecular graphs. The algorithm development I do is mostly graph manipulation, with a small number of types. For example, given N molecules, find the largest subgraph (in terms of the number of edges) which are in at least k of them.

Or, think about computing an FFT, or clustering a data set.

Types add little to how to think about these problems, so TFD provides little structure to this sort of algorithm development process.</comment></comment>


Where 2.0: The State Of The Geospatial Web (O'Reilly) - <AUTHOR> http://radar.oreilly.com/research/where2-report.html Somebody here who has read the State of the Gespatial Web Document by O'Reilly?
What do you think about the field of the services growing around geodata in the web.
Does the document miss some things?
Is there a way to get the full document - without paying? <comment><AUTHOR> OOps, I wrote a text below the link, but you have to choose. So my questions were:

1\. What do you think about the report - a 15 page sized can be downloaded for free?

2\. Is there a way to get the whole report for free?

</comment><comment><USER2> The actual report is something you have to pay for, right? So, not that interesting of a link.</comment>


Unofficial Stories: Conversation with Svetlana Alexievich - <AUTHOR> http://harpers.org/blog/2016/10/unofficial-stories/ <comment><USER2> For those who don't know, Alexievich won last year's Pulitzer Prize for books such as "Voices from Chernobyl" and "Zinky Boys", an account of Russia's war in Afghanistan. She writes something close to non-fiction -- heavily edited oral histories of people who have survived disaster and war. The books are incredibly moving, and as well written as any work by Tolstoy or Dostoyevsky. You won't waste your time reading her.

<comment><USER3> > Pulitzer Prize

Nobel prize

</comment></comment><comment> guard-of-terra "Which country do you want to live in, a great country or a normal country?"

The problem is, neither one is offered anywhere to anybody. You end up living in a depressed shard of Russian State with fake history, be it Russia, Belarus or Ukraine.

Russia a bit richer, Belarus a little bit more "normal", Ukraine the third one.

The concept of "normal country" is very Soviet and peculiar on its own. Every country out there stems from its history. You can't really have a blank slate "normal country" where you want it much like you could not have "a democracy" in place of Iraq or Libya. It has to be about something.

<comment> guard-of-terra There are these awesome SF writers, Maria and Sergey Dyachenko, and some of their books' plots are placed in an unspecified "normal" eastern european country. This is when you want to write a book with SF plot but do not want it to be about poverty, banditism and misery, which are the only plot devices offered by real, non-normal ex-USSR republics.

Same way, a lot of Soviet writers wrote e.g. detective stories placed somewhere unspecified in the West, because for proper detective you want bars, whiskey, coated detectives, not Komsomol activists offered by USSR peoplescape.</comment></comment>


Who's buying the Nano? Why is Apple is still selling them? - <AUTHOR> http://www.iateyourblog.com/post/31413496697/whos-buying-the-nano-why-is-apple-is-still-selling

<comment><USER2> "In my mind, I can't find a great reason for Apple to sell a nano. Everything it does one of Apple's other devices does far better, especially for $149."

i'm confused. what other apple device costs $150 or less and does the same? the shuffle doesn't have a screen. everything else is more expensive. what am i missing?

(nice to see the classic still there. will it get the updated connector?)

<comment><AUTHOR> Sorry that was bad sentence construction. I meant that for $149 it doesn't have that much functionality compared to say an iPod touch which can sell for as low as $199.

<comment><USER3> Just like how you think the Touch is obviously superior to the Nano because of certain feature differences, I suspect there are others for whom the Nano is obviously superior to the Touch because of certain feature differences.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> This is written by someone who obviously lives within the tech bubble. The people who are buying the Nano are the same people who are still buying CDs at Walmart.

Apple is still selling the Nano because people are still willing to buy them. And Apple has driven the COGs down so low that they get terrific profit margins.

</comment><comment><USER5> I want one. Pedometer is nice, 16GB is enough for the music I listen to most, and for apps and games I have an iPad. I've been using a Zune HD for years, this is basically that plus a little fitness incentive. $150 is a bargain, and I think people will make some interesting hacks for it as well.

</comment><comment><USER6> I use my current Nano exclusively for running. I can carry a bunch of music (or audio books, or podcasts) in a device that, for practical purposes, weighs nothing.

I can use the built in clip to attach it to a shirt edge, or just put it in a pocket. Neither of these modes of use are possible with my iPhone.

I really, really hate armbands for iPhone running, and my iPhone bangs about in a crazy way if I run with it in a pocket.

</comment><comment><USER7> It's good when you're running/exercising in general and can hold more than the shuffle . It's lighter than the iPhone/iPod touch.

<comment><USER8> ...and you don't feel as scared to drop it? If you let go of a nano, it swings on the headphones. If you let go of an iTouch, it rips the headphones off you and crashes to the ground.

<comment><USER9> The nano has a spring loaded clip on the back so you don't drop it.

The nano is for listening to music while exercising.

Although I just checked the product announcement, it appears they removed the clip! Probably want you to buy some armband or clip sold separately now.

<comment><USER8> I have a 4th Gen Nano and it has no clip. I don't think there has ever been a clip on this model. The Shuffle has the clip.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I have two. One I wear as a wristwatch and use as a backup music player if my iPhone is running low on batteries. The other I use at the gym because it has FM radio and the gym supplies the TV audio only on FM.

<comment><USER11> That's a good explanation why the device has FM radio built in. One of the target segments must be people who use it with TV audio at gyms and similar.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> "This iTunes need eliminates a large segment of technophobes."

Really? It wasn't even 3 years ago when all iPhones required iTunes syncing to load music. Every single iPod, since the very first one in 2001, have required it all along, and they've done fine with "technophobes".

<comment><USER13> You could buy music directly on the original iPhone, no need to sync music over to it, starting with the 1.1 update about 3 months after release, 5 years ago.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IOS_version_history#Version_his...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IOS_version_history#Version_history:_portable_iOS_devices)</comment></comment>


Angry judge calls porn troll's bluff, orders entire firm to court - <AUTHOR> http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/03/angry-judge-calls-porn-trolls-bluff-orders-entire-firm-to-court/ <comment><USER2> Legal nerds: do not miss Popehat's writeup:

[http://www.popehat.com/2013/03/06/what-prenda-law-is- facing-...](http://www.popehat.com/2013/03/06/what-prenda-law-is-facing-in- los-angeles/)

The words "pants-shitting terror" are used to describe the judge's order.

<comment><USER3> I know very little about the law, but I think I too would need a change of pants if those orders had been directed at me. Remind me to never, ever piss off a federal judge! It makes me happy to see this sort of detailed inspection of the actions of suspect lawyers though. Surely it wouldn't take many similar actions by federal judges to make the trolls think twice about filing these sorts of lawsuits.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Hold them in contempt until they can produce a way to contact the person who doesn't exist?</comment>


Show HN: Google Analytics by Email - <AUTHOR> http://xtra.ga/

<comment><USER2> Google Analytics already let's you schedule emails (PDFs) of any report you want.

<comment><USER3> I like this is (or appears) to be html embedded in an email. PDFs are annoying.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Hey, this is cool! The screenshot looks very compelling, looking forward to getting a report. :)

I'm actually working on a competing product, [https://briefmetrics.com/](https://briefmetrics.com/).

Feel free to give it a whirl, take inspiration, etc. If you have any questions or if I can be of any help, my email is in my profile (or reply in this thread).

Have you given any thought what kind of pricing you're going to go with? This is something I still struggle with on Briefmetrics.

</comment><comment><USER5> Just signed up to try it out. Everything was easy and straightforward.

This would be wonderful if all I wanted were basic metrics. However, I'm mostly interested in specific metrics, for specific segments of visitors, and for specific time periods. Additionally, this changes with every project (I manage multiple GA accounts).

I know I can set up custom email reports in GA, but it's a tedious-enough task that I'd pay for a simpler solution.

</comment><comment><USER6> Can I combine data from multiple profiles in one report? That would be huge for people like me with multiple products/domains.

</comment><comment><USER7> Looks cool! Going to try it out. FYI, typo in header immediately following connection to Google, "Please, select a Google Analitycs"

</comment><comment><USER8> How safe is it to allow apps like this access to my accounts?

<comment><USER4> As safe as any other API. The app will be able to read your analytics for all sites that your account has access to.

<comment><USER8> The app will be able to read it, so does that mean the operator of the app has access to everybody's analytics data?

<comment><USER4> Correct. Same way Github has access to everybody's source code, or Google has access to everyone's emails, etc.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


How NeoCon Billionaire Paul Singer Is Driving the Oursourcing of US Tech Jobs - <AUTHOR> https://www.mintpressnews.com/neocon-billionaire-paul-singer-driving-outsourcing-us-tech-jobs-israel/259147/ <comment><USER2> Netanyahu claimed that "Israel is the 2nd eye" of the "Five Eyes" SIGINT group, which is an intelligence sharing group to counter China, meanwhile Israel consistently passes American technology to China. Our Silicon Valley is being slowly transferred to Israel where chips are designed. Want to know where the x86 hardware backdoor DEC (Deeply Embedded Core) came from? Look no further than "our greatest allies."</comment>


Michael Tsai – Apple Responds to Spotify - <AUTHOR> https://mjtsai.com/blog/2019/03/15/apple-responds-to-spotify/ <comment><USER2>
        Yet Apple specifically disallows sideloading apps and competing stores, which would drive the App Store to be better.

Ah, that explains why the Android ecosystem is so much more vibrant and filled with useful apps. /sarcasm</comment>


Black Hole Sun: a slight reversal of fortune for Apple - <AUTHOR> http://siracusa.tumblr.com/post/513260338/black-hole-sun

<comment><USER2> (a) Apple was never in my recollection a huge gravitational force for engineering talent. Google was, almost from day one. I don't see what's changed.

(b) There are high-profile people who have taken positions at Apple recently.

<comment><USER3> I think when the Advanced Technology Group existed at Apple (closed in 1997 by Steve Jobs), it did tend to attract some big names such as Alan Kay and Gary Starkweather (inventor of the laser printer). Maybe not a huge gravitational force, but still noticeable.

<comment><USER2> Yes, and I think that gravitational "tug" is pretty much still there. Bear in mind, they may also attract a different class of high-caliber engineer than typically contributes to Hacker News: RF, chip design, industrial design...

I _know_ they have some pull in security now, and they don't exactly have a spotless reputation for security, so I don't think it's the news cycle that's doing it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> the "gravitational sink" argument makes no sense. you could have said the same thing about microsoft 10 years ago, but look at what a difference 10 years has made.

silicon valley and the technology industry is a desert of shifting sand dunes. i remember telling my old man the same thing about microsoft, but he just told me to wait and see. he's an economist, and much smarter than me.

</comment><comment><USER5> If having James Gosling were so important for a company's success, then SUN wouldn't have the end it had. Truth is, the success of a tech company is the combination of good engineering and smart business practices -- and the second element is the most important to make money.

</comment><comment><USER6> How far did big-name talent hoarding get Microsoft or the Washington Redskins over the last 10 or 12 years? Going after big names is a warning sign.</comment>