Why We Blame Millennials for Everything - <AUTHOR> https://www.citylab.com/life/2017/12/why-we-blame-millennials-for-everything/547160/ <comment><USER2> Adam (from Adam Ruins Everything) does a really good talk at a marketing conference on why Millennials don't exist. Generational titles are never used to bring people up, but always tear a group of people down. Time magazine covers about Baby Boomers from decades ago are almost identical to those calling Millennials entitled today:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-HFwok9SlQQ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-HFwok9SlQQ)

<comment><USER3> Ugh. Typical Gen X cynicism and nihilism. ;)

<comment><USER4> That's because Generation X is tired of all this millennial talk, as Gizmodo explains so well:

[https://gizmodo.com/5851062/generation-x-is-sick-of-your- bul...](https://gizmodo.com/5851062/generation-x-is-sick-of-your-bullshit)

;)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> The children now love luxury; they have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place of exercise. Children are now tyrants, not the servants of their households. They no longer rise when elders enter the room. They contradict their parents, chatter before company, gobble up dainties at the table, cross their legs, and tyrannize their teachers.

<comment><USER6> You know nothing.

<comment> the-dude Dude, he is quoting.

[https://quoteinvestigator.com/2010/05/01/misbehaving- childre...](https://quoteinvestigator.com/2010/05/01/misbehaving-children-in- ancient-times/)

<comment><USER6> And I'm quoting (apocryphal) Socrates :-)

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

<comment> the-dude I would call that creative quoting.

<comment><USER7> And we can't have creativity being shown here, no sir!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Well, shouldn't things that can't sell their stuff anymore fail?

In Denmark where I'm from, municipalities have grouped together to build open source software as a response to a market which fails to deliver the products we want.

The industry response has been lobbying the government and trying everything in courts because it's viewed as "job theft". Well, not all industry, some companies have figured out software as a service, open APIs and agile corporation is where it's at, but the big old dogs are playing the blame game.

In 10 years the old dogs won't be around, because just like the diamond industry, they ran out of things people wanted to buy.

I mean, you can blame millennials all you want, but the most watched sporting event in 2017 was still the CSGO finals featuring a Danish team. You either adapt or you disappear because the people who are into your aged ways are only going to continue dying.

<comment><USER9> Source of stats on CSGO finals?

<comment><USER10> Seems like this was note quite true.

CSGO finals had about 3m [https://www.dexerto.com/news/e-league-csgo-major- breaks-view...](https://www.dexerto.com/news/e-league-csgo-major-breaks- viewing-records/25592)

The 2017 Superbowl as one example, had 114M. [http://money.cnn.com/2017/02/06/media/super-bowl-ratings- pat...](http://money.cnn.com/2017/02/06/media/super-bowl-ratings-patriots- falcons/index.html)

<comment><USER11> Maybe most watched in Denmark?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I'm going to stop blaming generational labels. I should have done it a long time ago.

I'm going to quantify the people whom I blame for everything as those with a net worth equal to or greater than an arbitrarily determined net worth of $10 million. If they're going to _own_ everything, they need to _take responsibility_ for everything-- _own it_ , in the colloquial sense, as well as the literal.

I am not suggesting that we "eat the rich", as it were. They seem to have some sort of brain-eating prion disease, and I don't want anyone else to catch it. Probably best that we just put down the ones that show symptoms, and burn the bodies.

As a class, they only number about 1.2 million. The rest of us are about 7.6 billion strong. We could take 'em. We know they don't know how to fight, because they always send young poor people to do it for them, and seem completely unfamiliar with self-sacrifice for the common good.

Why $10 million? Because that's "enough", in my opinion. You can retire on it, withdraw the "safe rate" of 3%, and live on this year's equivalent of $300k-- which is 5 times the median _household_ income--every year, forever (within a reasonable statistical confidence interval). You get too far ahead of that, and you start to lose touch with people who don't have "enough", at lower levels on the needs hierarchy. At that level, you still need to know how to play well with others, and not be a %%%%%% tyrant, in order to accomplish the great works that require large concentrations of capital. Above that, you start to grow less fearful of losing the trust of others.

If there is anything wrong with the Millennials, it's that they haven't yet applied their talent for killing off societal staples and institutions to quite the right people and practices. If you're a Millennial, think long and hard about your student loans and your healthcare coverage, and the people who made a conscious, calculated choice that you don't deserve to have nice things unless you _serve_ , _consume_ , and _obey_.

Put on the glasses. Just put on the f'ing glasses.

</comment><comment><USER13> There is little I dislike more than generational labels.

It's lazy and reductionist thinking that allows people to arbitrarily draw lines in whatever way they feel will best push their narrative.

Quick, 1981/1982[1] Millennial or X?

[1] _Those born in 1981 /1982 graduated in 2000_

<comment><USER14> Well, to take the bait, considering that according to Wikipedia the range starts from early 1980s with some even considering the beginning at late 1970s, i'd say 1981/1982 is firmly Millenial material.

Although that is probably closer to the Oregon Trail Generation :-)

[https://socialmediaweek.org/blog/2015/04/oregon-trail- genera...](https://socialmediaweek.org/blog/2015/04/oregon-trail-generation/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> I feel like there's some obvious point-missing going on here. "Millennials are killing X" is a marketing POV, and marketing fundamentally exists outside morality. It's not a moral indictment, it's just a bald statement of fact, like "the automobile is killing the horse-drawn carriage".

Disclaimer: I have not read everything that's ever been written about millennials.

<comment><USER15> > marketing fundamentally exists outside morality. > It's not a moral > indictment, it's just a bald statement of fact

Marketing exists to sell stuff. Facts are only relevant to marketing in-so-far as the facts sells the product. More often than not, marketing is bullshit and completely devoid of facts because facts are boring and products need to be exciting.

"Millenials are killing X" is exactly the sort of marketing statement that is completely devoid of facts.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> I have a friend that's just inside the 1980 millennial designation and he's always talking about how horrible millennials are. If I'm not happy with my job I sound like a millennial. If I'm complaining about relationship issues or say I feel socially isolated I sound like a millennial.

<comment><USER17> It's easy to feel contempt for a generation who's response to a generation- defining economic collapse was as toothless and misguided as Occupy Wall Street.

It's absurd to draw that equivalency, but good, bad, or indifferent, that is what society at large sees as the Millennial generation's only foray into public life.

<comment><USER18> Black lives matter? Science demands action? NoDAPL? Womens March?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> When a millennial does something I hate, I tend to not want to blame them directly, so instead I attribute their behavior to a sort of group behavior. When they do something I like, it's easier to attribute their behavior to them as an individual.

I've noticed this tendency for people these days to just refuse to do work they don't like. They expect to be doing the interesting work that is reserved for people who have earned it. I tend to attribute this to millennial and their sense of entitlement. I've also seen some really driven millennials who get a lot of work done on their own initiative. I don't view them as typical millennials, but rather, as individuals who have rejected the entitled behavior of the standard millennial.

I don't know how true any of that is. I was born in '80, and my generation is entitled as shit. It just feels like, as we were realizing the lie of how entitled we were told to be, that the subsequent generation fell for even worse bullshit than we did.

</comment><comment><USER20> The group vs group dynamic here is quite interesting because one group consists of parents of the other, though not directly. Its those "other" children and those other "parents". Millennials are simply trying to live for the future, as their parents did. But the exponential growth stalled so the extrapolation they were prepared for is no longer correct. The wealth is dispersing elsewhere globally. Domestically only those that are part of this dispersion, mostly technologists and higher echelon finance people, continue this growth.

Millenial behavior that seem wasteful like avocado toast are a type of premium mediocre consumption that they are not oblivious to. It is a dispirited but sincere effort to tell themselves and their parents (and perhaps society) that they are alright.

In truth, one generation's over optimism (not greed, as many say) causes the latter generation to be ill prepared. Neither side wants to admit this is an emergent systemic situation but rather would prefer to imagine it is controllable. Millenial's think it was something done to them. The other groups think millenials do it to themselves.

All the while the countries without these group labels are simply rolling with the punches and surviving day by day and getting smarter. The countries that have grown too accustomed to wealth due to incorrect human belief that exponential growth can continue infinitely are too busy suffering to figure out how to survive. They are getting dumber.

</comment><comment><USER21> That was a pretty decent article until the part with video games.

<comment><USER22> Came here to post this. Gamergate is more than three years old now and yet people still try to dredge it up and smear it as a "misogynist hate campaign" when even a cursory amount of research proves otherwise (not if you only look at headlines of course).

Once again a writer decides to try and project their personal opinions on to a subject they're* interviewing.

<comment><USER23> Nope, that's a pretty dead accurate description.

<comment><USER21> It's about as accurate as saying "all Muslims are terrorists" and I'm saying this as someone who sees that movement as a laughingstock since it has failed to reach any of it's goals and is full of internal conflicts that only divide it even further.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> Don't you just love the snake millennial chrome extention? "It seems a reader can barely go a week without seeing at least one news headline about how Snake People are "killing" some industry or product. Serpent Society is purportedly wiping out casual dining, golf, diamonds, homeownership, and bars of soap, among other consumer products; news items have also characterized the generation as lazy, vain, and always looking for a handout."

<comment><USER23> It's the only thing that makes reading stuff about us snake people bearable. And based on another thread here, I see they've already put something in that changes Generation Zed/Z into "Zolom's Children", which is also excellent.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> It's simple divide and conquer. The 0.1% know you need _somebody_ to blame for them squeezing you, so they tell boomers' it's millennials' fault and vice versa.

It works pretty well: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15844087](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15844087)

If that doesn't work, they can always blame immigrants, Islam or blacks.

<comment><USER26> It could be a conspiracy.

Or it could be too many column inches to fill and not enough time to fill them with something insightful.

Yeah, probably conspiracy.

<comment><USER25> I'd call it a group of individuals acting out of rational self interest.

The notion that there's an agenda behind _any_ media beyond selling eyeballs is, of course, a harebrained conspiracy theory.

<comment><USER26> Of course they have an agenda.

If you were to suggest that there is an agenda amongst the moneyed classes to keep corporate tax take low and restrictive regulation low then I would most heartily agree. There is overwhelming evidence that that is the case.

That there is a high level conspiracy to pit parent against child so everyone's too busy infighting? Extraordinary claims etc.

<comment><USER25> "The can kicks back" is a good example of one of the more blatant attempts at this.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> I'd agree that they are clearly getting the short end of the stick for now, but I have to wonder... if the flower children grew up to give us Iraq and Trump, what kind of monsters will our Starbucks guzzling Warby Parkers transform into?

Or maybe I'm being too pessimistic? Perhaps a little adversity will make them turn out better...

</comment><comment><USER28> This is a plug for a book..

<comment><USER29> and to think they would have gotten away with it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Personally, as a Millennial, I blame Boomers for everything.

<comment><USER30> Considering Boomers have actual power right now and plenty of time for their influence to spread; it's rational to blame them for a huge range of issues.

<comment><USER31> > it's rational to blame them for a huge range of issues

No, it's not. It's making broad generalizations on a huge group of people. It's like blaming all white people for discrimination or all black people for crime. It's wrong and discriminatory, and makes the assumption that everyone in that group is equally bad.

Instead of focusing on a certain age group, focus on the economic forces that gave boomers more opportunity than the younger generations. It's not the age group that's caused the issues, it's those forces.

<comment><USER30> Economics are not separated from politics. The poor diet of most Americans is a direct result of various subsidies given to the farming lobby. Individual choices allow an individual to be fat, but at a national level it takes vast tracts of land.

The growth of Chinese manufacturing is in large part a result of trade policies and our vast growing national debt's impact on currency's. Want long term growth? End deficit spending.

Our poor heath care system is again based on political choices.

The current drug policy and prison system is again an outgrowth of political choices.

<comment><USER31> Right. I'm not arguing this. What I'm arguing is that blaming all Boomers for these issues is silly. Not all Boomers are in control of the government. Not all Boomers pushed for farming subsidies or pushed manufacturing to China. Not all boomers were white or lived a solidly middle-class life.

<comment><USER30> A specific subgroup of Boomers are still Boomers. So, yea it might not be every single Boomers fault equally, but that does not change anything it's still the Boomers fault.

<comment><USER31> That argument can be extended to black people. Blacks statistically commit more crime than whites in America. It's still bad to say that black people are violent, because it's a broad, presumptuous generalization that ignores the forces causing that trend. Along the same vein, it's bad to assume that an entire age group is bad just because some currently run the country.

<comment><USER30> It's important to consider reality even if it seems unpopular. Blacks are convicted of more crimes in the US, that does not mean they commit more crimes.

Just look at all the collage students not busted for drugs. We have a long history of intentionally creating systemic issues.

<comment><USER31> Racial discrimination may play a role, but it does not explain the discrepancies in crime rates that we see: [https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-black- amer...](https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-black-americans- commit-crime)

I'm not saying that black people commit more crime because they're black. In fact, that's exactly the point I was trying to make: blaming black crime on their skin color is bad because it ignores the socioeconomic forces causing them to commit more crimes than other races with lower poverty levels. Just like how blaming boomers ignores the geopolitical and economic forces that gave them an advantage at the time. Not all black people commit crime, and not all boomers were privileged or lucky in life.

<comment><USER30> As long as we are discussing systemic issues I think we need to go deeper. The article lists someone being killed, yet the death is not part of the murder statistic. If you had said Blacks committed statistically more murders based on the current legal definition that's more defensible than crimes because total crime is a very different beast. We don't really keep track of the _total_ number of crimes in any real way. But, that number is competently separate issue from various sub types of criminal acts.

If you look annually their are ~17,000 reported murder and non-negligent manslaughter cases in the U.S. However, that excludes for example a significant subset of the ~32,000 traffic facilitates in the US that could be classified as Murder with slightly different laws. (Call it 1/4 from thin air and those murder statistics look different.) Importantly, they are generally both crimes, but while someone still ends up dead legally they are very different.

Another issue is if a factory kills thousands from pollution is that one crime, thousands of murders, or millions of assaults based on different interpretations of the law.

PS: Why are most serial killers in the US white? Is it because they actually kill more people, or because gang violence is not counted.

PPS: I am not sure why so many people are down voting you, it's reasoned argument even if I don't exactly agree.

<comment><USER32> ...and the systemic bias that when poor people (often Black) are the demographic involved, its a crime. But rich people (often not Black) running factories, not a crime. Agreed.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> > But it wasn't that surprising that people play video games all day and they > have bad politics.

This article is dripping with bias.

</comment><comment><USER34> millennials ruins the millennial blaming!

</comment><comment><USER35> Boomers are worse, a thousand-fold worse. I doubt there has ever been a generation more destructive, hypocritical, or self-unaware... I pray there is never another.

<comment><USER36> The biggest sin of the Boomers is, they grew up in a world that was carefully curated by their parents, and became convinced that this was the natural state of things.</comment></comment>


Strider will run at 1080p, 60fps on Xbox One and PS4 - <AUTHOR> http://www.redbull.com/us/en/games/stories/1331630671642/strider-remaking-an-arcade-classic

<comment><USER2> how about a game preview on a beverage company's website?</comment>


ARM-Based Windows 10 Portable PCs? Hell Yes - <AUTHOR> https://www.thurrott.com/windows/windows-10/86298/arm-based-windows-10-portable-pcs-hell-yes <comment><USER2> Download my great free Windows program now! Please choose:

        EXE installer     32-bit x86   64-bit x64   32-bit ARM   64-bit ARM
        MSI installer     32-bit x86   64-bit x64   32-bit ARM   64-bit ARM
        Portable Zip      32-bit x86   64-bit x64   32-bit ARM   64-bit ARM

(Download my great free macOS program now!

         Click here

)

This is already a usability problem, and adding 2 more target chipsets makes it worse.

Given both bandwidth and smart programmers, couldn't Microsoft make an installer creator that works on all the above architectures and installs the right version of the program? No problem shipping 4x too much code right - most installers that are big at all, are big because of assets, not code size.

I guess politics vs the Windows Store team would prevent this from happening within Microsoft, but given how awful the Windows Store is and how it still can't be used to download and install boring oldschool desktop applications, this is a usability nightmare waiting to happen - despite the obvious benefits of not being locked into a single chipset architecture anymore.

<comment><USER3> It's not really different from choosing among 32 bit or 64 bit programs, or even, for Linux software choosing the package that's best for your distribution. It's not really a pain point. People can read. People who use Windows and Linux know how computers work. People are smart. People should not be babysat by their operating systems. It's gonna be OK. Don't worry.

<comment><USER4> Well, one guy I work with, I've had to install DraftSight for him on three computers now.

In my head I think "Google _download draftsight_ , click click, how hard is that?", then I remember some of the guys I work with csn hardly read but at least this guy can draw rectangles in DraftSight.

I put Linux on my SOs laptop, she llove it, but I still have to remind her to install updates occasionally.

The right balance for notifications, nagware, user interaction, download and installing things, is hard.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Here is the announcement from Microsoft: [https://blogs.windows.com/windowsexperience/2016/12/07/devic...](https://blogs.windows.com/windowsexperience/2016/12/07/device- innovation-opportunities-mixed-reality-gaming-cellular-pcs/)

</comment><comment><USER6> Qualcomm also announced a 48-core ARM server SoC today, which is based on "Falcor" cores, and is to be manufactured on a 10nm node.

[http://semiaccurate.com/2016/12/07/qualcomm- announces-10nm-c...](http://semiaccurate.com/2016/12/07/qualcomm- announces-10nm-centriq-2400-arm-server-soc/)

</comment><comment><USER7> Interesting development. Could this be a good thing that encourages OEM to standardize on something like the IBM-like PC that we have for x86 systems so we don't have to deal with each individual boards in Android or the traditional GNU/Linuxes?

Furthermore, if the x86 emulation turns out to be as fast as they promised and demo'ed, will this kind of technology be developed for desktop linux? Is it even necessary as most apps tend to be open source and can recompile already?

<comment><USER8> +1 A major issue with ARM boards is you can't expect [name-your-arm-os] to run on all ARM boards. Each implements it's own boot sequence and drivers aren't the best. Something like this might push for a unified spec.

<comment><USER9> UEFI is the boot environment for Windows on ARM

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> > ... as such, it will be late 2017 or sometime next year ...

Well, that could be clearer.

> Perhaps Surface phone isn't a phone in the traditional sense. Perhaps it is, > instead, just a new kind of PC with a small—for PCs; I'm hearing > 6-inches—screen.

This sounds a lot like what others have been doing / try to do for a while now with Android devices (albeit not hugely successfully ... yet). So it's not surprisingly that Microsoft is considering jumping on that bandwagon.

</comment><comment><USER11> Interesting. I must say that I'm surprised that MS didn't give up on Continuum after Intel hosed them by cancelling their Broxton smartphone x86 chip. MS might just be throwing good money after bad.

The two keys will be performance and compatibility for the x86 emulation. If they can get it to the point where it's effectively as fast as Intel's low power Atoms while still keeping broad Win32 app compatibility, then Microsoft's Continuum concept is back on track to become a game changer.

<comment><USER12> _> I must say that I'm surprised that MS didn't give up on Continuum after Intel hosed them by cancelling their Broxton smartphone x86 chip. MS might just be throwing good money after bad._

Intel didn't hose Microsoft, it hosed Intel.

Microsoft was already developing for ARM so nothing changed for Microsoft. Intel stopped developing for smartphones and tablets so something changed for Intel.

Windows 10 is free on small screen devices so Microsoft didn't even lose any revenue....

<comment><USER11> > _Intel didn 't hose Microsoft, it hosed Intel._

I'm not sure I follow your logic. Surely you'd agree that implementing Continuum running x86 apps on Microsoft's rumored Surface Phone would have been far easier if Intel hadn't cancelled Broxton and MS had been directly able to use it as the target processor?

<comment><USER12> Not at all. The apps were being developed for Windows Runtime. You shouldn't confuse that with the old Win32 API used by traditional Windows software.

The only advantage of having an Intel processor would be for the old-style traditional apps, and if you allow those, you have all sorts of problems. They're not sandboxed like runtime apps, and you can't stop them from eating your battery. It's actually better to run them in an emulator.

<comment><USER11> >" _The only advantage of having an Intel processor would be for the old-style traditional apps, and if you allow those, you have all sorts of problems._ "

That's precisely what MS is allowing. From Thurott's article:

" _Even better, Windows 10 on ARM will supply a long-rumored feature: The ability to run 32-bit Win32 /x86 desktop applications—Apple iTunes, Adobe Photoshop, Google Chrome, whatever—directly on the system, unchanged_."

I suspect that MS probably would have very much preferred not to have to use emulation, which is always a tricky business, for Continuum on the Surface Phone. Curbing resource intensive apps is a vastly less complex engineering problem.

<comment><USER12> You appear to have overlooked the fact that OEMs can _already_ make Intel- based smartphones and tablets, using Windows 10 for free. One smartphone example is the Asus ZenPhone, and there are plenty of tablets.

How many have you bought? How many has anyone bought?

 _> The ability to run 32-bit Win32/x86 desktop applications—Apple iTunes, Adobe Photoshop, Google Chrome, whatever—directly on the system, unchanged."_

True, but they're in an emulator. Pretty sure they don't have access to the whole system, which they would on a standard Windows 10 device.

<comment><USER12> Extra info: there may be some confusion here because the above announcement is about tablets/2-in-1s/laptops NOT smartphones. The headline is (with my emphasis):

"ARM-Based Windows 10 _Portable PCs!?_ Hell Yes!"

So if you recompile Win32 programs to run on this version of Windows 10 on ARM, they will be able to do all the (good and) bad things they can do on the x86 version....

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I tried a surface pro as a replacement for an ipad, but I found it to be extremely frustrating. Beyond the bugs and blue screens, I found the battery life to be way shorter, and the surface to take a long time to wake up, not an instantaneous experience like an ipad, where you can forget it in a bag for 10h and use it straight away. More like a laptop.

Would an ARM based windows device achieve an ipad style battery life and instantaneous experience? Or is it more linked to the architecture of the system?

<comment><USER14> which version of Surface Pro? 2 / 3 / 4 ?

<comment><USER13> 4

<comment><USER14> Thanks. I'm thinking of replacing my MBP for a Surface Pro 4.

I'd heard the battery life wasn't great but didn't know about it taking a long time to wake up.

<comment><USER15> This is exactly what I just did and it's been great so far. The battery life isn't spectacular for todays standards, but it lasts longer than my 2012 rMBP 15" does now. Quick, light (way lighter than the MBP) and has been fun to draw on. Getting use to windows again takes a bit of time, but with the new Bash integration, my workflow is just about the same.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Photoshop x86 running on Windows 10 ARM [https://www.neowin.net/news/watch- microsoft-shows-off-photos...](https://www.neowin.net/news/watch-microsoft- shows-off-photoshop-running-on-a-windows-10-device-with-a-snapdragon-820)

</comment><comment><USER17> Even assuming they can hit performance targets with this, which sounds hard but not impossible, what's the major use case?

Continuum? Windows laptops with better battery life?

Most win32 software is going to suck on a touch screen, so I'm not really seeing this help them in mobile.

<comment><USER18> >"Windows laptops with better battery life?"

Not going to happen. There's a performance hit that almost certainly comes along with emulation. Battery life is likely to get worse with x86 Windows emulation on ARM.

Also, by the time Intel stopped pushing x86 in mobile devices they were producing chips that were competitive with ARM chips when it came to power draw.

<comment><USER19> Maybe, though their partnering with Qualcomm is suggestive: perhaps they're doing hardware-accelerated binary translation? That _might_ be fast and power efficient, who knows...

In any case, many users may just be wanting to run older enterprise apps, and so even then, with the translation penalty, they'll probably be quite snappy.

<comment><USER18> > "That _might_ be fast and power efficient"

My argument is that it's not going to be as power efficient as using x86 natively. There's no getting around that.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> People have been speculating for the past year if Apple could switch their Macs to ARM, and keep compatibility with a emulation layer like they did during the PowerPC->Intel transition. I guess Microsoft beat them to the point... Will be interesting to see how well it performs in real life.

<comment><USER21> I think Linux beat them both to the point... many years ago.

<comment><USER22> No way. Linux has never had any sort of cross-architecture binary compatibility story. Certainly nothing that worked as well as Apple's Mixed Mode Manager or Rosetta.

<comment><USER10> > Linux has never had any sort of cross-architecture binary compatibility > story.

You mean like qemu?

> Certainly nothing that worked as well as Apple's Mixed Mode Manager or > Rosetta.

I think the parent was alluding to the fact that with GNU/Linux and/or free software in general there isn't the same kinds of requirement to get binary lumps of code running on alien architecture.

<comment><USER22> > You mean like qemu?

No.

> there isn't the same kinds of requirement to get binary lumps of code > running on alien architecture.

Are you implying that this has something to do with the software being free?

In 2006, I used Time Machine to back up my G5, and then restore it onto my new Intel Core Duo (both iMacs!). The migrated apps just worked, regardless of whether they were free software or binary blobs.

This has nothing to do with software freedom. It's about having a good user experience: when your users migrate from an old machine to a new one, it just works, period.

Linux doesn't have this requirement because it prioritizes developers over end users. I'm not bashing Linux here, I use it often and appreciate it for what it is. But an honest assessment tells us it has never come close to Apple- level smoothness in architectural transitions.

<comment><USER10> You sure you don't mean like qemu - that lets you run different architecture binaries.

Perhaps I have misunderstood the use of the word 'story' in your first post.

> Are you implying that this has something to do with the software being free?

No, but I am asserting that I typically don't need to run non-native code on my computers because I can obtain or generate native code for any given architecture [1] I happen to be using.

I expect that where people are beholden to others, say if they are using non- free software, to create binaries that they can use on specific pieces of hardware, then yes in that case it will have 'something to do with software being free'.

> In 2006, I used Time Machine to back up my G5, and then restore it onto my > new Intel Core Duo (both iMacs!). The migrated apps just worked, regardless > of whether they were free software or binary blobs.

I'm not sure I appreciate the usefulness of this feature as much as you do -- you were obliged to run that software, in both instances, on hardware available exclusively a single vendor. In that scenario I would have expected to be able to run native code on both platforms.

[1] [https://www.debian.org/ports/](https://www.debian.org/ports/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> Presumably these will all have Secure Boot enabled with no option for the user to disable it. >sigh<

</comment><comment><USER24> If this works out, this is the final piece of the puzzle for Apple moving to ARM chips in their Macs. Windows emulation is too big of a feature to leave out. Then again, who knows with Apple of late. Either way, very interesting news!

</comment><comment><USER25> The last time we had ARM Windows machines, we got the Surface RT. I still have one of these that I occasionally bring to meetings to fool around and maybe put a ticket in with. It is not a great piece of equipment...

<comment> mark-r It generally takes Microsoft 3 tries to get something right. Unfortunately their next ARM device will only be #2.

<comment><USER26> I'd say Windows CE on ARM devices was attempt #1.

Lumia and Surface 1 and 2 were #2.

<comment><USER27> 1\. Windows CE on ARM

2\. Xbox 360

3\. Windows Phone 7 (on leftover chunks of Windows CE) on ARM

4\. Windows Phone 8/Windows RT

5\. Windows 10 on ARM

So, by my count, this might be iteration 6? (Though maybe more like 5 Part 2.)

<comment> mark-r I'm thinking specifically of the Windows desktop experience on ARM, so things like phones and Xbox don't count. But I didn't realize the Surface went through 2 iterations of ARM, so maybe this counts as #3? Or maybe it doesn't count at all since it was a watered-down version of Windows that couldn't run most apps.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> For me it is more like hell no. I am having a hard time getting over stuff like, you know, waking up one day and Chrome is no longer my default browser.

<comment><USER19> How the hell does this happen. Seriously, I've ran Windows for like over 10 years now. It's happened a grand total of 3 times, ever, and 2 of those were back in the Windows 9x days, and the last one was between W8 and 8.1 (a major service pack).

Never since then. Oh, I'm even in the fast update pool. What do you people _do_?

<comment><USER28> It happens after every Windows update. I'll log in, and have a message about the update, then see that Edge is my browser and VLC is no longer my default music player. Maybe it is because I have so many of the "features" of Windows 10 turned off? I dunno, but some people seem to not have the same experience.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> > First, Qualcomm's System on a Chip (Soc) designs have improved so > dramatically in the past four years that their performance rivals that of > mainstream Intel Core chipsets for PCs.

Hah!

> And even better, Microsoft has developed an emulation technology that allows > Win32 applications to launch and run unmodified on ARM-based PCs. And to do > so with what I am assured is excellent performance.

I don't believe it.

<comment><USER30> > I don't believe it.

My understanding is Microsoft actually has some pretty cool and fast tech for this already: the Xbox 360 emulation on Xbox One.

<comment><USER29> No matter how good it gets, binary recompilation will always be slower than native code. And when the host CPU is already a very slow model like Qualcomm ARM, those effects stack.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> I am skeptical that the emulation can achieve reasonable speeds. I would like to see first that Qualcomm's chips are even up to par with Intel's. Secondly, can a heavy duty Win32 app like iTunes or TurboTax or Photoshop could run reasonably fast via emulation, something that has historically been a problem.

I'll believe it when I see some benchmarks.

<comment><USER32> They are, at least with the mainstream Macbook Air-type/older Mac Pro type chips, not the latest and most expensive Core i7's, obviously. But they don't need to reach that high, either. Even taking over the Celeron/Pentium market from Intel would probably make Qualcomm bigger than AMD is in the PC chip market.

[https://www.extremetech.com/mobile/221881-apples-a9x-goes- he...](https://www.extremetech.com/mobile/221881-apples-a9x-goes-head-to-head- against-intels-core-m-in-arm-x86-grudge-match)

[http://www.theverge.com/2016/9/16/12939310/iphone-7-a10-fusi...](http://www.theverge.com/2016/9/16/12939310/iphone-7-a10-fusion- processor-apple-intel-future)

</comment></comment><comment><USER33> Call me cynical but this feels like another platform to be abandoned when no one buys them as per the old Windows ARM tablets. Those who bought them abandoned quickly.

There will probably be a crazy restriction like App Store only.

Oh and the whole MSI 32/64/ARM pile of crap as well.

<comment><USER13> Well, that would be repeating the Surface RT failure. I can only assume they are not going to make the same mistake twice, so I doubt it will be locked down like Windows RT was.

</comment></comment><comment><USER34> We'll see. Full Windows x86 emulation will likely be slow.

It will be a harder sell the second time around, too as Windows RT burned a lot of people, and fewer trust Microsoft than before.

<comment><USER35> It's native ARM version of Windows 10 and for UWP apps, as well as any x86 apps recompiled for ARM. The rest of the classic x86 32-bit apps will run via the emulation, like Rosetta on macOS in the past when running PPC apps on Intel.

That means unlike WinRT, almost all of your apps will be usable, no confusion about it like what befell the WindowsRT.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> I'd assume the .net framework would run natively

<comment><USER36> Doesn't seem like any reason that it wouldn't be native.

<comment><USER13> Agree. But it is a big deal. If the CLR is ported to ARM then any c#/vb code will run very efficiently on ARM without even needing to be recompiled or making use of the x86 emulation. That's a big deal for a corporate environment.

<comment><USER36> I just have a tough time imagining that Microsoft wouldn't (or hasn't given RT) the CLR to ARM. It would be news if it wasn't ported.

<comment><USER19> It has been, I'm running one such example on my Raspberry Pi 2 right now. It's just a DynDNS updater. Written in UWP.

I have tried it in CLR and native (machine code via .NET Native) modes. Both work great.

I'm pretty sure my Pi runs on an ARM chip, anyway

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> An interesting development, but it is a shame that this will require a new chip from Qualcomm, while there have been full desktop Linux distributions for several ARM chips and boards for quite a while now. Microsoft's software is really full of bloat.

<comment><USER19> It probably doesn't require the chip... I'm thinking they are using some form of hardware accelerated binary translation.

Re: Windows on ARM, I run Windows IoT on a Raspberry Pi. Shows they have a good lot of it running, eg the full UWP UI system, kernel etc. Imagine it's the translation part that's deleted things.</comment></comment>


Bulletproof Coffee - <AUTHOR> http://www.bulletproofexec.com/how-to-make-your-coffee-bulletproof-and-your-morning-too/

<comment><USER2> I'm not sure why this on Hacker News. This whole website has a "scammy" feel to it.

<comment><USER3> Apparently, a lot of SV area entrepreneurs swear by this stuff for maintaining high levels of cognitive function during 60-hour/week death marches.</comment></comment>


The Start-Up Guys - <AUTHOR> http://www.collegehumor.com/video/6507690/hardly-working-start-up-guys

<comment><USER2> If I can just drive the bus a second! ; )</comment>


You Too Can Join the Internet Of Things  - <AUTHOR> http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/09/20/you-too-can-join-the-internet-of-things/ <comment><AUTHOR> Been hacking on a Lilypad when I can, and the mbed looks quite handy for wearable computing.

However, the claim by the ARM guy that this "... should open microcontrollers up to a new audience by removing some of the technical headaches associated with programming the chips" sounds odd when you consider that mbed requires you to code in C++ while Arduino allows the use of Processing.

Worse, the C++ compiler is Web-based. That might be handy at times, but needing an Internet connection to hack on some hardware seems to be yet one more obstacle. I have to believe there's a way to do this all locally, but poking around the mbed site I didn't see it.

</comment><comment><USER2> Not true: _"Technology is only cool if it solves a real problem"_</comment>


Barbados Offers 12-Month Visa to Remote Workers - <AUTHOR> https://gisbarbados.gov.bb/blog/twelve-month-barbados-welcome-stamp-for-visitors/ <comment><USER2> not a great score in [https://nomadlist.com/pros- cons/bridgetown](https://nomadlist.com/pros-cons/bridgetown)</comment>


This needs to happen - <AUTHOR> https://www.google.com/search?q=1+BTC+in+USD

<comment><USER2> The question is which exchange to use. They differ a lot. Using MtGox will just further promote MtGox as 'the' exchange, which is bad.

[mtgox] Bid: $114.82000, Ask: $115.00000

[btflr] Bid: $115.07000000, Ask: $118.77000000

[btc-e] Bid: $107.909, Ask: $107.3

<comment><USER3> Moreover, BTC isn't the only hot new digital currency out there.

It's quite possible a currency with better technical support by vendors/exchanges could overtake BTC as the premiere ecurrency.

<comment><USER4> So what? It would show both...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> no, no it doesn't

</comment><comment><USER6> what needs to happen first is for bitcoin to stop dropping and going up like crazy.</comment>


NBC Sports disputes World Cup streaming record - <AUTHOR> http://www.networkworld.com/article/2365288/opensource-subnet/nbc-sports-disputes-world-cup-streaming-record.html#twitter

<comment><AUTHOR> The World Cup match between Cameroon and Mexico was viewed 2.8 million times, setting a world record for the most views of a sporting match streamed over the internet. However, NBC Sports still claims it holds the record for the most internet views of a sporting match, Variety reported yesterday, even though the record-setting 2014 Olympic Semi Final hockey game between the U.S. and Canada generated only 2.1 million views.</comment>


GopherJS 1.7-1 is released - <AUTHOR> http://www.gopherjs.org/blog/2016/08/21/gopherjs-1.7-1-release/ <comment><USER2> I had expected this to be a JavaScript implementation of Gopher. A little disappointed.

<comment><AUTHOR> Sorry about that. :) This does come up occasionally, but given that the gopher is the mascot animal for Go, this name has a nice ring to it once you're used to it, at least IMO.

Also reminds me of earlier days where people would talk about Go, I'd get excited and it turned out it was the board game not the programming language.

<comment><USER3> I always thought it was a clever play on "Go-for-JS". If not, you should change the backstory retroactively! ;-)

<comment><AUTHOR> That is... genius!

Now that I think about it, I could've made this connection sooner. There's an (awesome) set of Go packages at go4.org, and the description text says:

> _... go4, go four, gopher... get it?_

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Has anyone gone the other direction? Javascript to Go. It would be cool to use Go for server logic and serve an isomorphic reactjs app.

<comment><USER5> Just this weekend I found this: [https://github.com/olebedev/go-starter- kit](https://github.com/olebedev/go-starter-kit)

It uses the duktape JS engine in Go to render react apps server-side, with live-reload & hot-module replacement during development. Pretty cool!

<comment><USER6> I'm actually quite impressed by that. I had looked into that a bit, but believed Ducktape & React to be too slow to be worth while. This is really interesting!</comment></comment></comment>


Clojure all the way down - <AUTHOR> http://bucharestfp.ro/2015/10/21/clojure-all-the-way-down-finally-a-useful-lisp/ <comment><USER2> What a terrible title. Lisp has been useful for a long time, and it's annoying to see so many Clojure programmers pretend that it's the revolutionary, useful Lisp we've all been waiting for.

I'll stick with Guile Scheme, which has tail call semantics, first-class continuations (both regular and delimited varieties), and other things that are absent from Clojure.

<comment><USER3> I wish Clojure had those features, too. But I don't miss reader macros for all the reasons that Clojure doesn't implement them, though you don't have to use them where they do exist.

In my experience, though, the lack of full TCO in Clojure actually makes people write more readable code in many cases (because you can only recur from a tail position in Clojure, you always know where to look).

On the other hand, does Scheme have STM? Agents? Refs? I'd miss those.

<comment><USER4> Aren't Refs STM? I haven't seen any clojure project use or leverage Refs, do you know of any? The feeling I get from community is that they are nice in theory but not so in practice.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Seems like a trollish title, considering people were building stuff in other Lisps for decades and still do.

<comment><USER6> Also (note that I only went through the slides), it seems like he misunderstands what "All the way down" traditionally means in the context of Lisp. Clojure is different than the lisp variants that embrace this philosophy BECAUSE it's implemented on top of the JVM/CLR. You have access to the core Clojure implemented parts of the language, but you eventually hit a boundary where you explicitly cannot go further -- precisely where the Java part starts.

I guess you could argue that most Schemes / Lisps have a similar boundary, but from using both it feels different in Clojure.

In short, I think you run out of turtles to jump down onto at a certain point in Clojure.

<comment><USER7> Clojurescript is the more "all the way down" of the two. It managed to self- host a few months ago so in theory you could write a backend and cross compile to your computing platform of choice. I know of a number of alternative targets but they all predate the self-hosting and none are actively maintained:

[1] [https://github.com/takeoutweight/clojure- scheme](https://github.com/takeoutweight/clojure-scheme) [2] [https://github.com/raph-amiard/clojurescript-lua](https://github.com/raph- amiard/clojurescript-lua)

I think it'd be a fun project to get cljs-lua working and build a system for developing OpenResty apps but it's so low on my priority list I don't anticipate ever making it happen.

<comment><USER6> Has anyone tried to get a Clojure-in-Clojure on the JVM working? Similar to PyPy or something of that ilk... I think even Shen (or even some branch of arc, I believe) would be more along those lines?

<comment><USER7> I've heard people talk about it but I'm not aware of anybody actually trying it. I know that Rich has stated a number of times that he's not interested in working on Clojure-in-Clojure.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> The title of this talk is an act of friendly fire.

</comment><comment><USER9> Considering Clojure would work better in SBCL I think that says a little something about Clojure and a little something about CL. Macros in ParenScript make Clojurescript seem like a bad rails library.

<comment><USER10> Care to elaborate?

<comment><USER9> [http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?CommonLispConditionSystem](http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?CommonLispConditionSystem)

"When an exception is thrown in Java, the stack unwinds meaning all state in stack frames from the point of the throw to the handler gets thrown out."

"In Common Lisp, the stack does not unwind and high level logic can simply restart the computation (after fixing the error or trying different strategies) without losing any intermediate state. This killer feature is what makes interactive debugging possible."

Not enforcing a functional paradigm also makes prototyping easier.

<comment><USER10> Thanks! That's completely new to me. You got me looking into Dire, which looks like a similar pattern for error handling.

[https://github.com/MichaelDrogalis/dire](https://github.com/MichaelDrogalis/dire)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Here is (imho) a good test to see if a language is sufficiently capable and worth considering for bigger projects: try to implement a memoization library in the language. By memoization library I mean a library that enables you to cache function calls. So calling f(x) twice with the same f and the same x should not trigger recomputation the second time. It is also a good way to quickly get to know the intricacies of the language.

<comment><USER12> Well, Clojure has a memoize function built in.

<comment><USER11> That is considered cheating :) In that case, the requirement can be extended to storing the memoization cache on disk. Bonus points for using a mmapped file, for fast access after the program is restarted from scratch.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> All: We took the trollish bit out of the title. Please let's focus on the rest of the content now.

<comment><USER14> Wasn't there a way to endorse flagged stories?

<comment><USER13> Yes, if they're dead.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Says the dwarf standing on the shoulder of giants:

McCarthy, Steele, Gabriel, Fahlman, Weinreb, Moon, Stallman, Bobrow, Greenblatt, Moses, Norvig, Sussman, Brooks, Masinter, Pitman, White, ...

The all have been working on useful Lisps...

<comment><USER16> You forgot Graham, the man who wrote the website (in Lisp!) that this article is posted on.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> I'm not exactly the strongest advocate of political correctness, but the "documentation" slide is somewhat racist and offensive.

</comment><comment><USER18> Q: Is Clojure bootstrapped on something other than JS or JVM or CLR?

A: No, and don't waste your time on this talk if you already have watched any of Rich Hickey's talks, this is an ego-stroke at best that introduces no new solutions to any problems. It's an hour and a half of 'Hey look what clojure can do', and 'Gee, our documentation isn't great'.

Maybe someday Clojure will have something like the Shen project has with KLambda. A tight, core language implementable in any language, and a language library built on top of that core language, agnostic of the implementation it's derived on.

If Clojure had gone this route, we could basically have Clojure on any platform capable of parsing and modifying S-Expressions.

Maybe someday!

<comment><USER19> Actually, from someone who has been writing Clojure for a living for the past 5 years or so: I'm very glad Clojure did not take that route.

The idea that you can have a language which is portable/reimplementable on any platform is fundamentally flawed. You can't.

It is because of the fact that Clojure and ClojureScript are not really exactly the same language, and are implemented in very different ways from each other, that we can take advantage of many platform-specific features that would otherwise be abstracted.

<comment><USER20> "The idea that you can have a language which is portable/reimplementable on any platform is fundamentally flawed. You can't."

Can you elaborate? Shouldn't VM just standardize EVERYTHING on the language level? Can you give specific examples when language NEED to be aware of the hardware?

<comment><USER21> Not the parent;

You always need to be aware of the hardware/target-platform. Some examples:

1\. Bioinformatics 2\. Data storage 3\. Any soft real-time application 4\. Any kind of constraint search with simulated annealing through large spaces 5\. Operating systems 6\. Compilers 7\. Image recognition/analysis 8\. Rendering 9\. Basically any application where the user expects a responsive result

You ignore performance at your peril. The reason why we have super-fast computers and software with loading screens is because of this thinking.

If you do have a legitimate reason to run on a VM you should be aware of the burden its abstractions places on your ability to reason about the performance and costs your program will incur.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> You are the type of person I was hoping not to encounter!

The kool-aid drinkers.

I don't like Clojure or ClojureScript. They are both awful by virtue of the platform they exist on. I would like very much if Clojure had a core lisp KLambda, because I could abstract Clojure onto a platform that wasn't terrible.

Rich is a guy who (whether consciously or otherwise) hated writing Java and decided that functional programming worked, and that Lisp did too. Clojure is a strange abomination from the points of view of those in the pure-functional family, and those from the paren-dimension, but I find that Clojure code reads easily, and comes off far more expressive than that of Python or Ruby or other so-called expressive languages.

When someone who uses the JVM tells me that something I know to be true is 'fundamentally flawed' I become fearful for myself, that I might drown in irony.

<comment><USER13> > _You are the type of person I was hoping not to encounter!_

Personal attacks are not allowed on Hacker News. I'm sure you can express your thoughts about programming languages without them.

[https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html](https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html)

<comment><USER18> I'm sure you can mind my own business for me, maybe I should even let you write my next comment?

Would you like to see my papers?

<comment><USER13> Let me try this again. There are rules here, and we ban accounts that break them. Please read them, and post civilly and substantively or not at all.

[https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html](https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html)

To anticipate the objection, no, this hasn't a fig to do with political correctness. It's about trying to preserve HN as a place where people want to come for substantive discussion. I'm sure many of us agree with your views on Lisp; that doesn't mean you get to be an arsonist.

We detached this subthread from [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10432280](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10432280) and marked it off-topic.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> ....................

This entire thread of backstabbing selfishness is why Lisp and Lisp people never accomplished anything.

Go lock yourselves in your own personal Orthancs weaving unreadable code and leave the rest of the world alone.

<comment><USER13> This comment breaks the HN guidelines. Please post civilly and substantively, or not at all.

[https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html](https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html)</comment></comment>


Former Boeing Engineers Say Relentless Cost-Cutting Sacrificed Safety - <AUTHOR> https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2019-05-09/former-boeing-engineers-say-relentless-cost-cutting-sacrificed-safety <comment><USER2> And that is the smoking gun I was waiting for.

All the ingredients for an ineffective Quality Assurance are there.

A)Selecting the most junior engineers as certification authorities

B) Emphasis on testing and defect discovering as non-value adds (the article quotes at least one manager referring to it as "polishing an apple")

C) Active suppression of legitimate defect reporters (engineers let go or otherwise ostracized for legitimate defect reporting)

D) Undermining of labor's ability to act as a check valve to management taking the company into dangerous waters (South Carolina plant)

E) Engineering around regulations instead of just building the plane that needed to be built and accepting the cost. (No simulator time became a non- negotiable marching order due to the emphasis on cost cutting)

F) Misaligned incentives and strategy after the McDonnell Douglas merger (Forget the box [plane], people already assume it's high quality. Focus on the financial/value engineering in order to maximize shareholder value.)

F is especially damning, since part of that financial value engineering was heavy reliance on outsourcing, which if you don't combine with a strong Quality first in-house QA team to manage the acceptance criteria, leads to debacles like the supposed to be standard, but not AoA disagree warning. This is a corporate behavior pattern that must absolutely be avoided in life/safety critical systems. At the end of the day, the laws of physics give not two shits over what shareholder value you've created, or how many people's lives it will cost. It is only the will of your engineers to proof the plane against catastrophe that will result in a product that won't come back to haunt you later. It's okay to keep up some pressure on cost; but at the end of the day, safety and Quality must win. The system must be modelable from just what is in your engineer's head, backed up by your spec docs, in a reasonable amount of time.

I'd like to know more about how point D played into this mess as well. In all these stories, I'm not seeing much information on what the union was actually doing to try to improve the situation.

I know there were walkouts, but most of the reporting focused on those being focused on wages, work conditions, etc. Typical important union stuff. However, that "stuff" is like the cosmic microwave background of labor relations. It seems like quality/safety concerns should have been a bright point on somebody's map of stuff to run down. If not, why?

Were people raising safety/quality issues with Union reps?

Were those concerns effectively received and recommunicated by union reps? Or just translated or left to fall by the side in the interests of the typical union agenda items?

If Union reps accurately represented concerns which were reported to management, did management understand the message? Or did they oversimplify the problem to "let's avoid the unions"? Who made that decision?

If not, where did the breakdown in communication occur? What caused the breakdown?

There's a fairly complex social web of influence at play in workplaces, doubly so with Unions, and I think this is a serious enough case that everyone involved should have at least some investigation done on them, if only to illuminate a new corner case in how not to handle concerns with safety critical work.

As Demmings would say "A system is perfectly tuned to yield the results it produces." What else about Boeing, and it's employee relations made it manufacture such a lethal breakdown in communication?

By no means is this "apple polishing". No amount of polish puts a glimmer on 300+ corpses.</comment>


Twitter bans Alex Jones and Infowars for abusive behaviour - <AUTHOR> https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-45442417 <comment><USER2> If Twitter wants to ban him, then they can ban him. I honestly don't know how he gained so much publicity as a conspiracy theorist, but he sounds like someone who's drive is to continuously poke the sleeping bear and bother people for the sake of being an asshole. Abusive behavior was his business model.

<comment><USER3> The horrifying thing is how many people his antics resonate with.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I'm not a fan of Alex Jones. I think Alex Jones was at his worst during Sandy Hook when he accused the victims families of being crisis actors. I think if social media platforms had banned him then, I would have understood the decision and applauded them.

What I can't understand is the decision of major social media platforms to ban him now. His content now isn't any more out of the ordinary or abusive than at any other point in his broadcasting history. So it just seems strange that facebook, twitter, youtube, apple and spotify all come together and ban him at the same time. And it seems even stranger that none of these companies can give even a vague hint at the specific content he was banned for. I'm not saying they have to broadcast the actual content but something along the lines of "harmful, defamatory and malicious speech directed against Sandy Hook victims" could work.

Silicon valley is starting to look more and more like a tech oligopoly. It seems like these huge corporations are having discussions behind closed doors and making decisions that have a major impact on the public discourse.

<comment><USER5> This may have something to do with: [http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/ny-news- conspiracy-...](http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/ny-news-conspiracy- subpoenaed-mueller-roger-stone-20180905-story.html) I think the Russia investigation has unearthed links between conspiracy theorists and efforts to divide and undermine US politics and these companies were warned behind the scenes to stop being complicit (or perhaps they had a inter-company meeting, Bilderberg-style). Also there was a concerted effort by media companies to have Jones banned. They kept him in the news cycle for weeks. Finally, the left united to have him banned, made him an issue and visible to employees of these companies.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Anyone know what videos or tweets were 'abusive'? Twitter didn't say which ones they were.

Twitter needs to be more transparent about this stuff. Especially when banning one of the most influential conspiracy theorist in the world.

Not to mention a vague and/or arbitrary banning policy is always a bad idea.

<comment><USER7> Twitter isn't going to broadcast or link to tweets that were bad enough to merit a ban, for obvious reasons- they're banning it precisely to _avoid_ having that content be propagated any further.

<comment><USER8> This is circular reasoning, and it conveniently excuses any abuses or hypocrisy by the company by disappearing the evidence and not allowing anyone else to judge for themselves.

From an outside observer, there is no way to distinguish between the claim that the ban is for "good reasons", or that the ban is a result of bias on the part of the company.

<comment><USER9> This is the same reasoning that leads to people getting banned from a service for a reason, and then given a cold shoulder and absolutely no information about _why_.

Perhaps this is fine in situations where the banned entity is a malicious actor, but it presumes a zero false-positive rate. My opinion is, if even one person is wrongly punished without recourse (other than rolling the dice with social media) then the whole system is unjust and should be reworked.

<comment><USER10> Who, other than you, says that twitter must be just? The world would be a _completely_ different place if companies were required by law to be just.

<comment><USER11> What makes you think that they said that Twitter _must_ be just? Why not simply _should_ be just? Why would you not want a platform as large and integral to modern open communication to be just?

<comment><USER10> > integral to modern open communication

Why do you assume that it is integral to modern _open_ communication? (hint: it's not, for plain reason that twitter does what's best for twitter)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> This could have happened sooner, but glad Twitter _finally_ had the gumption to do it.

It always amazes me, the conspiracy theorists, on the right in particular. The government is too inefficient to do anything, but can create these elaborate fictions and instantly turn into bastions of loyalty and commitment to a mission that the right can't even seem to muster.

But when you're beliefs are unfalsifiable, and you have no respect for objective truth, just perception and position, anything is possible.

</comment><comment><USER13> What happened to the HN I once knew. Anti-censorship no matter who the individual. The fact that we have the majority of people here celebrating censorship truly scares me.

<comment><USER14> It is not just HN. That seems to be the direction the entire IT section has taken. Used to be we would respect DVD John and demand no censorship -- now all with get is that meme that free speech is exactly the same as the US admentment and that it can't be done by private parties, oh and it is not censorship if your employer is haunded down, your livelyhood ruined and everybody hates you if you say something somebody disagree with.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> The video that got him banned: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ne_wFdA-1oU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ne_wFdA-1oU)

<comment><USER16> Lol, and the video was all about how the left censors people!

Seriously, I never gave Alex Jones much credence before this, but this getting him banned makes him much more credible in my mind.

<comment><USER15> I see it less about the left censoring people and more about a grown man harassing a journalist by hurling abuse at his face for 10 minutes straight (whilst invading his personal space with a camera), and topping it off with a racist anti semitic dog whistle comment about his eyes. The guy being, for lack of a better word, bullied in the video took it exceptionally well.

Different strokes for different folks I guess.

<comment><USER16> Yes, the bullying was uncalled for.

And what this has done has motivated me to look further into who Alex Jones is, and reversed my opinion back to him being a scumbag. Seems he is only a few ratings away from going full Holocaust denial in his mission to doubt all official accounts of anything.

<comment><USER17> He's an absolute, frothing-at-the-mouth nut job. It makes me sad how many people listen to him.

<comment><USER16> It is partly the fault of the established media that they make his message of censorship believable.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Given that Jack Dorsey just testified to Congress that he considers Twitter a digital public square, does the "it's a private company" work to defend them on such matters anymore?

<comment><USER19> Of course it does. No organization private or otherwise has the obligation to provide you a platform. As far as I'm aware the government doesn't have to provide you a platform, they just can't deny you your right to have one of your own making or limit your access to one that they provide to others on an arbitrary basis.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> In the eyeball economy there seems to be no way I can personally reward Twitter for good behavior. I'd like to send them $100 for banning the creep.

If I feel Apple is doing well with social responsibility I can buy more Apple stuff. I certainly won't click more ads on Twitter to reward them. So what incentive do they really have to foster good behavior?

</comment><comment><USER21> Hopefully the banning of Alex Jones puts us on the path to breaking up the tech giants.

<comment><USER22> Now I wonder why some folk would not approve of that. Interesting!

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> Twitter is a shithole of humanity where people get off on tearing people down.

The ultimate teardown is getting Twitter to un-person them.

(not my take, but thought it was interesting none the less)

</comment><comment><USER24> Dupe: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17929417](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17929417)

</comment><comment><USER25> What is Twitter?! :D

</comment><comment><USER26> Soo... When is Trump getting banned?

</comment><comment><USER27> First off, there is compelling evidence that the Q movement is actually controlled by senior intel close to Trump

Secondly, Q just posted that this is retaliation for action against @jack, amongst other claims regarding infowars

Can anyone close to TWTR confirm?

<comment><USER5> Qanon is a Russian psyop and a bunch of unwitting agents.

<comment><USER27> What evidence is there that it's a Russian psyop?

Also, who are the "unwitting agents"?

And why did this comment receive a downvote? Just asking for clarification.

<comment><USER28> _Also, who are the "unwitting agents"?_

You are one of them, as an example.

 _What evidence is there that it's a Russian psyop?_

Have you noticed that if someone disagrees with a Qanon claim the followers ask, "What evidence is there that my claim is false?"

But if someone makes a claim contrary to Qanon orthodoxy, the followers ask, "What evidence is there that _your_ claim is _true_?"

You can't have it both ways.

You can't make claims and expect people to prove that you're wrong when _they_ don't believe _you_ , then turn around and expect them to prove that _they're_ right when _you_ don't believe _them_.

<comment><USER28> To be clear, when I responded to "Also, who are the 'unwitting agents'?" I was explaining what boxspam meant.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> Why is Twitter always last to do the right thing? It's almost like being a publicly traded company robbed them of their last shred of humanity.

<comment><USER30> "do the right thing" is difficult when you are suppressing free speech on a platform that's supposed to be all about it.

<comment><USER31> Alex Jones is free to express his speech on his own website as much as he pleases. "Free Speech" is not about forcing a company to host content they don't like. That would be against Twitter's freedoms. Alex Jones will still be heard by his audience.

<comment><USER32> That's like saying: Alex Jones is free to grow his own food on his land as much as he pleases. This supermarket has a policy not to sell food to people who violate our terms of service regarding hate speech.

<comment><USER33> The supermarket is free to not sell to any particular person on the basis that they constantly engage in hate speech.

It gets murkier when they start banning classes of people or ban someone for something that puts them in a protected class, but any supermarket that banned Alex Jones for hate speech would be well within their rights.

<comment><USER32> Ok, let's take it one step further. All the supermarkets in town decide not to sell food to Alex Jones, essentially condemning him to starvation. Are you still good with that?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> Crossfire, Alex Jones and Gordon Ramsay need their own shouting as a service platform.

It sucks for free speech that he got banned because it gives him notoriety and "credibility" in wingnuttery circles.

There ought to be other remedies to manipulative behavior for ratings than simply banning.

<comment><USER35> I think Gordon Ramsey deserves better than to be grouped with Mr. Jones.

I haven't heard much from Milo Yiannopoulos since he was banned from Twitter and other platforms. I suspect Alex Jones has a similar future.

<comment><USER36> After watching [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1X11aLACso](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1X11aLACso) I would have to disagree; they both made money by verbally abusing others.

<comment><USER37> No, one gained notoriety by making incredible food. Incidentally, he was also an abusive asshole boss, but that was not how he made his fame. Eventually Gordon was so famous for his skills that people would _volunteer_ to be abused by him on TV just to stand near his light.

The other is just a liar, blowhard, asshole. Alex Jones has never done anything else of note besides the aforementioned.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> Does anyone still actually think that Alex Jones isn't a character or persona being put on by an actor, like Colbert's Colbert Report character? Not that this excuses anything he says or does of course (though apparently what he said here wasn't a big deal at all)... but how anyone can think Jones acts the way he does on-camera after the cameras are turned off and nobody is looking is beyond me. His lawyer essentially admitted as much in court!

<comment><USER39> Are you serious, have you ever run into one of his listeners?

If anybody listens to him thinking it's not real, they are a tiny and insignificant minority. What his lawyer admits in court means nothing to his audience.

<comment><USER38> Yes I have, and he literally showed me his water filter and offered me a glass. Doesn't change my point one bit.</comment></comment></comment>


Code quality vs profit - <AUTHOR> http://www.simplemartin.com/2009/10/code-quality-versus-profit.html

<comment><AUTHOR> Hello everyone. I am new to this, and I want to share my thoughts through this blog. Hope someone will take advantage of it</comment>


If spying on citizens was a business - <AUTHOR>

If spying on citizens was a business I would ignore Google and Facebook.
Wouldn't it be better to hook into a few major desktop players.
You have your Adobe Acrobat type programs that are wide spread and lots of chatty client/server communication.
Better yet, you can your anti-virus programs. These also have lots of network activity. Better yet they come with escalated system privileges.
And the more obvious. You have Windows/OSX. Both closed source and are now always phoning home.
I realize you can't do as much on a single system as you can with an aggregated data set back at your main server. But it seems like you only need a  few bytes of flags to be able to deduce that this system is worth looking into further.
Sometimes less is more. If spying on citizens was a business... Forget about downloading all the data in the world. Reduce it at client side and send back the results. <comment><USER2> Sadly, it _is_ a business, and it's become an entrenched part of the political landscape. It's hard to read "Top Secret America" [1] and not come to that conclusion.

A lack of transparency for intelligence operations means their outcomes are difficult to measure, which in turn means the bang-for-the-buck efficacy of those operations is probably not a significant deciding factor in the funding they receive.

[1] [http://projects.washingtonpost.com/top-secret- america&#x2F](http://projects.washingtonpost.com/top-secret-america&#x2F);</comment>


Show HN: VETS – Volunteer Effort Tracking System - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/vets/vets

<comment><AUTHOR> About 5 years ago I volunteered to help our local SPCA (Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals) build a computerized system for tracking hours that their volunteers spent. This an important part of the volunteer coordinator's job, as there are hours/year requirements for volunteers, awards given out annually, etc. Prior to that they were using a paper binder with sign-in sheets, and adding up everything by hand at the end of the month. With about 1000 active volunteers, this was no small task, and seemed like a place computerization would be an amazing help. I wrote up a simple system in Rails (which I had spent a fair amount of hobby time with) and it's been running there ever since.

Today, there are about 67,000 "hours" entries in the database, about about 3,000 volunteers (1/3 of them active), and the system is a little slower than it ought to be (my original testing was with tens of records, since there was no existing database to import). Rather than try to update and re-learn ruby and rails, I opted to give a try porting the essential parts of the system to Python using bottle.py

The result of my work is now up on github and licensed under MIT.

I'm at a point where things are about functionally complete and I'd love to hear feedback from anyone willing to take the time to take a look at it. It's a generic enough system that I could see other non-profit organizations (who often have much/any money available to spend on commercial software that can track things like this) being interesting in this.

Things I'm not that great at, which are incidentally the main things this project uses:

* Python

* bottle.py

* SQL

* HTML/CSS

This is a hobby project for me (I'm a C programmer by day) so I am probably taking a naive approach in most cases, but in some cases I know that when I re-deploy this version of the system, it's likely to sit for another 5+ years.

(Reposted as link from [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8179419](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8179419) as suggested by dang)

<comment><USER2> I'm concerned that the code base is open to SQL injection.

I'm not a Python developer, but it looks to me like you're taking input from the user and putting it into queries without filtering it.

That said, my nonprofit helps other nonprofits use technology, and ALL of them want a volunteer-tracking system. This is a very useful, worthwhile project.

<comment><AUTHOR> I realize I'm pulling a huge cop-out by expecting that there aren't malicious users in terms of input (especially since the text fields are entered by an admin who presumably doesn't want to destroy their database), passwords are stored in the clear, etc. For this reason all that's in this database is volunteer names and hours, as the coordinator and I agreed that the less personal information is present, the better. :)

I'd love to get others involved in the project whose needs are slightly different and thus might have a motivation for doing a security audit, etc.</comment></comment></comment>


Go 1.4 Release Candidate 2 is Out - <AUTHOR> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/golang-nuts/AXBjhN3xvjI/XhlvfBqN-VwJ

<comment><USER2> The Go 1.4 release notes[1] mention a "fully precise" garbage collector, but I thought this was one of the major highlights in the 1.3 release? (The notes[2] for the 1.3 release say: "For a while now, the garbage collector has been precise when examining values in the heap; the Go 1.3 release adds equivalent precision to values on the stack.") What's up with that?

[1]: [http://tip.golang.org/doc/go1.4](http://tip.golang.org/doc/go1.4)

[2]: [http://golang.org/doc/go1.3](http://golang.org/doc/go1.3)

<comment><USER3> This is perhaps a bit misleading. What was achieved in 1.3 was a collector that was precise for the heap and the stack. In doing so it enabled the new stack copying mode for more efficient stack growth.

However not all code could take advantage of stack copying, so sometimes it would fall back to the old stack splitting behaviour. The magic code that would decide if you split or copied was, apparently, the runtime, stuff like channel send and receive, map operations, which if they needed to grow the stack would require splitting as this code was written in C not Go and the c compiler didn't emit the right magic for the stack walking code which decided if you split or copied.

In 1.4 due to rewrite of th Go facing parts of the runtime the stack walker, garbage collector and stack growth code always knows the state of every call frame so can always copy the stack. This resulted in a metric shed tonne of corner cases being deleted from those parts of the runtime. So, what was precise before, is now even more precise. o_O

In 1.5, the remaining c code in the runtime will be converted to go, meaning the go standard library is written only in go. Yay, no more weird c89(ish) c code in the runtime.</comment></comment>


Puerto Rico as an Early Warning Sign - <AUTHOR> The effects of the 2008 financial crisis remain with us today.  High consumer and government debt, low wage and economic growth have combined to make this the weakest economic recovery ever.  Plus there are demographic headwinds: the US population is getting older by the day.  But there is another aspect of our financial imbalance which will soon come to the fore: the pension crisis. Many state and local governments have promised pension benefits way beyond their ability to meet those obligations.
This isn't some theoretical argument.  Earlier this year, Puerto Rico defaulted on its general obligation bonds because it couldn't pay. As a US territory, Puerto Rico did not have the option to declare bankruptcy so Congress passed a law that allowed the commonwealth to default on its debt; in return, the commonwealth relinquished responsibility for its financial matters to a federal review board. It may well turn out that Puerto Rico is but the first "state" to declare the equivalent of bankruptcy. Recently there have been articles on how Illinois could well follow Puerto Rico's example. So in this case, Puerto Rico could be the early warning of something much bigger.
This would not be the first time that events in Puerto Rico presaged a financial calamity.
As recounted in a manuscript I have just completed: It Started in Puerto Rico: The Fall of Doral Bank and the Advent of the Financial Crisis the crash in the stock price of Doral Bank on March 16th, 2005 actually was the harbinger of the crisis of confidence which befell several giant financial institutions just three years later. Just as a chain is only as strong as its weakest link, so too in financial transactions -- where confidence and trust are so prominent -- signs of trouble are first evident where the foundation is less solid.
Therefore, it may well be that history is repeating itself.
So what happens in Puerto Rico may not stay in Puerto Rico. <comment><USER2> PR is a unique case. The vast majority of their deficits come from spending commitments from well before 2008.

PR's financial mismanagement parallels Chicago more than it does any state.</comment>


Kicking off Tech Week, Jared Kushner rallies tech leaders against floppy disks - <AUTHOR> https://techcrunch.com/2017/06/19/jared-kushner-technology-week-hell-yeah <comment><USER2> Yes!!!

Replace the 8 inch floppy's used to load the launch codes with an Android app connected to twitter.</comment>


When Apps Modify Behavior - <AUTHOR> http://massivegreatness.com/why-frontback-works

<comment><USER2> It seems strange to see a long article on the novelty of Frontback without mentioning that it mimics and seems largely inspired by the built-in Dual Shot feature on Galaxy S4.

<comment><USER3> Actually, it wasn't inspired. The first time I ever heard about the Dual Shot (sorry I don't pay enough attention to Samsung) was two weeks before we submitted to the App Store.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Never heard of frontback, but wow! What a brilliantly simple idea. I told my younger sister about it, who loves Instagram, PicStitch, and all the other photography apps, and she could not have been more excited. I don't know if it will spread like the others, but I am very impressed by the idea.</comment>


David's Health Tech Weekly: No. 16 - <AUTHOR> http://lab.hemavu.com/2014/07/13/davids-health-tech-newsletter-no-16/

<comment><USER2> It´s great to see a direct to consumer lab service in Europe. Congrats.

I haven´t seen info on how are you measuring magnesium levels, or more specifically, why do you think that your chosen method is the right one ?</comment>


Ask HN: Startup investment runway and taxes - <AUTHOR>

Let's say you get into YC. You are a new startup with $120K investment, 2 cofounders, each paying themselves a $2K after-tax monthly salary with biz expenses around $1K/month.<p>What do the taxes look like? How does the investment get taxed before its used? What factors would you use to calculate the startup's runway? How much runway does the startup have? <comment><USER2> You'll have a professional do the corporate taxes. Briefly, you'll expect that for the first several years of the business, possibly continuing through exit, the business will have negative profits. Accordingly, your _income_ tax bill _for the corporation_ will be $0 every year. You'll expect to continue booking tax losses as an asset on the balance sheet against that day in the future when your business actually has profits. You will likely pay many taxes which are not founded on income, most prominently California franchise tax for YC startups, which has a minimum of about $1k a year or so.

The fact that the corporation received $120k from YC or $10 million from angel investors is immaterial. Those flows of money do not represent revenue/profits. They are not subject to income tax (nor any other tax that I am aware of).

The approximate runway of a company with $120k in the bank and 2 co-founders at ramen wages with $1k a month in OpEx is ~18 months as of the current moment in time. Napkin math: $6k to pay both founders ~$2k salary plus pay direct costs of employing them, $1k in OpEx, divide.

<comment><USER3> I'd stress talking with a professional. You'll probably need to pay state+federal unemployment tax and disability insurance, plus you'll need to do FICA withholding on the salaries you're paying yourselves. If you forget that and write yourselves a check for your whole paycheck, you'll wind up with a larger tax bill later.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Investments are not taxed.

You will most likely operate with a loss for the first year so your tax bill will be $0. And then you will be able to carry-over any losses to subsequent years which will reduce or eliminate your corporate tax bill in those years. Get a professional for the carry-over stuff. As patio11 said, there are often minimum state taxes. I believe California is ~$800 and Delaware is ~$200 or more.

You will of course have to pay income tax on wages individually. If you are considered employees then the company also has to pay a portion of the payroll tax. If consultants, then the company does not need to pay payroll tax. Talk to a lawyer about which is appropriate for the founders.

runway (number of months) = (total - one-time expenses) / monthly expenses</comment>


The QR Clock - <AUTHOR> https://tindie.com/shops/ch00ftech/qr-clock-1/ <comment><USER2> Reminds me of the tumbler, pictures of people scanning qr codes: <http://picturesofpeoplescanningqrcodes.tumblr.com/>

</comment><comment><USER3> Man I'm sick of the word "maker."

Clock looks nice though.</comment>


The Percentage of American Adults Not Having Sex Has Reached a Record High - <AUTHOR> https://www.sciencealert.com/the-percentage-of-americans-not-having-sex-has-reached-a-record-high <comment><USER2> The articles misses one important factor: Tinder, Bumble, Hinge, OKCupid et al. have changed the market in such a way that in a large city, even the homeliest of girls can log on and within hours arrange sex with a guy who she would otherwise have no prospects of a long-term relationship with, but is well above the attractiveness level she would have previously had access to.

I haven't just read this online; I have seen this with my own eyes, with multiple female acquaintances, none of them exactly venuses, showing me the guys they've been meeting up with.

The fact stands that guys are a lot less choosy than girls, and this necessarily includes the guys who are also more physically attractive than most.

As online dating has become the norm, this causes a drought for a larger portion of men than before.

<comment><USER3> I agree! As a man, you're in for a really hard dating life (and life in general as a result) if you're relying on these apps. Meeting women in person, an increasingly rare opportunity, is far more likely to result in a positive outcome.

At some level I hold the apps them selves responsible. I think they create some kind of negative loop in the dating world. I don't believe the results of these apps are a net positive for society but my perception is colored.

<comment><USER4> > Meeting women in person, an increasingly rare opportunity, is far more > likely to result in a positive outcome.

Yeah, it will take another 100 years until women are hired 50:50 into engineering jobs. Or probably so many jobs.

<comment><USER5> I thought the new school of thought was never, ever attempt to date a colleague. Too much risk, even in considering.

<comment><USER6> Yeah, you could also hang out with your actually funny and interesting female colleague and meet her female engineering college friends. In pre online dating times you'd meet people by physically hanging out in groups, having fun and eventually meeting other friends. Good times. Y'all should try it eventually.

<comment><USER5> And have your after hours discussions and activities now possibly jeopardize your job if something is misinterpreted? Not even once.

<comment><USER7> I think the risk of this is widely exaggerated.

I have had many, many long and interesting conversations with women colleagues, and there's never been any risk of anything being misinterpreted, because I:

* don't joke about how I would like to date them (because I don't want to and it isn't a good joke),

* don't suggest that we should meet in places that would be appropriate for dating (romantic restaurant, one of our places, quiet bar, etc),

* don't joke about having sex with people (because those aren't good jokes and I wouldn't discuss having sex with people who aren't close friends),

* don't talk about or joke about pornography.

Carving out that handful of broad exceptions of things I don't discuss with colleagues (men or women) leaves a huge amount of things to discuss -- and places to discuss them -- that aren't really open to misinterpretation.

I also don't think most women _want_ to call out their coworkers, because of the intense social scrutiny turned back on them when they do so, even when their initial calling-out was warranted.

<comment><USER6> So telling that these simple behavioural rules actually have to be spelled out instead of being normal common sense behaviour.

<comment><USER5> You can follow the rules laid out and still be accused of saying something offensive. The risk reward isn't worth socially engaging with colleagues.

<comment><USER7> Certainly, it's possible one can be accused of anything, with or without any basis in reality.

I don't believe the risk of being accused of inappropriate behavior is anywhere near what you seem to, and accordingly have spent many, many hours and evenings socializing with colleagues, many of whom (men and women) remain friends long after the job is over.

Govern yourself according to what you deem appropriate, but suggesting that it is a fact of society that women are untrustworthy is neither true nor useful to society at large.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Technology could be creating a 'winner-take-phenomenon' in dating by massively expanding the options people have. The top X percentage of guys get all the women. There's also the social argument, since marriage is less common, sought after males are no longer locked down the way they once were.

<comment><USER9> What I don't understand with this argument, is sex is usually a 1:1 activity that takes up a bit of time (like interviewing). Even if you have a population H (for Hottie) of men every woman would wave her panties for (doubtful but let's assume) the men in H can't possibly have sex with every woman every day. Meaning some of the women, even if they can have sex with the men in H, and it probably does affect how they view men in not-H (less well due to inferior H factor), must be spending enough time sexually frustrated to be available for not-H.

Indeed, if you look at sex not as a matching problem between males and females, but as an event distribution, then let's say "desirable men" want sex at a rate of K events per week and all women want sex at a rate of J events per week. Let's say the population has 10 desirable men, 90 undesirable men, and 100 women. In the past where the desirable men were married off, they had sex avg(K,J) times per week, for a total of 10xavg(K,J) events involving a desirable man, leaving 90xavg(K,J) events involving an undesirable man.

Let's say now all those people move in the new, "casual" world. The desirable men can have sex to their heart's content: K times per week. The undesirables must use the remaining times that a woman in the population would like to have sex but the desirables are satiated: 100xJ-10xK. Now, if 100xJ - 10xK > 90xK, so if men and women want sex roughly as many times, or if women want more, undesirable men are not really negatively affected. Indeed they have more variety under the new system.

However if J = 0.5xK, then roughly half the undesirables are unsatisfied, or they're all unsatisfied half the time, which does feel like a step down. Anecdotally I don't think it's the case that 50% of less desirable dudes are just not having sex, but let's say it's 10, or 20%, that's believable. It would mean women want sex slightly less than men -- 10 or 20% less. Note that the 10 or 20% not having sex aren't necessarily less desirable than the other undesirables, just less lucky.

Clearly a solution for the leftover guys is obvious: They must increase all women's libido past the points where the hotties can satiate it.

(Obvious caveats: silly analysis, doesn't model gay people, assume libido is constant or normally distributed across populations, assume partners for every event are independent, etc)

<comment><USER10> This has actually been studied quite a bit, and it would appear that the increased optimization of dating apps has caused a huge inequality in the dating "market". It can even be quantified with the Gini Coefficient, a measure of economic inequality. [1]

> It was determined that the bottom 80% of men (in terms of attractiveness) > are competing for the bottom 22% of women and the top 78% of women are > competing for the top 20% of men.

And anecdotally, it is consistent with what I have observed. I am troubled by the effect this might have on our society. I am sure that it is sowing resentment among those who have been left behind. Our society is more sexualized than ever; people are bombarded with messages about how great sex is, and yet it is less available than ever.

[1]: [https://medium.com/@worstonlinedater/tinder-experiments- ii-g...](https://medium.com/@worstonlinedater/tinder-experiments-ii-guys- unless-you-are-really-hot-you-are-probably-better-off-not-wasting- your-2ddf370a6e9a)

<comment><USER9> I'm arguing that if sex is more casualized, which it is, then partners are not "competing"; they can have sex with Man A on Monday and let Jody from Accounting have Man A on Tuesday.

The failure modes for this system are twofold: if women want sex much less than men, by a huge factor (which for casual sex may well be true) or if the most desirable men are insatiable nymphomaniacs and quite capable of finding a spot for every groupie. I'm not sure if the second part is amenable to change, but I'm sure it's possible to increase women's libido because surveys tend to indicate women have much less satisfying sexual experiences than men do, so changing that would show room from improvement.

<comment><USER10> It really isn't a distribution problem, although it is tempting to look at it that way. But I think you are neglecting human behavior.

It would seem that what is happening is that the majority of women are competing for the attention of a small minority of men. The goal of the players is not to make sure that the most people have sex.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> The data presentation in that article is probably a little misleading. It's not entirely clear that young men are having less sex than young women.

Somebody has created another graph showing the confidence intervals, and there is a large overlap:

[https://twitter.com/graykimbrough/status/1111695055541161992...](https://twitter.com/graykimbrough/status/1111695055541161992/photo/1)

</comment><comment><USER12> Yawn. Everybody is beating it to internet porn. It's probably the main reason that being seated for long periods isn't killing more people.

</comment><comment><USER13> I think the article could go into more depth and analyze this much further. One aspect that is entirely missing is how dating changed over the last decade. The rise of dating apps for instance would be interesting to put into the mix when discussing this.</comment>