Malthusian Catastrophe - <AUTHOR> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malthusian_catastrophe <comment><USER2> [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sub- replacement_fertility](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sub- replacement_fertility)

As of 2010, about 48% (3.3 billion people) of the world population lives in nations with sub-replacement fertility.

</comment><comment><USER3> This is particularly alarming: "A study conducted in 2009[12] said that food production will have to increase by 70% over the next 40 years, and food production in the developing world will need to double.[13] This is a result of the increasing population (world population will increase to 9.1 billion in 2050, where there are just 7.8 billion people today). Another issue is that the effects of global warming (floods, droughts, extreme weather events, ...) will negatively affect food production, in such a degree even that food shortages are likely to occur in the coming decades.[14][15] As a result, we will need to use the scarce natural resources more efficiently and adapt to climate change.[16] Lastly, some things (such as the increase in agricultural production for 1st generation biofuels) has not been taken into account in FAO's forecast.[17]"

Unless there is a breakthrough in carbon-free fertilizer (something fertilizer manufacturer Yara is working on for example [https://www.abc.net.au/news/rural/2020-06-19/pilbara-yara- en...](https://www.abc.net.au/news/rural/2020-06-19/pilbara-yara-engie-trial- aims-make-sustainable-fertiliser-green/12340826)) that 70% growth will likely come with considerable emissions on its own, exacerbating the problem.

</comment><comment><USER4> The simplistic illustration is absurd: The population outpaces food supply, yet it continues to grow exponentially.

Nature has a solution to this: Starvation induces infertility. Problem solved!</comment>


Ask HN: Possible to make an app that's just a Web view on iOS and Android? - <AUTHOR> So let's say I e got a website that looks good on mobile.
But I want to get on the App stores.
Is it possible to start off with just deploying an App which is just a Web view?
And then over time work on making it more native?
In assuming the the simplicity means that I wouldn't need to use some third party framework?
Anyone done this?
Will it work? Is it a bad idea? <comment><USER2> Yes, you can do it definitely, it is called app wrapper.

Android has not any restriction you can do it easily with wrapper but in iOS, you need to create a Native navigation bar and link to your pages so iOS will accept your application.

We are happy to help you, you can contact us on here [https://www.websoptimization.com/](https://www.websoptimization.com/)

</comment><comment><USER3> I have published apps that are primarily a WebView in both iOS and Android recently. Though I'd ensured to put some native components besides a splash screen in both of them. I had created a side menu navigation bar, setup Firebase for notifications and it was accepted on both platforms. Here's a link to the iOS App:

[https://apps.apple.com/au/app/aged-care- decisions/id14744800...](https://apps.apple.com/au/app/aged-care- decisions/id1474480074)

Happy to answer your questions.</comment>


What to Know When Coworking with Someone with Autism - <AUTHOR> http://bostinno.streetwise.co/2016/06/29/working-with-someone-with-autism/ <comment><USER2> Highly related research: [https://www.microsoft.com/en- us/research/publication/underst...](https://www.microsoft.com/en- us/research/publication/understanding-the-challenges-faced-by-neurodiverse- software-engineering-employees-towards-a-more-inclusive-and-productive- technical-workforce/)

</comment><comment><USER3> At my current job, I disclosed my autism diagnosis after I was hired but before the first company-wide meeting. I didn't get too technical in my explanation, just went over some of the strengths and weaknesses that it brings. If a co-worker complains to my boss that I didn't act appropriately in a social situation, he knows the deal.

</comment><comment><USER4> This article hardly explains what to know about working with someone who has Autism...

<comment><USER5> I think it was covered in the first sentence of the second paragraph:

"If you've met one person with Asperger's syndrome, then you've met one person with Asperger's syndrome."

However, I think this could be replaced with the simpler: If you have met one person, you have met one person.

<comment><USER6> > However, I think this could be replaced with the simpler: If you have met > one person, you have met one person.

But that's exactly the point. The quote is pointing out that people with Asperger's or autism differ just as much as people without; the latter is commonly accepted and expected, the former less so.</comment></comment></comment>


A template for future news stories about scientific breakthroughs - <AUTHOR> http://andrewgelman.com/2016/05/04/a-template-for-future-news-stories-about-scientific-breakthroughs/ <comment><USER2> The main problem with this solution is that he assumes that the purpose of news stories is to inform.

It isn't.

It is a vehicle for generating ad impressions. It doesn't matter whether it has all of the intellectual content of cotton candy, the purpose is served if it gets clicks. Therefore widespread reporting of a bad paper is not a problem for the industry, it is an opportunity. And if it is so bad that they are forced to publish a retraction, well cry me a river to the nearest bank account, they got more ad impressions!

This will continue and intensify until people get so fed up that the online equivalent of the NY Times becomes viable. A subscription news source that people trust for content, that people go to because the free news is so obviously made up BS.</comment>


3 Facts About New Zealand I Didn't Know Until I Moved Here - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/@alannallama/3-facts-about-new-zealand-i-didnt-know-until-i-moved-here-28208ef8b700 <comment><USER2> Hmm, I thought Moa were extinct.

<comment><USER3> It's satire like [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bielefeld_Conspiracy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bielefeld_Conspiracy) or [http://www.idlewords.com/2007/04/the_alameda- weehawken_burri...](http://www.idlewords.com/2007/04/the_alameda- weehawken_burrito_tunnel.htm)</comment></comment>


On the Women's Petition Against Coffee of 1674 - <AUTHOR> https://resobscura.blogspot.com/2017/04/that-newfangled-abominable-heathenish.html <comment><USER2> Imagine a space where you can bet on bear fights, warm your legs by the fire, witness public dissections (human and animal), solicit prostitutes (male and female), buy and sell stocks, purchase tulips or pornographic pamphlets, observe the activities of spies, dissidents, merchants, and swindlers, and then read your mail, delivered directly to your table. The thread tying it all together is a new drug from the Muslim world—black, odiferous, frightening, bewitching—called "coffee."

<comment><USER3> Hold your horses. Author is citing from a satirical text. it's probably 110% false. Telling like a fact in the first paragraphs and title is just click bait at its finest.

<comment><AUTHOR> Author here - the opening paragraph is based on Brian Cowan's academic monograph on 17th century coffee houses which I recommend highly to anyone interested in this. None of the things I wrote there are mentioned in the satirical text, but are instead based on documented cases, such as Lloyds coffee house becoming an insurance brokerage.

<comment><USER4> I've been pretty fascinated by the idea of ancient coffee houses since reading Raymond E. Feist's fictional novel "Rise of a Merchant Prince" in which most of the action happens in a coffee house.

Are there any more articles or books you'd suggest to get more across the topic, and particularly the salacious and dramatic details?

<comment><AUTHOR> It's so funny you mention that book because it was one of the things that set me on my current path (got a Phd in early modern history and am now writing a book about the drug and spice trade). I need to reread it, it's been a long time. Anyway, Cowan's "The Social Life of Coffee" is a good read, I thought. The diary of Samuel Pepys is an exceptional book if you're looking for something written by a contemporary, although he spends more time in taverns. I suspect that Dutch and French coffeehouses were even more interesting than English ones but there doesn't seem to be much on them unfortunately.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I for one wish for the days when one could order a bespoke codpiece, bet on a bear fight and hire a prostitute all in a single establishment.

</comment><comment><USER6> Not sure if this is satirical, but obviously we are all convinced.

Who is going to join me in taking freeing our land from the scourge of coffee houses?

</comment><comment><USER7> If you're looking for a more insightful history to the "penny university", the Wikipedia page contains much more detail about coffee houses and some analysis of the pamphlet.

[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_coffeehouses_in_the_...](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_coffeehouses_in_the_17th_and_18th_centuries)

It's a fascinating read. Trying to capture how people lived and thought a few hundred years ago is very difficult today because much history is now overlaid with politics and filters. The Wikipedia page paints a picture that seems feasible based on my wide reading of history.

The resobscura speculates (without evidence) that the pamphlet was most probably written by a man. This view is not shared by the Wikipedia article for multiple reasons that anybody can speculate over.

<comment><AUTHOR> Re: whether the pamphlet was written by a man or a woman, if you reread you'll see that I simply note that others have speculated, but there's no evidence either way. Suffice to say, 17th century pamphlets aren't always what they purport to be, so I think it's best to be agnostic about claims of authorship without additional documentation.

<comment><USER8> Either way, authorship doesn't really matter that much. At the time, printing these pamphlets still cost some money, it wasn't something done entirely on a whim; therefore, if a pamphlet exists, there was someone with a purpose behind it, either religious, or political, or economic motivation but it wasn't just someone expressing an opinion, it was someone hoping to somewhat influence the public narrative.</comment></comment></comment>


Philips Hue: The Smart Lightbulb Exclusively Hitting Apple Stores on Oct. 30 - <AUTHOR> http://thenextweb.com/gadgets/2012/10/29/meet-philips-hue-the-smart-led-light-bulb-exclusively-hitting-apple-stores-on-october-30/ <comment><USER2> Ouch - This surely can't be good for the LIFX - Kickstarter project.

</comment><comment><USER3> $60 light bulbs. Well at least they have the target market right (iphone buyers).</comment>


How to sleep - A physician's guide to sleep in a stressful age. - <AUTHOR> https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/01/how-to-sleep/508781/?single_page=true <comment><USER2> Does this tell us anything that is actually useful?

Caffeine keeps us awake. So does light, especially blue light. We knew these things.

But is there anything new or useful here?

<comment><USER3> I thought it was just me. This article says absolutely nothing of value.</comment></comment>


TabNine Raises $12m in Series A - <AUTHOR> https://www.tabnine.com/blog/weve-raised-series-a/ <comment><USER2> This shows a blank page for almost 8 seconds in Firefox before it renders anything. Crazy.</comment>


Ask HN: Can you recommend free computer science uni lectures? - <AUTHOR> I can only find one or two good ones on iTunes U. Are there more great uni courses to listen to? <comment><USER2> Try [https://www.edx.org/](https://www.edx.org/) \- you will find a wide variety of courses in there. Courses are free unless you wanted official certificate (so the content is free)

Another one is [https://www.coursera.org/](https://www.coursera.org/) \- similar (last time I looked there have been free courses in there)

<comment><AUTHOR> To clarify, I don't want to do courses, just listen to university computer science lectures.

<comment><USER3> I enjoyed Richard Buckland's videos as much for his sense of humor as for the actual content. Some of them are apparently now part of a mooc, but the ones I watched a few years ago are just recordings of his lectures at UNSW.

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

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs by MIT is excellent - [https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/electrical-engineering-and- compu...](https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/electrical-engineering-and-computer- science/6-001-structure-and-interpretation-of-computer-programs-spring-2005/)

</comment><comment><USER5> List of awesome university courses for learning Computer Science!

[https://github.com/prakhar1989/awesome- courses](https://github.com/prakhar1989/awesome-courses)

</comment><comment><USER6> Just find.You will find a wide variety of courses in there. Courses are free unless you wanted official certificate.

</comment><comment> ng-user CS50x was great, stick with it.</comment>


History of Weapons in Switzerland - <AUTHOR> https://www.tooyoo.ch/en/blog/if-i-end-owning-weapon-what-does-swiss-law-say/ <comment><AUTHOR> Note: "History of weapons in Switzerland" is the second part of a bigger article. If you just want to read about that, you can scroll down.

"When talking about firearms, we often compare Switzerland and the US – one of the most heavily armed populations in the world.

"Despite a large number of weapons in circulation in both countries, there are – proportionally – more gun-related deaths in the US than in Switzerland. Even though the Zug parliament shooting has left its mark, this is the only mass murder that has taken place within Switzerland in recent years.

Each year, slightly over 200 deaths are caused by firearms in Switzerland, but about 90% of these are suicides.

Meanwhile in the US, several tens of thousands of people are dying from guns as a result of mass shootings or other accidents. In 2015 alone, the Federal Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reported 36,252 such deaths in the country. In the same year, 'only' 231 people died from gunshot wounds in Switzerland."

Population US in 2015 : 321'000'000 Population CH in 2015 : 8'238'000

US rate in 2015 : 0,011293 % CH rate in 2015 : 0,002804 %</comment>


Pizzeria Employees Wear T-Shirts With Quotes From Nasty Yelp Reviews - <AUTHOR> http://consumerist.com/5164533/pizzeria-employees-wear-t+shirts-with-quotes-from-nasty-yelp-reviews <comment><USER2> This is great for them by encouraging people to put the most ridiculous and outlandish one star reviews possible on Yelp, in hopes that their review will be turned into a T-Shirt. They'll be left with positive reviews and off-the- wall negative reviews that no one will take seriously anymore.

</comment><comment><USER3> I'm definitely eating lunch there today, even though it isn't hacker news.

<comment><USER3> I went there and no one was wearing these shirts. Delicious food, and still not Hacker News.</comment></comment>


Ask HN : best laptop keyboard - <AUTHOR>

Extremely frustrated with my HP laptop keyboard. Briefly used a gateway laptop and even the gateway had a better keyboard. Any suggestions on a laptop with a good keyboard?<p>Thinkpads supposedly have the best laptop keyboards. Any others? <comment><USER2> The one on my (little over a year old) macbook pro. Its the best.

Sadly, the 'delicate' mouse button broke and the Geniuses (no pun intended) at my local apple store can't locate my extended warranty.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for the tip. Will checkout macbook pros at a local store.

<comment><USER3> i actually like the macbook/MB Air KB (i think they're similar if not the smae) better than MBP. But the fullsize Apple wired keyboard is light and durable enough to carry around in a backpack with you, and the keys have the feel of the macbook KB.

Keyboard fix: call Apple. Lots of times employees in Apple stores are too busy to spend the time it would take to properly diagnose a problem .

non-apple product: in the US, hit big box stores, Costco, Office Max, best buy, pound on the keys, look at displays carefully. You have to spend time with a laptop to discern if the KB, display, heat, fan noise, etc are all tolerable in your workspaces. Those are my top deal-killers (always carry a couple mice around with me, never use trackpads, ) Some places (Costco, target) have 90-day return policies

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I like both my macbook pro and thinkpad keyboards, but the thinkpad keyboard feels nicer to me. The keys seem to have a bit more travel and is just feels good.

Both are solid though and I don't mind the mbp one. I just prefer the thinkpad one.

</comment><comment><USER5> Macbook Pros have excellent keyboard and Apple of course now sell the one from the Macbook as a separate desk keyboard which is also excellent.

<comment><AUTHOR> Is this one portable? I do use an external keyboard when I can but mine is too big to carry.

<comment><USER5> Well obviously the one built into the computer is ;)

The other one is thin but not really portable. It's just nice to get the same feel on a desktop keyboard, it has nice feedback. I'm so over model M keyboards now. _sigh_

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I've used Macbook, Dell and Thinkpad keyboards extensively. The Thinkpad is my favorite by a long shot.

</comment><comment><USER7> My Dell Inspiron 600m has a keyboard that I would consider better than passable by my standards, but I'm supremely finicky about my keyboards. I'd give it a 7/10 for feel.

I'm unusually fast on it for a laptop keyboard as well, it seems well-laid out.</comment>


The Thai cleaning lady facing prison for 'I see' - <AUTHOR> http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-36328865 <comment><USER2> I was in Thailand in December, and the political situation there is really not great at the moment.

The 90-year old King, whom Thais regard on the whole with a great deal of respect, is dying. He is in hospital for much of the time, there are rumours that he now barely speaks, and he is hardly seen in public at all anymore. The military is nervous about what happens when the King dies, as his son is not held in anywhere near the same high level of esteem with the public. The King's popularity stems from being seen as a 'unifying force' through many of Thailand's political crises. Fearing a constitutional crisis when he dies, they're now clamping down heavily on any dissent.

Which makes the atmosphere on the street a little strange. I was there on the King's birthday in December, and the whole country (people included) were decked out in yellow, the King's colour. There are icons of the King every 300 yards or so in central Bangkok (less so out in CM). While I was there someone was sentenced to several years in prison for a Facebook post about the King's dog. The laws re: insulting the monarchy have been around for a while, but are now being much more widely applied and strictly enforced.

It's very very hard to work out if the public affection for the King is for real, and no Thai will speak openly about their feelings. I spoke to a taxi driver on the way out of the country and said I'd been in the country for the King's birthday. His response: 'Yes.'

I left the country fascinated by the experience of a population living under authoritarian military rule, but really hope that for everyone's sake Thailand is able to resolve its difficulties and get back to regular elections soon.

<comment><USER3> > I left the country fascinated by the experience of a > population living > under authoritarian military rule,

It's not as simple as that. They are a democracy, with regular elections. They're just punctuated with military coups. There'll be tanks in the street and the military will have to, after a few days, try and stop people from dancing on/near the tanks. There'll be as many people in favour of the coup as against it. The military situation has nothing to do with the respect for the king; the coups don't happen without the king's blessing. Absent the monarchy in Thailand I don't think the situation regarding democracy would be any different at all.

<comment><USER4> > They are a democracy, with regular elections.

That's almost laughable. The country has been under martial law for two years, with its constitution revoked. If the article is to be believed, the military prohibits campaigning against pieces of "legislation" they want passed -- like the new constitution, which basically just confirms military rule as law. A country with harsh (and enforced) laws on the book prohibiting criticizing the head of state... yeah, not a democracy.

<comment><USER5> > the military prohibits campaigning against pieces of "legislation" they want > passed -- like the new constitution

They prohibit campaigning either for or against

<comment><USER4> Sure, except that the military "nudges" people toward voting in the direction they want.

Regardless, even if they didn't, your argument is in no way in support of the idea that they have a democracy. A democracy requires public discourse in order to be healthy.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I was in Thailand in 2012, spent a day in Bangkok hanging out with my former office assistant who had returned there to take care of family. While walking through the park there was sudden music playing from the loud speakers. Everyone stopped and stood perfectly still. My friend had gone into a public bathroom and rushed back out to make sure I was standing as well. There was an announcement from the king that lasted a few minutes. After it ended everyone resumed their walking, sitting on the grass, and exercise routines. I found it hard to imagine political intrusions like this in daily life, although it seemed akin to being at a sports event that had obligatory random national anthems in the middle of a game. Anyway it seemed indicative of a larger political climate of intrusion, but it sounds as though it's gotten exponentially worse.

<comment><USER5> this tradition happens twice a day - [http://tastythailand.com/standing-still- for-thailands-nation...](http://tastythailand.com/standing-still-for- thailands-national-anthem-every-day/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> There's an Arabic saying that goes

لا تسأل الطغاة لماذا طغوا , بل اسأل العبيد لماذا ركعوا

Do not ask the tyrants why they tyrannised, but ask the slaves why they knelt.

<comment><USER8> Maybe I'm misreading you, but this seems disrespectful—to victims of tyrants in general, and to the victim of this possible prison sentence in particular—and I can't see what it adds to the discussion.

<comment><USER9> You can't be made a slave without your permission. You can be made a fugitive, a prisoner, or dead... but you can't be made a slave.

<comment><USER10> It seems pretty dickish to blame the slave because they could have chosen to be killed instead. That's the kind of justification tyrants tell to themselves in those rare instances where their concious tingles. "It's their fault for being oppressed, they are a bunch of weak sheep, if they were real men they would have chosen to be tortured to death instead."

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> German comedian faces prison for mocking Turkish leader [1]

In Canada men went to jail for disagreeing with feminist. He was latter released on bail, but could not use computer and electronic devices for 4 years. Father of five is graphic designer...[2]

[1] [http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2016/04/ger...](http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2016/04/german- erdogan-insult-case/478437/)

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

<comment><USER12> I believe that the way you phrased that second thing is potentially misleading.

Not being allowed to use twitter or "have a smartphone or use a computer with Internet access" (direct quote from wikipedia because I'm not sure whether the internet access part applies to the smartphone part.) was part of the bail. The 4 years were between the time which he was charged (Nov 2012) , and the time that all charges were dismissed (Jan 2016. So, really, closer to 3 years, but that difference doesn't matter all that much).

I believe that someone who did not read what you linked might assume that you meant that it was part of a sentencing for something he was charged with, as opposed to part of the bail.

Indeed, I initially misunderstood your comment in that way.

So, I would like to clarify this potential confusion for anyone else reading your comment, and also let you know that people may be lead to make inaccurate assumptions if you phrase things like that.

In addition, I think your phrase "for disagreeing with feminist" is probably suboptimal / unclear. It is true of course that the things that happened to him were a result of things he said to and about the person(s) in question, but that isn't how a typical person would understand "went to jail for disagreeing with an <X>".

I believe that a typical native English speaker would typically interpret "They were sent to jail for disagreeing with a <X>." to mean that the person was jailed for the opinion that they held or expressed, not for the way they allegedly expressed their disagreement with the <X> in question.

Am I saying that what happened to the person was right? No, that's not what I'm saying.

I'm only saying that I think that the way you said the things, while perhaps technically true in a sense, has a high risk of people misinterpreting it as saying something that is not true.

<comment><USER11> What is inaccurate? He was in jail and he could not use computer for couple of years. Whatever he was found guilty is just technicality. The damage was done:

> _Elliott was released on bail on the condition that he did not tweet or > access Twitter, have a smartphone or use a computer with Internet access._

> _when it was discovered that the tweets were actually made by an account > impersonating Elliott._

... and it took 3.3 years to discover that.

Anyway I find your tone threatens my opinion. Please send me your name and address...

<comment><USER12> I did not say that you said anything inaccurate. (Well, the unimportant 4 vs 3, but that is unimportant.)

I said that the way you said some of it was prone to being misinterpreted as meaning some other things which are not accurate.

Now, perhaps my initial misunderstanding was just due to me being exceptionally stupid, but I think that there is a fairly high chance of misinterpreting the things in question.

As such, I thought it would useful for it to be expressed in way which would be less prone to misinterpretation, because you don't want people thinking you mean something other than what you do mean, especially when what you mean is true, and the misunderstanding of what you mean is false.

I'm under the impression that he was forbidden from using a computer connected to the internet, not from using a computer in general, but I only read the Wikipedia article, so I could be wrong about that. ( Also, that distinction might not be very important.)

Indeed, that he was found not guilty does not reduce the harms he suffered.

But, as far as what is indicated about the legal system, I think it IS relevant. I don't know much anything about Canadian law, but I would figure that the purpose of the forbidding is rather different than what it would be it it were part of sentencing. Was it not meant by the authorities as a (rather too extreme) means to prevent more of what they suspected might be harm, until they could determine whether what was being done constituted harm? Or something like that?

Again, this of course does not make things better for the person. But as for the implications about what the law is, I think it is extremely relevant.

Regarding the impersonator, uh, I thought the things said by the impersonator only came up near the end of the case. Did I misunderstand this?

I thought it was kind of an addendum?

> Anyway I find your tone threatens my opinion. Please send me your name and > address...

Haha, very funny.

___

Has any of what I said been false or unclear?

<comment><USER11> > _Has any of what I said been false or unclear?_

Not really.

> _especially when what you mean is true, and the misunderstanding of what you > mean is false_

He was punished for disagreeing. Jail, lost job, a few years without a computer and money spend on defense. Guilt is irrelevant if trial takes years and does not postpone punishment.

Computer without internet is useless today. Would you employ graphic designer who can not use computer connected to internet?

Also guilt is irrelevant, if false accuse is left unpunished. His accusers should be forbidden to use internet, and should go to prison for harassing him

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Yes, first rule when you go to Thailand - don't say anything about the king.

It's strange when they talk about the military presence over there. I was over there for two months at the start of the year, (3rd visit in the past 2 years), and as usual didn't notice any military except for when I was close to the Burmese border (they were checking everyone for papers), and around the Kings palace.

</comment><comment><USER14> Explanation of the title:

> So what did Patnaree do to get charged? According to her lawyer, the only > evidence the police have produced is an exchange on Facebook between her and > a political activist, in which she responded to comments the police say are > defamatory with the Thai word "ja", which translates as "I see", or "ok".

<comment><USER15> "Ja" is the informal rural equivalent of "Ka", which is used here as an acknowledgement. "Ja" may have been interpreted as improper in this context, as it is not formal.

Language is something different to Thais - the West does not really have an equivalent, which probably makes this confusing to some. For instance, royalty in Thailand have a whole unique language that they, and their servants, converse in (Ra-cha sap). The only thing I can think of that's even close is the use of Latin in Catholic churches.

<comment><USER16> Can you source that? It sounds really interesting, but Google turns up nothing

<comment><USER17> [https://thaitranslation.wordpress.com/tag/thai-royal- languag...](https://thaitranslation.wordpress.com/tag/thai-royal-language/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Related from earlier this week:

Thai government plans to MITM all internet communications

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11801325](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11801325)

</comment><comment><USER19> WTF 56 years?

This makes China and Saudi Arabia look almost sane.

First sign of weak rulers is when they make insulting them a prison term (same goes for religions).

<comment><USER20> > She responded to comments the police say are defamatory with the Thai word > "ja", which translates as "I see", or "ok". The police say she should have > condemned the comments.

The definition of a dictatorship is they dictate what you _should_ say. That's how they keep control.

<comment><USER21> These laws have been on the books well before the junta seized power.

It's a criminal offense to criticize monarchs both living and dead in Thailand. A lot of people found guilty are pardoned, but a lot are not.

<comment><USER22> Except this isn't "criticizing the monarch". This is making a case out of basically nothing against the mother of a "student activist".

<comment><USER8> I think that this point is easy to miss, since it's practically a throwaway remark in the article: this does _not_ appear to be in any direct sense about the woman's Facebook comment; rather, it is an intentionally overzealous application of a law to a situation where it applies only tenuously at best, in order to silence someone _else_ 's dissenting voice.

<comment><USER23> oh the rich rich irony of your comment here, you silencer of dissenting opinions you.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> Check out the posters threatening jail for 'like' or 'share' put up publicly around Bangkok during the beginning of this round of unrest back in 2014: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_censorship_in_Thailan...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_censorship_in_Thailand#Aftermath_of_2014_coup_d.27etat)

</comment><comment><USER25> That's so awful.

<comment><USER26> It is. All she did was acknowledge something. I've seen another instance where a Thai man liked a photo on Facebook. [http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/dec/10/thai-man- arrest...](http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/dec/10/thai-man-arrested- facebook-like-photo-king)

Pretty sad this is becoming more widespread in Thailand

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> Thailand's technically a constitutional monarchy but the royalty is much more than just a figurehead like those in Western Europe.

The actively interfere in elections and are on record supporting the various coups that have happened over the decades.

Cables leaked more recently had the King backing the army during the massacre in Thammasat University.

People should really read "The King Never Smiles" to get an idea of how this came to be.

<comment><USER15> Excellent book. Also banned in Thailand.

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> I lived in Thailand in the 90s. Sad to see it's become (or was it always?) so draconian with speech perceived to be against the monarchy. :\</comment>


Anybody else hating web fonts lately? - <AUTHOR> I adore great typography, but I think @font-face in practice contributes to some of the most annoying user experiences on the web today.
It is very frustrating when loading up a website and seeing a mostly blank page because the fonts are still downloading. This is especially frustrating on a slow internet connection or on mobile.
I'm sure that more people will discover and adopt best practices to improve performance and overall user experience over time, but right now I'm noticing this slowdown very frequently. - see http://www.igvita.com/2014/01/31/optimizing-web-font-rendering-performance/ for some notes on best practices
To me, speed is still the most important feature of a website, and it's shocking how bad this experience often becomes when web fonts are added to the equation.
This is one of the biggest problems I have with the current web because of how frequently I'm noticing this. <comment><USER2> > It is very frustrating when loading up a website and seeing a mostly blank > page because the fonts are still downloading.

Soon to be fixed! Blink (Chrome, Chrome on Android, Android 4.4+ WebView, Opera) will be implementing new behavior for how webfonts are loaded: [http://crbug.com/235303#c17](http://crbug.com/235303#c17) Basically, you'll only see invisible text for a maximum of 3 seconds (this is the same as Firefox). As Ilya's post also points out, we have strong data on webfont latencies in the wild that supports this behavior.

Further, we're shipping it with Font Load Events so you can customize loading behavior very easily. On the Safari side of things, I've seen WebKit add a radar tracking ticket for font loading behavior, so it seems likely Safari will be updating their style soon as well.

<comment><USER3> Showing nothing for 3 seconds beats just using the fallback and switching when the download finishes?

It's great you collected data, but I think the working hypothesis is flawed.

<comment><USER4> I would rather not have the fallback font as the font changing suddenly is jarring. It also can muck up spacing to quite a high degree. If for example you were at an anchor quite a distance down the page and then the entire page shifts.

I added a Feedback drawer to the top of my site. Javascript would determine the height of the drawer then set the top position equal to the inverse of it's height. That way the drawer was completely hidden.

However when a font was loaded the height of the drawer changes and then you've got it sticking down over of the top of the page.

These kinds of things are really frustrating. I'd like to see the page not display until the fonts are loaded and I'd like to see Chrome start shipping with some of the more common web fonts included.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> You know what's annoying? Having to wait for JavaScript to download before I can click on a menu.

You know what's annoying? Having to wait.

Waiting is annoying. But at the end of the day, a web without typography freedom is not a web I want, or would value. Especially since I remember what people did when they couldn't have web typography: save it as a _one-time use only_ image.

Sorry, you were saying something about speed?

<comment><USER6> > a web without typography freedom is not a web I want, or would value.

You wouldn't value a web without typographic freedom? That sounds pretty extreme. Are you a designer for whom the web is canvas, rather than a non- designer for whom the web is primarily a source of information?

I've been using the web for twenty years, and typographic freedom is fairly low on my list of priorities. But I'm not a designer.

<comment><USER5> I think in hast, my wording wasn't as specific as it should have been. My point is: I don't value the opinion that it is not important. Not when you see what happens without it. It's pure fallacy to suggest that web fonts are the problem - when the pressure should be on finding a creative way to resolve the issue (i.e. just display the next available in the font-family list until downloading is complete, or read-ahead meta data that includes kerning, width, height and size, so the layout can modulate well).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> The problem is font-loaders. All of them. At best, you've got an additional http request, at worst a javascript file loads, executes, authenticates and then generates yet another CSS file.

The solution is to make everything as legal as you can, then quietly embed the font files directly into your CSS as data:font urls.

</comment><comment><USER8> You know what is even more annoying?

The web is a regression in the art of typography; not a single browser proposed to stop all this absurdity such as pixel based measures. Not a web page respect the rules of typography, not a single font is "nice", we have to drop accents.

Typography are sets of rules that are well codified, but the we put the burden of enforcing typography not on the computer, but on web designer (line spacing for instance).

Web is WYSIWIG, it should be What You See Is What You Mean, and computers that have so many CPU power should do their job of automation and take care of the part of the presentation that is both hard and that can be automated: typography.

The web is archaic. A web page is just a stupid port of the stupid "physcical page with boxes in which you put content". The abstraction of web page is a shame compared to all we could provide: automatic versioning, true separation of the content and the styling (yes I think of latex or wiki), something to make bibliography when quoting an URL automatic and complete (who, (c), legal conditions for reusing, scientific informations, related articles...).

The web concept is conservative yet progressing irreversibly towards a de facto standard that brings less advantages than a pure paper system (think of the cost of conservation of the content over time and the cost of maintaining server operational+permalink).

At one point, we will have to erase data from the web, and the knowledge will be lost.

What will have been the benefit of internet when you see you can still consult the first book printed by Gutenberg

</comment><comment><USER9> In Firefox they can be disabled via the gfx.downloadable_fonts.enabled about:config switch. Unfortunately that will really highlight the accessibility nightmare that icon fonts are, as they don't display and have no alt-text like images.

I've also noticed that disabling JavaScript has a huge effect on some websites' speed. But other sites don't even work without it nowadays.

<comment><USER10> Regarding icon fonts:

I override all web fonts, I just want to use a readable one. There's a noticable trend with embedding icons in fonts. Yahoo mail uses them. This doesn't feel quite right, even if it is a neat hack, and it can be annoying.

How I view Yahoo mail: [http://postimg.org/image/unnwg0d9p/](http://postimg.org/image/unnwg0d9p/)

<comment><USER11> What's interesting to me is that even in that state, it is not difficult to understand what the menu item does, so why even bother with the icons?

<comment><USER10> Mail selection with Yahoo is tricky, but it's mostly usable. The current iteration is way better than it has been. (They've fixed back button integration. )

Google use a lot of buttons without text, using icons instead, which a lot of the time are background images. This lends to a lot of mystery meat navigation. Google+ is a bit of nightmare on that front for me.

I don't think my setup is that exotic, all I'm doing is trying to use consistent background and foreground colours, font and text size.

It's amazing how many sites seem to gloss over accessibility.

An instagram page: [http://instagram.com/p/ieluJhv-V7/](http://instagram.com/p/ieluJhv-V7/)

How it looks to me: [http://postimg.org/image/an1jbvf65/](http://postimg.org/image/an1jbvf65/)

Yup, pretty useless. I've never been able to use/see Instagram pictures without flipping between browsers!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> What's more annoying is that disabling HTTP referrers breaks virtually all hosted font services and results in absolute mess as nobody seems to care to test their designs with their actual fallback fonts.

</comment><comment><USER13> I haven't noticed it too much, but I agree a few design trends today have horrendous impact on UX.

My personal beef is anything that causes jerky or laggy scrolling. Usually it's caused by parallax and/or fixed fancy header of some sort.

The only parallax effect that I found truly functional was this page: [http://www.fiftythree.com/pencil](http://www.fiftythree.com/pencil)

</comment><comment><USER14> Speed is a very important feature of a website.

Content is next.

Way way down the list is presentation. Give me ascii text in Courier? That's fine. I'll read that while all the other guff loads in the background.

<comment> sTevo-In-VA [http://www.lowing.org/fonts/](http://www.lowing.org/fonts/)

I was just looking at this today and I agree, 'just give me courier'

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> I have a website[1] that uses web fonts[2]. I have found that if you host the fonts yourself and compress the font files using Font Squirrel's web font generator service, you can get fairly small font sizes. I'm using two font weights (regular and bold) and the total comes to 104kb. Admittedly, that's quite large for a mobile website, but I think it's acceptable for a desktop site.

I've found the font files served by Google fonts are quite large and this is probably because their fonts contain the entire character set. Font Squirrel strips out characters it thinks are not needed.

[1] [http://www.interfacesketch.com](http://www.interfacesketch.com) [2] The font I'm using [http://www.behance.net/gallery/ALEO-Free-Font- Family/8018673](http://www.behance.net/gallery/ALEO-Free-Font-Family/8018673)

<comment><USER16> That's incorrect. Google fonts subsets the font (default is latin). You can also limit the font to just the characters you want by appending &text=ABCDEF... to the URL. [1] They use other tricks to shrink the size of the font: WOFF2 is served to compatible browsers for further compression, and they remove unused hinting when they serve fonts to an OS X client. [2] Their caching and CDN are good too.

There are reasons not to use Google Fonts, but download size is not on that list.

[1] [https://developers.google.com/fonts/docs/getting_started#Opt...](https://developers.google.com/fonts/docs/getting_started#Optimizing_Requests)

[2] [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sqesm0euf9M](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sqesm0euf9M)

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> So use standard fonts. What you have to say will be impaired by Ariel? Give me a break. I'm reminded of all the 'research' that went into early half-tone printing (silk-screen) - where ink flows through variable-sized holes punched in a sheet to make newspaper-like pictures. Folks argued about what shape of hole to use (really!) Because square holes would bleed and the ink would make rounder dots on the paper. One guy determined if you put little round holes at the corners of the square holes, the dots were squarer. Why? What possible difference did it make?

That's what I think about fonts. Don't get in the way of reading == win. After that, its squarer dots.

</comment><comment><USER18> I detect mobile devices on the server and simply disable web fonts for them. You just don't need all that stuff on mobile.

</comment><comment><USER19> You know what's worse? Just try to use the option in firefox to "Allow pages to use own fonts" because, you know, you would like to read all pages with the freaking same font and font size you define in the browser options, and then just go to some random page like github and see all the broken stuff around without any icons.

I'm sorry that I have to say this and people will feel hurt and use their reasons, but don't use fonts to put images / icons on websites. Those are IMAGES, use that, please. Fonts are for text. Stop the madness.

</comment><comment><USER20> The instance that irks me the most is Fast Company, more specifically m.fastcompany.com. The subtitle that's highlighted in yellow loads the BG color before the font is loaded and line-height is calculated, so on mobile there's an empty yellow block that then separates and _then_ gets filled with text. For a site/magazine focused on design it's one of the uglier things I see on a regular basis.

</comment><comment><USER21> Looks like different browsers behave differently. [http://24ways.org/2010/using-the-webfont-loader-to-make- brow...](http://24ways.org/2010/using-the-webfont-loader-to-make-browsers- behave-the-same/) (edited)

</comment><comment><USER22> Especially noticeable when a site uses it as their main content font, rather than just titles. Countless times I've closed a tab before the font renders (hey, there's too much stuff to look at, not enough time waiting for web fonts to load!).

</comment><comment><USER23> Haven't noticed this recently but I did when I had a slower internet connection. But yeah, I was still on broadband when I was noticing the blank page problem.

</comment><comment><USER24> Some of the potential reasons that this is more annoying than usual (for Chrome users) right now are these bugs:

[https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=336170](https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=336170)

[https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=336879](https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=336879)

</comment><comment><USER25> To me the biggest problem is very complex websites that start downloading content after the page loads. For example, Facebook. Page loads, get displayed and only then it starts loading content, ads, navigation, etc. The second problem is super-slow scrolling. Only my new i7 laptop with 16gb of RAM can open Facebook smoothly.

</comment><comment><USER26> I notice it a lot on Digg.com on my iPad. The images show up sometimes 10+ seconds before the text! hurts my brain!

</comment><comment><USER27> >It is very frustrating when loading up a website and seeing a mostly blank page because the fonts are still downloading.

Yes, annoying, can confirm. So I load the page, and all I see are text decorations like underlines, but no text. I have to wait like 1.5-3 seconds, depending on the connection. I mean, seriously, come on!

</comment><comment><USER28> I always hated them! I spent endless hours making things load faster and the designers would always kill my effort by pushing Typekit. I think the average user cannot tell the difference anyway. I won't even mention how big our bills were at the last two large e-commerce properties we used Typekit!

</comment><comment><USER29> +1 - this is dreadful on the iPhone. There is surely some kind of sane fallback that could be used while it loads

</comment><comment><USER30> Hating is good. It allows you to think of improvements. But, hating without any solution is highly annoying.

I understand the fact that you prefer speed but just speed is not the only solution to effective web design. Typefaces play a very important role in the overall UX of any site.

<comment><USER31> Let's not kid ourselves. Web fonts are 80% about branding and 20% about usability - on a good day.

</comment></comment><comment><USER32> Is there a reason that the font fallbacks you've defined in your CSS don't get used by browsers while the prioritized fonts are being loaded? This will take care of the blank page problem wouldn't it? Are there any JS solutions out there for this?

<comment><USER33> That's how they used to work. However, it was just as jarring as the OP's complaint: the flash of unstyled content. You'd start reading something while the fonts downloaded. Suddenly, the whole page would jump and change as the new font (with its metrics, kerning, etc) are applied.

IIRC, Firefox waits a few seconds showing no text. If the font still isn't available, it resorts to fallback fonts and redraws the page if/once the font is actually downloaded.

</comment></comment><comment><USER34> A page being blank while the fonts are downloading is a browser bug. The user's default font should be displayed in the meanwhile, just like (I hope) it would be if the font link was broken.

<comment><USER35> That was initially the case, but it led to such a bad UX, that it had to be scrapped. Look for FOUT on the web.

</comment></comment><comment><USER36> Don't use too many fonts and embed them in css. The waiting time is roughly the same but the experience is better because you see all the styling at once.

</comment><comment><USER37> How well does Typekit implement those best practices?

</comment><comment><USER38> You can try ad-blocking font urls. (I've done this in the past to get rid of a hideous heading font on some apache site.)

</comment><comment><USER39> On mobile, it's the worst! I have to stare at a completely blank screen for several seconds while the fonts download.

</comment><comment><USER40> Digg.com is horrible for this. I can't believe that I see the images before the text.

</comment><comment><USER41> Do you have any examples of this? I haven't noticed this occurring.

</comment><comment><USER42> Hmm. I've never noticed such. Does anyone have any good examples?

</comment><comment><USER43> try data-uri's</comment>


Ask HN: Jaded? - <AUTHOR> Hi (throwaway for obvious reasons), I'd like to ask opinions on a situation where I'm just feeling horribly jaded with a large portion of the industry.
I've been working for a long time (over 20 years) in an array of industries (big four accounting, healthcare, small retail) and through consulting roles I've easily had exposure to over a hundred companies. And I'm having feelings about the industry I don't know how to address.
I recently noted this situation[0], and whilst I noted people were (rightfully) outraged, I was confused by the surprise. All I would think was "well that's every CTO ever, what's the shock here?".
I recently did a phone interview for a security role. When I mentioned to their "technical manager" that I had several CVEs I had found, he said "noone in real security cares about that" and went on to describe their penetration testing methodology, which meant basically reading out this disaster[1] word for word. My eyes glazed at that point and even after telling them I'm not interested, they've continued to pursue me. Likewise, a tech startup many of you may recognise approached me for a devops role. When I found out their production servers were whitebox desktops running Windows XP (and they strictly did not intend on changing that) I bailed.
These things are simply examples of the things I've been seeing for years, and I've gotten so jaded about how the average company carries themselves I just can't consider any role seriously any more. I find it incredibly difficult to talk to a hiring manager and not sit and scoff because I feel like I know what's coming. It's also a huge contrast to the world about online.
[0] https://www.reddit.com/r/cscareerquestions/comments/6ez8ag/accidentally_destroyed_production_database_on/
[1] https://serverfault.com/questions/293217/our-security-auditor-is-an-idiot-how-do-i-give-him-the-information-he-wants <comment><USER2> What separates the young from the old? Knowledge, wisdom, of how the sausage is made. I suggest that you look around for some legit hackers in their late 60s and older, and get to know them.

Older OLD hackers I know are super optimistic, like to make things, and are always learning.

Optimism from this point on is your challenge. I challenge you to be optimistic and do something with your experience, even if it's a hobby on the weekends and evenings.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for your response.

I completely agree with your points. I run two side projects (non-monetised) which keep me very entertained. I've attended security conventions (for which I take annual leave, and receive strict instructions never to let a client know) and overall I have a very optimistic attitude to what the industry is capable of.

These things absolutely get me through the day.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Would it be possible for you to somehow change your career at this point, or to somehow escape your environment? Jadedness is typically something that grows worse over time unless there is a significant change in your circumstances. (can be a mindset change too, but these are easier said than done)

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for your advice. I cannot see a complete career change working. Despite my misgivings, I'm paid well and have a heavy mortgage I could not manage if I were to become junior in a different field.

"Escaping the environment" in the form of moving to another city or country is certainly an option I need to consider.

<comment><USER3> It may seem a little silly but simply making changes to your routine can help. It's not necessarily the case here, but it's worth investigating whether frustration at work is indeed the root cause or a symptom of some other problem that has built up over time. I hope I don't come across as an armchair psychologist. It's just that my experience has shown me that my mindset can dramatically change based on factors that seem less important than they actually are (for instance, a little more exercise or a little more sleep) or factors that seem only distantly connected (in my case, jadedness was cured by taking up cooking classes).</comment></comment></comment>


Why Are Senior Female Scientists So Heavily Outnumbered by Men? - <AUTHOR> http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2008/05/why-are-senior.html

<comment><USER2> "It is not acceptable if women are forced to choose between a family and a career in science."

Why not? Since family has a price, how else could it work than having to make choices?

I don't want to pay for other people's children, cute as the little things are.

<comment><USER3> I could not help but thinking is she really that bad at logic and math, or does she think so little of her audience that we would let it pass?

Microscopic sample + delayed effect = no meaningful data.

PS: My sister was working as a plant geneticist for a while until she quit teaching yoga. Their might be an ongoing disparity but guessing from small samples is not enough.</comment></comment>


On Hobby Projects - <AUTHOR> https://firstname.lastname@example.com/on-hobby-projects-ddddde13f864 <comment><USER2> Liked this - no easy answer, but guess it's important for your company to understand the value of your projects to them - not just in $£ but in your personal development and training</comment>


A nice and easy solution if you need /etc/rc.local on a systemd machine - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/catinello/rc-local.service <comment><USER2> It's pointless.

An rc-local generator is already present in systemd.

* [https://github.com/systemd/systemd/tree/v233/src/rc-local-ge...](https://github.com/systemd/systemd/tree/v233/src/rc-local-generator)

rc.local is a double backwards compatibility mechanism, superseded _twice over_ on operating systems such as Ubuntu and Fedora, that is best forgotten about on systemd operating systems.

* [https://unix.stackexchange.com/a/247543/5132](https://unix.stackexchange.com/a/247543/5132)

* [https://unix.stackexchange.com/a/333003/5132](https://unix.stackexchange.com/a/333003/5132)

If one is going to all of the unnecessary effort of downloading an rc-local service unit from GitHub and installing it, one might as well just make a _proper_ service unit tailored to whatever one wants, straight off the bat. Or download such a service unit from GitHub and install _that_ instead.

* [http://jdebp.eu./FGA/systemd-house-of-horror/daemonize.html#...](http://jdebp.eu./FGA/systemd-house-of-horror/daemonize.html#first-rule)</comment>


HTC Vive Headset Nearing 100,000 Sales - <AUTHOR> http://www.roadtovr.com/htc-vive-sales-figures-data-100000-steamspy-data/ <comment><USER2> I said this in another thread, but if you haven't tried the Vive (or maybe Oculus with the Touch controllers, which are not generally available yet), then you haven't really tried VR.

Wearing a stereoscopic headset is one thing, but the presence that room-scale brings is just another thing altogether. I had tried Oculus demos at conferences and such, and I kinda started to think maybe VR was over-hyped.

Then I got my Vive on pre-order, put it on and went into the tutorial. There was a part where you can inflate balloons coming out of your perfectly-tracked controllers. I instinctively bonked one with a controller, and I FELT it (thanks to haptic feedback from the controller and diagetic sound). I basically forgot I was wearing a headset for the rest of the tutorial, I was present.

That's when it really clicked for me that this is happening this time. This is something new. I'm 100% convinced VR is the new medium going forward.

<comment><USER3> So you kinda thought VR was hyped, but it didn't stop you from ordering a Vive?

I think VR is incredibly hyped, just as it was 15 years ago.

What do you imagine this new medium replacing? Games? Movies? Monitors?

<comment><USER4> VR definitely hits games and porn pretty naturally, right now. Games like Hover Junkers are an example of great early execution in this medium.

I think VR movies are a still a bit off, though I could be totally wrong. The reason I say that is because some of the fundamental theories used in making a movie are different in VR. Namely, you can't be certain you know where the "camera" is. :) Also, VR movies require a lot of new and developing camera hardware and editing software to come along. There are some cool things out now but my understanding is it is all very new and developing. Ultimately, I still buy in on VR movies, though. I am a believer in VR movies mainly because of my own experience watching short films in VR was super cool but also from watching videos of people curled up in the fetal position as they were being shown some scary movie in VR. It's visceral in a way that has not been achievable up until now.

I also think AR well be a widely adopted medium and there might become a pretty gray distinction after a while. I could imagine headsets or glasses that you can increase or decrease how much external light comes through. I can see doing things like checking email, facebook, etc. being done in AR but still allowing you to go about your normal routine like making coffee and breakfast or walking the dog. Seems far more compelling than looking at notifications on my watch.

Eventually, I also suspect that we will be "mainlining" these experiences and not be wearing headsets at all. Implanting some device that directly stimulates the necessary parts of the brain (or other parts of the body needed).

<comment><USER5> _Namely, you can 't be certain you know where the "camera" is._

Aren't you assuming that they would allow the wearer to change the camera position?

You could film a movie or design a game such that the camera location is fixed or on rails. You're more like an observer than a participant.

Eg. Chronos and Edge of Nowhere

<comment><USER4> I would agree that my language was a bit loose but what I'm talking about still applies as long as the viewer can turn their head.

The main issue I was thinking about was that you cannot say for sure where your audience is looking at any moment in time.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I must say that having purchased both the Vive and the Oculus, my vote is for the Oculus:

\- easier to set up, the Vive requires these little captors placed at odd angles, that need to be powered and that make noise when powered

\- the oculus is lighter. I find the weight of the headset to be a major factor for not playing long periods, more than motion sickness, particularly given that some games require some weird viewing angles

\- the headset has less cables. I have the feeling of wearing an octopus with the vive

\- I regularly lose tracking on the vive for short moments (grey screens) even though the captors are in direct line of sight and less than 3m away

\- I have the feeling the vive is a lot blurier when looking at the sides of the screen. Not something one does when a zombie is trying to kill you, but certainly something one does when navigating menus

The only downsides of the oculus are:

\- vertical green line between the two eyes, very visible in a dark environment

\- the oculus pauses the game when I take off the headset. Except that I do that when a game is holding me hostage with some interminable, unskippable story telling instead of letting me play VR (too frequent!)

<comment><USER7> I've heard a lot of good things about the Oculus, especially the touch controllers.

My main experience demoing the dk2 around was that the first thing everyone did was try raising their hands in front of their face, and that motion sickness hit about 30% of people. The Vive fixes both of those problems, and they're first to market.

Still, facebook has deep pockets, and from everything I've heard their headset is better and their controllers are better. I can't wait to give them a try.

The next big thing that I want in VR is multiplayer.

<comment><USER2> There are actually already a bunch of pretty decent VR multiplayer games (at least for the Vive). Some of my favorites, on Steam:

Battledome, Rec Room, Hover Junkers

There's a bunch more, but these are the most polished, in my opinion. Battledome/Rec Room really shine because you can get right next to a person, wave at them, talk to them (built in mic on the Vive headset). It's super immersive and cool to be literally right next to a person that is maybe in another country.

<comment><USER7> I've tried Rec Room and I really like it. It's amazing how much fun it is to play with someone else.

It still seems like early days for multiplayer. There's no way to see other people's facial expressions, and the avatars are pretty basic. There's also no support for having a local multiplayer experience. Hololens is doing some interesting things, allowing multiple headsets to see the same holograms, but their hardware is still super limited. The void is also doing interesting things.

I guess I should have said that I want better multiplayer.

<comment><USER2> Oh for sure, these aren't even large studios, most of these are single developers working part-time after hours on them.

The Void's Ghostbusters game looks amazing. They are using custom hardware and a more expensive tracking technique, but it is an awesome example of a "VR- Arcade" sort of business.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> If you look at the Steam Hardware Survey [1] you will see that HTC Vive is "winning" two-to-one [2].

But sobering reminder of how far consumer-grade VR has to go: users with VR headsets are 0.15% of Steam's installed base.

[1] [http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey](http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey) Caveat: Participation is optional.

[2] Caveat: this assumes that all HTC Vive and Oculus Rift users are Steam users. Oculus has its own store.

<comment><USER9> Being backed by Valve, if the Vive wasn't winning on Steam something would be seriously wrong.

<comment><USER10> For more context, the default store on Oculus is Oculus Home, not Steam. Even so much as when you put a Rift on your head you are by default in Oculus Home.

<comment><USER11> That does not cancel the fact, that only a minority of desktop gamers do not have Steam constantly running on their PCs.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Given the audience here, I think it's worth a plug that web developers looking to develop VR experiences such as for the Vive should look into A-Frame ([https://aframe.io](https://aframe.io)), a WebVR framework.

<comment><USER13> I really like aframe, but I just has the feeling that for things like aframe, it would be similar to what the Web Apps has been experiencing: the performance will always a few steps behind the native alternative. Even for Vive/Rift, there's still vast space for improvement on the hardware/performance side, so I'd assume a long way before efforts like aframe.io to really take off.

<comment><USER14> Not all the VR experiences will be AAA games. There are plenty of mobile and desktop indie games that are engaging and don't require state of the art performance (see GearVR). Also WebVR content doesn't rely on traditional DOM rendering that it's the main bottle neck for web applications to feel smooth.

<comment><USER13> Yes, WebVR is more performant (many webpages struggle to achieve even 60fps). But minimum 90fps, at a much higher resolution is a challenge even running on bare metal right now. And that is needed for even the simplest VR experience (unless you don't move your head that much, but then what's the point of VR).

<comment><USER12> True, the 2D web may have had its performance issues, but the 3D web can actually be surprisingly performant. Browsers with the new WebVR API implementations can maintain high framerates starting with 90.

<comment><USER15> Even with a JIT and garbage collector? Because there's a difference between 90 FPS and "90 FPS, except when it stutters"...

I think the future of VR has a place for the web, but I'm skeptical there's a place for JavaScript. Good thing we'll have WebAssembly... eventually.

<comment><USER16> I'm running a DK2 on a GTX 660Ti and, now that there are more games that support VR, I'm starting to get those stutters. It breaks the experience _entirely._

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Somewhat related: Nintendo sold 770,000 units if their Virtual Boy in less than one year.

The Virtual Boy was nothing against the current VR products and for a Nintendo product a pretty mediocre one then, maybe their biggest product failure but they still did 770k units.

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

<comment><USER18> $179 in 1995 is about $280 today. [http://www.carinsurancedata.org/calculators/inflation/179/19...](http://www.carinsurancedata.org/calculators/inflation/179/1995)

Vive/Rift + desktop able to play it is close to $2k.

<comment><USER17> Good point and I agree that the Virtual Boy comparison is not perfect but two underlying questions remain:

1\. Will VR achieve mass adoption in the next 5 years considering the high costs for GPUs and screens with high pixel density?

2\. And if we get to a mass compatible price point, will VR be the killer medium the mass is looking for?

So, I still find the adoption rate of the Vive/Rift underwhelming and I do not see the high costs as the main reason. Millions of gamers invest in 3-4k rigs, why not in VR then? Those weak adoption rates might give a glance on the future--or if there will be any future--for VR.

<comment><USER19> 1\. GPUs certainly have halted in price.

2\. Mobile VR will probably be the vehicle for mass adoption. From what I remember GearVR has hit over a million units.

<comment><USER20> > 1\. GPUs certainly have halted in price.

I don't know about that one. The Nvidia 1080 GTX costs here in Europe around 750-800 Euros, that's what previously high end multi GPU cards have cost.

It's still a good price for the performance though.

<comment><USER19> Yes, but he entry level has halved in cost, rather than the upper levels.

<comment><USER20> But VR is more GPU intensive than playing on a 1080p monitor. From what I remember a Nvidia 970 GTX was recommended by Valve before the 1080 GTX was released which was pretty near highest end back then.

And many VR early adopters are now buying 1080 GTX to improve the often lacking frame rates.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> It's great that Vive has gained such traction (I personally contributed to that number), but I don't think VR has "hit it" yet. I think what Vive offers today is a good indicator of what would become the norm in VR in the next few years (assuming big companies keep pouring money in), when mass production of low cost equipment that provides experience similar to what Vive can do today. Low cost device + pretty good (but may not be the top notch) experience is what's needed for VR to really take off. Cardboard is trying to do that right now, but honestly it lacks a lot on the "pretty good experience" part.

<comment><USER2> Agreed, this is the iPhone 1 right now (like when it was $500), only early adopters / fans / developers will grab the higher end systems for now (although, the PSVR coming out later this year might change that a bit). But those people will show their friends and they'll start watching and then Gen 2 comes out, cheaper and better, and it takes off.

Cardboard/Gear (to some extent) is like a flip-phone for VR. Without positional tracking, it barely qualifies as VR imo, and honestly one of my fears is that people will try Cardboard/GearVR and assume that is all that VR is and will be turned off.

I think these large companies will continue to throw money into this for a while, hell look at all the news last week from HTC.

<comment><USER21> The problem with this comparison is that the iPhone 1 was supplanting phones that could do little more than call or text. It could do _at least_ those things so there was no loss (except for monetary) to buying an iPhone over maintaining the status quo. Eventually the tech got better and better and the value of the phone shot way up against its price.

But a VR system needs software and is useless without it. If there aren't many users, they're not going to get software. If there's no software, no one's going to buy more units. If people don't buy the units, the manufacturers won't eat the cost to continue making them. Then we're back to square one.

If manufacturers really want this to work, they either need to pour tons of money into first party development or developers need to charge a lot more money for the games. I don't see either of these things happening, so I'm not holding out much hope for this generation of VR either.

<comment><USER19> You could argue the poor battery life and lack of third party apps as a significant detractor.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> I don't see why anyone would buy an Oculus over a Vive. The software support for the Vive is just so much better on Steam. Additionally, the majority of PC gamers prefer Steam and it only makes sense they would want all of their VR games and traditional games to be under one service.

I really don't see how Oculus will even be relevant in VR games in about 2-3 years especially once the VR headset is commoditized.

<comment><USER23> Because the Oculus headset works on Steam games, but the Vive doesn't out of the box work with Oculus Home. You can make it work, but it's not quite official. The Rift is also a little bit more comfortable and people seem to the think the display is generally better.

The real reason not to buy the Oculus is because there aren't motion tracked controllers for it yet. There also isn't a lot of room scale experience out there with Oculus so it's not totally clear how it's going to compare when the touch controllers are available.

Early reports sound positive, but early reports are early. The potential for the Rift seems a little greater. Oculus Touch controllers look like they are going to be a real nice piece of kit.

Disclaimer. I went with the Rift because it was more comfortable and I had no problem waiting for motion tracked controllers.

<comment><USER24> "Because the Oculus headset works on Steam games, but the Vive doesn't out of the box work with Oculus Home. You can make it work, but it's not quite official. The Rift is also a little bit more comfortable and people seem to the think the display is generally better."

What? Why would you want Vive to make it work with Oculus Home? Isn't that like saying you want your Android phone to visit Apple's App Store?

Vive works with Steam and I think that's more than adequate. And Vive works with Steam games too, so not sure why you said your first sentence.

<comment><USER25> This metaphor is dangerous. One potential future for VR is one where Oculus (or Rift) and Vive are two separate platforms, like smartphones. Some overlap in releases, but in general, no compatibility.

The other future is one where your VR device is a replacable peripheral, like a screen or a keyboard. It's absurd to think you'd have to double-check whether the game you want to play supports Dell monitors.

One of these futures is better for consumers, and I'd wager it's the second.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> I've held off on the VR sets because, imho, the games are just not there yet. My decision turns on one thing: I want a proper flightsim. Not mariocart in the sky. I'm talking JanesF15 with a fully interactive cockpit. I want to be able to look over my own shoulder and see a wing. I want to look left and see the runway I'm about to turn onto. The day that happens, then the VR headset will be the least of my purchases. Pedals, a throttle suite ... perhaps a special chair. Until then, inflating balloons and riding roller coasters just won't win me over.

I don't see why this hasn't happened yet. Flightsims, which lock the player into a chair anyway, would seem the perfect vehicle for VR.

<comment><USER27> There are a couple of flight sims available for VR now: DCS world, MS Flight Sim X (with a 3rd party add-on) and War Thunder.

<comment><USER28> Last I checked War Thunder didn't work for Vive, or possibly it was that making it work took hours of messing with stuff. Same story for FSX I believe.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> VR is great but making any decent 3D model or environment requires enormous amount of labor. Without better tools I don't see VR being used for anything but games since you'll need to throw huge teams and many hours at making anything decent. Most (all?) VR apps and games I've used look like shit.

<comment><USER30> Well, in our group we just started (academic) research testing out possibilities to bring data analysis, visualization and remote collaboration to VR (Vive).

I'm quite curious whether this will work out and what the future will hold for us.

<comment><USER31> I, for one, am waiting for GitS style chat rooms:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=poKi7YyuamI](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=poKi7YyuamI)

<comment><USER32> Isn't AltspaceVR or Oculus Social or vTime or JanusVR this? I mean, I'm pretty sure I saw an exact replica of this scene in JanusVR.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> I recently watched the Arizona Cardinals documentation that is on Amazon Prime video (iirc it's called "All or Nothing" but searching for "Cardinals" finds it). It's excellent. The most interesting thing for me was that 5 NFL teams seem to be using VR to learn the playbook/go through scenarios. The Cardinals are one of them and it was a Rift. Unfortunately that sequence lasted about 5 minutes (don't remember which episode it was but probably across the midpoint).

Technically the Vive would have been a better choice as the room feeling is exactly what you want but I guess FB are pretty good at customer acquisition/signing big name contracts.

</comment><comment><USER34> I'll buy one when I can have a room full of xterm windows.

<comment><USER35> Check out Virtual Desktop

<comment><USER34> That just draws a desktop onto a big texture. Plus it only runs on Windows.

<comment><USER36> [http://fuscus.li](http://fuscus.li) Does free-floating windows. But, it's quite pre-alpha.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> I've tried the Rift DK2 and the Vive Developer Edition. What I've found is that VR just isn't there yet; it's too much of a hassle for there to be a critical mass of consumers willing to purchase a headset. The HMDs are very much alpha tests - if you're into VR, wait for the Vive 2nd generation to come out that hopefully works out the kinks (unless you have a ton of spending money).

Haven't seen the Rift CV1 but I know that the Vive, for me, still has the "screen door" effect. Until that goes away I'll always be reminded that I'm in a digital world - after all, I can see the pixels.

</comment><comment><USER38> Ever since I accidentally fell asleep in an Alcatraz prison cell[1] while being Vive's room-scale VR, I started to appreciate my carpet on a whole new level.

[1]realities.io [http://store.steampowered.com/app/452710/](http://store.steampowered.com/app/452710/)

</comment><comment><USER27> I had both the Rift (got it because I was an original Kickstarter backer) and the Vive. The roomscale of the Vive together with the tracked controllers adds a lot to the immersion and that was the reason why the Vive is the one I kept.

In general the differences between the systems are overblown, you'll have a good experience with both.

</comment><comment><USER39> Before VR makes any real headway in the regular Joe Consumer market, it must come down in price dramatically.

The actual VR hardware itself isn't entirely unreasonably priced. But, when combined with some beefy backend hardware, it's approaching "unreasonable" territory.

</comment><comment><USER40> Is 100,000 a big number or a small one? Kinect sold 10 million units in the first three months (that's 133,000 a DAY). But it was half the price and didn't need such a strong PC - then again there is more PCs then xBoxes.

<comment><USER27> It's a good start for a $800 device, nothing more, nothing less.

Mass adoption on an iPhone scale will require a couple of iterations with improvements in performance, quality, software and price.

</comment></comment><comment><USER41> Vive is so much better an experience than Oculus. I've tried the Vive version they were demoing to the public last year, and the current consumer Oculus. Presumably, the new Vive is better, but the version I tried was better then the actual consumer Oculus. That comes as a tremendous relief to me, as I'd never, ever buy into the Facebook VR walled garden. It's too bad Carmack had to join Oculus, but whatever, just glad there's a better alternative.

</comment><comment><USER42> Steamspy is highly inaccurate, but I do think Vive sales are generally healthy, and it seems like they are making them about as fast as they can be sold now. It has enough of an install base for quality content to make it onto the top 10 list when they launch, as Pool Nation VR did a few weeks ago. The general public still has not tried VR (barring maybe cardboard) and a very vocal group is against the very idea of it. Still a pretty steep mountain to teleport up.

<comment><USER43> Game developer here: SteamSpy's data is actually very accurate. We have a game on Steam and the actual sales figures are well within the error margins specified on the site. And other local devs has said the same about their games as well.

</comment></comment><comment><USER44> Vive and Oculus are both first-generation, early-adopter versions of VR. As such, arguing about which is "better" is unwarranted or at least premature. They are both capable learning and demoing tools. Neither one, as v1 offerings, will reach the mainstream. In fact, it is possible that neither will become the dominant consumer VR platform.

</comment><comment><USER45> I demoed the vive in-store and attempted to pop the balloon I was given (which resulted in a loud clap of the two controllers -- thsnkfully they designed for bumps like this). Now I keep thinking of ways to play with the tiny area of space (apart from just teleporting). I want to dev for one so bad.

</comment><comment><USER46> Searched for places to try Vive without spending $800 + PC cost: [http://www.digitaltrends.com/virtual-reality/where-to-try- ht...](http://www.digitaltrends.com/virtual-reality/where-to-try-htc-vive/)

select MS Stores and GameStop

<comment><USER47> That link is missing Waterloo, Ontario's Ctrl-V VR arcade [1]. I went with a friend, it's affordable and fun.

[1] [http://www.ctrlv.ca/](http://www.ctrlv.ca/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER48> The more I look at these numbers in the tech world the more I see the huge divide in humanity. Even if they have sold 10 million units it's still a fraction of a water drop of the sea of humanity, more than frigging 7 billion.

100k is just 0.0014 % of humanity who got a Vive.

Bubbles, bubbles everywhere.

<comment><USER49> I'm not sure I follow your point. Your statement could be applied to when the internal combustion engine was first used in transportation.

</comment></comment><comment><USER50> I don't see a near future where the Vive is something I'll invest in, purely because I don't have the physical space to dedicate to it (not even temporarily).

<comment><USER51> I've tried the Vive and it is very cool, but I do wonder how much physical space will be an issue for its take-up in the UK. We've got a decent size house by UK standards (4 double bedrooms and 3 reception rooms), but, with two kids, I really can't think of anywhere that we could sensibly put one.

</comment></comment><comment><USER52> I'll just leave this here

[https://youtu.be/KrcMvjAOTFE?t=33](https://youtu.be/KrcMvjAOTFE?t=33)

</comment><comment><USER53> I own a Firefly VR headset which I bought for $60. It works great for 360 videos on youtube and some games. The best part is it uses my phone and has a small wireless remote for navigating and making selections.

I don't understand the whole hype with Vive/Oculus. I know they are a beast compared to cheap VRs but requirement of gaming pc, strangling wires etc sets me off.

<comment><USER54> There are a lot of psychological factors that go into tricking the brain into "being present" in the VR space. When you use that $60 VR headset your seeing neat VR technology but your brain is never tricked. There is tons of research on this going back to the 70's. The Vive / Oculus is basically the first time we are getting close at this price point. There is still a ton of hardware and software work needed. For example seeing a fake body in VR takes you out but seeing your hands 100% tracked makes takes you back in.

</comment></comment><comment><USER55> I know that this is completely superficial, but I really wish I could have a Vive in Rift's industrial design. Part of me can't even get past the look of Vive. I know, when I'm using it I'm not seeing the outside. However, knowing what's strapped to my face just seems a little gaudy.

<comment><USER35> Good hand tracking is a total game-changer though. I suppose you could wait for Oculus Touch.</comment></comment>


You Will Totally Work for This Start-Up - <AUTHOR> http://mediamemo.allthingsd.com/20110517/you-will-totally-work-for-this-start-up

<comment><USER2> My favorite part is the subtle Blackberry notification sounds throughout the video.

</comment><comment><USER3> No brandcuffs!</comment>


A Brief Glance at How Various Text Editors Manage Their Textual Data - <AUTHOR> http://ecc-comp.blogspot.com/2015/05/a-brief-glance-at-how-5-text-editors.html

<comment><USER2> Wow, great work.</comment>


Samsung to Seek Block on iPhone in Europe  - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/06/technology/samsung-to-seek-block-on-iphone-in-europe.html?pagewanted=all

<comment><USER2> If Samsung's IP was really that strong - if they really have patents "essential" to wireless communications - then my first question is why they allow any competitors.

Florian Mueller makes a reasonable case that Samsung is trying to assert a very different kind of patent in a highly unusual way - [http://fosspatents.blogspot.com/2011/10/samsungs-attempt- to-...](http://fosspatents.blogspot.com/2011/10/samsungs-attempt-to-ban- iphone-4s-over.html). TLDR: these kind of patents fall under the FRAND (fair reasonable non-discriminatory framework) and Samsung is obligated to grant them to anyone ("non-discriminatory") that wants them for a "reasonable" fee. To press an injunction without any arbitration violates the basic spirit of FRAND. Agree with their case or not, Apple's patents in question do not have these restrictions.

<comment><USER3> Because basically everyone has patents "essential" to something their competitors do. So there's been a broad detente in the industry, where no one sues indiscriminately on patents as a way to block their competitors. Except that Apple broke the truce, so now out come the guns. Yawn. I find it hard to believe that either side is really going to impede the other's sales much; this is a play for better negotiating position by Samsung.

And yes, Apple was wrong to have shot first.

<comment><USER4> "So there's been a broad detente in the industry... Except that Apple broke the truce... Apple was wrong to have shot first"

Apple shot first in the mobile industry the same way Greedo did.

[http://news.cnet.com/8301-27076_3-20073471-248/a-brief- histo...](http://news.cnet.com/8301-27076_3-20073471-248/a-brief-history-of- apples-mobile-tech-patent-battles/)

<comment><USER3> Way, way out of scope. I was talking specifically about Apple and Samsung. That they got sued earlier by Nokia doesn't make it OK to go after other vendors, sorry. And yes, Nokia was wrong too.

<comment><USER4> "I was talking specifically about Apple and Samsung."

previously on HN:

"broad detente in the industry"

I call shenanigans.

<comment><USER3> Indeed. It looks pretty bad when you selectively quote and drop the stuff I said about Samsung. Please. This site should be better than that. Frankly I don't even see where you disagree with anything I said. Apple sued Samsung in a high stakes bit of asshattery, and Samsung did the same. You think either of those is a _good_ thing?

<comment><USER4> "drop the stuff I said about Samsung."

Your stuff is right there, I parsed the quote I originally responded to that made it clear you were very clearly _not_ originally talking about a specific case -- a "broad detente in the industry" that Apple was the first to violate. Saying after the fact that you were only talking about Samsung is moving the goalposts. Maybe we don't disagree there but I'm hardly wrong for pointing out what I did when I did.

"You think either of those is a good thing?"

I think Nokia had many innovations that Apple infringed on and Apple probably deserved to be sued by Nokia and they paid up. I certainly don't remember anyone crying about how Nokia started "high stakes asshattery" in that case. Apparently it's only when Android vendors are the target of lawsuits that people get up in arms.

I think Samsung comes very close to if not crossing the line of infringement and Apple has the right to test that in court. You call this "high stakes asshattery" but you can just as easily make the case that Samsung is the asshat for blatant copying.

I think Samsung (like Nokia) has many technologies that Apple may infringe on. Based on limited evidence we've seen it's not as compelling as Nokia's but they have the right to test this in court or leverage it for a settlement or whatever.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> From what I'm reading, it seems like Samsung is trying to use FRAND patents in their injuction against Apple which I thought is a big no-no.

[http://fosspatents.blogspot.com/2011/10/samsungs-attempt- to-...](http://fosspatents.blogspot.com/2011/10/samsungs-attempt-to-ban- iphone-4s-over.html)

<comment><USER6> This blogs is anti-google and anti-android and he constantly paints the google side as the losing one even though he got proven wrong many times. No wonder he did it again today. Samsung isn't just using FRAND patents in this lawsuits. The majority of the patents Samsung claimed in their lawsuit weren't.

> Also, Samsung can sue Apple if Apple is unwilling to pay which they aren't. > The correct route (going by what I've read) to license FRAND patents would > be: negotiate on price; if negotiations fail go to court to determine a fair > price; if still the infringer doesn't want to pay seek an injunction and > forced payment. (from > [http://www.reddit.com/r/Android/comments/l1jcu/samsung_seeks...](http://www.reddit.com/r/Android/comments/l1jcu/samsung_seeks_iphone4s_sales_ban_in_italy_and/c2p32cy))

Also, a few years ago, Nokia sued Apple based on wifi FRAND patents, how did it end up? With a settlement in favor of Nokia. If FRAND patents were impossible to enforce, do you think it would have ended with a settlement?

<comment><USER7> >Also, a few years ago, Nokia sued Apple based on wifi FRAND patents, how did it end up? With a settlement in favor of Nokia. If FRAND patents were impossible to enforce, do you think it would have ended with a settlement?

It's not that FRAND patents are impossible to enforce. Nokia sued Apple after neither side could get an agreement about the licensing terms. Apple held that the terms Nokia was demanding were not fair. That was the entire reasoning about the suits.

At the end of the day, it was not about whether or not Apple would pay Nokia. That was a foregone conclusion. The entire suit was over how much Apple would pay.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Seems that Apple decided to live by the sword so it might die by it, depressing to watch such waste

<comment><USER9> This comment frames it in a way that makes it sound like Apple is going to suffer some negative consequences solely because it asserted its own patent rights.

Companies like Microsoft and Nokia collect royalties from companies like Apple and others by threat of patent litigation. By which I am suggesting that the "sword" falls on everyone, not just those who wield it themselves. Thus, it may be true that Apple wielded the sword and also true that Samsung is wielding it against Apple, but we cannot assert that companies who don't wield the sword won't find it wielded against them.

I suggest that the underlying problem with the patent situation in a field as complex as technology is that since every non-trivial product seems to infringe on a non-trivial number of patents owned by a wide range of practising and non-practising entities, _everyone_ ends up dying by the sword.

Some pay by the month and die slowly, some resist and may face a more sudden demise.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Such a terrible waste of time and money, yet you start a fire and it may well burn you.

<comment><USER11> With Apple's bank I don't think this is just about money. Since the beginning of these lawsuits I felt Jobs was personally offended. This may be because he felt backstabbed by Google or that OEM's were copying his creations at a faster rate than he could innovate.

Regarding the article, I couldn't less what goes on between these companies. I only care about major court decisions. What I'm more interested in is the lawsuit regarding Motorola and Apple's multitouch patents.

<comment><USER10> I have severe difficulty with the idea that's actually what's happening here, the iphone was nothing new when it came out and the good parts of it were assimilated into pretty much everything after it, and the better phones that came out after that point continued to beat the iphone in the feature and performance war generally speaking, it seems to me that apple got annoyed that the usability improvements that they made ended up being so trivial in the grand scheme of things and were/are unable to compete with the pace of evolution in the marketplace so wanted to try and force a result in the courtroom.

For this, I think they deserve what they're getting here.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Samsung previously said they would try this the moment it was released so far from a surprise. Big waste in time and money.

</comment><comment><USER13> Fight fire with fire.

</comment><comment><USER14> Apple has no one to blame by themselves. Instead of focusing so much on lawsuits, they should've focused on launching the new iPhone on time, and also on launching a real successor to the iPhone 4.

This is like US starting a nuclear war with China because "they stole their jobs", and then when China sends some nukes back, they realize that maybe they shouldn't have done that. Plus, it ends up destroying its own economy financing a huge war, too, and focuses more and more on the war instead of economical growth.

<comment><USER15> > This is like US starting a nuclear war with China because "they stole their > jobs"

This is more than a bit of a stretch. Apple has indeed launched a new iPhone 4 successor on time, so I'm not sure where you're trying to go with your argument.

What indicates to you that Apple is using ALL of their financial resources to go after Samsung?</comment></comment>