Feds announce final e-cigarette rule that nearly bans them - <AUTHOR> http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2016/05/05/feds-expected-announce-final-e-cigarette-rule-could-nearly-ban-them/83951786/ <comment><USER2> The article neglects to mention that the Congressional Act which forces (?) the FDA's hand, was one that Phillip Morris sponsored and lobbied for. I think this is key to understanding why the FDA is acting like this, seemingly against public health, while benefiting incumbent cigarette makers.

        Passage, if it comes, may be politically impossible without
        the negotiated support of Philip Morris, whose Marlboro
        brand helps make it the American tobacco industry's biggest
        player.

        The company's central role, in fact, is a reason that some
        antismoking activists worry that the bill is a deal with the
        devil. Philip Morris's support is also why other major
        tobacco companies — none of which back the legislation — see
        a cunning ploy by Marlboro's maker to seal the company's
        dominant position.

[http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/01/business/01tobacco.html](http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/01/business/01tobacco.html)

<comment><USER3> This is a great example of what lobbying is and isn't. There are objectively good reasons to regulate e-cigarettes. And it's undeniable that tobacco companies are much more heavily regulated than e-cigarette companies. But it's also true that what hurts e-cigarette companies helps tobacco companies.

<comment><USER4> > But it's also true that what hurts e-cigarette companies helps tobacco > companies.

Not really. The major tobacco manufacturers dominate e-cig marketshare in the US.

The way it benefits them is that smaller players can afford the regulation less, ensuring the tobacco manufacturers can get a total lock on the market.

<comment><USER5> Bootleggers and Baptists... I wonder how all the hysterical anti-tobacco organizations, who see anything with nicotine in it as the second coming of tobacco smoking, feel about that? It should feel awkward.

<comment><USER4> Well, I favor it. Just because it favors Big Tobacco doesn't mean it doesn't simultaneously do some good. Big Tobacco's self interest is, in this case, what I consider to be the general interest.

It was actually incredible to me that e-cigs got away with so little regulation for so long in the first place. The only thing I'm worried about is it's too little, too late: there are a lot of people now who are hooked on nicotine who weren't before, and the constant barrage of marketing claiming they are perfectly safe is only making matters worse.

And yes, I recognize that it possibly has some use in helping smokers quit or move to a nicotine delivery system that is most probably less harmful. If that's the justification for e-cigs, then limit sales to smokers.

<comment><USER6> There are a lot more people hooked on nicotine than before? Is there evidence you can cite for that? That's a surprising statement.

E-cigarettes are 100x dorkier than cigarettes and much more annoying to use. Virtually none of my smoker friends stick with them for very long.

<comment><USER4> > There are a lot more people hooked on nicotine than before? Is there > evidence you can cite for that?

I said "who weren't before", i.e., there are new nicotine addicts who became addicted through e-cig usage (and probably would not have become addicted otherwise.) I did not say, and I doubt, that there are more nicotine addicts than before given the general downward trend in smoking.

I generally see two types of people vaping or using e-cigs: middle schoolers and smokers who want an additional fix, often in places they aren't allowed to smoke - for some reason a huge number of vapers, etc. think that no-smoking rules don't apply to them. I've seen people get violent over being asked to stop vaping in a no-smoking area twice.

<comment><USER6> Can you present data to back this up? I would be surprised to learn that it was true. Middle schoolers, for instance, can get cigarettes even more easily than they can e-cigs†, and while vaping indoors was pretty common a couple years ago, it's been more than a year since I saw anyone do it in Chicago.

I guess I'm saying: I'm really skeptical of your claim that e-cigarettes are introducing more people to smoking. Cigarettes already do a pretty amazing job of introducing people to smoking.

† _As the parent of someone who was a middle schooler just last year, let me add that I would be flabbergasted to see one of them vaping, but not entirely surprised to see them with a cigarette. If I saw a teenager vaping, "tobacco" would not be my first guess as to the intoxicant involved._

<comment><USER4> > Can you present data to back this up?

I framed it the way I did because all I have is anecdotes. When I say "a lot of people are addicted to nicotine that weren't before" this is substantiated by my personal knowledge of around three dozen individuals.

> I'm really skeptical of your claim that e-cigarettes are introducing more > people to smoking.

There are more than three hundred million people in the US. E-cigs are a multibillion dollar industry. It would be astonishing if there was no one introduced to nicotine by e-cigs.

> vaping indoors was pretty common a couple years ago, it's been more than a > year since I saw anyone do it in Chicago.

> As the parent of someone who was a middle schooler just last year, let me > add that I would be flabbergasted to see one of them vaping,

Some of this is probably cultural. I've never been to Chicago, but Chicago friends tell me that people are generally much health-focused in Chicago. I live in a southern rural area, and from what a teacher friend tells me and from my own observation, about a third of local middle schoolers vape. I can definitely believe this is an outlier, but even that's too much, in my opinion, considering it didn't have to be that way. There are much fewer smokers, and that's been about constant.

<comment><USER6> "Chicago friends tell me that people are generally much health-focused in Chicago".

This city is practically made of sausage. Its official vegetable is bacon.

I'm sure someone, somewhere has gotten hooked on nicotine by way of e-cigarettes, but it's nowhere close to cigarettes. A 12 year old can get a pack of cigarettes and hand them out to their friends. Try that with one of those dorky e-cig pens.

<comment><USER4> If we assume that childhood obesity is a reasonable proxy for health, then Chicago is healthier than my state: 25% vs 31%. [1] [2] (I use state because nobody is publishing statistics on the local level.)

> Try that with one of those dorky e-cig pens.

They just pass them around if someone doesn't have one.

[1] [http://www.cityofchicago.org/content/dam/city/depts/cdph/CDP...](http://www.cityofchicago.org/content/dam/city/depts/cdph/CDPH/OverweightObesityReportFeb272013.pdf)

[2] [http://msdh.ms.gov/msdhsite/_static/resources/3593.pdf](http://msdh.ms.gov/msdhsite/_static/resources/3593.pdf)

<comment><USER6> They really don't.

<comment><USER4> I'm not speculating. I'm telling you what I see daily in front of the school.

<comment><USER6> I remain skeptical. I did some research, and the reports I found suggest that e-cig usage among teenagers is rare relative to cigarettes, and that most teenage e-cig users are former cigarette smokers. And again, as a parent of two children in roughly this age group, what you're saying you see every day conflicts with my own experience.

I think you're wrong about the general argument you're trying to make about e-cigarettes.

<comment><USER7> _About 5 of every 100 middle school students (5.3%) reported in 2015 that they used electronic cigarettes in the past 30 days—an increase from 0.6% in 2011._

 _About 2 of every 100 middle school students (2.3%) reported in 2015 that they smoked cigarettes in the past 30 days._ [http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/youth...](http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/youth_data/tobacco_use/)

 _Findings from the 2014 National Youth Tobacco Survey show that current e-cigarette use (use on at least 1 day in the past 30 days) among high school students increased from 4.5 percent in 2013 to 13.4 percent in 2014, rising from approximately 660,000 to 2 million students_ [http://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2015/p0416-e-cigarette- use...](http://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2015/p0416-e-cigarette-use.html)

PS: Why do you constantly say stuff like this when fact's are clearly not on your side?

<comment><USER8> But note that on the page you cite it says that overall tobacco use in middle school has not changed since 2011. So kids are substituting a more dangerous product (cigarettes) for a less dangerous product (vaping).

<comment><USER7> That's reversing a long term trend of decreasing tobacco use among middle school students. Current usage patterns mean e-sig users tend to go back to tobacco at some point. Thus e-sig's may in fact act like the mythical 'gateway' drug among middle school students.

 _During 2000--2009, the prevalence of current tobacco use among middle school students declined (15.1% to 8.2%), as did current cigarette use (11.0% to 5.2%) and cigarette smoking experimentation (29.8% to 15.0%)_

[http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5933a2.htm](http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5933a2.htm)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> E-liquid can be made at home using pharmaceutical grade glycerine. In fact, you can vape glycerine on its' own (possibly adding some distilled water to aid in wicking). It has a vaguely sweet flavour. Commercial e-liquid is made using vegetable glycerin, propylene glycol, or some mixture of the two.

In the UK glycerine is available in pharmacists for ~$2 per 200ml. [https://www.boots.com/en/Value-Health-Glycerin- B-P-200ml_852...](https://www.boots.com/en/Value-Health-Glycerin- B-P-200ml_852418/)

The devices themselves can be bought from overseas - AliExpress has many variants, some for <$10.

At that stage, the 'safety of e-cigarettes' is equivalent to the safety of inhaling atomized glycerine. Stage smoke.

Flavourings - you can look for things which are used in aromatherapy (e.g. menthol crystals), but you'll probably want to study whether any chemical changes can occur under heating.

Pre-mixed nicotine is a difficult one. I don't use it so I'm not sure if you can acquire it from trustworthy sources.

I would not want to fall into the habit of using e-cigarettes produced by tobacco companies such as the 'vype' disposable (British American Tobacco). They have a history of producing methods to increase the addictive potential of cigarettes, ramping up nicotine levels, to cheating on tests, using ammonia to produce 'freebase' nicotine, etcetera. I wouldn't be surprised if the same bag of tricks comes out in the e-cigarette market.

<comment><USER10> "atomized glycerine" drawn over a hot metal element. It's that heated element that biochemists find worrisome. We regularly use hot metal elements ("catalysts") in the lab to "activate" (typically to generate free radicals) small molecules along a synthetic pathway. If you draw glycerine, or any glycol, over a heated element you will generate products like formaldehyde. Inhaled formaldehyde is a health hazard; often associated with cancer. The flavorings are often aldehydes and ketones and are even more likely to generate free radicals, which are implicated to an even greater degree with triggering cancers. The real social health concern with vaping vs smoking is while we have a hundred years worth of statistical data on smoking - we only are just now guessing at the "well, it's better than smoking" conclusion with vaping.

<comment><USER11> It's a red hot element too, I've never seen a vaping device with anything like good control over more than some basic resistance parameters. Basically you can vape over a cherry red wire, or a dull red wire. IIRC that's well over 800 degrees, which is past "vaping" in any real sense.

<comment><USER12> Temperature-control mode has been available for a couple years now. [http://vaping360.com/temperature-control-a-vaping- revolution...](http://vaping360.com/temperature-control-a-vaping-revolution/)

<comment><USER13> But it is not a requirement, which maybe it should be for safety. It is pretty obvious that cooked and inhaled chemicals should be under FDA regulation. What current regulations are proposed? A warning sticker? Restricting vape sellers from calling their products "perfectly safe" until more evidence is available. Sounds perfectly reasonable to me.

<comment><USER14> Marketing and labeling restrictions are something most of the vaping community could support, as well as requirements to list ingredients used in liquids. The burdensome fees to get a product through regulatory approval is another matter entirely and could effectively destroy the harm reduction (not elimination) these products can provide over cigarettes.

<comment><USER11> Yeah, this isn't the way to go, especially when the other option for people will be cigarettes. We have to be honest though, about the popularity of vaping beyond the community of ex-smokers, and the concern for that growing group. If you're coming at this as a non-smoker, the "less harmful than ciggies" doesn't work so well.

<comment><USER14> > and the concern for that growing group

Human beings are wired to do drugs, all throughout history we have sought ways to get high. On the face of it, nicotine itself isn't any worse than caffeine (aside from the vasoconstriction) - both are highly addictive, but alone without any other substances aiding in the addiction it is relatively easy to quit.

It really amuses me that as a society we are finally starting to end the war on drugs (slowly, but surely) yet because of the public opinion on cigarettes _ANY_ alternative delivery system for nicotine is stigmatized. I don't smell after I've been around people that vape, and many people I've been around that quit smoking through e-cigs are substantially healthier than before - I think that alone is enough reason to _incentivize_ these products.

You aren't going to stop people from seeking pleasure, trying to "save the children" is almost universally nothing more than FUD to try to pass a political agenda. Are people going to pick up vaping without ever smoking a cigarette in the first place? Sure. But there was nothing stopping them from picking the worse alternative either, and I would much rather they don't. For all the talk the FDA makes about this being in the interest of protecting public health, I think it's going to do a lot more damage than good.

Lastly, this is only going to hurt small businesses who have started a multi- billion dollar industry. Modern vaping hardware evolved from hand-made devices built from flashlights, a frightening time in the history of the community where ohms law was something anyone who wanted a satisfying experience was familiar with. Modern devices have substantially better safety features, and all of that is going to go away to satisfy the public perception. I hope the FDA is proud of themselves, they have condemned tens of thousands of people to death.

<comment><USER11> You accuse me of trotting out "Save the children"... which I didn't do... then you end on "It's going to hurt small businesses".

I mean... lol

<comment><USER14> I had no intention to accuse you in particular, however if you read the news following this article that is precisely the message that is being parroted.

This isn't a single-faceted issue we are discussing here.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> This is a prime example of Regulatory Capture [1].

"That means nearly all every e-cigarette on the market — and every different flavor and nicotine level — would require a separate application for federal approval. Each application could cost $1 million or more."

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

<comment><USER16> Does anyone know why each application would be so costly? That amount seems ridiculously large to me.

<comment><USER14> The FDA's position on tobacco products is such that they realize they will continue to exist, but they certainly don't want to incentivize their continued use and development. Of course, the high cost of the application results in regulatory capture, so this is more of a handout to the existing tobacco industry more than anything. Imperial Brands and Reynolds American both own products that are grandfathered in (Blu and Vuse respectively), and can afford the cost of the applications (especially when you consider they sell cartridges fro these products at $5 a piece for under 1ml of liquid, which is why the majority of "vapers" buy higher grade equipment and liquid in bottles - these devices are less cost effective than traditional cigarettes).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> I am confused. Most things in this article talk about tobacco products, but many e-juice and e-cig products actually do not contain tobacco, though they do contain nicotine. Is this just failure on the author's part, or is this bill not really going to affect e-cigs afterall?

<comment><USER18> It's representative of the equivocation being used by the anti-tobacco lobby to expand to a device that doesn't involve tobacco. The ultimate inversion of the tobacco industry helping them would be surprising to me if I weren't familiar with their efforts to keep Swedish snus out of the EU (where it is illegal.)

edit: "The widespread use of snus by Swedish men (estimated at 30% of Swedish male ex-smokers), displacing tobacco smoking and other varieties of snuff, is thought to be responsible for the incidence of tobacco-related mortality in men being significantly lower in Sweden than any other European country. In contrast, since women traditionally are less likely to use snus, their rate of tobacco-related deaths in Sweden can be compared to that of other European countries."

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snus#Health_consequences](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snus#Health_consequences)

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> A perfect example of regulating your competitors out of business.

</comment><comment><USER20> They haven't just done this for e-cigarettes, they've done it for cigars as well. My understanding is that any new cigar released in the US will need approval from the FDA at a fairly exhorbitant cost.

This will of course massively favour the big producers who can afford to deal with it and destroy the boutique brands.

</comment><comment><USER21> This report from the CDC:

[http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/65/wr/mm6514a1.htm](http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/65/wr/mm6514a1.htm)

shows that a good part of the middle- and high-school student population replaced their cigarette consumption by electronic cigarettes. But this is another nicotine-delivery system, and, as the report says, "Nicotine exposure during adolescence, a critical period for brain development, can cause addiction, might harm brain development, and could lead to sustained tobacco product use".

<comment><USER22> But AFAIK selling both cigarettes and e-cigarettes to minors was _already_ illegal, so how does this law change anything?

<comment><USER23> It's not illegal federally and most states are only just now getting around to banning ecig sales to minors.

<comment><USER24> Sorry for the accidental downvote.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> Here's the actual rule: [https://s3.amazonaws.com/public- inspection.federalregister.g...](https://s3.amazonaws.com/public- inspection.federalregister.gov/2016-10685.pdf)

From what I can tell it would regulate all nicotine containing juice and all hardware that is intended to be used with that. So a lot of small business that build these mod-boxes and things will not be in compliance.

It's too bad, this really hurts small business.

<comment><USER26> i suspect some will rebrand as marijuana focused vape companies, that will also happen to work as ecigs, especially as marijuana becomes more legalised across the nation.

Though i further suspect someone will try to get the FDA to pass similar rules for marijuana products, something i dont believe it can do until marijuana is legalized at the federal level (it would be hard to get federal approval for a device thats designed to break federal law)

<comment><USER14> The dispensaries in WA already sell the same devices as well as pre-filled cartridges containing oil extracted from cannabis. I don't think the FDA would buy it though.

<comment><USER25> Which are awesome by the way.

<comment><USER14> Agreed, combustion of any kind produces things you really shouldn't be inhaling. Inhalation of anything that isn't clean air (not much of that anymore these days, though) is potentially hazardous, but the cannabis vape cartridges are certainly a better way to go about it (and less smelly too). It will be unfortunate if these FDA regulations hurt these too, not that the FDA is particularly fond of cannabis either (and I can easily foresee similar regulations being passed when it is eventually legalized at a federal level).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> Can anyone fill me in as to whether or not this will apply to any 'e-juice' products that do not contain nicotine?

I think the 'competitive vape' scene use nicotine-free substances, so I'm aware they exist. But that whole 'different formulations' thing sounds very troublesome, even on the basic level?

Many thanks in advance to any who might have closer tabs on this subject.

<comment><USER28> The general presumption is no it wouldn't effect ejuice containing no nicotine. The general formula for ejuice is vegetable glycerin, propylene glycol, flavor extracts, and liquid nicotine based in PG. Sine all these ingredients are generally available without regulation ( minus nicotine ) I feel that I would be hard to claim that these constitute a tobacco product.

<comment><USER27> Thank you very much for the distinctions. This bodes well for a non- consumption idea I had somewhat based on the existing technology, though with no intention of including nicotine in the platform. I'll have to see what the local shops plan on doing to get a first-hand feel for potential supplier issues. Again, very much appreciate the shared perspective.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> My only opinion on this: Nicotine vapour can be absorbed through skin. That, and the lack of any possible filtration, means it is a totally different beast in terms of bystanders. I don't want to be around nicotine vapour. Any and all legislation/regulation that keeps me from having to share a bus/plane/bar/ship/hallway with that cloud is a good thing.

Whether it's better or worse for current smokers is beside the point. That's their problem and they can solve it themselves. I care about my health and me remaining not influenced or even addicted to nicotine.

<comment><USER30> You're being entirely dogmatic; nicotine is hardly bad for you at all on its own. The consensus is that it probably doesn't have any role in causing cancer, although it might accelerate an existing metastasized cancer. There are some adverse effects on developing fetuses, but those are relatively minor even when the mother is smoking a pack a day.

Consuming nicotine yourself is somewhat bad for your health, and its irresponsible for a pregnant woman to smoke it because it _will_ hurt their child. But in the doses that can be achieved through secondhand consumption are so terribly low as to be totally negligible. It's absolutely ridiculous to worry about being around someone who's vaping.

Second hand smoke is a problem not because of nicotine, its a problem because of other chemicals in smoke, and its only actually harmful if you _live_ or _work_ with a smoker. You have to be exposed to it constantly and live in an environment where the smoke has penetrated every porous object and seeps into your clothes and your food and your water.

And your comment about nicotine vapor being absorbed through skin is misleading, because you suggest that cigarette smoke isn't absorbed through the skin and that there's a significant amount absorbed through the skin relative to the amount inhaled. Perhaps the root of your confusion is that the nicotine/glycol liquid solution can be absorbed through the skin and spilling it on yourself is enough to get quite a high dose of nicotine if you don't quickly wash it off. Before ecigarette fluids standardized on glycol, they used other solvents which allowed faster absorption through skin, which made it realistic to give yourself lethal nicotine poisoning by spilling it on yourself.

If you want to avoid the ecig cloud for the sake of avoiding the smell, I can't disagree with you, and I'd support legislation prohibiting vaping in public indoor spaces.

Just please stop making up stupid shit. It is inconceivable that your health would be influenced by spending time in a public space with someone vaping. It would be even more absurd to conceive of developing an addiction that way.

<comment><USER14> It is certainly not absurd to not like being bombarded with a cloud of smoke or vapor, at the very least. The vast majority of people who use e-cigs follow the same etiquette as smokers, but there's always asshats in society who care about nobody but themselves.

<comment><USER18> I don't drive; do you?

<comment><USER14> Not sure how driving is relevant, but yes, I do on occasion drive (though usually it's the wife behind the wheel). Unfortunately I do not live in a public transit friendly or walkable city.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> This seems pretty draconic. To compare with a recent law passed here, in Belgium:

\- A fee of 4.000 Euro to bring a product to market.

\- Juice bottles of maximum 10ml

\- No remote selling of e-cigarettes (but liquids are for some reason allowed)

\- No advertising (with some exceptions)

<comment><USER32> (Just a small note: "draconic" means "dragon-like". You mean "draconian".)

<comment><USER31> Thanks. It's "draconisch" in dutch. And words with -isch are typically translated to -ic in english, hence the confusion.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> There are a lot of posts on this threat that assume nicotine is bad. "Bad" badly needs to be defined. Worse than other stimulants? If not, why not accept a choice people make to vape?

Being a bluenose _is_ bad. It's bad for everyone's freedom of choice. It's bad because it introduces social costs for no supportable reason. Don't be a bluenose.

Lastly, this is transparently a rearguard action by cigarette makers, who have been shown to be selling a deadly product. That's really bad.

<comment><USER34> Nicotine in and of itself is a wonderful drug, far better and less harmful than caffeine. The problem is not nicotine, it's tobacco and the other things that come with it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> Well this has, more or less, killed my ejuice business.

<comment><USER35> That may have been the intent. The million dollar a flavor fee isn't too large a hurdle for the likes of Phillip Morris, but will be ruinous for most of their competition.

</comment></comment><comment><USER36> What's up with the numbers in the title?

<comment><USER37> I believe those are supposed to represent votes for Yea, Nay, Abstain...

<comment><USER38> No, they're the "social sharing" scores from the strip along the left hand side of the article page. If you're not very careful about how you highlight the title of the article, you'll get them too when you copy and paste. They aren't part of the title and will presumably be removed when a moderator notices.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yep, my mistake, didn't notice until after I submitted.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER39> Gwern compiled an excellent assessment of nicotine as a supplement.

[https://www.gwern.net/Nicotine](https://www.gwern.net/Nicotine)

This regulation is disingenuous and misinformed, if only because vaping solutions don't contain nicotine as a necessary component any more than bubble gum or throat lozenges do. The regulation seems to try to cover for this by including new rules for only other optional ingredients: its flavorings.

Conflating it with tobacco smoking is their basis for passing as a protection measure for children, but it bears little in common, chemically or medically, with it. When ultrasonic models appear, they'll piggyback off of existing regulation to include them, but it'll be a bankrupt argument.

</comment><comment><USER40> Link to the announcement from FDA which contains more info:

[http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/uc...](http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/ucm499234.htm)

</comment><comment><USER41> They are regulating the hardware as well? What is to differentiate between an ecig battery and a flashlight battery? Are Tesla vehicles now going to be considered nicotine devices? That's absolutely ridiculous.

</comment><comment><USER42> So as usually kill the little guy and make big corporations even richer. The same big corporations who then complain that there is "too much regulation" on CNBC.

</comment><comment><USER43> Nearly bans them...for children.

</comment><comment><USER44> VΛ

</comment><comment><USER45> It seems like more and more of the legal system is based on "rules" issued by unelected officials, and less based on actual laws passed by Congress.

<comment><USER46> These rules were issued by the FDA under the provisions adopted in "actual laws passed by Congress", principally the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act of 2009.

<comment><USER45> I'm not entirely comfortable with Congress delegating its authority to unelected people for unlimited periods of time.

The fact is, what was perfectly legal yesterday will be illegal shortly, despite no new laws being passed, and no members of Congress taking responsibility.

That's called rule of man, not rule of law.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER47> It's kind of sad that the only answer to this type of thing we have seen in (relatively) recent times is Reagans disastrous deregulation, nothing like Northern Securities Co. v. United States or the Sherman Anti-trust act in over 100 years (unless you count NIRA or the Robinson-Patman Act), which I don't. The FTC just approves mergers, that's the only change, one more step.</comment>


Ask HN: Please review my webapp (and help with autism research) - <AUTHOR>

For the past 6 months or so the lab I work at has been working on a system to administer studies and surveys related to autism. We wanted something more customizable than something like SurveyMonkey, so I was tasked to create our own version.
You can see the result at http://thegatewayproject.org
Usability was extensively tested and geared towards autistic and disabled, so the design and layout is very simple.
Note: by default, registration will only enable the first survey, which is pretty basic and unremarkable. If you'd like to check out some of the more sophisticated ones, shoot me an email at sngardner {AT: wisc.edu with [HN] in the subject and I'll set you up with a test account.
Thanks for any feedback you can give us, and feel free to email me directly at sngardner {AT: wisc.edu if you have any technical questions / bug reports. <comment><USER2> I don't know much about autism, but I would suspect that when dealing with any challenged groups you would want to use a design that is high-contrast with simple layout.

There is a lot of text to read on your homepage, and the menu on the left is fairly plain (which is good), but doesn't really stand out.

Also, using 3 lavenderish colors don't provide a contrast between different sections.

Why have multiple pages for registration and email? why not just have that on the home page?

When I create an account, it doesn't just give me access to the site, it makes me then login from the login page. This could be done better, when I create an account, just have it log me in.

Once logged in, I again have WAY too much text telling me about ?? i don't know because I can't be bothered to read so much. You should be able to visually display this info so that so much text isn't needed.

The first page again has a list of 9 options for the first question. I think that is way too much, it is overwhelming. And I think most people don't know what type of connection they have.

Then when you get into 'sex', it gets REALLY interesting... Really?? there are 5 different types of sex?

anyway, I think you get the point. I can't imagine somebody who has any disability having an easy time with this.

But as I said, I don't know much about autism, so maybe this is the type of information organization which makes sense to them.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for taking the time to respond. You've managed to come up with suggestions that would result in the first iteration of the software I came up with.

The results of the focus testing we did (mostly with a group of autistic adults) ended up resulting in most of the peculiarities you described.

Incidentally, if anyone has any experience doing design work for disabled individuals, I'd love to hear your design processes. This project had a decidedly "too many cooks in the kitchen" sort of feel to it, and though I think it turned out pretty well I think the process could have gone smoother.

<comment><USER2> WOW!, that is VERY cool. It just goes to show that the most important thing is know your audience.

However (and this is just a suggestion), now that you have this new version, and I suspect the old version, maybe you could do a side by side comparison to see how your targets actually interact with the different designs.

It's entirely possible that your subjects ask for one thing, when they really prefer another.

<http://noisebetweenstations.com/personal/weblogs/?p=1742></comment></comment></comment>


Writing an OS in Rust: Kernel Heap - phil-opp http://os.phil-opp.com/kernel-heap.html <comment><AUTHOR> I really love this series. I particularly appreciate the emphasis on developing safe abstractions: it's what makes it developing an OS _in Rust_ (following the Rust philosophy) as opposed to just developing an OS (which happens to be written in Rust).

<comment><USER2> Yup, really like the whole approach Rust takes to things.

Also as an aside, the more I work with Rust's iterators the more I really like them. Being able to specify move semantics by replacing iter() with into_iter() is just sublime.

As I spend time in C++'s <algorithm> the more I wish for Rust to take over the world.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Hi phil-opp,

I'm following your blog. I'm wondering if you might have any tips for a ARM port. Thank you for sharing your work with us!

<comment><USER4> I thought the same.

I also looked into stuff like bare metal raspberry pi with rust..

But then I realized, that I take very much for granted. Even if I would get a kernel running, I wouldn't have any driver support.

<comment><USER5> Running a Rust-based OS on the Raspberry Pi is probably a no-go at the moment; too much proprietary code at the bootloader and hardware level.

You might get more luck with other ARM boards that is open down to the bare- metal. Sorry, but I am unable to recommended any boards, but a search for open ARM boards might give you some pointers.

<comment><USER4> Banana Pi? Galileo?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I wonder if you can do the same dodgy stuff Linux does to load kernel modules? Would there be a non-unsafe way of going about that?</comment>


IPad 2 gets glasses-free 3D display using front-facing camera for head tracking - <AUTHOR> http://www.tuaw.com/2011/04/11/ipad-2-gets-glasses-free-3d-display-using-front-facing-camera-fo/ <comment><USER2> See also <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h5QSclrIdlE> , which is actually a product that you can buy, though I think it was never localized for the US.

Edit: Also, <http://johnnylee.net/projects/wii/> , under "Head Tracking for Desktop VR Displays using the Wii Remote" (down a bit).

(Also, to be clear, I just mean these as interesting "see alsos". I am not saying "it's been done" (so what?) or "it doesn't work" (I have no direct experience to make a judgment). Nor am I saying anyone accused me otherwise. The iPad is still a potential interesting sweet spot for this tech.)

<comment><USER3> [http://kotaku.com/#!5541044/looksleys-line-up- micro+review-b...](http://kotaku.com/#!5541044/looksleys-line-up-micro+review- broken-promise)

Looks like it did come out in the US, although from the review it looks like we might not have heard about it because the effect just didn't work well enough.

Maybe this implementation will deliver? It looks fairly promising, and the effect looks like it might be more pronounced on the (compared to the DSi) large screen of the iPad. Of course, I'd like to pass judgement on it personally, so here's hoping for a demo we can hold in our hands soon.

<comment><USER4> This seems like a big deal even if it didn't work in the previous attempts. In part because I feel like it eventually will work.

I'm excited and impressed by it. Although I do get a little disappointment that I didn't think of it. What the heck is my brain doing in my free time?!

<comment><USER5> _What the heck is my brain doing in my free time?!_

If you're bored... people ask for a touch sensitive rear surface - how about using the rear camera for gesture control?

Wave your finger in front of it to scroll, that kind of thing.

Also, some acoustic gesture recognition would be good to pick up one/two/three fingernail taps on the back.

<comment><USER4> Apple's already patented it. I don't want to get sued into oblivion. :-)

[http://www.addictivetips.com/mobile/iphone-control- through-c...](http://www.addictivetips.com/mobile/iphone-control-through- camera-gestures-apple-patent-reveals/)

<comment><USER5> That's annoying, but it only seems to cover tap detection by accelerometer where I was thinking of tap detection by audio click, which definitely seems plausible from a quick test of the sound recorder.

Also it only covers finger swipe detection/direction determining, where I was also imagining gestures from holding fingers a few centimeters away, such as scissoring two fingers, thumb/finger flick, two finger scroll movement, two fingertips touching, etc. A quick test with the iPhone camera suggests that might have to be too carefully positioned to be practical, but should be possible at some level.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Johnny Lee demonstrating Wii-based head tracking using the same plates-on- sticks imagery in 2007: <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jd3-eiid-Uw>

Guy mounts two large framed LCDs in a wall and uses this effect to create a very effective virtual window which adjusts the view depending on viewer's position: [http://www.engadget.com/2010/04/15/winscape-virtual- window-f...](http://www.engadget.com/2010/04/15/winscape-virtual-window- features-wiimote-headtracking-absolutel/) ("Winscape") in April 2010.

</comment><comment><USER6> Does anyone have a reference for the camera transforms this is doing? I've got as far as figuring out that it's using an asymmetric frustum, but plugging the "obvious" numbers into OpenGL gave me obviously wrong results.

</comment><comment><USER7> I wonder what happens when several people try and look over your shoulder. How does it handle multiple heads?

<comment><USER8> It could only render for a single viewpoint. I would imagine the simplest approach (i.e. without tracking) would be to render for the viewpoint of the closest detected head.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> dont be fooled, this is not 3D as in "stereoscopic" 3D like avatar. You will not get the feeling of depth because for that you need a different image for each eye (only achieved with glasses or a special screen (like 3DS or at the movies). This is just a 3D geometry trick...

<comment><USER5> _Do_ be fooled. What do you gain by refusing to be fooled?

<comment><USER9> Well I'm just annoyed because many people still say that the current 3D TVs dont bring anything, or that the technology with glasses will disappear soon. They think that someone will find a magic software trick to make it 3D without glasses, maybe by tracking eyes. But it is impossible, it is a misunderstanding on how stereoscopic 3D actually works. Current 3D technology is actually really good, though the glasses will surely get much lighter.

<comment><USER10> You're probably correct in saying that glasses won't disappear anytime soon, and it is impossible with eye/head tracking alone to achieve stereoscopic 3D, but I'd like to bet that sometime in the future a holographic display could be created. One that sends different images to different regions of the room, such that your left eye is literally seeing a different view than your right eye, without shutters or polarization to mimic it.

To truly get there, you'd have to actually change the path length of each ray, to allow your eyes' focus to agree with their convergence (a common complaint with current 3D, where the eyes are forced to focus on light coming from 3 meters away but converge on an object thats "1 meter" away.)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> So you have to constantly move your head to have some 3D illusion, otherwise if you not moving your head it's just plain 2D. It would be more interesting to combine with stereoscopic 3D, but even with this we are still far from real 3D. The next interesting thing will be real hologram displays using rewritable holograms: <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b84RBl-jgZM>

<comment><USER12> Not just moving your head...you'll also get the effect from moving just the iPad. Will be interesting how much of the effect holds up from just subtle movement of either.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> Mr Doob tried something similar a while back...

<http://mrdoob.com/blog/post/643>

</comment><comment><USER14> This is pretty amazing. I think that this coupled with multi-touch interactivity could be pretty revolutionary. It turns the iPad into an "iWindow".

<comment><USER15> Yes! As I was looking at the cube, I wanted the viewer to reach out and manipulate it: spin, pinch, what-have-you.

I think the worst thing that could happen is that this sort of experience get baked into the core of the iPad's UI (or the UI of any tablet). But I could see imaging applications (MRIs?) where it would be valuable.

<comment><USER16> I suspect that touching the screen would, at all but one depth plane, break the illusion. The brain is eerily good at fooling itself, until it receives contradictory information.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> This is pretty cool. I'm most impressed that the iPad 2 has the horsepower to do all of the face-tracking and geometry rendering.

As others have mentioned here, Johnny Lee had something similar running with the Wii hardware but as far as I remember the display was all driven by a PC which was (presumably) much more powerful than the iPad.

<comment><USER3> Johnny Lee's version was definitely cool, but it was more of a clever hack. It took advantage of the fact that the Wiimote is basically a very cheap IR camera, which normally tracks the IR light coming from the sensor bar. By using the Wiimote as a stationary camera, and wearing infrared LEDs on his face (attached to safety goggles, iirc) he could track the position of user's head. I'd imagine the Wii hardware would definitely be up to that task, as it is basically just the inverse of what it does already.

Also, if you really want to be impressed with the iPad's rendering capabilities, check out Infinity Blade. That will blow your mind.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> This looks like it would support some fun new game mechanics on the iPad. I can imagine some sort of game where you have to look at the screen from different angles in order to perceive the route that your character (or a ball, vehicle, etc.) ought to take. Even something like 3D Pong would be kind of neat.

</comment><comment><USER19> It's starting to feel like the future.

<comment><USER20> Yup. I'm wondering when more average people are going to start noticing this.

<comment><USER21> I'm sure your father was saying the same thing forty years ago.

<comment><USER19> But this is what I was told the future would be when I was a kid.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> As someone said, this was done for Wii several years ago. I think the idea is more practical for iPad, since you can rotate the screen instead of moving around. I would probably be more likely to use this if the position tracking was done via gyroscope.

</comment><comment><USER23> This could be extended with eye tracking to create even more impressive functions.

<comment><USER24> I doubt the iPad's camera is good enough for eye tracking but maybe in future devices.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> Is this more or less what the new nintendo handheld does? How do they differ if not?

<comment><USER26> The 3DS screen is closer to one of those lenticular "3d" things you'd see on a ruler or a bookmark as a kid. It uses two interlaced images that are fed to each eye separately. The iPad 2 screen is just a normal screen.

[http://loot-ninja.com/2010/06/22/how-the-nintendo-3ds-screen...](http://loot- ninja.com/2010/06/22/how-the-nintendo-3ds-screen-works/)

Basically, the iPad 2 demo only gives the illusion of being 3D when you move it, but since your head and hands are pretty much constantly moving it should look "mostly 3D" if it has enough sensitivity.

<comment><USER25> Thx, yeah I knew the ipad screen was a standard display, but having only seen ads for the new nintendo I wasn't sure what their tech was.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> So this is "3d" now? Wow, I've got a lot of cool stuff that is 3d, including a prototype compiz plugin that does roughly the same thing. Gives you spatial context for windows on your desktop environment via Kinect and OpenCL.

I had no idea I could get away with calling this "3d", and have people in the comments thinking it's the same technology as the 3ds.

<comment><USER3> 3D on a screen is always an illusion of some sort. The 3DS is just a different illusion (albeit a more technically involved one, for sure). It's not any more "3D" than this. Perspective not changing when your head moves is one of the things that breaks a 3D illusion; with this, you don't have that problem.

<comment><USER9> There is a big difference between old style 3D (that games have had for dozen years) and stereoscopic 3D where your brain captures the depth because each eye sees a _different_ image. Seeing depth makes it a much more involving experience.

<comment><USER28> Do you still see 3D with one eye closed?

Most people instinctively say "no". But the reality is that there are far more cues for depth than just stereoscopic vision. Someone with one eye still perceives depths by judging relative object sizes, changes in focus and subtle changes in objects when we move relative to the object.

Head tracking will almost certainly play a big part in coming 3D techs (with or without stereoscopic tech). Add to this eye tracking to adjust virtual focus, and you start to get "real" 3D. One day!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> That hurts my retenal neurons just thinking about perceiving that.

</comment><comment><USER30> that is sick</comment>


Julia v1.2 has been released - <AUTHOR> https://devclass.com/2019/08/20/julia-1-2-gets-star-for-special-interest-computations/ <comment><AUTHOR> Release notes here, quite a few changes in the standard library:

[https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/blob/v1.2.0/NEWS.md](https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/blob/v1.2.0/NEWS.md)</comment>


This Apple Ad Is Nuts: How Our Devices Turn Us Away From Reality - <AUTHOR> http://www.fastcodesign.com/1673020/in-20-years-we-re-all-going-to-realize-this-apple-ad-is-nuts

<comment><USER2> The behavior is nuts, not the ad. The ad is perfectly in tune with the unfortunate reality. Today people engage more with gadgets and are obsessed with capturing everything on camera.

While Apple and other manufacturers are the cause of the former, it's all the startups feeding on people's narcissistic tendencies thats caused the later, and in my opinion, the worst part.

We're not going to look back at this in the future and shake our heads at the absurdity of the ad, but the absurdity of the culture.

</comment><comment><USER3> true. kissing in the rain and then check your mobile if you picture u taken is ok for facebook, well that's depressing.</comment>


Going Somewhere? (Mozilla Firefox) - <AUTHOR> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7gi46YO1o_Y

<comment><USER2> >When it's personal use Firefox.

If only online privacy were that simple.

<comment><AUTHOR> As with other aspects: it's a start.

It's also awareness.</comment></comment>


Semantic Style Transfer and Turning Two-Bit Doodles into Fine Artwork - <AUTHOR> http://arxiv.org/abs/1603.01768 <comment><AUTHOR> There's an implementation of the algorithm on GitHub: [https://github.com/alexjc/neural-doodle](https://github.com/alexjc/neural- doodle)</comment>


"Hacker Monthly": now available in e-book format - <AUTHOR> http://hackermonthly.posterous.com/now-you-can-read-hacker-monthly-on-ebook-read

<comment><USER2> I just got the paper version in the post yesterday and it's awesome! Keep up the good work, I'll definitely subscribe if ypu make that an option.

<comment><USER3> Agreed. Simply fantastic.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> just got mine this morning — I thought I saw in the editor's note that you had no prior design experience. I don't believe you! =) Looks really, really great.

My only criticism is the giant blocks of text — breaking them up with a pullout quote/picture/chart would do wonders. (I worked in newspaper layout before getting involved in programming)

If you're looking for a design book, my newspaper swore by Tim Harrower's "Newspaper Designer's Handbook".

But again, excellent job! I'm excited for future issues, and, like @almost, you can also definitely count me as a subscriber.

</comment><comment><USER5> Oddly enough, I find the print harder to read. Multi columns, distracting pictures, huge quotes to take me away from the content, and low font to line- height ratios...

I guess I've just gotten use to reading online, esp w/ readable.

<comment><AUTHOR> Do you mean the pdf file?

The e-book version is based on html, so there are no multiple columns, and the text is flowable, searchable, resizable, etc.

<comment><USER5> I guess I'll have to try the e-book version and see what I'm missing out on.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Is it just me, or has <http://hackermonthly.com> been Fireballed? I can't get it to respond.

<comment><USER7> Isn't "fireballed" a term used for when daringfireball.net/ John Gruber links to a website and it goes down?

Like the slashdot effect from simpler times.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Is there any way to get this into iBooks directly from the iPad, or do you have to sync with iTunes? If the latter, that's annoying.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yeah, going through iTunes is a drag.

Unfortunately, that's the only way we know it will work.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> Is it me, or is there no plaintext or PDF version?

<comment><USER10> PDF: <http://hackermonthly.com/hackermonthly-issue1-revised.pdf>

<comment><USER9> Thanks ;-) Got it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I'm sorry, but I had to laugh when the "Hacker Monthly" blog post told me on which devices I would be able to read the eBook. You should know your audience a little better than that I think. Just being snarky :)

The easiest way to read the eBook: save the PDF to the eBook folder on your DropBox and it's already on all your devices.

<comment><USER12> Right, because every hacker news reader uses dropbox...

<comment><USER13> If they don't they should ;)</comment></comment></comment>


The Coolest Guy On The Internet - <AUTHOR> http://www.altvirtual.com/tech-news/coolest-guy-internet.html SEO Contest to see who the coolest guy on the internet is. <comment><USER2> I'm not sure if I should flag this or vote this up for trying to harness the hackernews effect to win an seo contest.

On the one hand it's evil, but on the cooler hand it's really clever.

<comment><AUTHOR> hackernews effect ?? reminds me off the slashdot effect.

<comment><USER2> Being on hacker news seems to HUGELY affect a links google rank.

This is anecdotal btw, I haven't measured it in any real way.</comment></comment></comment>


The Express Dive System – Dyson Awards - <AUTHOR> http://www.jamesdysonaward.org/projects/express-dive/ <comment><USER2> Any idea what kind of dive time and what depth limitations this has?</comment>


Not raising funds to stay small and happy - <AUTHOR> https://antoine.finkelstein.fr/not-raising-funds-to-stay-small-and-happy-938535c9c09d <comment><USER2> I also identify with the author. Tried the startup game on two occasions and got burned 2 times (one as senior engineer the other as CTO) - somehow both companies managed to sell but not at a price that made my shares worth it.

I then swore I would never be an employee again and decided to join an accelerator but crashed out. Now I am freelancing and building a bootstrapped business on the side: much less headaches, I earn a good living, and get to build something I am passionate about while remaining master of my destiny. Not seeking VC money nor VC-esque returns, just a meaningful life where my work is valued and provides enough to live comfortably.

<comment><USER3> May I ask what is your bootstrapped business?

I am about to start one myself and I am curious about how and why experienced devs choose their ambitious side projects

<comment><USER2> I am building a B2B platform for logistics and taxi companies to store dash cam footage and easily retrieve and annotate them (for accidents, training, etc.).

We already have one interested customer, so trying to finish the MVP by January!

<comment><USER4> If you're only that far how do you "earn a good living"?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Building a small boot-strapped company vs a funded company is in a large part dictated by market and product rather than by individual intention.

If you try to build a funded company in a space that can't sustain one you will struggle, likewise if you try to build a small bootstrapped company in a space that can you will similarly struggle.

If your direct competitors have a much better product then you (because they have more dev/product/ux resources than you), a professional sales org, marketing machine, etc. then it's very hard to compete. Your acquisition costs and churn will be high which will severely hurt your ability to grow to a sustainable level.

There are some ways to compete by going after the customers your competitors don't want (if they're price sensitive, too small, wanting unusual customization, services, niche needs, etc.) but you should think about upfront what your strategy is going to be.

<comment><USER6> > If your direct competitors have a much better product then you (because they > have more dev/product/ux resources than you), a professional sales org, > marketing machine, etc. then it's very hard to compete. Your acquisition > costs and churn will be high which will severely hurt your ability to grow > to a sustainable level.

I would disagree. If the customers are comfortable with your product, and they don't feel a big reason to switch, they probably won't. This is more true in the B2B space where customers tend to be less finicky. There are plenty of products that haven't innovated in years, but still enjoy decent sales.

<comment><USER5> Even a couple of percentage points of churn is a big deal in the long term as you have to keep replacing those customers just to stand still.

If you're in a moribund space you can get away with a MVP product for a long time, but if you're in a highly competitive space where your competitors have a significantly better product and a better sales team it has a real impact.

The other major factor driving churn in bootstrapped b2bs is they largely sell to SMEs who have a high-rate of insolvency.

<comment><USER7> Being bootstrapped doesn't mean you can fall asleep. You still have to fight for your customers, however VC investment is usually not what will help you in the fight. It is even common for startups to fail _because_ of the funding, when they try to reach the goals which are not realistic, just to provide returns for the investors.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Rarely comment, but definitely identify with this. Given HN's general focus on growth and funding, I think it's great/important for an article/concept like this to be given some reach.

I find that there isn't enough critical thought given to why one ought to pursue an aggressive growth strategy. And that generally, staying small is seen as a failure to grow, rather than a conscious effort to grow in line with ones own life. Going from 3 to 100 employees in a (relatively) short period will naturally have a large impact on one's personal life and mental/emotional state. I think it's important to ask, before one ventures into that kind of adventure, whether or not you're okay risking mental/emotional (and arguably physical) stability in place of the adventure, and the potential financial windfall.

There's nothing wrong with saying no to that risk. This is a short life we have, and spending it chasing growth to keep up w/ the momentum of the extremes of capitalism doesn't need to be your game ;)

[edit] Prefer my last paragraph be written as: There's nothing wrong with saying no to that risk. This is a short life we have, and __if you 're __spending it chasing growth to keep up w / the momentum of the extremes of capitalism, it doesn't need to be your game ;)

<comment><USER9> Startup is aimed at growth, to become next unicorn. If your business is not aimed at growth, then it is just regular business.

YCombinator is incubator for startups, hence their HN site is aimed at startups too.

<comment><USER10> I can see why YCombinator would be biased toward startups that raise funding, HOWEVER: I've always understood the word 'startup' to simply mean any new business.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I can definitely agree with this. I was developing [http://framestr.com](http://framestr.com) (SaaS), and at the time, we had to bring on a 2nd developer and server costs were increasing (we all wanted to avoid raising funds and aim to bootstrap). Rather than raise funds, my partners and I built a small SEO business. We ended up scaling the SEO business to around $200k MRR.

Having been through the financing process before for at a previous start-up, I can say that the time invested in the side business was not a whole lot different than time invested in fund raising (+ meetings, reporting to investors after the raise).

By hustling, we were able to build a nice life style business, while being able to grow our tech SaaS. At the same time, we had much more flexibility and have been able to build / invest in what we want, and for what we believe is best long-term.

<comment><USER12> Anecdotally, Boeing built furniture for a while to keep afloat when developing it's commercial aircraft business

[http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h1832.html](http://www.u-s- history.com/pages/h1832.html)

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> Totally agree with this. Been bootstrapping my own thing for a while. If it hits $5k MRR I'll be more than satisfied and probably never raise money.

</comment><comment><USER14> What worries me the most about freelancing, or being a small 3-person shop, is retirement.

A 3-person shop might not be sustainable if me (1/3) decides to retire and has to pay someone to keep it afloat. And that is, if I find such a person. I also have to make sure that whatever service I provide, will keep making sense in ~30 years.

Saving might work in countries with stable economies, but you still have to set aside quite a bit of money -- and should you outlive your saving, you're in trouble.

<comment><USER15> Why do you want to retire? It is a question out of interest as I do not know many people (many of retirement age or above) that want to retire (anymore). Most who did retire in my circles (including me) found it not very inspiring and went back to (more than full time) work.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> It depends what you want and what is your market size. Due to liquidation preference, it makes sense for investors to invest in any good companies they can no matter their size.

Now that SaaS is maturing and opportunities are smaller microSaaS will become more commonplace.

I built one 10 years ago and I remember people thought I was crazy at that time...

</comment><comment><USER17> I believe it is Bhutan that measures gross national happiness in addition to GDP, realizing growth just for growth's sake doesn't necessarily increase overall happiness. Don't know how well that works for them but good for both the nation and this startup to have it as a goal. My concern in the context of the startup would be that another player would enter the same market segment and use funding to expand aggressively, eating all of my market share in the process. Even if there is plenty of space in the market for both the slow growth and quick growth startups, there is going to be a danger of getting steamrolled by the quick growth company.

<comment><USER18> Yes, you're thinking of Bhutan. But "gross national happiness" is just a propaganda exercise.

<comment><USER19> As a Buddhist nation I doubt that is the case. Its seems fairly central to Buddhist philosophy from my understanding of it.

Out of interest having been chasing growth for decades I assume we are at the highest GDP measure ever, but do you assume that we are happier than ever? The opioid crisis in the US would suggest otherwise.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> I was expecting more than a few paragraphs claiming that a small company is a good thing in regards to happiness and flexibility at work... oh well.

</comment><comment><USER21> I also had these thoughts when I bootstrapped but the problem is not being able to hire a great team that can build something you would not be able to. If you're all 3 single guys in 20s, enjoy 20s. When you're married and have kids, then you'll care about bills rather than lifestyle and retreats.

<comment><USER22> Depends how much you're making as a bootstrapper? If $10 or 15k a month isn't able to fund your lifestyle then you'll probably have problems later in life. Also, unless you're based in the Bay area / NYC / London, hiring people generally won't cost you $10k/mo per employee.

Also, no one says you can't sell your bootstrapped business. A project generating $30k in profit can generally be sold for $1-1.3m. Reinvest that, and you suddenly have great cash flow from investments in addition to any other income you manage to make from your next project.

All in all, a path worth taking in life if you want flexibility and freedom.

<comment><USER23> You can definitely make over $1m a year running a bootstrapped business. On the high end of the success scale you can walk away with more money than a successful VC backed co-founder.

There are more businesses that are totally inappropriate for VC than should take VC money. The problem is everyone is equating tech businesses with VC. There are plenty of dead tech startups that actually have modest economics and would have worked if VC, and the high expenses of the top tier US talent, had been avoided.

Another note, something I've learned more recently. Some businesses won't make more money even if you force more capital in to them. You can end up with a really good company that can be profitable for decades, but destroy it by force feeding it outside capital (VC or other.) It is important to identify this early.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> Funding is just another form of employment (or slavery if you wish).

</comment><comment><USER25> What's the ultimate value of growth anyway? If a startup is VC backed, then growth is the pathway for investors to get rich. If growth is a way to have a sustainable competive advantage of that's a value too. However there are also enough small companies with a sustainable competitive advantage. Depends very much on your positioning etc

</comment><comment><USER26> I think about the controlled growth of Amazon. They're the tortoise than won the race. Others grew fast and crashed and burned. They were careful not to overleverage and to make sure they were doing what they could handle.

</comment><comment><USER27> > Not raising funds to stay small and happy

But in this winner-takes-all reality, is that possible? If your business concept becomes successful, what prevents a bigger player to copy it, improve upon it, and steal away your customers?

<comment><USER28> > But in this winner-takes-all reality, is that possible?

This is an assumption, and I would say, an invalid one. The reality is actually that there are many successful businesses in any given industry. This is thanks to the fact that one-size does not fit all. Niching down is a good way to build a small, profitable business, because you can address the needs of the niche better than those bigger players that have to try to solve the problems of many different customers using the same systems.

<comment><USER29> Good point

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> My Name is, Miss Adol Fadi I live in Hamburg. and i am a happy woman today,So i told my self that any lender that can rescue my family from our poor situation, i will refer any person that is looking for loan to the lender all thanks go to ASYLUM LOAN INVESTMENT. They grant me a Loan, I was in need of a loan of 500,000.00 Euro to start my life all over, as i am a single mother with 2 kids I met Asylum Loan Investment On line Asylum Grant me a Loan of 500,000.00 Euro, ASYLUM Loan & Investments Group is a company into pure loan and debt financing at ROI returns of only 1.8% to pay off your bills or buy a home Or Increase your Business .please contact Asylum Loan @… (firstname.lastname@example.com )</comment>


Should Arrows be Placed Before Link Text or After? - <AUTHOR> http://www.usabilitypost.com/2008/10/28/should-arrows-be-placed-before-link-text-or-after/ <comment><USER2> When in doubt, use the real-world for a guideline. In this case, road signs provide a perfect metaphor. In the case of street signs, arrows pointing to the right are always positioned after the text and arrows pointing to the left are positioned before the text. In the case of links, these little chevrons or triangles almost always point to the right so it's natural to position them after the link text.

<comment><USER3> Yes, but what about back links?

I have a site that's "You have done blah. Want to return to previous blah?" Now where do I put that previous arrow?

(Its made more annoying because I have lots of parallel "You are viewing an old version. Check out the newest version >>", so we want to stick an arrow in for visual similarity... but its confusing.)

<comment><USER2> Like this:

«Back ||| Next»

<comment><USER3> Sorry I must have explained things poorly. There are lots of little blurbs "X happened, would you like to go look?". Sometimes that go look is a backwards motion and sometimes its forward. "X happened, « would you like to go back" looks really strange.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Not a very authoritative usability article in my book. It's just the intuition of some random guy as far as I know. The arguments are scarce and there are no usability studies to back it up.

Jakob Nielsen has spoiled me.

<comment><USER5> It's a conversation starter though surely...

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Intriguingly, I had no opinion on this before going to that page, but after looking at their examples, something about the "arrow after" examples make me want to click on them more. It's only an anecdotal data point, but others comment similarly.

</comment><comment><USER7> I have the same question for checkboxs (and radioboxes): before or after the text?</comment>


Seeing like a superintendent: education and Campbell's law - <AUTHOR> http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2011/04/education_reform?page=1

<comment><AUTHOR> Money quote (Campbell's law, paraphrased): "Any quantitative social indicator used for decision-making corrupts the social processes it is intended to monitor."</comment>


Ask HN: Ever had a near total inability to focus on code? - <AUTHOR> I've recently been struggling with an almost complete inability to code. I can see what needs to be done but cannot focus more than a few minutes on getting there. My current task is to rip up big chunks of a SPA I just built and rebuild per new business requirements and I just cannot move forward. What's odd is that I have been capable of nearly inhuman levels of focus in the past.
It's like a mental block and it's been going on for weeks now. I struggled with this before but powered through it. Now I am making virtually no progress and am actually growing stressed and, oddly, somewhat angry about the whole thing. Just the thought of tediously assembling all of the glue required in the app nearly depresses me.
Has anyone experienced this and what did you do? I don't know if it's just burnout or what. <comment><USER2> Do you suppose you may be suffering from burnout? What you have just described sounds a lot like that.

> What's odd is that I have been capable of nearly inhuman levels of focus in > the past. > It's like a mental block and it's been going on for weeks now. I > struggled with this before but powered through it.

These lines signal to me that you may have an unsustainable relationship with your duties.

Some questions will help you reflect ans self-assess how severely you are suffering, or if it is something that can be isolated to your current tasks. Have you recently sacrificed time with family and friends, or scheduled personal leisure time for your duties? Have you sacrificed your hygiene and personal management for your office duties? If you have been unproductive lately, have you seen an increase of unscheduled and unenjoyable leisure and free time? Have you been waking early but still feeling vegetative and sluggish lately, if you are not a consistent early riser?

Back to the task, it depends on how well you understand the problem and how well and accurately time-costed it is. I'll let someone with better experience managing uncertainty in projects reply on that.

<comment><USER3> It sounds like it could be burnout. There have been many discussions of burnout on HN - some of them might be useful:

[https://hn.algolia.com/?query=burnout&sort=byPopularity&date...](https://hn.algolia.com/?query=burnout&sort=byPopularity&dateRange=all&type=story&storyText=false&prefix&page=0)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Why is the comment from ardent_uno dead.</comment>


Polyisocyanurate#Fire_risk - <AUTHOR> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyisocyanurate#Fire_risk <comment><AUTHOR> I submitted this in relation to the tragic fire at Grenfell Tower, London 2 days ago.

Also relevant is the article referenced by Wikipedia:

[http://www.probyn-miers.com/perspective/2016/02/fire- risks-f...](http://www.probyn-miers.com/perspective/2016/02/fire-risks-from- external-cladding-panels-perspective-from-the-uk/)

Edit: more specifically I was interested in the following. In the relevant article it states:

>The most common forms of insulation cores for composite panels in use in the UK at the end of the 20th century, in order of decreasing probability of fire propagation, [4] were:

>polystyrene (EPS),

>polyurethane (PUR),

>polyisocyanurate (PIR),

>phenolic,

>mineral fibre.

And then:

>PIR, a variant of PUR having improved fire properties, is difficult to ignite and exhibits a pronounced charring which enables it to withstand fire for longer, but is ultimately combustible.

OK - so PIR "is ultimately combustible".

But then there is also the convection effect of cavities:

>If flames become confined or restricted by entering cavities within the external cladding system, they will become elongated as they seek oxygen and fuel to support the combustion process. This process can lead to flame extension of five to ten times that of the original flame lengths, regardless of the materials used to line the cavities.

So maybe what is needed is an sufficiently hot trigger - e.g. an exploding fridge or tumbler drier - and a PIR clad tower block like Grenfell Tower can become an inferno.

Unfortunately, it seems that all this was known and understood by the fire authorities in the UK and that they had been communicating it to government for years, but nothing was done.

</comment><comment><USER2> People often aren't aware of the fire dangers of plastics.

If you get a chance you might see a demo from your local fire department of how quickly a synthetic fiber couch will burn up and fill a room with smoke. Have a few beers, smoke in bed and you can die from the fumes just like that.</comment>


SpaceX Falcon Heavy – Launch Animation - <AUTHOR> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tk338VXcb24 <comment><AUTHOR> Obviously some creative license was taken. From a marketers perspective this is brilliant. Never seen something so well done from an aerospace company (even NASA) and the cross-marketing with Tesla is a great touch.

<comment><USER2> They are actually launching Elon Musk's Tesla Roadster into an earth-mars transfer orbit though :P

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Launch got delayed</comment>


A mechanical lion invented by da Vinci to amuse the King of France is alive - <AUTHOR> http://www.abc.net.au/news/video/2009/08/17/2657455.htm <comment><USER2> <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=768823></comment>


Gogo Internet is intentionally issuing fake SSL certificates - <AUTHOR> https://www.scribd.com/fullscreen/216718125?access_key=key-2cpy2pw2uqev3oqv1k8b&allow_share=true&escape=false&view_mode=scroll <comment><AUTHOR> _In designing its existing network, Gogo worked closely with law enforcement to incorporate functionalities and protections that would serve public safety and national security interests._

More here:

[http://www.neowin.net/news/gogo-inflight-internet-is- intenti...](http://www.neowin.net/news/gogo-inflight-internet-is- intentionally-issuing-fake-ssl-certificates)

</comment><comment><USER2> Related to this: [https://twitter.com/__apf__/status/551083956326920192/photo/...](https://twitter.com/__apf__/status/551083956326920192/photo/1)

HN Discussion: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8838332](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8838332)</comment>


Steve Jobs in a TV report about Apple Computers (1985) - <AUTHOR> http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=p0JseHQ8sDc#! <comment><USER2> two things:

1) I love how in various TV pieces they make distorted reality - in this case by picking one woman out of random and asking her as to what she thinks about Apple - like that's supposed to indicate what the general public thinks.

2) Even if the public saw their computers as toys, this is a good reminder that the public could be mistaken.

3) Deal with everyone on your terms, it pays in the long run.</comment>


Eric Allen: TipJoy Textpattern plugin - <AUTHOR> http://svallens.com/eric/article/60/tipjoy-textpattern-plugin <comment><AUTHOR> An early adopter of Tipjoy made this cool plugin. Go and tip him for it, and use it on your Textpattern blog.

<comment><USER2> Hey, Ivan, I realize this isn't the right venue, but I'm not sure what is, so...

I like you guys's product a lot. The execution's really clean, and it seems that all that needs proving is the model itself.

My thought, though, is that you guys would drive a lot more tips if you focused on the people doing the tipping rather than the sites being tipped. Although there's certainly some altruism involved in tipping, I think the underlying drive for most when giving to charity is much more selfish. In real life, people make large donations to get their name put on buildings or to be respected as philanthropists. People tip in restaurants to not look cheap in front of their date and contribute to political campaigns so they can tell their friends they put their money where their mouth is.

In all of those situations, there's at least the ability to prove to other members of society that you did tip. In the case where you've tipped well beyond what might have been expected, you even get to be famous.

All of this comes down to the question: Why not provide widgets that show the top X tippers for a given website? You get peer pressure via the suggestion that you _should_ be tipping like these guys, and you let the people kicking in lots of money feel special and be a minor celebrity within that community. Seems like it could really up the usage of your product.

<comment><AUTHOR> There is an issue of privacy, in that people might not want their tipping advertised. That said, we're definitely going down this path. We'll make the experience very open and social. I think the widgets idea is really excellent.

As for the right forum, we've had another idea which we'll implement soon: an open tippable forum. The feedback form here: tipjoy.com/feedback

Will soon have the option to "make this public". Below it will be a ranked set of feedbacks given. Users can tip the feedback (and the tips will go to the submitter) to get the features they want.

I'm really excited about making this open and extensible, so tipjoy could provide a feedback forum for other sites as well.

Lots coming soon! Thanks for the ideas!</comment></comment></comment>


How I Invented the Vector Space Model - <AUTHOR> https://didyougogo.com/blog/how_i_invented_the_vector_space_model.html <comment><USER2> See the Semantic Hashing paper by G. Hinton...

Semantic Hashing [http://www.cs.toronto.edu/~rsalakhu/papers/sdarticle.pdf](http://www.cs.toronto.edu/~rsalakhu/papers/sdarticle.pdf)

[https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=related:_jJNEcvrLfQJ:sc...](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=related:_jJNEcvrLfQJ:scholar.google.com/&scioq=&hl=en&as_sdt=0,44)</comment>


Mathematicians Come Closer to Solving Goldbach's Weak Conjecture - <AUTHOR> http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=goldbachs-prime-numbers

<comment><USER2> Mathematician Terence Tao, a Fields medalist and the youngest ever International Mathematical Olympiad gold medalist to date, did the work described in the article kindly submitted here. His blog

<http://terrytao.wordpress.com/>

is not to be missed. The "Career Advice" section of the blog

<http://terrytao.wordpress.com/career-advice/>

includes several classic articles, of which I especially like and recommend "Does one have to be a genius to do maths?"

[http://terrytao.wordpress.com/career-advice/does-one-have- to...](http://terrytao.wordpress.com/career-advice/does-one-have-to-be-a- genius-to-do-maths/)

(Tao's answer is no.)

<comment><USER3> Don't get it. How can you celebrate someone as the "youngest ever International Math Olympiad gold medalist" while simultaneously denying the importance of genius in math?

Terence Tao is a humble, self-effacing guy. Or at least he knows that society expects him to act like that rather than mimic the chest-thumping, endzone- dancing wide receiver. So obviously he's not going to say that "yeah, to really move math forward you kind of need to be a genius". Though of course other geniuses like Feynman were more up front about that truth.

Very few people have the innate ability to do what Tao or Feynman did. Recognizing that early is a mercy that allows people to move into other areas where they have a comparative advantage, rather than beating their head against the wall for 10,000 hours only not to get anywhere.

<comment><USER4> But how would you know that you don't have that, supposedly, innate ability if you don't try first? and why does it matter?

If you enjoy it, do it.

<comment><USER5> You'll never know 'til you try? Sure, but most people get _plenty_ of chance to try mathematics at school. And while school-level mathematics ain't the same as research-level mathematics, enough of it uses the same bits of brain that by the time you hit university you already know whether you're brilliant at mathematics or not.

Terry Tao was clearly brilliant at mathematics as a child, though what nobody knew then was that he'd go on to be _super_ -brilliant at mathematics as an adult, rather than being one of the many disappointing prodigies.

Anyway, I'm pretty smart, but I don't take career advice from anyone as smart as Terry Tao, just as I don't take dating advice from Scarlett Johannsen.

<comment><USER6> _> And while school-level mathematics ain't the same as research-level mathematics_

School mathematics isn't even math, it's a bad joke. I recommend Lockhart's Lament[1], I fully share his views. School 'math' destroyed every ounce of interest I had in math, and now, as a CS student, I still have a hard time getting rid of this attitude towards the subject even thought I know a lot better now.

[1]: <https://www.maa.org/devlin/devlin_03_08.html>

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Something interesting about the article (and how analytic number theory is done in general).

As mentioned in the article, it was proved over 50 years ago that every odd N can be written as a sum of _three_ primes, provided N is sufficiently large. The proof extends to cover five primes instead, if you like (indeed, write N = 2 + 2 + (N - 4), but in fact the five primes case is in fact easier).

Usually in such proofs the definition of "sufficiently large" is maybe like 10^(10^(10^(10^(10^10000)))) or something similarly absurd, possibly far worse, and it is typically difficult even to calculate such a fixed N, because then you can't use big-O estimates in your calculations. Sometimes you can't even compute such an N, it is "ineffective", see e.g. here for an example:

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siegel_zero>

Tao's accomplishment, which was really cool, was to bring the value of N down to the level where you could settle the small N case by brute force.

</comment><comment><USER8> The paper that is referenced in the article <http://arxiv.org/pdf/1201.6656.pdf>

</comment><comment><USER9> Did the commenter named julianpenrod get confused about causality (the article said "the weak version would follow if the strong were true"; he replied that it is "not correct in stating that, if the weak conjecture is proved, then the strong conjecture is prove[d]") or did the article get edited after he commented?

<comment><USER10> It's hard to say. In either case, the result makes julianpenrod look rather silly. More online publications should, as the New York Times does, note all corrections to an article since its original appearance in a paragraph at the bottom.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> >Moreover, the larger the number, the more ways exist to split it into a sum of two other numbers—let alone three.

I don't think that makes sense. Every large odd number has exactly 0 ways to find its sum with two primes^, so they can't have more ways than small numbers (which also have 0, of course). Perhaps he was speaking about the strong conjecture, but then there would be no point to say 'let alone three', because three is only relevant for the weak conjecture.

Am I missing something obvious, or did the author just word that sentence/paragraph poorly?

^I am pretty sure this trivially follows from the fact that two odd numbers always produce an even number.

<comment><USER12> He says _numbers_ , not _primes_ , so it's trivially correct.

Though that doesn't directly imply the conjecture being true for sufficiently large numbers, since primes become increasingly sparse as one moves up the number line... it seems more like an appeal to intuition than a real argument, to me.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> Is there any practical application to this? I'm not one of those silly people who only cares about math if it can make a better lawnmower or whatever, but I'm just curious as to whether this could make certain algorithms easier or something, or if it's "just" a pure number theory result.

<comment><USER14> The conjecture has been verified already for large enough n that it can be applied without a real proof; a proof won't give any new "real world" applications. Like with Fermat's last theorem, the real interest in a proof is in the ideas that would be developed along the way. (For example, on the way to proving FLT Wiles established the modularity theorem for a class of elliptic curves, and his work was extended to a proof of the full modularity theorem in 2001.)

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> This is news from february.

<comment><USER16> Unlike most programming, mathematical theorems usually survive for a bit longer, so a longer time frame is justifiable.</comment></comment>


Women Who Code virtual workshop on Apache Kylin - <AUTHOR> https://www.meetup.com/Women-Who-Code-Dallas/events/270678889/ <comment><USER2> I have to be honest, i hate those programs. Imagine a program that's called 'Man's Who Code', what picture brings that to your mind? Right, drinking beer and play around with computers.

But i think that whats between your legs should completely be ignored, what we really need is too tell that you can do and be whatever you want (if your born in the 'right' country), maybe you have to fight a little more (ask any male Nurse) or you can adapt, its just plane wrong to always focus on women, and divides a society even more, don't focus on sexual organ's but persons.

</comment><comment><USER3> Very cool to see this! Kylin has been a super fun project to b a part of. A unique approach to OLAP/query acceleration that's pretty much the best way to deal with huge volumes of data.

It's great to see them collaborating with Women Who Code to get the word out and grow our open source family. If anyone is interested in learning more about the project, check us out here: [http://kylin.apache.org/](http://kylin.apache.org/)</comment>


Does sitting = death? - <AUTHOR> http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2012/04/does_sitting_death.php

<comment><USER2> This study is as insightful as those "studies show sleep helps you think better".

</comment><comment><USER3> Living = death? I'd bet standing all day is harmful in some way too. At least it doesn't feel very healthy to me. I think a height adjustable desk, a good chair, regular breaks, and regular exercise is the way to go.

</comment><comment><USER4> Is this the solution..?

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standing_desk>

<comment><USER5> No. That increases your risk of carotid atherosclerosis by around 9x, and also greatly increases your risk of varicose veins.

Best is to sit, but NOT CONTINUOUSLY. Approximately every 30 minutes, you need to get up and move around for a couple of minutes. Details here: <http://ergo.human.cornell.edu/CUESitStand.html>

<comment><USER6> How about a treadmill desk where you walk constantly at a slow pace?

[http://iphonedevelopment.blogspot.com/2011/12/brilliantly- si...](http://iphonedevelopment.blogspot.com/2011/12/brilliantly-simple-idea- treadmill-desk.html)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> This makes me feel much better about my standing desk, gluten free snacks, and free range chickens.</comment>


Internet sites and files of interest to C++ users - <AUTHOR> http://www.robertnz.net/cpp_site.html

<comment><USER2> This list still exists and is maintained? Amazing. I looked at it 10 years ago the last time.</comment>


Scientists have found evidence that stress can cause hair graying - <AUTHOR> https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/01/200122135313.htm <comment><USER2> Previously: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22173776](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22173776)

</comment><comment><USER3> That's a pretty alarming finding to be honest. It's not just hair graying, it's also all kinds of other tissue damage that can occur, as the last few paragraphs hint at.

Stress may just kill us more directly than we've suspected, instead of through its physiological effects like e.g. elevated blood pressure and the effects from that.

</comment><comment><USER4> Something interesting i found.

Magnesium attenuates the release of norepinephrine on the nerve cells (as mentioned in the article, its norepinephrine that causes the greying)

[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15477382](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15477382)

Its also known that during stressful situations, including extreme exercise, magnesium is depleted and excreted in urine.

[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK507250/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK507250/)

[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17172008](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17172008)

What do you think, am i on to something?

</comment><comment><USER5> This was long suspected. I've seen countless examples of this in real life. But it was never "proven" like this.

This was really interesting to me:

"But surprisingly, when we removed the adrenal gland from the mice so that they couldn't produce cortisol-like hormones, their hair still turned gray under stress."

It's also permanent.

</comment><comment><USER6> And scientists still couldn't find a simple way to find man baldness :>

<comment><USER7> Epoxy

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> So it's related to norepinephrine. Wonder if SNRIs can give grey hair then.

</comment><comment><USER9> it would be news if relaxation caused hair darkening

</comment><comment><USER10> Hasn't this been widely known for a long time?

<comment><USER11> Look at how a president's hair turns over their term, it's striking. Can't think of a more stressful job.

<comment><USER12> This is generally understood as a natural consequence of aging rather than the rigors and demands of the job. Most presidents end their terms in their mid- fifties or mid-sixties [0], which is prime time for developing a head full of gray hair, whether you're the POTUS or not.

[0]: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_presidents_of_the_Unit...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_presidents_of_the_United_States_by_age#Presidential_age- related_data_points)</comment></comment></comment>


I Went 24hrs Without Touching Plastic. This Is What Happened. [video] - <AUTHOR> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XgD9ItnBQsA <comment><USER2> Today I saw a plastic grocery bag flapping in the wind caught in a tree. There was a story about a bag found at the bottom of an ocean trench.</comment>