Programming Language Checklist - <AUTHOR> https://famicol.in/language_checklist.html <comment><USER2> When I was younger, I imagined there would come along a true language that would solve my problems.

It took me a long time (and a lot of banging my head into bad environments) to realize that language matters a lot less when the IDE is well-configured and fluent with what I want to do, the toolchain allows for experimentation without ruining the ability to do large, collaborative work, and both debugging and profiling are possible. And those are things you can't really add to a language environment when the language itself (spec and implementation) is constantly in flux.

Maybe a language will appear one day that renders all those tools obsolete, but we still evaluate and run code on real machines and it's still written by human beings so I sincerely doubt it.

<comment><USER3> > when the language itself (spec and implementation) is constantly in flux.

Common Lisp and Clojure are legendary for their stability. So many times I have experienced it myself - I would pick up a 5-6 year old Clojure project, update a bunch of dependencies, and somehow most things work right off the bat. That trick never worked for me with pretty much any other language - C#, Java, Python, Ruby, Go, Lua, Javascript - you name it.

Why is that? Probably because Lisp dialects essentially have no syntax. Code is data and data is code.

<comment><USER4> I thought Common Lisp is stable because the standard is unchanged since its publication in 1994.

Lisp dialects have a lot of syntax. Every macro implements syntax.

<comment><USER3> Macros don't get written very often. Some Lispers (e.g.: Clojurists) advocate against solving problems with macros (if they can be solved with regular functions). However, at the end of the day, macro or a function - data remains data. In non-lispy languages syntax often complects meaning and order.

<comment><USER4> > Macros don't get written very often.

It's not how often you write macros. Just write ten macros -> ten syntax extensions. The Common Lisp implementation I use has around 700 predefined external macros.

> against solving problems with macros (if they can be solved with regular > functions).

It's just that macros are for different things and for those are widely used in Lisp.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I've loved this list for a long time. It's a play on the old spam solution checklist: [https://craphound.com/spamsolutions.txt](https://craphound.com/spamsolutions.txt) .

</comment><comment><USER6> > [ ] Syntax is what makes programming difficult

I'd love to see language design and language development treated as different disciplines.

Just like developers were the first web designers, developers have been the first language designers.

Ideally a language designer would only be tasked with how to express complex ideas in a simple, composable syntax.

Language developers would be tasked with everything else: basically making those ideas work as efficiently and consistently as possible.

Not to say a language designer and developer can't be the same person, but I think there might be some benefit to having a linguist (with some understanding of development) and a developer (with some understanding of linguistics) team up on a new language.

<comment><USER7> > a linguist (with some understanding of development)

Your wish has been granted: Larry Wall, Perl 6.

<comment><USER8> Please note that Perl 6 has been renamed to Raku ([https://raku.org](https://raku.org) using the #rakulang tag on social media).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER2> "The name of your language makes it impossible to find on Google"

\--> [ ] Google has made its own language with a name near to yours and has stolen all the search results from you

<comment><USER9> I don't think Google needs to steal a language name. They fuck it up and create a non-searchable name just as well on their own.

<comment><USER10> GP may be referencing the Go! programming language, which predates the Go programming language by several years.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Go!_(programming_language)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Go!_\(programming_language\))

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Of course, every successful language could be roasted with this, too.

It's a cute post but if there were a simple checklist for creating a successful language, every language designer would just do that.

<comment><USER12> Bjarne Stroustrup, creator of C++, is often quoted with this statement: "There are only two kinds of languages: the ones people complain about and the ones nobody uses."

I suppose, scathing criticism in that respect is the highest form of praise.

<comment><USER13> If you're not making anybody angry, you're not doing anything important.

<comment><USER14> But making people angry doesn't imply that you're doing something important though.

<comment><USER13> Well yeah, it's necessary but not sufficient. ;)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> > [ ] You have reinvented Javascript but worse

> [ ] You have reinvented PHP but worse

I'm trying to think of languages that would fit that bill. That almost sounds like a challenge.

<comment><USER16> Brainfuck [0], Whitespace [1] and INTERCAL [2] come to mind :)

Of course, one could argue none of these are 'serious' programming languages.

\---

[0]: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whitespace_(programming_langua...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whitespace_\(programming_language\))

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

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

<comment><USER17> > [ ] You have reinvented Brainfuck but non-ironically

:)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> FWIW, here's some IMO interesting and maybe even good advice "on language design":

Frank Atanassow, "Some words of advice on language design"

[http://lambda-the-ultimate.org/node/687#comment-18074](http://lambda-the- ultimate.org/node/687#comment-18074)

</comment><comment><USER19> > Shift-reduce conflicts in parsing seem to be resolved using rand()

Ha!

</comment><comment><USER20> Is there anybody who would argue against:

\- everything is an expression

\- destructuring

\- support for higher order functions

Those seem to be universally loved features that new programming languages are required to have in order to still be appealing.

<comment><USER21> While I personally agree with you, I know that some people really hate 'everything is an expression', especially when assignment is treated as an expression. This has been a very controversial addition to Python 3 for example.

I would also mention that support for higher order functions, in the sense of functions which take other functions as arguments, is eevn possible in C. I think a much more important feature that is only recently becoming mainstream is support for lambdas. Support for HoF without lambdas is relatively worthless in my opinion.

<comment><USER22> Loops are not expressions in python.

<comment><USER21> Many things are not expressions in Python. My point was that the community is hostile to making (some of) them expressions, as was seen with the controversy over adding := as an assignment expression (so you can do `if x:=y`, for example).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> Has there really been only one big thread? [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6784085](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6784085)

Edit: well, there's also this: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7836410](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7836410)

Can anybody track down the year this was written?

<comment><USER24> Looks like it goes back to at least November, 2011:

[https://web.archive.org/web/20111103024132/http://colinm.org...](https://web.archive.org/web/20111103024132/http://colinm.org/language_checklist.html)

<comment><USER2> It's older than that. I won't say how I know, but bits and pieces of this were tumbling around in the undergrad hivemind of a certain Pittsburgh university for awhile before 2011. ;)

<comment><USER25> I remember seeing it back when I was interested in programming language design. I lost interest around 2010 (after concluding largely what the checklist was getting at, that there's no point developing a new programming language), so that would put it in the 2005-2010 period.

Ironically, most of the languages I've used in the last 5 years (Swift, Rust, Kotlin) post-date that period, so I was wrong in my conclusion.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> I got an idea for a language where the code in the file format is some intermediary language, which you write with an editor plugin that makes it more human-readable.

The editor plugin (in contrast to existing language plugins) also translates the error msgs back to the human-readable code.

Just an idea, but I could not get it to fit in the questionaire :)

<comment><USER27> Have you heard of Unison? If not, it may interest you -- it stores code in a syntax tree rather than as text directly.

[https://www.unisonweb.org/](https://www.unisonweb.org/)

>Unison is a language in which programs are not text. That is, the source of truth for a program is not its textual representation as source code, but its structured representation as an abstract syntax tree.

It has some further goals for doing this which are really exciting to me, such as content-addressable code, but the starting point is similar to the one you stated. :)

<comment><USER26> Interesting indeed! Thanks for pointing this out.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> >> You appear to believe that: Syntax is what makes programming difficult

This is exactly the problem. People spend so much effort looking for better syntax that they miss the most important part of programming. It's about design and structure, the syntax doesn't really matter at all. I don't even care if it's dynamically typed or statically typed or functional or not. A bad developer will produce bad code no matter the language is. I've seen this over and over.

It's not so different from human languages. It doesn't matter what the language is; if you know it well enough, you can write a great novel with it... But only if you're a good author to begin with.

A bad author is not going to start learning French because they couldn't write a successful novel in their native English... Instead, they will work on their storytelling because they know that they are at fault, not the language.

I've written code in many languages and I can produce good software with any of them. The language I'm most familiar with is the one which allows me to work faster, but it has basically no effect on quality of the code.

For example, in the past, I've written Golang code after learning it a couple of days before for a job interview and the interviewer (a well known developer and founder of a popular startup at the time) commented that it was one of the best designed/structured samples he has seen. It took me a long time to write it because I had to look up stuff all the time but it seems to have had little effect on the quality of the code.

People have to stop blaming tools and start blaming themselves. It takes over a decade of intense work (nights and weekends too) of constant self-blaming and adjustments to become good at coding. That's if you have natural talent for it. If you're not a natural then you have to be even more patient.

<comment><USER29> > the syntax doesn't really matter at all.

Somehow it does though: I find even j/k/apl easier to parse in my head than Ruby; somehow the ruby syntax gives me a headache. Not sure why that is, as I wrote a lot of code in it, but I find Python, C#, F#, Haskell or Kotlin far nicer to read and write. And, even though I understand the semantics and can write code in Ruby, if I have a choice, I would never touch it again. And that's only syntax/idioms. I find JS also quite rancid syntactically, but not as repulsive as Ruby.

And I know other people have this with different (or the same) languages as well; like someone else said, most people (even on HN) won't even try languages with a 'weird' syntax, even if they are proven to be more productive in some cases relevant to them. I know quite a lot of Lisp-y coders (most of them do Clojure these days) and they don't understand how/why you would ever use anything else. Most people here (maybe including you) have the inverse of that. As there are blazingly fast Lisp/Schemes on every platform, why are you using Go or another syntax than the basic AST? And yet you are and most of us are. If syntax does not matter, why have any syntax at all?

<comment><USER30> Yeah for sure this is a big thing. I love Ruby's syntax and if I could, I'd love to write in it all day if I was being paid the same amount as another language. Psychology is also at play. JavaScript I agreed can be quite rancid. But knowing it's the only language that works in every browser, I internally whined about it less and now rarely do at all.

<comment><USER29> I do not really whine about it (except when people are talking about it as I do feel it's important to have and hear different opinions) and of course JS is currently a necessary evil. Thinking about that too much makes no sense and serves no purpose, but when I step back, I know I just really don't like it. And then I just get back to coding. With Ruby I have a harder time doing that. Guess it's taste and 'first experience'; my first Ruby experience was inheriting a very large, badly written (very hacky) RoR codebase I had to migrate 2 versions up to the latest RoR. It was pure hell. So it would be a combination of things that gives me such PTSD for syntax.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> This checklist comes across as incredibly ignorant. We push forward with research into all kinds of things, processors, hardware, mathematics, etc. The fact that PLT should somehow be exempt is silly. New languages coming out that do something different are a testing ground for features, some will become popular, most won't.

Sometimes there is a real advantage to writing real world applications in some particular language. Maybe you are writing something that needs to be performant, safe, and low level, so Rust is an attractive option. Maybe you are writing web front-ends and you see the benefit of a type system like what's available in Typescript. There are lots of reasons not to just write everything in C or Java. Don't be sour because we aren't all using the same language for 50 years; we've made advancements in computer science and that's reflected in our tools.

<comment><USER32> Woosh

This is satire of HN, not an actual checklist

<comment><USER33> I think GP gets it. This checklist does a great job making several different valid points, and at the heart of them seems to be the fact that there is no Perfect Language. Discovering this checklist helped me a ton back when I was turning down language after language for silly reasons. For example, I'm glad I gave Rust a chance this past month, despite dismissing it a few years ago.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> Making a language is fun, and builds your skills. I'd rather work with a person who has made a bad language than someone who has never made one.

Don't make fun of people for making languages.

<comment><USER35> This checklist is, to my eyes, making fun of people who make fun of languages.

<comment><USER34> Well, if that's the case, I can do you one better.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> Criticism of Typed FP seems to be the main focus of this as most of it's criticisms seem to be at the top of the list. I think it's partly justified, typed FP has been cargo culted to the point where I've seen hello world implementations that definetely were not obvious and required a PhD in category theory. That said I've seen a ton of python code that took monumentous effort to get working at runtime, and broke unpredictably in production too...

</comment><comment><USER37> dear C, unfortunately you lack: a memory safe compilation mode for gcc and clang, non-clunky syntax for iterators and abstractions

dear python3, unfortunately you lack: print statement, fast/any type checking, concurrency, speed

dear java/golang/javascript et al., unfortunately you lack: named parameters, default parameters, predictable performance

dear nearly everyone except ada/oberon/et al., unfortunately you lack: sensible numeric types/subtypes and ranges

</comment><comment><USER38> > You appear to believe that: [ ] Nobody really needs: [ ] concurrency [ ] a > REPL [ ] debugger support [ ] IDE support [ ] I/O [ ] to interact with code > not written in your language

This is funny for general purpose languages, but doesn't seem relevant for specialised languages. I wish the checklist clearly stated that it targets general purpose languages.

<comment><USER2> I think the joke-inside-the-joke is the assumption that every language seeks to be a GP language. Which is not true, but sure tends toward truth as time approaches infinity.

</comment></comment><comment><USER39> Is there a formula to follow the checklist? Like some kind of directed graph in the background?

<comment><USER40> The checklist is a valid, but not very good, brainfuck program, simply execute it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER41> Man, I so need something like this filled out for Blazor, but since it's not expressly a language, it doesn't quite fit. Been arguing against it for a while, half the new projects (from other teams) where I work are using it.

<comment><USER42> My mates a 'die hard' C# fan and has been using it (almost exclusively) for over 15 years. Recently he's been talking about Blazor a lot, and having worked on a few web apps myself, I can see its general appeal.

Why don't you like it? I've not read any anti-Blazor opinions.

<comment><USER41> First off, I'm not really against it in concept... about my only real complaint is the latency for server actions over the internet is rather painful (look at devexpress or telerik component demos) and the wasm payload is around 2.2mb for a hello world app to start.

The component libraries themselves are relatively poor quality and have some weird JS integrations. There's no good open-source component libraries. Even a good library that utilizes bootstrap or material-design scripts would be nice.

Once these issues are generally resolved, I'd be more inclined to suggest it, but I do not want to be the first mover on this one. I've seen way too many X to browser libraries come and go without gaining any real traction only to die on the vine so to speak, then you're stuck rewriting or patching an application that looks and feels ancient.

Even then, one of the larger arguments in favor of Blazor is really, "I can reuse my C# skills." Even there, you need a lot of Browser application context knowledge in practice, and you've just created disconnects and more work where you do need it. That doesn't even get into the mirrored trees directory structure of .Net MVC that is repeated with Blazor.

If I were to explore something similar, I'd probably favor Yew (rust) which seems to be around 220k for the todo mvc app.

In summary:

        * Bulky payload or laggy response
        * Lighter alternatives
        * No network effect
        * Dirty abstractions
        * Messy structure by default
        * Verbose

My preference for web applications isn't particularly lightweight, but much more responsive and imho much better developer velocity with a more consistent and better functioning application...

        * React (favoring hooks)
        * Redux / GraphQL
        * Material-UI (jss/css-in-js themes)
        * Fetch API
        * connected-react-router

I'd also be more inclined to give Vue or Flutter (Dart) a try, both of which have more maturity in terms of network effect behind them.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> How is this checklist supposed to be used?

<comment><USER43> A: Look this, the perfect programming language I invented is the best.

B: (tick the checklist and sent it back)

</comment></comment><comment><USER44> [ ] You appear to have a reason to avoid change.

</comment><comment><USER45> [ ] You require the compiler to be present at runtime [ ] You require the language runtime to be present at compile-time

The guy never heard of Lisp so I wouldn't pay much attention to this anyway.

<comment><USER5> I think those were included specifically to poke fun at Lisp. The list isn't meant to be taken very seriously.

<comment><USER46> I also chuckled at the '[ ] "multi-paradigm"' and immediately thought of lisp since it's one of the only languages that's ever had a reason to lay claim to that.

If you think about it, lisp is really just the smallest amount of higher-level PL primordial soup you can give to a programmer.

<comment><USER47> Almost every language is multi paradigm (it just takes two paradigms after all, so every imperative OOP language is multi paradigm). All the most popular languages today have a mix of imperative, functional and OOP. Few languages (and certainly fewer popular ones) are paradigmically "pure".

<comment><USER48> > every imperative OOP language is multi paradigm

I am not sure how you can count imperative and OOP as two paradigms. OOP is an extension of imperative paradigm. I would like to see what language you consider to be OOP but not imperative and not functional.

<comment><USER49> In the spirit of a bit of fun, Erlang can arguably make that claim. The processes are easy to view as objects, in the sense that I've often thought that when I read what Alan Kay said about objects, it often seems to be describing Erlang moreso than Smalltalk. But the language those objects are implemented in is functional.

(That said, if you read real Erlang code, despite being immutable and nominally functional, the code often is in practice simply imperative code where the code author has manually done the SSA rewrite. This is one of my major criticisms with the language. If you really try to program it functionally, it's quite a pain compared to Haskell.)</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Cdn. Supreme Court: Google must block search results of tech company worldwide - <AUTHOR> https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2017/06/28/google-must-block-search-results-of-tech-company-worldwide-supreme-court-rules.html <comment><USER2> This has terrifying implications.

Imagine an Islamic country demanding that Google remove any website that they deem insulting to Muhammad... WORLDWIDE.

Imagine your religious beliefs (atheist, christian, etc.) being deemed offensive or hate speech, and the government therefore DEMANDS that Google remove you from its index WORLDWIDE.

This is censorship. This is wrong.</comment>


Parked in the Pyrenees, A380 Awaits New Owner – Or Scrapyard - <AUTHOR> https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-11-08/parked-in-the-pyrenees-an-a380-awaits-new-owner-or-scrapyard <comment><USER2> Boeing supposedly had a fully double-decker variant of the 747 in the works back in the late 1970's or early 1980's but abandoned it early on because there wasn't a market.</comment>


React Conf 2017 Livestream - <AUTHOR> http://conf.reactjs.org/livestream <comment><USER2> For anyone interested in more details about React Fiber, the recommended links in [0] provide a great jumping-off point. For many apps, especially ones that render large amounts of data to a screen and haven't done (or can't do) much optimizing with componentShouldUpdate, it will likely be an almost-seamless drop-in upgrade that will make things feel truly more "snappy." A video (of a demanding stress test) is worth a million words: [1]. And it's coming soon: [2]

[0] [https://github.com/facebook/react/issues/7925#issuecomment-2...](https://github.com/facebook/react/issues/7925#issuecomment-259258900)

[1] [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qu_6ItnlDQg](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qu_6ItnlDQg)

[2] [http://isfiberreadyyet.com/](http://isfiberreadyyet.com/)

<comment><USER3> I wonder how React fiber will stack up against preact. Both in performance in areas like animation and in more "regular" workloads.

<comment><USER4> The creator of Inferno joined the React team a while back. Performace wise, I'm sure some of that Inferno magic will be there

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Here is the agenda: [http://conf.reactjs.org/schedule](http://conf.reactjs.org/schedule)

<comment><USER6> Unfortunate that there are no TypeScript related talks

Edit: it appears that there is a talk related to TypeScript

<comment><USER7> "Type Systems Will Make You a Better JavaScript Developer" \- Jared Forsyth

That talk appears that it will make the argument for using Flow/Typescript.

<comment><USER6> Ah okay. I assumed that this was strictly talking about Flow.

<comment><USER8> You are not wrong, the talk talked about the benefits of types, but focusing on Flow

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> That link didn't work for me but this did: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S8HXkEnA48g](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S8HXkEnA48g)

</comment><comment><USER10> Adding to the AWS Lambda + React talk; if anybody is looking for a more detailed Serverless + React.js tutorial, we've put together - [http://serverless-stack.com](http://serverless-stack.com)

It goes into detail on how to use AWS and React.js to handle user authentication, file uploads, and securing your serverless backend. We go through step-by-step building a simple note taking app with detailed screenshots and code samples.

<comment><USER11> looks cool. good job.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> React trying to do such fine grain scheduling with current DOM APIs is very impressive. I wish browsers had better APIs for doing this.

</comment><comment><USER13> Wonder why they went with streaming on YT instead of FB Live...

<comment><USER14> they always stream on their Youtube channel. this is their conf stream last year. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pm0uwncSCo4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pm0uwncSCo4)

<comment><USER13> FWIW FB Live wasn't a released product in Feb 2016.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> ReasonML doesn't seem to be on the list of presentations this conf. Will Facebook discuss this in the near future? :)

<comment><USER16> Cheng Lou works on ReasonML and is speaking tomorrow at 4:30PM PST. Talk description:

> What is a piece of code? What is a library, a tool, a platform and a > language? Based on my last talk on the spectrum of abstraction, this talk > explores the daily concerns and the meta-concerns of writing code, and how > our new effort, Reason, relates to them.

<comment><USER15> I overlooked this talk. My apologies.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> I was quite impressed by flow, it's so natural for me as Python developer to apply something like this. Awesome!

</comment><comment><USER18> Sounds like Guillermo Rauch likes Inferno but isn't convinced yet, anyone have experience with it?

</comment><comment><USER19> When would it start?

<comment><USER20> I believe it already has started and now it's a break until :30

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> React is such BS. Its sole purpose for existing is to make simple tasks unnecessarily complicated.

<comment><USER22> After using it in couple of projects, we see it as making complex tasks really intuitive. Maybe you are using it for some wrong problem.

<comment><USER23> I had the same feeling.

Coming from ExtJS and Ember, React felt rather simple.

But Redux is a whole nother story :(

<comment><USER24> Have you thought about using MobX instead? I think Redux's "complications" stem from guiding you towards a certain set of principles and ways of coding without giving you the tools to commit to those principles and ways of coding. Particularly, the way you compose reducers and the way you expose actions is manual and very boilerplate-ish.

Mark Erikson hosts a wonderful page full of redux ecosystem links, and here you can see all the tools to allow you to write and compose reducers - [https://github.com/markerikson/redux-ecosystem- links/blob/ma...](https://github.com/markerikson/redux-ecosystem- links/blob/master/reducers.md) so clearly there was something missing there.

Redux as an idea I found very simple yet interesting. Watching Dan Abramov's series on building a Redux-lite from scratch helped changed my way of approaching how I build web apps.

However, using Redux in the mundane, daily sense was riddled with little practical niggles that were never really answered by the fairly minimalistic library, so I ended up with a kind of feeling that Redux kind of required me to "know" how to write good code before I commit to using it...

Meanwhile MobX seems to map to my mental model and all the modes of "mutation" that I'm already used to and have experience in, while also essentially introducing the same ideas as Redux.

<comment><USER25> Mobx is far more intuitive (and fun) than Redux. It truly enables you to focus on features rather than concepts.

Mobx also frees you from the "Redux architecture", which I found to be difficult and contrived...

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> As usual the only black guy there doesn't get to talk about tech. It must either be "on diversity" or nothing showing black people do tech.

I don't think it is deliberate but it perpetuates a wrong narrative.

==

EDIT.

I was inaccurate in this case. See below

<comment><USER27> [http://conf.reactjs.org/speakers/ben](http://conf.reactjs.org/speakers/ben) ?

<comment><USER26> I stand corrected. Thanks ng12

When I looked through, I didn't see him. I'm happy I am wrong here.

The stats are still worrying [1]. My greatest joy will be to be continuously wrong on this

[1] [http://oonwoye.com/2015/10/15/where-are-the-black-tech- found...](http://oonwoye.com/2015/10/15/where-are-the-black-tech- foundersexecutive-speakers-at-major-tech-conferences/)

<comment><USER28> As someone who was involved in speaker selection, I agree. We'll keep pushing on this and hopefully do better next year.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


A homemade piece of lab equipment recreating chemical evolution (2015) - <AUTHOR> http://nautil.us/issue/68/context/the-dawn-of-life-in-a-5-toaster-oven-rp <comment><USER2> Not really current despite the 2019 byline:

> This article was originally published in our "Dark Matter" issue in August, > 2015.

See the home page of laboratory[1] and their list of publications[2].

One particular publication[3] appears to give substance to the posted article. However to a cursory read, it does not address what would seem to me to be a blatantly obvious problem with the "toaster oven" experimental setup: contamination! If you are looking for the formation of RNA, how in the world can you be sure that the RNA you find didn't wander in on a dust mote? The present world is saturated with biochemicals, and I don't see how any open substrate can avoid be contaminated by them.

[1] [https://ww2.chemistry.gatech.edu/hud/home](https://ww2.chemistry.gatech.edu/hud/home)

[2] [https://ww2.chemistry.gatech.edu/hud/publications](https://ww2.chemistry.gatech.edu/hud/publications)

[3] [https://ww2.chemistry.gatech.edu/hud/searching-lost- nucleoti...](https://ww2.chemistry.gatech.edu/hud/searching-lost-nucleotides- pre-rna-world-self-refining-model-early-earth)

<comment><USER3> Thanks, we've added 2015 above. I wish Nautilus would stop doing that.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Nearly all molecular biology labs have toasters and Waring blenders. It's Waring because an experiment in the 40s or 50s used one really!</comment>


Founder / Life Balance - <AUTHOR> http://jordancooper.wordpress.com/2010/04/02/founder-life-balance/

<comment><USER2> Joran, taking breaks and letting work go is extremely necessary. Your marginal production and happiness begin to severely decline and you end up just burning yourself out.

You can put in 2 days of straight, solid work and get half as much done (and be much more unhappy) than if you take a day off, check back into the real world, then work the next day, for example.

"All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy"</comment>


Qatar Airways demands payment for training from terminated flight crew - <AUTHOR> https://ukaviation.news/qatar-airways-you-are-no-longer-required-heres-a-130000-bill <comment><USER2> More background here:

[https://onemileatatime.com/qatar-airways-fires- pilot/](https://onemileatatime.com/qatar-airways-fires-pilot/)

[https://viewfromthewing.com/qatar-airways-firing-pilots- and-...](https://viewfromthewing.com/qatar-airways-firing-pilots-and-sending- them-a-bill/)

It's suggested in the first article that the pilot had failed to pass the necessary exams:

"The other side of the story here is that the pilot has spent the past six years completing a two year training course, and still hasn't passed any of the tests necessary to become a pilot. The airline became fed up, and since they're firing pilots anyway and trying to cut costs, they also decided to terminate their contract with her at this point."

<comment><USER3> Why would they hire someone so incapable in the first place?

<comment><USER4> Interviews and tests don't determine how competent someone is going to be performing a job in future, passing candidates are just as likelty to be as competent or non competent. What you should really be asking is that how come they end up hiring competent people in first place? Because those who apply are already have knowledge or experience to help them be competent in first place. I have seen some people who interview and pass tests well end up being useless and sometimes those who initially don't present well end up being competent. How would you determine competency in the first place? In many cases with enough practice and assistance even the most incompetent can perform the required tasks successfully. There is no test to show that anyone is going to be competent or not in future. At above some intelligence level everyone is just as likely to end up being competent in performing any job, but the time that they have reached the position of applying for a specialised job they are likely to be competent in.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> By COVID standards, Qatar has actually been one of the better-off airlines in the Gulf, since (unlike the UAE) they still allow transit passengers and have been making some money flying stranded people around, even to the extent of putting on entirely new destinations like Brisbane. But obviously their business has still taken a huge hit and they've got a lot of excess capacity to shed. As always, PPrune has the goss: [https://www.pprune.org/middle- east/288896-joining-qatar-airw...](https://www.pprune.org/middle- east/288896-joining-qatar-airways-qr-all-you-need-know-about-threads- merged-513.html)

But this has always been the flip side of doing business in the Gulf: you're paid well, but once you're no longer useful, you'll be discarded without a second thought. This happened during the GFC as well and there were plenty of stories of once high-flying expats sleeping in their cars.

</comment><comment><USER6> Are there any comprehensive websites that are documenting this type of behaviour for the future - like Glassdoor but for consumers and investors?

Given an equal choice between buying something from two companies I'd choose the one that had been nicer to its employees and community.

Case in point - I own a (quite small) number of shares in UK retailer Hotel Chocolat. I'd probably have sold them if it wasn't for their apparently decent policy: [https://www.hotelchocolat.com/uk/corona-virus- updates.html](https://www.hotelchocolat.com/uk/corona-virus-updates.html)

<comment><USER7> In the case of Qatar, you just have to read the news.

e.g., [https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/fifa- qa...](https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/fifa-qatar-world- cup-2022-migrants-dutch-union-slavery-fnv-bangladesh-court-legal- action-a7356191.html)

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> I think this clause is standard for cadets. I don't agree with it but I remember looking into becoming a cadet when I was much younger.

I distinctly remember EasyJet: you basically had to go to a bank to get the loan for the whole cost of your pilot training (300k GBP iirc) in your name. If you failed to pass any of the mandatory exams and steps during your training, you'd be kicked out and have to repay the loan back on your own. If you made it as a pilot, EasyJet would deduct part of your salary to pay back.

It seemed like a very shitty arrangement for the cadet/pilot wannabe where you basically shoulder most of the risk for the privilege of working as a pilot for EasyJet.

I didn't enroll to become a pilot. I don't regret it.

</comment><comment><USER9> It's an interesting situation.

Qatar Airlines pilot requirements are ICAO ATP, which you can convert to an FAA license, or just go fly in China.

(It's more difficult to go the opposite way, from FAA to European (EASA.))

You will never hear of such a situation where the pilot is billed for ab initio training in the US because US airlines do very little such training, if any. When US airlines partner with a flight training academy, they just promise to let graduates apply. :)

Sometimes US airlines will pay for (jet) type ratings, which cost in the $20k range, and charge the pilot if they leave within a year.

</comment><comment><USER10> This really sucks for those affected. It's one thing if an organisation chooses to stop funding their employees' education further, but to sack them and then demand compensation for what was supposed to be under "scholarship"? Ugh. Shitty.

</comment><comment><USER11> I can't access the page. Can someone kindly provide a summary?

<comment><USER12> Go to [https://web.archive.org/web/20200511090135/https://ukaviatio...](https://web.archive.org/web/20200511090135/https://ukaviation.news/qatar- airways-you-are-no-longer-required-heres-a-130000-bill/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> That's it, I'm cancelling my summer holiday to Qatar.

<comment><USER14> I can't tell if you're serious, but Qatar has had a long history of migrant worker abuses and exploitation, perhaps most globally publicized due to the FIFA World Cup controversies. This Qatar Airways incident is rather benign by comparison. Migrant/foreign workers make up almost 90% of their workforce according to this article, which honestly makes much of Qatar seem dependent on something resembling indentured servitude:

[https://www.amnesty.org/en/countries/middle-east-and- north-a...](https://www.amnesty.org/en/countries/middle-east-and-north- africa/qatar/report-qatar/)

<comment><USER13> Don't worry, it was a joke! I thought that would be more obvious given the current lockdown in most countries.

<comment><USER14> Ha, thanks for clarifying! I wasn't sure and perhaps should have taken it more lightly, but then I couldn't have attempted to make a point. :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Lawyer up.

<comment><USER16> that was my initial reaction, like "ok this would not stand at any court". then I realized that it probably affects employees who live and are citizens of Qatar or similar nations in which 1. I have no idea about their legal system 2. and the only idea I have from what I see in the news etc. about worker rights etc. is not the best

<comment><USER8> Isn't it Qatar where you go to jail if you fail to pay your debts? Or maybe it's only Saudi Arabia, I can't remember. And this was the reason why the city was apparently littered with perfectly good but abandoned Ferrari and lamborghini cars.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Training was done in 2013 apparently. Still hasn't paid it by working for 7 years? Makes no sense.

<comment><USER18> He hasn't worked, he's been training and dicking around. Imagine just being paid to learn about your job, without ever really producing any value, for the past seven years.

<comment><USER19> well based on the comments on this story they should just work as a full time poster on HN, not reading the story by automatically knee jerk responding how vile the company is.

this story comes down to a contract dispute, the pilot signed an agreement as part of being given training and if the company is guilty of anything it is guilty of letting it go for this many years.

sometimes the little guy is at fault

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Flyer forums have a lot of information on work conditions regarding airlines around the world (usually the ones that attract expats).

From what I remember this company does not get the better reviews, even when compared with other companies from the same region.

</comment><comment><USER21> This is pretty standard in many countries and industries.

Really, we need a law that turns it into a loan automatically with reasonable terms at the end of employment. But other than that, this is no different to any other student loan. Boomers killed free education, so now everyone pays one way or another.

<comment><USER22> Actually not most countries strictly limit /regulate this sort behaviour and if your made redundant I suspect that the employer would not be able to recover anything.

Unfortunately employment practices in that part of the world are Horrific - its just normally poor navvies employed on building sites get the worst of it - see some of the coverage of the word cup construction in Quatar

<comment><USER21> It's not illegal in the UK either I'm afraid. In fact, it's standard.

Im not saying this is nice or positive. Just that it's totally legal and pretty standard.

I know because my first proper employer did NOT put this clause in my contract. Then they tried to introduce it for me and others after adding it for new employees. So I (we, there were 5 of us) actually sought legal advice.

The lawyer was surprised it wasn't in the original contract (and it's been in all the employment contracts I've signed since). Since it wasn't there, they couldn't enforce it or make us sign it. So we were lucky.

Its a hard thing to decide because the alternative is banning this sort of program. Then the only people who get to be pilots are the ones with 130k to spare...

<comment><USER23> Is it not still the case that that almost all commercial pilots come from people leaving the military or has that changed?

<comment><USER21> I don't know to be honest. I don't think so, as there are really not many military pilots compared to commercial? But I'm no expert.

Quickie edit...

Google says the RAF has 1830 pilots and the Navy about 200 more but the UK has over 10,000 commercial pilots. So I guess at least half the commercial pilots trained outside the military. So they're either self funding or getting these employer funded loans?</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


You See What You Believe - <AUTHOR> http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/ulterior-motives/201308/you-see-what-you-believe <comment><USER2> Ah, yes, "psychological science".

* The "science" whose interesting published results are forgotten in a fortnight.

* The "science" that won't create testable, falsifiable theories, then abandon those that are falsified.

* The "science" that was recently described this way: "... three investigative panels today collectively find fault with the field itself. They paint an image of a "sloppy" research culture in which some scientists don't understand the essentials of statistics, journal-selected article reviewers encourage researchers to leave unwelcome data out of their papers, and even the most prestigious journals print results that are obviously too good to be true." ([http://news.sciencemag.org/people-events/2012/11/final-repor...](http://news.sciencemag.org/people-events/2012/11/final-report-stapel-affair-points-bigger-problems-social-psychology))

* The "science" that is science in name only.</comment>


My Technical Blogging book for hackers and founders is now in print - <AUTHOR> http://pragprog.com/book/actb/technical-blogging

<comment><AUTHOR> If you have any questions about the book, feel free to ask.

</comment><comment><USER2> Great job, Antonio! I've been putting off purchasing it, but now that it's "official" I'm looking forward to a good weekend read.</comment>


Amazon Uses Trucks to Drive Data Faster - <AUTHOR> http://www.wsj.com/articles/amazon-extends-web-based-artificial-intelligence-1480529802 <comment><USER2> there is a paywall...yikes</comment>


Building Android Apps with Scala and Intellij - <AUTHOR> http://nevercertain.com/index.php/2011/02/scala-android-intellij-win-part-1-prerequisites/ <comment><USER2> Tantalisingly hints that the next posts in the series will cover more ground, but doesn't link to them. Here they are:

* [http://nevercertain.com/index.php/2011/02/scala-android-inte...](http://nevercertain.com/index.php/2011/02/scala-android-intellij-win-part-2-simple-build-tool/)

* [http://nevercertain.com/blog/2011/02/18/scala-android-intell...](http://nevercertain.com/blog/2011/02/18/scala-android-intellij-win-part-3)

* <http://nevercertain.com/blog/2011/05/04/robospecs>

</comment><comment><USER3> Unfortunately, I have yet to write the promised testing post. The main ground I wanted to cover there was the legwork getting IntelliJ to run focused tests and whatnot.

Overall the situation has gotten much better thanks to the awesome guys working on the IntelliJ Scala plugin (details: <http://blog.jetbrains.com/scala/>).</comment>


When Perl isn't fast enough? - <AUTHOR> https://www.perl.com/article/when-perl-isn-t-fast-enough/ <comment><USER2> Perl fan for many years.

Recently developing a systems API. Did a benchmark. A simple response of pong to an http request. Mojolicious Vs go.

Perl was not fast. By a BIG order of magnitude.

</comment><comment><USER3> The only thing you need to know when it comes to optimising code is very simple: _You can never make code run faster. You can only make it do less._

<comment><USER4> I think with modern processor architectures there are some edge cases where you can shuffle calls around, keep the same runtime complexity, but have things go faster. For example, moving a conditional outside an inner loop function call to inside the function can cause the entire function to be loaded into cache, decreasing runtime.

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> I have had fun with Go, but I really hope they add something less verbose for error handling in a future version.</comment>


[video] A Crash Course on the Go Programming Language - <AUTHOR> http://axialcorps.com/2013/11/12/go-lyceum-video/

<comment><USER2> What are the most famous web projects built in go today?</comment>


A Guide to AWS Custom Cloudformation - <AUTHOR> https://milapneupane.com.np/2019/10/08/a-guide-to-aws-custom-cloudformation-resource/ <comment><USER2> This is a great example of how to get this working, I don't think I've seen a complete guide like this the last time I needed this.

I'm frustrated that CloudFormation ends up needing these customizations though, and that you need to leave the world of CloudFormation and self manage and deploy your own set of lambda functions to support your customizations. It feels like a hack.

I really strongly advise folks to look at Terraform instead of you can. While I've needed custom lambdas for CloudFormation, I haven't hit a similar limit for Terraform.

<comment><AUTHOR> Custom Cloudformation is flexible but needs extra work. I would not say it a hack but is time-consuming.</comment></comment>


Your fastest Internet in the world is found in Berkeley, CA - <AUTHOR> http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2010/04/your-fastest-internet-in-the-world-is-found-in-berkeley-ca.ars <comment><USER2> It's our granola power!

But more seriously: Thank you, UCB, DOE, DOD, NSF, NIH, and a slew of other TLAs.</comment>


Making Millions by Distributing Pirated Movies - <AUTHOR> https://thehftguy.com/2017/12/20/how-to-make-millions-by-distributing-pirated-movies/ <comment><USER2> The problem with legal movies are DRM, vendor/device lock-in, forced ads, regional policies etc.

You can just download a pirated movie as a plain MP4/MKV/AVI file in the language you want (not necessarily the official language of your region) and the quality you want (some people like 30+ gib HDs, many prefer 5 of less gib per movie) and play it forever everywhere, including unsupported platforms (namely huge number of TVs and no-name set-top-boxes with USB ports, old PCs with exotic OSes etc). This (besides visiting cinemas, these 2 things don't really affect each other, people often do both for the same movie) is what almost everybody does in the eastern Europe. People don't really mind to pay some bucks for a movie/song/book/etc. but nobody in sane mind wants the crap I've mentioned in the first paragraph. Sell plain DRM-free standard-format multilingual downloadable files for humble prices (under $5 per movie) and you'll have almost all the audience pirate sites attract.

<comment><USER3> DRM, lock-ins etc. are a problem for sure, but this is a narrow view.

It's disingenous to depict torrents ("download a pirated movie") as a problems-free, conventient, alternative, since there is a certain set of associated problems.

There is malware lingering at each page. The movies are typically in english. Torrents may be very slow at certain times. Subtitles needs to be searched, generally separately, and generally, are available only in english. Subtitles may even be malware (happened a few times to me).

For a part of the audience, using torrents is worth the compromise, but it's not the very convenient and generic option that is generally depicted.

In addition, most of the people I know switched to streaming long ago; those who are willing to pay, use Netflix, the other ones, use streaming websites.

<comment><USER4> > There is malware lingering at each page. The movies are typically in > english. Torrents may be very slow at certain times. Subtitles needs to be > searched, generally separately, and generally, are available only in > english. Subtitles may even be malware (happened a few times to me).

These problems are [mostly] solved for private trackers. It always amazes me that a group of volunteers can do a better job than huge companies that are dedicated to the same thing. I'd love to be able to pay for stuff with the same ease of use as a good private tracker.

<comment><USER5> The little guys can do it where the big companies can't because the little guys can break the law and not get caught or sued into oblivion (for the most part).

It's a theme that appears a lot in these pages: you can do all sorts of neat things when you ignore the rules.

<comment><USER4> There's nothing stopping a company from distributing non-DRM files with an easy to use interface and fast download speeds...

<comment><USER6> Did you miss the part above about the law?

Content providers don't allow companies to ship non-DRM movies, so unless that changes...

<comment><USER7> I think GP was referring to content providers who distribute their own content, e.g. HBO, Disney, etc.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I don't think reputable ad networks would advertise on pirate sites. The disreputable ones don't get you $2 cpms. Period. I think he is off by at least an order of magnitude, maybe more.

Source: I run twicsy.com, which major networks avoid because of nsfw content, and only get about 12 cent RPM (revenue per page per 1000).

<comment><AUTHOR> Author here. The estimates could go either way. Kindly note that the stats are incomplete, notably the welcome page is missing.

Some ads are cheaper, some countries are cheaper. Put 3 ads per page from 3 different networks to counter balance. Then force the page to refresh once or twice. There are many ways to optimize revenues when one really care about revenues.

I hate to break it up to you but your site is picture hosting, it's low engagement and low value. People will not try the wrong "download" button 3 times until they find the right one, only to do the same thing again next week for the new episode of games of thrones.

<comment><USER9> As someone who ran a fairly large, mostly reputable website (reddit), I agree that you are off by an order or magnitude or more. There is no way they get close to $1 CPM. They'd be lucky to get 10 cents, probably closer to 1 or 2 cents.

They most likely barely break even after paying themselves a modest salary.

<comment><USER10> I run a network of a handful of sites that amass roughly 1MM hits per day. Over the last 14 days, my Ø CPM for pops is $2.74 across all countries, with the top CPMs being:

       Country	CPM
       US	  $11.175
       Nigeria	$5.519
       Italy	$4.104
       Iran   $3.636
       Japan	$3.596
       Grenada	$3.591
       Australia	$3.217
       Canada	$3.198
       Egypt	$2.459
       Panama	$2.384
       Germany	$2.244
       France	$2.199
       Israel	$2.146
       UK	  $2.109
       South Africa	$2.035
       Denmark	$1.733
       Finland	$1.732
       Sweden	$1.617
       Portugal	$1.579
       New Zealand	$1.545
       UAE	 $1.528
       Korea	$1.480
       Switzerland	$1.476
       Norway	$1.354
       Latvia	$1.233

EDIT: formatting

<comment><USER8> What network do you use? Are you popping every page? What is the nature of your content?

<comment><USER10> The nature is very similar to yours, except I use another social network as a content provider. I use a combination of the top ad networks and optimize placements based on payouts for a particular country. I do try to pop every page.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> There are a few things you forgot

$2 CPM!! That's not even close to what shitty ad networks pay. Majority of traffic comes from countries with < 5 cent CPM

HOSTING COST It's not just about running a wordpress website here. Most decent site run auto uploaders which need decent size seedboxes. Easily hovering around a thousand dollars

Sources/runners: If its a scene pre-d site you need access to some runners. Scene access isn't cheap

Changing Domains & black hat seo: These sites are constantly loosing domains and almost all google ranking ones are using black hat seo to get their ranking. Usually means paying someone to do the dirty work.

\-- Some revenue streams you missed

\- Pay Per Link (aka locked/paid link shortner) things like AdFly

\- Background Crypto miners (becoming rather popular on streaming sites)

-'FTP ACCESS' / paid subscriptions

Still millions? Not by a long shot.. Few thousands.. Probably yes

<comment><AUTHOR> It's really just about running a wordpress site. My blog is a wordpress so I'm pretty familiar with it. Just need a good theme.

It couldn't be further from being a scene site. The content is limited and most of it is published late compared to some other sources available.

AdFly is a mix of pay per view and pay per click. Didn't think it was worth a specific category but why not.

Crypto is a new thing, that certainly wasn't available a year ago. That's a very interesting point though, shady sites will probably be the first ones to have a good use for it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> I've said this before on HN, but we _really_ need to get away from the idea that distribution is hard. Distribution is basically a Solved Problem. We don't need gatekeepers telling people what they are and aren't allowed to consume.

What we do need is better economic models that allow the creators to get paid. People are _clearly_ willing to pay for content, but I don't know of anyone who wants studios/companies/lawyers/etc to get the money rather than the artists themselves. This old world way of thinking about content funding really needs to die off already.

<comment><USER13> What's hard is distribution without allowing redistribution, which is what traditional companies consider a mandatory prerequisite for distribution

<comment><USER12> And that's what I mean. It's stupid that disallowing redistribution is even a concept. We have data that can immediately be duplicated infinitely for free, why should anyone be barred from re-distributing it?

<comment><USER14> Because property rights exist to allow the owners of intellectual property a wide ability to legally control the (re)distribution, ownership, and/or licensing of their creation.

<comment><USER12> And that made sense back when distribution and funding the creators was hard. That is no longer the case today.

<comment><USER14> My point was more that it's not the issue of difficulty or whether or not it could be done, but rather that each property holder has different wishes, and many times their wishes don't conform to the model which you are suggesting. They don't really seem to want a consume-all-you-want because that hasn't proven to be able to replace the income from the classic distribution chain. Look at Spotify as an example.

<comment><USER12> Oh yeah, I'm not trying to argue against what you are saying, I'm arguing against the model we are using to monetize. You are absolutely correct.

IDGAF what the property holder wants, unless it's the creator themselves. Even then, if you don't want it redistributed, maybe don't put it in a format that is trivial to redistribute in. Just because they've been making money because of the old model, doesn't mean they have the right to keep making money once we've automated that away.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> I want to add that I subscribe to Netflix, prime and some HBO content via a local partnership in my country but still regularly watch pirated copies of content available via my subscriptions for the following two reasons.

1\. Netflix/prime/hotstar(HBO) content is often not in HD while the pirated content I stream is always HD. 2\. Pirated sites give me a kind of federated search/browsing for all the content in one place.

The second point I fell is key and will remain even after the subscription services have improved their CDNs near where I live.

</comment><comment><USER16> I know of a few teenagers who do this. Their sites have been taken down multiple times, but they never seem to stop. I completely understand that internet forums are no place for seeking legal advice, but I would like to know what can I do to thwart/report these people (in the United States).

(My real concern is that the money they are generating is being used to fund illegal activities in the neighborhood -- which I can not tolerate. I have lost a close one to a drug crisis already, cannot take it more).

<comment><USER17> Talk to your government about their drug policies enacted at the behest of the pharmaceutical industry. That's a much bigger problem than the teenagers in your industry.[1]

Of course, that'll also mean actually getting out the corrupt autocrats currently in charge. So... get politically engaged. (And by that I mean, do real work. Posting on social media is not getting politically engaged. Get out. Organize. Hold your politicians accountable. Run yourself.)

Going after the teens in your neighborhood might feel more satisfying, but the drug problem is a _systemic_ problem. It's not caused by a few teens, it won't be fixed by locking up a few teens.

[1] [https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2017/investigations/...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2017/investigations/dea- drug-industry-congress/?utm_term=.34c660a4fc92)

<comment><USER18> If someone says that they're trying to deal with local drug deaths, telling them that their local problems aren't worth their time isn't the right answer.

<comment><USER17> It's convenient to have a local scapegoat. It feels good to inflict pain on people you perceive as the guilty party. I certainly understand that. I've lost more than one friend.

But that convenience has brought us to where we are right now. If we continue to close our eyes to reality, preferring to go after scapegoats, guess what - nothing is going to change. We _need_ to channel our anger into more productive channels.

You don't solve a systemic problem by attacking symptoms.

<comment><USER18> You also don't keep things healthy by ignoring the symptoms.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Oh wow. So piracy. Such millions.

Here's a novel idea that will let you win those "lost" millions back: provide a legitimate service that beats pirate sites at:

\- content can be easily found

\- content can be easily viewed

\- no arbitary restrictions (oh, you are watching from Sweden? Oh, you only get a downsampled version with baked in subtitles covering half of the screen etc.)

Update: Relevant Oatmeal comic [http://theoatmeal.com/comics/game_of_thrones](http://theoatmeal.com/comics/game_of_thrones)

<comment><USER20> After reading discussions on this for years, I feel now that only a small part of piraters would now still go for that. A lot of them would argue that the price point is still wrong, or whatever restrictions are left are still unreasonable.

<comment><USER21> Yea I think I agree with this, most piraters are doing so because they are so used to the idea of FREE that the idea of spending any money at all on content is a disaster to them.

<comment><USER22> That's bullshit and hearsay. Until content is provided in convenient standard formats, DRM free (it does fuck all beyond annoying paying customers already), offline friendly, region lock free, etc. it's an apples to oranges comparison. An often offline/mobile binge watcher's only choice for watching conveniently is piracy or paying way more than the price of the content itself his in mobile data fees due to streaming enforcement. You can't even rip your own DVD or BluRAy legally due to DMCA supposedly.

I wanted to get my favorite anime ever legally and this is the end result (TL;DR; - I _maybe_ could get an Amazon Fire TV and pay 20 dollars to stream into it in SD quality while BluRay 1080p rips mp4s are floating around torrents): [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15989321](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15989321)

Or are you going to tell me I should get a Fire TV and watch in half the quality and only on it, or hunt and get that DVD or BluRay from a private person on an auction site, just so I lose money and not get stuff for free, despite the studio not getting any from that purchase?

Not everyone is streaming the latest Game of Thrones or something. Niche stuff goes out of print, into copyright hell (NOLF game series), studios go bust (so no one who produced the content gets compensated for it, thus moral argument is gone), there are region locks (and Poland is no small or poor market for anime), arbitrary restrictions (on what languages and subs you get, on quality, on devices you can use, stream only enforcement, etc.) and then it's "theft" to want something you actually can't buy (and that would be feasible to be available with 0 impact on profits, and that's is actually available illegally and conveniently).

<comment><USER23> Not being available in exactly the way you want it is not an excuse for you to pirate.

<comment><USER19> Copyright holders sell you crap despite non-crap being readily available.

Copyright holders have no intention and have made no moves to replace carp, or to make non-crap readily and legally available.

Why should I buy crap from copyright holders?

Netflix, Steam, and Spotify have shown that once you provide people with non- crap, people are more than happy to pay you, and piracy all but disappears.

<comment><USER23> I'm not saying you should buy it if you don't like it. I am saying that you are not entitled to just take it if you don't. You go buy something else that is provided as you want.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> Netflix is at 9 billion, this is a million with some optimistic numbers on CPM. If piracy is about making money then it seems to be a bad business to be in.

</comment><comment><USER25> "Did you know that Google pay cash for every new installation of Google Chrome? Yes, they do." , Is it for real ?

<comment><USER26> Yes, they are paying software creators to add a chrome install in the installer, usually with a checkbox that's enabled by default. I remember the creator of VLC saying that refusing Google's offer was the hardest decision he's taken, so the money offered must be good.

</comment></comment><comment> LV-426 Given the state of the front page/s of HN now, and lately, I expected the answer to be coin-hive or some other crypto-currency related thing.

Instead the answer is simply the rather more mundane "advertising".

<comment><AUTHOR> Don't forget affiliations and subscriptions.

At the height of their time, the likes of rapidshare/megavideo used to pay a lot.

<comment> LV-426 I've heard that some forums which are dedicated to linking to copyright violations are owned by the file hosting site they use for the files.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> Selling traffic via background pop ups is a common method for streaming sites to make money, likely they kick back some of this revenue to feeder sites like the one mentioned. See here: [https://www.buzzfeed.com/craigsilverman/porn- runs-the-intern...](https://www.buzzfeed.com/craigsilverman/porn-runs-the- internet)

Previously discussed: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15915564](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15915564)

<comment><USER28> I hate pop-unders (background popups, whatever you want to call them) with a passion. When a website I visit spawns one, I immediately blacklist the entire domain. It's a losing battle through.

<comment><USER29> I still don't understand why browser makers can't make this sort of interactivity impossible to implement.

I can't think of a single good use-case for pop-unders (or pop-ups even)

<comment><USER9> There two good use cases I can think of.

When you do a captive portal with some sort of timer (hotel, airplane, etc), they will sometimes do a pop under with a timer that has the option to pay more to renew. That can be slightly useful.

Or when you visit a site, and it does a pop under of a survey about that site. Then you see it when you close the window and maybe fill out the survey. That one is less useful but at least legit.

<comment><USER23> I feel there are plenty of alternatives for those legit uses, that getting rid of the ability to do that won't hurt.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> It's super ironic how many ads "attack your mind and computer" on your site. You must have like 10 ads on this one blog post... hypocrisy is a tricky bitch.

<comment><AUTHOR> There is one banner on the bottom that's added by WordPress. Maybe in you meant 10 in binary?

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> I don't understand this section.

>What's so special about this site? They made one mistake. They opened some of their analytics statistics in the period 2014-2015, probably not something they intended to do.

Does the author mean they made available their stats for the period of 2014-2015? The last sentence seems to imply it was a mistake? I'm not sure how the author got access to the page view data.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes, the statistics were available publicly for a short while.

</comment></comment><comment><USER32> Who pays for the video storage and streaming costs? The same person with the site?

<comment><USER33> There's a section titled "Streaming and Hosting Affiliation" in the article that answers that. Fly-by-night file hosts that pay for hits and serve a billion malware popups to visitors.

<comment><USER34> Except that some of them (rapidgator, keep2share, mega, ul.to etc) have legs. They've been around a while now and dont use ads, at least not ads that arent easily blocked by 99% of users. They are shady, but thepiratebay is still a thing. Being shady doesnt mean you are unreliable or your existance fleeting.

<comment><AUTHOR> That's doubly wrong. The sites cycled between subscriptions and ads, historically. None has been around for a full decade in the same form.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> Come'on..they are nothing compared to the massive volume of money the producers are earning with streaming services and cinema ticket prices. In 2017 we are seeing the average price of 10€ for a 2D film and of 14€ for a 3D one..that is robbery

</comment><comment><USER36> Perhaps not millions, but some charge money to host the torrenting and then streaming of the resulting files.

[https://alternativeto.net/software/bitport- io/](https://alternativeto.net/software/bitport-io/)</comment>


Is Dropbox Really The World's 5th Most Valuable Startup? - <AUTHOR> http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/dropbox_value.php

<comment><USER3> Another one. No?

What's the difference between a "startup" and a "business"?

I'm going to go with Steve Blank's answer: A startup is in search of a business model. A business has found it.

Pretty sure Dropbox has found theirs already.

<comment><USER4> Wouldn't you say it's a short term business though?

People expect email to be free, and have tons of storage. Likewise they will now expect services like dropbox to be free and offer a ton of storage.

<comment><USER5> Don't think so. The value of service for the Dropbox user grows over time (as the number of stored files and their revisions grow). Having a competitor that will simply be free is not enough for those users to start considering switching. So I think Dropbox is fine in the long run.

<comment><USER6> Who's using Dropbox as a long-term backup strategy? Also, it's just a folder on your machine, switching to a competitor is pointing exactly one folder to the new storage, isn't it?

And it should be possible to use two or more services an the same time, building new revision history while still using Dropbox. Then switching over altogether. Sounds rather simple to me.

<comment><USER7> "Who's using Dropbox as a long-term backup strategy".

I am, and I'm guessing plenty of others are too.

Although I don't really use the revisions feature, so technically you're correct, I'd have no problem switching to a competitor. But it'll be _really_ hard to compete with Dropbox, and for something so important to me, price isn't the most important issue.

<comment><USER4> I don't see why it would be so hard to compete.

Isn't dropbox a pretty simple thing? It's just storing your stuff, with some sync things etc.

Seems like the barrier to entry is "Stores my files and doesn't lose them"?

<comment><USER8> Michael Wolfe answered this perfectly on Quora:

 _Well, let's take a step back and think about the sync problem and what the ideal solution for it would do:

There would be a folder. You'd put your stuff in it. It would sync.

They built that.

Why didn't anyone else build that? I have no idea._

[http://www.quora.com/Dropbox/Why-is-Dropbox-more-popular- tha...](http://www.quora.com/Dropbox/Why-is-Dropbox-more-popular-than-other- programs-with-similar-functionality/answer/Michael-Wolfe)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Dropbox, to me, is a shining example of a startup which _invented a whole new field_ , one that I can't live without. Much like Facebook invented a whole new method of social interaction,

Had you asked me 3 years ago whether I'd need Dropbox, and described it as "file sharing easily", I'd have said "meh". But Dropbox is more than that. It's a backup solution + file sharing among devices, rolled into one, and executed to perfection. It literally changed my computing life. Dropbox is one service I simply could _not_ live without anymore.

So in terms of actual value to me, personally, I'd easily rank Dropbox in the top 5 (along with Facebook).

* Note: I agree with joshu here, Dropbox is really not a "startup" per Steve Blank's definition. Also, since when is Wikipedia a startup?

</comment><comment><USER9> The fifth most valuable? _Only_ the fifth?

We use Dropbox for teams for our company data. We forked out for it because it _is_ that good. Admittedly we're small - only five people thus far - <USER2> growing. A few years ago we couldn't do this reliable without a file server. Dropbox has revolutionised file sharing from the low end, and will continue to hit up into the business market with their current trajectory.

Yes, we have used alternatives, but none are as straightforward and fuss-free as Dropbox. I think they're the _most_ valuable startup out there at the moment.

<comment><USER10> Agreed, however I'd say the technology barrier to compete is not that high and it might soon be common to share files conveniently. With a choice of many services that offer the same. That would probably lower the value of Dropbox significantly.

Or is there reason to believe there will be no equally useful competition products?

<comment><USER9> I disagree that the barrier to compete is not very high.

There have been "alternatives" for years - see FolderShare/SkyDrive. There are plenty of alternatives now, but the reality is that their implementation sucks. We tried using JungleDisk but it is just too inefficient. Others were just too fiddly.

Dropbox is so easy that my wife and I use it to share files between computers at _home_ rather than do local file shares. Seriously. And it was her idea.

Dropbox is so far ahead of the competition it is crazy. They just need to keep that advantage.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I think they are too vulnerable a business to be so valuable.

I recently swapped to another similar solution recently because they gave a few more gb free storage. And the fact these services are so easy to set up now means it is also so easy to swap for a small reason. Plus the coming of Google Drive; their integration / pricing / distribution will be hard to compete with as syncing becomes more popular with the masses.

<comment><USER12> I would add a parallel between Youtube and Dropbox.

Then compare the coming gDrive with Google Video and remind us that Google Video was unable to disrupt Youtube userbase.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> Dropbox is used by about half my coworkers. Among friends that I work on projects with, it's used by more like 90% of them. That's on par with Skype and we saw their valuation.

</comment><comment><USER14> If Facebook, Zinga, Groupon and Wikipedia are startups (just looking at the first couple), could someone describe to me why Microsoft, Apple and Google are not startups?</comment>


Any good resources to find remote work? telecommute full-time jobs? - <AUTHOR>

I have seen We Work Remotely by 37Signals, but apart from it are there any such forums or resources available ? <comment><USER2> I am also looking for a telecommute job. There are few posts on StackCareers, but very limited.

I am well versed in PHP and its related frameworks. Also capable of scaling high traffic websites.</comment>


Twitter Acquires MoPub - <AUTHOR> http://www.mopub.com/2013/09/09/mopub-twitter/

<comment><USER2> I wrote a post following this acquisition with some thoughts on mobile advertising for anyone interested : [http://bellity.tumblr.com/post/60792069876/mopub-the- mobile-...](http://bellity.tumblr.com/post/60792069876/mopub-the-mobile- advertising-cake) (it's on the newest in HN)

<comment><USER3> You have no idea how mobile advertising works. Unlike what you may think, mobile advertising is not a magic wand where you integrate an SDK and viola you make shit ton of money. In your post you are criticizing Mopub for not making you money when the problem may be in your app and its popularity.

A lot of premium pubs use direct sold advertising - sign ads directly with large brands (such as P&G, King.com) at a guaranteed CPMs. Also, they sign exclusive deals with ad networks where they promise exposing a portion of their ad inventory in exchange of guaranteed CPMs. Publishers also setup various network waterfalls - stack ranking networks in various countries to determine which network should take a crack at your inventory first, which second and there on. In addition, for remnant inventory (which has no ad network or direct ad sales opportunity), Mopub exposes those to their RTB exchange to get a decent rate for them. Mopub makes all these different types of interactions possible through their product.

Now, in your case, the problem is that you are so small that no advertiser is willing to do a direct deal with you (it is not worth their time considering you are so small). Additionally, no network will do an exclusive contract with you. So your best bet is to mediate between various ad networks and let Mopub exchange take a crack at your inventory while you hope for better CPMs.

Mopub is a great product built by a brilliant team of people. Just because your app is not making money doesn't mean it is bad. If you become big, Mopub CS team will actually contact you to hand hold you to configure your networks in an optimum manner.

<comment><USER2> Chill out ! I never said it doesn't work for ANYONE. We actually got introduced to MoPub by Daniel from Mag Interactive (the folks behind Ruzzle) and they were very happy about it. They have millions of users and as you said, they can negotiate better terms with some advertisers and make some revenue.

For us (and we're not that small...> 400.000 downloads) it's not significant. And we are more popular than the majority of apps on the App Store.

Have you developed a mobile app that makes a lot of revenue ?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> MoPub was the best-funded company from their original class, and the second- best-funded company overall: [http://www.seed- db.com/accelerators/view?acceleratorid=2002](http://www.seed- db.com/accelerators/view?acceleratorid=2002) Congratulations!

<comment><USER5> Wow, I didn't know they were an AngelPad company. That's huge for them.

<comment><USER2> yes it's definitely huge for AngelPad. Few accelerators can have this kind of exit

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Congrats to a first class team and product!

</comment><comment><USER7> Very nice, congratulations on the work :)

</comment><comment><USER8> Congrats!

</comment><comment><USER9> congratz moPub</comment>


ISPs Must Take Responsibility for Sony Movie Leaks - <AUTHOR> http://torrentfreak.com/isps-must-take-responsibility-for-sony-movie-leaks-mp-says-141203/

<comment><USER2> That's a bit like saying the road-makers must take responsibility for the bank-robbers driving away to safety.</comment>


Carbon nanotubes found in children's lungs - <AUTHOR> https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn28370-carbon-nanotubes-found-in-childrens-lungs-for-the-first-time/ <comment><USER2> More I see these, the more it makes me wonder if we understand enough about the impact of 'Nano materials' on the health of living species. Sometime back there was some discussion around how graphene being so minuscule, can penetrate human tissues in a a way that we don't know about.

Then much earlier - maybe couple of years back - there was some noise around nano silver particles, I haven't seen any conclusive discussion on that either.

A quick search brought forth this: "Silver as a metal does not pose any danger, but when you break it down to nano-sizes, the particles become small enough to penetrate a cell wall. If nano-silver enters a human cell, it can cause changes in the cell" [http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/02/140227115424.ht...](http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/02/140227115424.htm)

<comment><USER3> Most likely not, same goes for any artificial material it takes decades until you are able to even begin to start understanding the effect on humans and until your body starts adopting to a new environment.

We now see our bodies starting to utilize mechanisms to repair the damage caused to DNA by the likes of smoking, and even that mechanism is only apparent in a very small part of the human population.

Nano materials are even more scary because depending on the actual material in question they can be made as fine as 100's or 1000's of molecules in size. Nanoscale Iron Oxide particles that first seemed to be quite bio-compatible now show signs of being potentially quite nasty [http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3459910/](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3459910/)

We have very little understanding of the chemistry and hence biological impact of materials when we encounter them in very small and unique forms that do not appear in nature.

Quite a few discoveries in material science and chemistry in the past few decades were a result of a field we though we mostly understood an element is an element no matter what, but now we know that the size and formation of elements on the molecular and atomic scales can have a huge impact on attributes of an element or a compound, whilst this isn't like rediscovering chemistry it does point at a very big and not yet understood part of it.

Nano particles are also quite nasty in the way that many of them can pass through some filtration and containment solutions we currently have including hazmat suits and long term storage containers so i think there is a need for a call to stop and think about this entire industry very carefully.

<comment><USER4> _We now see our bodies starting to utilize mechanisms to repair the damage caused to DNA by the likes of smoking, and even that mechanism is only apparent in a very small part of the human population._

As an ex-smoker I'm interested to know more about that, this is the first I've heard of it. Do you have any links or distinctive technical terms I could search on? I don't want to go on a fishing expedition.

<comment><USER3> The latest Nobel prize in Chemistry might be a good start, more specific examples can be like specific (and apparently fairly recent) mutations in the XRCC1 gene that greatly reduce the risk of bladder cancer (which smokers normally have 3-5 times greater chance of contracting) in smokers. [http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal....](http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0073448)

And there are probably 100's of other studies of various examples, our bodies constantly evolve to adapt to new environmental factors smoking is a fairly recent one but is still something that you could evolve to live with, not that we should count on that tho...

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I really doubt it's going to be found in quantities large enough to make harvesting it economical.

</comment><comment><USER6> "found in all of 64 children" "also found in vehicle exhaust"

Are there several definitions of nanotubes, one of them including a lot of carbon chains?

<comment><USER7> I didn't read the article, and I'm no chemist, but I wouldn't be surprised if combustion produces carbon nanotubes. Buckyballs were discovered to be present in candle soot.

<comment><USER8> Sounds like a great warning. Nanoparticles have the potential to be even more carcinogenic than asbestos, they will irreversibly permeate the ecosystem.

<comment><USER9> If nanotubes exist in car exhaust and buckyballs in candle soot then we've already performed a huge experiment on loads of people. Life expectancy is still increasing...

<comment><USER10> >life expectancy is still increasing...*

Yet cancer, Alzheimer's, autism, etc. are on the rise.

<comment><USER11> Cancer and Alzheimer's are on the rise _because_ life expectancy is increasing.

<comment><USER10> Nope. That only explains a portion of the increase.

<comment><USER11> Got a convincing and well-sourced statistical argument on that one?

<comment><USER10> Yes. Do you for your declaration?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I really dislike when an article waits til the end to explain why I shouldn't care. First half of the article is all about how we should worry and care about this thing. Second half of the article is, "actually you should just disregard everything we just said."

<comment><USER13> My wife (tech writer) calls this the 'mystery novel' form of essay. She says Engineers are particularly guilty of writing that way. She was right, in my case anyway. For a while after I married her I would go through all my writing and move the last sentence in each paragraph to first. Because I did it all the time.

<comment><USER14> This sounds similar to 'burying the punchline' which we are also prone to do.

If you have a solution to the problem you are describing, please notify us in the first paragraph so we don't think you're just complaining.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> I would guess the particles are from diesel soot[0], but that doesn't make sense that it's the 'first time they have been found', as diesel engines have been popular in Europe for decades.

[0] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diesel_exhaust#Effect_of_parti...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diesel_exhaust#Effect_of_particles_on_health)

<comment><USER16> > that doesn't make sense that it's the 'first time they have been found'

First time it's been looked for would make it the first time it's been found if it's common.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> Bracing now for the Facebook clickbait posts about a supposed link between nanotubes and autism.

<comment><USER4> Don't borrow trouble.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> I have a few tennis rackets made from carbon nanotubes, should I be worried?

<comment><USER19> Just don't powder them, or, if you do, don't snort the powder.

Just use common sense, in other words.</comment></comment>


On "order by" optimization - <AUTHOR> http://dom.as/2015/07/30/on-order-by-optimization/

<comment><USER2> In short, if I understood, the author used

SELECT c,d FROM t WHERE b=X ORDER BY a DESC LIMIT 1

on MySQL and was surprised to find that MySQL was using index over a and in his opinion fully ignored the existence of the index over (b,c) to discover where b is equal to X? I admit I didn't understand his explanation why, especially not why it would maybe do the right thing with the LIMIT 2. I can't imagine that any serious SQL engine would ignore the possibility to use the index in such a case.

<comment><USER3> Its usually better to be explicit and use aggregates like MAX or MIN instead of a LIMIT of 1.

<comment><USER4> As in SELECT MAX(a), c, d FROM t WHERE b=x?

MySQL will return a random c and d, not necessarily the c and d from the row with maximum a...

<comment><USER2> Goldenkey actually posted

SELECT c,d FROM t WHERE a=(SELECT MAX(a) WHERE b=X from t)

But that post got flagged because he also gave his opinion on the level of understanding the article writer has. The query you posted is actually the one by the article writer.

<comment><USER4> I see. Thanks.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Right. MySQL's optimizer knows how many records each table has, but not much else. It doesn't do statistical tests on the tables. Depending on table contents, "WHERE b=X" can select any number of records, from zero to the whole database. Whether the optimal strategy is to do the "WHERE b=X" first, possibly getting a large number of hits, or simply making a sequential pass, is not decidable from the database size only.

An alternative would be for the optimizer to do an indexed SELECT on b for "WHERE b=X", and if the number of hits exceeded some threshold, abandon that effort as inefficient and start over using a sequential pass. But MySQL doesn't abandon strategies once selected, or keep such statistics as a hint for future queries. As someone pointed out, Oracle's flagship database product does do that. Anyone know about Postgres?

</comment><comment><USER6> >>Unfortunately, optimizer doesn't understand, that there're humans who are building these systems, and humans have their own rationale and thinking. One of the ideas that a human would have is that if you have 100GB table, you better understand things like data locality and other sorts of efficiencies.

I have not used MySql and cannot comment for that but with my experience with Oracle, i believe its histogram generation process is actually trying to solve the same problem.It has a binning strategy for histogram generation that tries to help with data patterns.

[http://docs.oracle.com/database/121/TGSQL/tgsql_histo.htm](http://docs.oracle.com/database/121/TGSQL/tgsql_histo.htm)

</comment><comment><USER7> Great read!</comment>