Acer says Microsoft's move against Apple will fail - <AUTHOR> http://news.cnet.com/8301-1035_3-57459239-94/acer-says-microsofts-move-against-apple-will-fail/

<comment><USER2> Haters gon' hate. I personally would love to see Microsoft bring out a standard branded tablet to serve as a baseline. Their partners should be able to step their game up with their own tablets that may have support for things like 4G radios and the like.</comment>


Harvard moves classes online, shuts down dorms for rest of academic year - <AUTHOR> https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/10/coronavirus-harvard-moves-classes-online-tells-students-dont-return-after-spring-break.html <comment><AUTHOR> I may be naive, but some of the responses to COVID 19 seem overblown. Swine flu caused over 10,000 US deaths and the response seemed nowhere as dramatic, especially with regards to the press. Is novel Coronavirus that much worse? Or is social media and the press driving it to new levels?</comment>


A fun math puzzle whose solution will surprise you - <AUTHOR> http://maxschireson.wordpress.com/2012/01/24/how-the-heck-a-puzzle-with-a-very-surprising-answer/

<comment><USER2> My best guess for #1:

First, pretend that the Mathematicians know there are an even number of white hats, and an even number of black hats. In that case it's easy for each one of them to guess what color hat they're wearing. So have the Mathematicians assume there are an even number of each type of hat. There's a 50% chance that the number of hats actually is even (non-trivial, but I'll leave out details for now), and therefore a 50% overall chance that the Mathematicians get every guess correct (and a 50% chance they get every guess wrong!)

<comment><AUTHOR> Very good! Now how about the hard version?

<comment><USER2> It's trivially at least 50%, and I can't see how it can get above that.

This problem can be represented mathematically as a function _f_ : X->Y, where:

X = {-1,1}^16 represents the set of hats the Mathematicians are actually wearing. Say -1 is a white hat and 1 is a black hat.

Y = {-1,0,1}^16 represents the guesses made by the Mathematicians, where -1 is a white hat, 1 is a black hat, and 0 is an "I don't know."

We can also write _f_ (x_0,x_1,...,x_15) -> (y_0,y_1,...,y_15) . Then for the fixed set _f_ (a_0,...,a_15) = (b_0,...,b_15), the function _f_ is a correct guess if and only if

1\. For all k, b_k = 0 or a_k .

2\. For at least one k, b_k != 0.

Assume _f_ (a_0,...,a_15) = (b_0,...,b_15) is a correct guess. There must be some b_k != 0 where b_k = a_k, so we can assume WLOG that b_0 = 1 = a_0. Now note that if f(1,a_1,...,a_15) = (b_0,b_1,...,b_15) and _f_ (-1,a_1,...,a_15) = (c_0,c_1,...,c_15), then b_0 = c_0 . This is because mathematician 0 must make his guess based only on the colors of the other mathematicians' hats. Thus _f_ (-1,a_1,...,a_15) is an incorrect guess.

Thus for every set (x_0,...,x_15) where _f_ is a correct guess, we can come up with at least one set where _f_ is an incorrect guess. Thus _f_ cannot be correct more than 50% of the time.

...so, what am I missing?

<comment><AUTHOR> yes, each mathematician guesses incorrectly as often as they guess correctly. but that is not the same as saying that there is a 50% chance the group "wins" on any given round. remember with the possibility of passing the number of guesses on a round need not be uniform...

Hope that helps get you on the right track,

\-- Max (the original poster)</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Facebook Fails to Show Up for Seventh Tax Summons from IRS - <AUTHOR> http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-07-27/facebook-fails-to-show-up-for-seventh-tax-summons-from-irs <comment><USER2> Perhaps the reporter, Aoife White, should call the Facebook Board for comment, since they are ultimately responsible for the managers they hire.</comment>


Proposed new HTML tag: IMG (1993) - <AUTHOR> http://1997.webhistory.org/www.lists/www-talk.1993q1/0182.html <comment><USER2> I think the crux of that conversion is:

«Marc Andreessen (email@example.com)

Fri, 26 Feb 93 13:32:09 -0800

Tim Berners-Lee writes:

> I don't want to change HTML now if I can help it, until it has gone to RFC > track

I absolutely agree in all cases -- my purpose in suggesting IMG is that things are reaching the point where some browsers are going to be implementing this feature somehow, even if it's not standard, just because it's the logical next step, and it would be great to have consistency from the beginning -- so that when HTML2 comes along, we're all still in lockstep.....

Cheers, Marc»

[http://1997.webhistory.org/www.lists/www- talk.1993q1/0197.ht...](http://1997.webhistory.org/www.lists/www- talk.1993q1/0197.html)

The HTML 5 designers/implementers fight has always been there, with implementers usually having the last word.

Mark Pilgrim on how much the WHATWG resembles the HTML 2 working group activity: [http://web.archive.org/web/20110710091457/http://diveintomar...](http://web.archive.org/web/20110710091457/http://diveintomark.org/archives/2009/11/02/why- do-we-have-an-img-element)

<comment><USER3> And because of this, people were already predicting what would end up happening as a result of implementers rushing out features

[http://1997.webhistory.org/www.lists/www- talk.1993q1/0198.ht...](http://1997.webhistory.org/www.lists/www- talk.1993q1/0198.html)

 _Wait a minute -- let's temporarily forget about MIME, if it clouds the issue. My objection was to the discussion of "how are we going to support embedded images" rather than "how are we going to support embedded objections in various media". Otherwise, next week someone is going to suggest 'lets put in a new tag <AUD SRC="file://foobar.com/foo/bar/blargh.snd">' for audio. There shouldn't be much cost in going with something that generalizes._

<comment><USER2> That thread also predicted the weird and unrealistic "let's-stay-inside-the- existing-boundaries" responses:

> SGML does provide an official way of doing this folks and even if Dan C > ain't here to round us up we maybe ought to stick to the track. > > <!ENTITY > ICON6 SYSTEM "[http://blah..>&ICON6](http://blah..>&ICON6);

[http://1997.webhistory.org/www.lists/www- talk.1993q1/0202.ht...](http://1997.webhistory.org/www.lists/www- talk.1993q1/0202.html)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Yeah, that looks good, but it would be nice if it had a way to specify different resolution copies of the same image for the future when we have varying screen sizes and varying ppi.

Good proposal though, and hope that this takes off.

<comment><USER5> "Good proposal though, and hope that this takes off." it was a proposal made 19 years back?

<comment><USER6> I can feel the breeze of it going over your head from my desk.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> _"Otherwise, next week someone is going to suggest 'lets put in a new tag <AUD SRC="file://foobar.com/foo/bar/blargh.snd">' for audio. There shouldn't be much cost in going with something that generalizes."_

[http://1997.webhistory.org/www.lists/www- talk.1993q1/0198.ht...](http://1997.webhistory.org/www.lists/www- talk.1993q1/0198.html)

Well, maybe not next week, but certainly 15+ years later.

<comment><USER8> Both <embed> and <bgsound> (the latter not standard, but certainly "proposed") have been around for a long time.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> Jim Davis: 1) why have SRC instead of HREF?

Marc Andreessen: Because I wanted to avoid overloading HREF -- doesn't really make sense in this context, I don't think.

[http://1997.webhistory.org/www.lists/www- talk.1993q1/0196.ht...](http://1997.webhistory.org/www.lists/www- talk.1993q1/0196.html)

So... that's the reason!

<comment><USER10> Well, you want to _embed_ the image from a source identified by URL, not _refer_ to it. In fact, I wonder why we need to use href when invoking stylesheets.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> Mark Pilgrim's _Dive Into HTML5_ has a chapter about this very conversation, providing some usful context: <http://diveintohtml5.info/past.html>

<comment><USER12> A link to the exact section: [http://diveintohtml5.info/past.html#history-of- the-img-eleme...](http://diveintohtml5.info/past.html#history-of-the-img- element)

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> Great idea Marc. Just wondering what should happen with images stored on different web servers should someone in the future ever come up with a way for servers to identify individual clients.

Best sort something out now, before people get used to things working in a certain way.

<comment><USER14> Thanks for the feedback -- I'll see if I can work that in before I release the first implementation!

<comment><USER15> Was this the slippery slope that lead to the <blink> tag? (just to be fair, Microsoft introduced the equally horrendous <marquee>)

<comment><USER16> It was a joke: <http://www.montulli.org/theoriginofthe%3Cblink%3Etag>

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> No way! It's _that_ Marc Andreessen. What great humble beginnings!

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

<comment><USER18> This was the same year that NCSA Mosaic, the first ever web browser, was co- created by Marc Andreessen. He was probably working on Mosaic when he wrote this email.

<comment><USER19> > the first ever web browser

Fact check: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mosaic_(web_browser)>

> While often described as the first graphical web browser, Mosaic was > preceded by WorldWideWeb and the lesser-known Erwise[5] and ViolaWWW.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> The reply was especially amusing:

 _"I was proposing to use the file extension (.xbm above) to tag what format the image was in, but with the intention that in future, when HTTP2 comes along, the same format negotiation technique would be used to access images."_

Almost twenty years later and still no HTTP2!

[http://1997.webhistory.org/www.lists/www- talk.1993q1/0183.ht...](http://1997.webhistory.org/www.lists/www- talk.1993q1/0183.html)

<comment><USER21> Yes we do, it's just called HTTP 1.1 instead - and that exact functionality luckily made it in.

<http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec12.html>

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> I'm old enough to remember reading this reposted on usenet (or was it gopher) at the time. Cue discussion about how gopher was much better as it already did images.

Little did we know back then...

<comment><USER14> There was also serious backlash from certain people (cough TIM BERNERS LEE cough) that adding images to the web would degrade the user experience, encourage bad use cases, and encourage the riffraff to use it.

Why yes, I still remember that, why do you ask?

<comment><USER23> But it did degrade the user experience, encourage bad use cases, and encourage the riffraff to use it. The easiest way to eliminate those problems is to not have users.

Why'd you have to go making things popular? I could still be using Lynx on a 1200 baud modem!

<comment><USER14> Tim, is that you?

<comment><USER23> See, if you hadn't let the riffraff in, you'd know for sure...

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> _I was proposing to use the file extension (.xbm above) to tag what format the image was in, but with the intention that in future, when HTTP2 comes along, the same format negotiation technique would be used to access images._

Nineteen years later and we still don't have HTTP2.

<comment><USER9> In the link provided by sbierwagen, it states:

<http://diveintohtml5.info/past.html>

 _"HTTP2" is a reference to Basic HTTP as defined in 1992. At this point, in early 1993, it was still largely unimplemented. The draft known as "HTTP2" evolved and was eventually standardized as "HTTP 1.0" (albeit not for another three years). HTTP 1.0 did include request headers for content negotiation, a.k.a. "MIME, someday, maybe."_

So, at least in this context, yes, we do have "HTTP2".

<comment><USER25> Oops, I was calling HTTP/2.0 HTTP2 as a shorthand seems that I was so wrong to do that :-)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> [http://1997.webhistory.org/www.lists/www- talk.1993q1/0186.ht...](http://1997.webhistory.org/www.lists/www- talk.1993q1/0186.html)

Ha, so that's what rel was supposed to mean.

<comment><USER27> Wow, I have been meaning to look what rel means for years and I always forget.

Am i glad I saw this.

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> Mark Pilgrim had an insightful take on the development of the IMG tag in his book _Dive Into HTML5_ :

<http://diveintohtml5.info/past.html>

</comment><comment><USER29> It's too bad they went with `img` and `src` instead of listening to Tony Johnson and using `image` and `source`. Saved a few characters for needless abbreviation.

<comment><USER30> But how many more bytes would've been sent since 1993 were they image and source? :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> I feel sorry for Tony Johnson that had "something very similar in Midas 2", as it's the Mosaic implementation that "won" :)

<comment><USER32> It also shows here in his comment how 'small' the internet was: maybe everyone having fibre to their home was some far-off imaginings of crazy people.

"I somewhat prefer ICON since it implies that the IMAGE should be smallish"

</comment></comment><comment><USER33> I think the best part of this entire exchange is that it provides proof that shipping code wins.

</comment><comment><USER34> Sounds like a good idea

</comment><comment><USER35> We've landed on the moon!</comment>


Lessons of Y Combinator: Things I'd do differently after 2 startups - <AUTHOR> http://foundread.com/2008/04/02/ycombinator/

<comment><USER2> 3\. We focused entirely on product/market fit.

I'm curious. In what way did you focus on product market fit? What signs did you look for to point you towards it? Seems to be a very important aspect of success (besides boldness).

<comment><USER3> This might be a too-fancy way of saying "we focused on what people wanted" (to put it in PG-speak rather than Andreessen-speak).

We started with a permission marketing campaign (before we wrote a line of code)-- showing a few screenshots and allowing people to sign up to hear about the launch. That helped us understand how much people wanted it (measured by traffic and conversion of traffic to sign ups). We were immedietely barraged by lots of people who had ideas about the product, and we listened very carefully.

We ignored lots of things that it might've been bad to ignore in favor of building features that people wanted and talking with users. We didn't incorporate. Didn't get a bank account. Didn't talk to a lawyer. Didn't worry about SEO or any other marketing (even though I'm a bit of an SEO nut). Didn't talk to investors.

Lots and lots and lots of focus on reducing frustration, reducing friction, and increasing value-- and lots and lots of communication with users (to understand that stuff better).

Boiled down-- lots of focus on understanding what the market wants (both individual lifehackers and biz teams that want to be more productive) and then building/iterating. Rinse, repeat.

<comment><USER4> If you are giving a product or service away I don't think you can assert that you have "product/market fit." You have a very compelling application, but until you figure out who is going to pay you for it, and how much it's worth to them, I don't think you can put a check in the box next to "product/market fit" since you don't pass this test from the same Marc Andreessen post you reference ( <http://blog.pmarca.com/2007/06/the-pmarca-gu-2.html> ):

And you can always feel product/market fit when it's happening. The customers are buying the product just as fast as you can make it — or usage is growing just as fast as you can add more servers. Money from customers is piling up in your company checking account.

<comment><USER3> Well, revenue is a beautiful thing, certainly. You can define product/market fit however you like-- but by that definition, most consumer apps don't have it. A customer can "buy" a product with money or their time/attention. I'd say both YouTube and Facebook have found a great product/market fit. And Gmail. Andreessen found a great product/market fit with the Netscape browser, but monetization of it really only came in the form of a few bizdev deals (which didn't cover costs, I don't think). Money, in many of these iconic companies, was NOT piling up.

Regarding my company, we focused initially on a non-paying market (individual lifehackers), as that was easiest to build for and launch a rough beta for. They "pay" in blog posts, tweets, word of mouth-- they've driven every single business lead we've gotten. Now we've got a new market (teams) that we have to find a "fit" for. Wish us luck!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> It's unfortunate, but a polished presentation making a strong case for a large market share is more likely to get you angel funding than a working product with relatively few users. I say this after seeing a bunch of angel forums / VC workshops in the bay area. Many of the "ideal" presentations had no product, no engineers but a "strong management team," a large market, and a path to bigness. You are unlikely to get funded without a grand slam story.

</comment><comment><USER6> This just convinced me to apply, less than 12 hours to go. What is it going to be. Great read especially if you still hesitate.

<comment><USER7> If you hesitate a lot, try climbing or ski mountaineering ;-)

Either one is easier than having a kid, though. Don't do that until after you've got a few businesses under your belt, if you can help it. Execution is a habit, IMHO. Hard to acquire but much easier the 2nd, 3rd, 4th times. Make it your habit and you will be better off regardless.

Oh, if I'd known back then... fuck, if I looked back on the opportunities missed (instead of the ones we capitalized upon) I'd slit my throat. But that gets back to the three important qualities for a (founder|mountaineer|parent):

1) good pain tolerance, 2) shitty memory,

...and I can't remember the other one. ;-)

<comment><USER8> 3) Balls?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> "they aren't that much better than many of the great coders I've worked with. They're just bolder."

Interesting way to put it. Sounds like an critical ingredient for success.

<comment><USER10> It's also a critical ingredient for failure.

<comment><USER3> I'm a huge fan of "necessary but not sufficient" qualities like this.

A startup needs:

1) Boldness 2) A crazy idea that most people think is stupid. 3) Persistence

All of these things seem to be absolutely required for success. But none of them is sufficient. Combine 'em with good "product/market fit" (a la Andreessen) and I think you win.

<comment><USER11> Startups don't need "A crazy idea that most people think is stupid". In most cases, an idea that most people think is stupid is exactly that.

Startups need to offer something of perceived value, that's pretty much it. In some cases, it's doing a typical task in a non-typical way, or doing something non-typical altogether (your crazy idea), or marginally improving your typical task in a very typical way.

In the end, it's all about value.

<comment><USER3> I disagree. If everyone knows that an area is an amazing opportunity, then it's probably not an amazing opportunity. Every single runaway success at some point had a whole host of people saying, "That's ridiculous-- it'll never work" on some level.

examples:

1) When google was on its way up, it was a well-understood fact that no one could make real money on search. Oops.

2) When Excite was getting funding, everyone told them that search was dumb. People would do 1 search and bookmark what they cared about (and would never search again).

3) The very idea of youtube (giving away tremendous piles of storage and bandwidth) didn't seem very smart to a lot of people. Plenty of online video startups had failed.

4) Blogger couldn't get more funding and had to lay off their entire team.

5) If I described twitter to you 3 years ago, would you have been blown away by the idea?

6) Salesforce.com was not exactly warmly embraced by the enterprise when they first launched.

7) Marc Andreessen said he was constantly stonewalled by businesses when selling them stuff at Netscape. "The Internet? Inside our network?! MADNESS!"

Hindsight make these ideas seem obvious-- but at the time, they were pretty ridiculous.

As you say, most ridiculous ideas ARE really ridiculous. Thus the "necessary but not sufficient" part.

<comment><USER11> My point wasn't that seemingly ridiculous ideas never succeed, it was that they are not a requirement for startup success.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> From the article: I'd rather own 94% of a watermelon than 100% of a grape.

That's a very good metaphor and a very good explanation of why you'd want funding.

</comment><comment><USER13> would love to see a bit more depth here, most points seemed rather surface - "we focused entirely on product/mark fit" - how?, what are some methods you found effective? maybe best left for a follow up post but after reading it I wanted more on their successful/unsuccessful tactics.

</comment><comment><USER14> RscueTime seems like one of the more credible YC startups, with an actual value proposition and a pretty killer initial user experience.

After all the YC help, weekly dinners, and demo day, this article says they're still looking for seed funding. Not an A-round; just seed money.

</comment><comment> hafeez-bana Do you have the screenshot's you used for the first version to get feedback?

</comment><comment><USER15> surprising at 7%/week growth with Tony being featured on so many blogs

<comment><USER16> Surprisingly low or surprisingly high? If you think that's low, consider that 7% weekly growth is roughly 3300% annual growth, something that most companies would kill for. If that can be sustained for 3 years, the company will be roughly 25,000 times larger than when it started.

<comment><USER3> Yeah, we're pretty damn tickled with the growth (and stickiness-- abandonment seems unusually low for web software, from what I've read).

FWIW, the 7% week/week was well before any of the press coverage around YC demo day (and associated splash). We've been 12-14% for the last two weeks. I expect it to settle back to the standard word of mouth level of 7%. Of course, I think we have some clever SEO/viral things in the pipeline, which might pick things up a bit.

<comment><USER4> With respect, it's a compelling app but it's easy to give something away. The real question is how to wrap a revenue model around your offering. If you base advertising on my on-line behavior it may be viewed as too invasive. Another key attraction is that it doesn't interrupt me when I am in flow, so you are probably limited to presenting ads during the analytics so that I am not interrupted when I am actually working. You've done a good job of addressing privacy concerns so far, but a local app would be even more secure: why not offer a version that competes with <http://www.timesprite.com/> the attraction for me is that their revenue model is clear and I can rely on them being around for a while. And I would be glad to pay $40/yr for rescuetime as is if I knew that would allow you to persist in your current privacy model. Your situation is unstable until you get to at least cash flow positive. It's a great app, but I would worry a lot more about adding some kind of paying customers instead of more free users.

<comment><USER3> Heh-- if it's easy to give something away, why is it that so many free web apps/sites don't have growth? Or happy users?

It's damn hard to give something away online, as it turns out.

But I do agree-- while free accounts will always exist at RescueTime, our future is NOT as an ad-supported biz. :-)</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Yahoo Search Testing Google's Search Results Design? - <AUTHOR> http://searchengineland.com/yahoo-search-testing-googles-search-results-design-213107

<comment><USER2> I used to work on Y!Search 10 years ago. Those A/B tests (actually multiple at any given point) are always running. Fonts, colors, moving or removing features, algorithm tweaking (e.g. the language/region boost for a Yahoo France or Italy), green or blue links, full domain or truncated...

The tabs for selecting verticals (web,image,video, Yahoo has 10-15) moved from the top to left and back several times during the years. I think it's notable that the speed ("0.35 seconds") is back because that got optimized away a while ago.

<comment><AUTHOR> This is a bit more than A/B testing fonts, colors, and so on, though. They have almost completely replicated the look of Google, except with a Yahoo logo.

It's an interesting catch-up technique. I assume they are not looking to copy the UI in the long-term, but are looking to establish a baseline.</comment></comment>


Online Magazine Startup - Need Some Advice - <AUTHOR>

So me and my friend have launched an online magazine.
This is what we have so far.
http://planetivy.com/
We have about 150 writers and contributors in a Basecamp (unpaid, mostly from Universities after answering adverts), about 60-70 of which are actually pretty active. It's less than a week old, but people seem to like it.
We're trying to maintain a certain quality level whilst simultaneously delivering content that'll make people want to come back to the site again and again as returning visitors. We have a pretty good idea about the aesthetic we want to achieve.
We're missing something. Nobody cares about people reporting ABOUT the news, do they?
What are some things we're missing?
What should we be thinking about next?
I have some ideas as to how we can make the site unique, or attractive to potential visitors such as securing exclusive interviews or hosting video content. Things are early days so anything and everything could change. <comment><USER2> I agree that this site looks like a pretty blog. In terms of lean startup, Wordpress was a good idea. Take a look at some other magazines (that may also have print versions), and online newspapers. I don't think the design is that important at this stage though, you need readers.

I've heard once that people don't read news for the news. They read the news for the community. The reason why you read the WSJ vs NYT is because of the community that reading that particular newspaper gets you. Maybe your boss, or maybe it's your coworkers. Maybe it's the people you're trying to impress so you can get a job with them. Or maybe you and your friends just like the same things. Reading your magazine is thing you can share with others. I believe what you're missing is the community.

</comment><comment><USER3> One thing I noticed, you could do with an editor to review the posted articles.

The 6th post on the homepage reads:

"After years of pressure, Vogue finally caved in and made a long-awaited announAll 19 magazines in Vogues stable have vowed only to use healthy looking models above the age of 16."

announAll ?

</comment><comment><USER4> What is the magazine about?

To me, right now it just looks like a pretty blog.

Plus, what if I was online and wanted to read it? I cant take your webpage offline.

Think about it.

Decide on your niche, and then run with it. Push the envelope.</comment>


Ask HN: UK Developer Conferences? - <AUTHOR> I used to go to NorDevCon when I lived in East Anglia. Now I've moved to North Wales I'm on the hunt for some good developers conferences in North Wales or the Manchester/Liverpool area. Does anyone have any recommendations? <comment><USER2> Not what OP asked for, but Code Mesh LDN is always awesome if you're interested in alternative / functional programming and I think the team has been discussing doing smaller events around the country. Website: [https://codesync.global/conferences/code-mesh- ldn/](https://codesync.global/conferences/code-mesh-ldn/)</comment>


NH-based entrepreneurs to launch Bitcoin ATM this week - <AUTHOR> http://www.bizjournals.com/boston/blog/startups/2013/05/bitcoin-atm-lamassu-manchester-nh-this.html

<comment><USER2> I wonder if it accepts counterfeit dollars. [edit:] to clarify, I don't mean this as a joke. It seems that they're not paying out cash (only taking in) because they don't trust the depositor and have to wait anywhere from 10 mins to a couple hours for a transaction. But how can they trust the incoming cash? It seems like a perfect venue for a counterfeiter.

<comment><USER3> I would guess that they're using a standard bill acceptor that does optical and magnetic tests.

They'd have to be really good fake bills.

<comment><USER4> This! The exact same way a regular ATM ensures deposits are legitimate.

<comment><USER5> For some reason I always thought that was a manual affair. In Australia deposits are just money stuffed in an envelope with your intended value on it, that go into a slot in the ATM.

<comment><USER6> The US has fully automated machines. They even can read checks.

<comment><USER7> Checks? Seriously? They must have some badass OCR.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> For anyone else confused, I believe NH means "New Hampshire".

<comment><USER9> Title should be adjusted since I'm sure a lot of people don't know what that abbreviation is.

You might even guess it's related to "NiMH" or is some other kind of chemical compound.

<comment><USER7> I had to learn all fifty states' postal abbreviations and capital cities in elementary school, back in the 20th century. Seriously, kids these days! Now get off my lawn.

(And if you're reading this and you're not an American? You should learn this stuff anyway, because the world revolves around US.)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> This is not to be confused with the other Bitcoin ATM. The "ATM" described in this article is more of a Bitcoin vending machine.

Bitcoin ATM: <https://bitcoinatm.com/media/pictures/flagship1.png>

Bitcoin Machine (the one this article is about): [http://rack.1.mshcdn.com/media/ZgkyMDEzLzA1LzAyLzEzL0xhbWFzc...](http://rack.1.mshcdn.com/media/ZgkyMDEzLzA1LzAyLzEzL0xhbWFzc3VCaXRjLjViNWEzLmpwZwpwCXRodW1iCTEyMDB4OTYwMD4/9b7b81c3/5aa/Lamassu- Bitcoin-ATM.jpg)

</comment><comment><USER11> i don't get it, in what form/format does this machine 'dispense' bitcoins?

I'm not a bitcoin expert, but bitcoins are digital currency, right? How does a physical machine dispense digital currency? You attach a USB drive to it or something?

<comment><USER4> I can't be sure of this. But my guess other than a USB drive like you mentioned would be, you simply input a Bitcoin address for them to be sent to.

This way you could send the Bitcoins to a personal wallet, online hosted wallet, or even straight to Mt. Gox.

Or perhaps it does something more physical like creating a new wallet for you and physically prints out the private key of the wallet for you to keep with you.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> All on one page: [http://www.bizjournals.com/boston/blog/startups/2013/05/bitc...](http://www.bizjournals.com/boston/blog/startups/2013/05/bitcoin- atm-lamassu-manchester-nh-this.html?page=all)

</comment><comment><USER13> Please enter your 27-34 hexadecimal pin:

</comment><comment><USER14> Where is NH? Doesn't cover that.

</comment><comment><USER15> If I get paid in Bitcoins and only spend bitcoins, can I still report that I earned zero Monopoly Money-US dollars this year?

Does that mean when this takes off I can earn, exchange and sell units of future human labor without the friction of governments taking 25% to 35% of it?

We can assume the government will spare no expense in destroying bitcoin by fiat by making laws against it, and if that doesn't work, using economic hit- men, supporting jackals, or the old trusty domestic military action with soldiers from Georgia and Virginia to break down the door of anyone caught using it under the table.

The question is, how is this war going to unfold? Will the US dollar be allowed to be exposed as the always-inflating Monopoly Money it is, and slowly fade out over the next 20 years? So many possibilities.

If bitcoin can survive laws that make it illegal, taxes on it that make it less useful than USD, assassinations of key figures, the destruction of companies promoting it, and domestic military action, then bitcoin might have a shot at becoming the next world currency.

Otherwise, a combination of these things will erase it to a footnote in the history books. But you can be darn certain that the government is going to levy their tax on the income of bitcoins. In the interests of the sovreign, to promote "fairness".

<comment><USER16> The government does not levy taxes on US dollar, but on the income, be it in dollars, monopoly money, bitcoins, mussels or pigs. It's just in some cases the low scale of the phenomenon makes collecting the tax more expensive than the collected sum. However, if the alternate currency should rise above a certain level you can be sure, it will be taxed.

And the government really does not levy the tax because "they are evil them", but because the governed society has certain needs that can only be fulfilled by common effort and it would be good to minimize freeridership. Of course one can discuss whether certain governmental activities are needed or not, but to abandon all government wouldn't do any good.

<comment><USER15> But if I earn only bitcoins. The government wants their stake. I guess I would be forced to exchange some of my bitcoins for US Dollar and then give them that? I suppose that's actually good! As the government inflates the Dollars I don't feel much inflation because I only held dollars in the time it took me to move the money from A to B.

It would be fine that the government shoots all US dollar holders in the foot by inflating their currency, the value of bitcoin relative to dollars would always increase, because the US Dollars would asymptotically approach zero value over time, as it has been. The bitcoin I worked hard to earn would retain their value. And the burglars would use their old fashioned tools to pilfer trillions from all Dollar holders, and will be forced to yet again shout: "darn" when they figure out they are only stealing from their left pocket to put into their right pocket. A waste of time.

<comment><USER17> _... the value of bitcoin relative to dollars would always increase..._

Also known as taxable capital gains.

<comment><USER18> If the bitcoins are given in exchange for work, he is taxed as if it was income, and at income tax rates, much like if he was given a stock grant in a public company. Also, these taxes are calculated when he is paid, not when he sells the bitcoins, so if they lose value, he is still on the hook for the full income tax (which is in USD in the US).

However, if he sells bitcoins in the future, he will be forced to pay capital gains taxes on the difference in price between when he received the bitcoins (and paid income tax then) and when he sells. If he sells at a loss, he can use his losses to offset his income tax.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Gaia space telescope plots a billion stars - <AUTHOR> http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-37355154 <comment><AUTHOR> The Gaia Data Release 1 Archive: [http://gea.esac.esa.int/archive/](http://gea.esac.esa.int/archive/)

Some information about the archive: [http://www.cosmos.esa.int/web/gaia/dr1](http://www.cosmos.esa.int/web/gaia/dr1)

Press conference from earlier today: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5pAjvQ5uu7I](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5pAjvQ5uu7I)

Gaia's first sky map (incl. downloads up to 15360×7831): [http://sci.esa.int/gaia/58209-gaia-s-first-sky- map/](http://sci.esa.int/gaia/58209-gaia-s-first-sky-map/)

<comment><USER2> Visualization of the data: [http://gea.esac.esa.int/visualization/index.html](http://gea.esac.esa.int/visualization/index.html)

<comment><USER3> Seems like there are two smaller galaxies in the bottom right. Does anybody know what those are?

<comment><USER2> I had the same question, found the answer here: [http://sci.esa.int/gaia/58209-gaia-s-first-sky- map/](http://sci.esa.int/gaia/58209-gaia-s-first-sky-map/) it says > The two bright objects in the lower right of the image are the Large and Small Magellanic Clouds, two dwarf galaxies orbiting the Milky Way. Other nearby galaxies are also visible, most notably Andromeda (also known as M31), the largest galactic neighbour to the Milky Way, in the lower left of the image. Below Andromeda is its satellite, the Triangulum galaxy (M33).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> T'was back in December 2008, I applied for a university sideways move to a job analysing the data from the yet to be launched Gaia probe. Turns out I was over-qualified (which was their way of saying that the university was already paying me more than they were willing to pay for that position), and they recommended I apply for a position analysing data for the Planck probe instead. Went to that interview too, where I was told I was _under_ qualified. Every time either of those two probes turns up in the news is a nice trip down memory lane. The engineering involved in building them was quite remarkable, and sifting through the data would have been fun.

<comment><USER5> I wonder why they couldn't be honest with you? What bad things would happen if they simply told you "we're only able to pay X for this position, take it or leave it"?

<comment><USER4> Because it was a sideways move (in other words, I was already working for the same university) it would have been illegal for them to lower my pay.

Ironically, them telling me I was underqualified (specifically, I didn't have doctorate) spurred me on to go and get one. I had basically hit the ceiling for a Mr. in a university.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> "There may be 2-3 times more stars in the Milky Way Galaxy than we thought"

<comment><USER7> Looks like they found the dark matter.

</comment></comment><comment><USER2> > The one billion to be catalogued by Gaia is still only 1% of the Milky Way's > total

I mean, wow. We are so tiny.

> The called-for specification was to get to know the brightest objects' > coordinates down to an error of just seven micro-arcseconds. This angle is > equivalent to the size of a euro coin on the Moon as seen from Earth.

This is quite an impressive feat of engineering!

<comment><USER8> And there are more galaxies in the known universe then there are stars in our galaxy.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes, there may be more galaxies than stars in our milky way. But almost all of them are extremely far away and we will never have a chance to interact, or even visit them. Worse, the rate they are moving away from our galaxy/local cluster is accelerating. We have a bit time to study those galaxies before they fade into the eternal redshift, but the real interesting stuff, what at least has a decent chance to matter beyond pure curiosity is what Gaia observes.

<comment><USER9> > We have a bit time to study those galaxies before they fade into the eternal > redshift

Just want to point that we do receive light from galaxies that are receding from us faster than the speed of light and always have been.

<comment><AUTHOR> Until they are so far redshifted that they fade into background noise. And the expansion of the universe is accelerating. We have a bit time to watch this spectacle, but the fate seems it is just our local cluster that will matter, for most of the time while stars generate heat. That is why I am not so keen on emphasising the billions and billions of galaxies. It's only a nice good- bye firework.

Edit: I still think there are much more galaxies in our universe than stars in our milky way: The universe must be bigger than our observable part and there is no reason to believe that it is much different there (read less or no galaxies) than where we happen to be. So the "eternal redshift" already happened for many galaxies (from mutual perspective).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I have some questions on the "stellar parallax" illustration.

If I remember correctly the speed of Sun around the milky way is much bigger than the speed of earth around the Sun. So the position of the earth is completely different in June and December, because the sun has moved. So

-> Do the parallax computation works only in one direction ? (perpendicularly to the sun trajectory ?)

-> Does it works for nearest stars because they have roughly the same speed and direction than Sun ?

<comment><USER11> > they have roughly the same speed and direction than Sun

Are you sure about that?

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barnard%27s_Star](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barnard%27s_Star) : "The proper motion of Barnard's Star corresponds to a relative lateral speed of 90 km/s. The 10.3 seconds of arc it travels annually amount to a quarter of a degree in a human lifetime, roughly half the angular diameter of the full Moon."

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpha_Centauri](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpha_Centauri) "All components of Alpha Centauri display significant proper motions against the background sky, similar to the first-magnitude stars Sirius and Arcturus. Over the centuries, this causes the apparent stellar positions to slowly change. Such motions define the high-proper-motion stars"</comment></comment>


A simple and stylish way to surf FB, Twitter, Insta and its opensource - <AUTHOR> http://socialdj.ch <comment><AUTHOR> I was fed up with rss readers and other althernatives, I wanted something to browse my silly pics in style where i could define which things to aggregate. It turned out quite cool - give it a try. Oh and you dont have to have FB or Twitter etc. to use it.</comment>


Brite.li – the curated web gets into open beta - <AUTHOR> http://brite.li <comment><AUTHOR> Brite.li - curated web, gets into open beta.

The web is full of amazing products, articles, apps and content. Finding all the best things for a topic like astronomy or cycling is a hit or miss depending on how much time people are willing to spend going through search and evaluating content.

We found curated collections to be useful, if nothing a curated collection serves as a starting point for further search and discovery. We started off Briteli to curate the best content for a few selected topics based on popular web trends and people around us. A typical topic like photography will have the best (surely subjective) apps, articles and content chosen by our curators.

Give it a spin and let us know what you think.

Web version: [http://brite.li](http://brite.li) Android App: [https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.slidingbit...](https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.slidingbits.briteli)

We also plan to introduce user collections as soon as possible. Meanwhile if you find the idea interesting, shout out to your circles and share the message. We'd like to hear as many opinions and criticisms as possible.</comment>


Perl 6 Grammars – not only for parsing - <AUTHOR> http://ttjjss.wordpress.com/2010/11/21/perl-6-grammars-–-not-only-for-parsing/ <comment><USER2> Congratulations, Perl 6 developers. You are beginning to catch up with Django. (See <http://docs.djangoproject.com/en/dev/intro/tutorial03/> if you think I'm being sarcastic.)

Once upon a time, Perl was the de facto language for web development. Then there was a bit of falling out between the web-centric folks and the server- centric folks; resulting in PHP. Perl, as a language for web-development, never really recovered.

I find it kind of sad that it took over a decade and a half-hearted attempt at rewriting the language before the server-centric folks are even beginning to understand what the web-centric folks were talking about. :-/

<comment><USER3> Assume I'm barely competent at both Perl and Python. Can you explain how looping over repeated regular expressions is more powerful and useful than core language support for grammars and arbitrary tree transformations?

(I approve of Python's named captures, though even Perl 5 has had those for almost three years now.)

 _... over a decade and a half-hearted attempt at rewriting the language..._

In truth, the Perl 6 redesign began a few months after Python 3000, in July 2000.

<comment><USER4> Perhaps you could provide an example of a situation where grammars and arbitrary tree transformations are more useful than looping over repeated regular expressions?

If you want others to see the utility of these Perl 6 features, they're going to need side-by-side syntax-highlighted clear-as-day examples. Otherwise it's just, "must be some weird Perl 6 feature -- the way I'm doing it in blub works fine for me".

<comment><USER3> _Perhaps you could provide an example of a situation where grammars and arbitrary tree transformations are more useful than looping over repeated regular expressions?_

Any parsing operation which needs to keep in mind state.

<comment><USER4> That sounds like a good _brief description_ of an example, but like I said, for people to get that "a ha" moment, it's got to be written up so it can be presented right there in front of them.

My current language is already _fairly_ useful for "Any parsing operation which needs to keep in mind state" ... if you want users to look at Perl 6, then it's going to take concrete written-out examples. No in-jokes or historical anecdotes; just actually _show_ how Perl 6 does it better. Over and over, until it sinks in.

People who don't already know Perl 6 are not going to just take your word for it. They need to be _shown_ easy-to-follow examples of Perl 6 solving problems that are more difficult to solve in their current language.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> It would be wonderful if someone more familiar with Perl 6 could give a code break-down of what is going on.

<comment><USER6> I only know Perl 5, but I can figure out enough of it to give an educated guess. It seems like he's using the token returned by the grammar to select a method of the same name. So when he gets the token e404, he'll call the method e404 which does a make "404: Not found"

The grammar is something new in Perl 6, but it looks like there are a bunch of regexes that match different tokens. That makes me wonder how well it handles a buggy, ambiguous grammar, where the regexes overlap and something could be parsed as a token of two or more types. First rule wins?

Guess I should read some of chromatic's book over Thanksgiving so I'd understand more of this...

<comment><USER7> Yes, using

        Mysite.parse($req, :actions(Mysite::Actions.new))

says "Parse $req using grammar Mysite and actions Mysite::Actions.new." When a token is found, the action method with the same name is called. As I understand it, the idea with separating token and action like that is one grammar can be associated with more than one set of actions.</comment></comment></comment>


Hacking Ideas for Content - Webinar - <AUTHOR> http://www.competeonweb.com/events/upcoming-events/?utm_source=social&utm_hackernews=forum&utm_campaign=webinar090512_hackernews

<comment><AUTHOR> I'll be honest, I've been browsing HN for years but never posted as you can see from my history lol.

But seriously, I thought this was something the HN crowd would enjoy. We're putting together a lot of content around how to generate large lists of potential ideas for blog posts (or other content) in any industry.

For example, if you're interested in the broad topic of ruby on rails, we're going to discuss how to make a Google Doc that does all of the following automagically... (1) goes to Topsy.com to search for Tweets linking to ruby on rails topics (i.e. <http://goo.gl/36eaW>) (2) scrapes all of the tweets as well as actual links the tweets were about into the spreadsheet (3) scrapes the # of tweets for each piece of content into the spreadsheet so you can sort by this to identify popular content over various periods of time.

That's just a quick snippet of what we'll go over on the webinar, but I think the a few people on HN might find this helpful for hacking content ideas to promote their products and sites.

</comment><comment><USER2> Interesting.... a screen scrape of posts. Interesting manner to do some market research as well.

Think the webinar will be valuable for us and our client base. This stuff just keeps on growing! Maybe someday we'll be able to just think of what we want done and shazam... done! Yes one day......

<comment><AUTHOR> That's the goal - a tool that shazam does it all! Google Docs actually goes a LONG way if you know how to use coding within your Google spreadsheets (which we'll cover).

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> I'm new to this, but it sounds very interesting. Will your webinar have reference notes or a PowerPoint available for download? What you're describing sounds complex -- would love to have notes to refer to later. Thanks!

<comment><AUTHOR> We'll have a recap blog post / video after, but not a full download of the powerpoints. Yes, it's a bit complex - attending is best to really get the feel for things, but we'll provide resources to look back on after.

If you can't attend, you can jump on our list as we repeat these events periodically.</comment></comment>


[idea]Compatible code for Markdown literary programming - <AUTHOR> Compatible code for Markdown literary programming. Just add a custom line comment character before each line of Markdown.
When previewing or converting a format, you only need to simply preprocess: replace the `\r\n\;` with `\r\n` (note: line comment character of Clojure is `;`)
For example:
```<p>;# Markdown literary programming<p>;## example01:<p>;```clojure
(defn f [[evens odds total amax amin] x]

  (let [[evens odds] (cond

                       (even? x) [(inc evens ) odds]

                       (odd? x)  [evens (inc odds)]

                       :else     [evens odds])

        total (+ total x)

        amax  (max amax x)

        amin  (min amin x)]

     [evens odds total amax amin]))
 (reduce f [0 0 0 ##-Inf ##Inf] [5 6 8 -3 -9 11 156 6 7])
;```<p>;`=>[4 5 187 156 -9]`<p>``` <comment><USER2> Curious if you are familiar with Emacs, org-mode, and Babel.

[https://orgmode.org/](https://orgmode.org/)

[https://orgmode.org/worg/org-contrib/babel/](https://orgmode.org/worg/org- contrib/babel/)

<comment><AUTHOR> There are many editors that support markdown, and markdown is simpler, so you can simply draw flowcharts, tables, task list, and display data visualizations image in comments of code.

<comment><USER2> I don't disagree. I'm biased toward Emacs because it supports so many languages, from the mainstream like Clojure, Ruby, and Python to the niche languages like Dot, PlantUML, and Standard ML.

What Babel+org-mode do for me is all the tangling and weaving of my literate programs. It will handle the creation of multiple files from a single document. For example I can create a literate document that includes leiningen configuration, clojure source, a readme.md, and an HTML version of the literate program document for Github pages all at once with a single command (M-x org-babel-tangle). Within the document I have Emacs full suite of source code tools: syntax highlighting, indentation, paredit, REPL's etc. for all the different languages in my literate document.

Now all that comes with the caveat that I'm not really interested in writing my own tangling and weaving tools for literate programming. Glue code to make my workflow easier is enough. Of course, there was a point five or six years ago when I mostly committed to the Emacs learning curve and a point two years ago where I committed to Babel (as part of a commitment to more literate programming).

What I find useful is that Emacs supports literate programming at a deeper level than markdown.

Good luck.

<comment><AUTHOR> I mean, when we edit the code, we can preview the effect in real time. Editing literary code has a live preview like most markdown editors.

The editor has a Live Preview panel to do the following work:

1\. Get the current text

2\. replace the `\r\n\;` with `\r\n` (note: line breaks and line comment characters of the current file can be obtained from the editor's API. line comment characters of clojure(lisp) is `;`)

3\. live Preview markdown string

4\. Easily export directly to PDF or HTML.

Its advantages:

1\. Don't break the syntax of any programming language, you can compile directly.

2\. you only need a single line of regular replacement preprocessing, then you can use any Markdown parse or converter.

3\. Support any code editor that supports Markdwon Live preview, allowing the source code of any programming language to become rich text in real time. In the code's comment area, You can use the markdown to draw flowcharts, tables, task lists, and display images on the live preview panel, enhance the readability of your code.

4\. If you extend the Markdwon tag, you can implement the eval code, print result, display data visualization and other instruction tags, to achieve live programming, live test.

<comment><USER2> Ah, I see. Thanks.

<comment><AUTHOR> comment area markup method can be applied to any programming language and any markup (including Org,rst, asciidoc, etc.), which is the greatest advantage. :-)</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


An USB plug that goes both ways - <AUTHOR> http://www.yankodesign.com/2011/01/25/this-usb-plugs-in-both-ways/ <comment><USER3> Well, after 10+ years of using USB widgets of every shape, size, and color - <USER2> just discovered from reading the article that the USB symbol is always on the top side. So, I certainly got my value out of HN today. :-)

<comment><USER4>
      - ... that the USB symbol is always on the top side

Yes, I thought that, except that on my father's computer it goes on the bottom. I checked quite thoroughly.

<comment><USER5> That might be because your father's computer has the usb ports mounted upside down.

It happens very often though. And in some laptops you even have all combinations at once: some mounted right, others upside down and one or two mounted vertically...

It's a mess...

<comment><USER6> More like the USB spec should have realized that the ports may end up in all sorts of configurations, especially on devices where they are trying to make the maximum amount of limited space (i.e. laptops, netbooks, etc). The connector was designed without really allowing normal people (or at least people are aren't 'in' on the group-think that can go on in working-groups) to try and use it.

<comment><USER7> You know, back in '96 I can give them some slack for not necessarily thinking about that use case.

<comment><USER8> I can't. RJ11, RJ45, RS232 and PS2 plugs were already everywhere back then, and they were mounted every which-way. And they were all physically keyed at the connector such that you could figure it out blind. Bah _and_ humbug, I say.

<comment><USER9> Plugging in PS/2 ports is the one single single port that sucks even more than USB, because instead of flipping and putting it in right, you have to rotate the connector and try until you succeed. Or you give up the blind thing and look how the port is mounted.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I read a poignant comment on YouTube (I know, I know) the other day:

"I have a theory, that USB cables have three sides: Wrong side A, wrong side B and right side. Geometry would tell us that the first side would be the same as the third one, but I know the truth."

<comment><USER11> That reminds me of a saying that we used religiously back in the Navy: "50/50/90".

If you have a 50/50 chance of making a correct decision, you'll get it wrong 90% of the time.

<comment><USER12> I watch this in action every time I ask my four year-old which is his right or left hand. Poor little dude gets it wrong almost every time.

<comment><USER13> How cute :)

Btw, to help him learn you could attach a bracelet to his left or his right hand. Give him a landmark that he can recognize.

<comment><USER14> Put your hands in front of you, palms facing outwards. Your left hand is where thumb and index finger form an L. (Or if he's into cars, explain it via `where the cars drive'.)

<comment><USER15> Put your hands in front of you, palms facing _inwards_. Where the thumb and index finger form an L, that's your _right_ hand.

And of course, cars where I grew up (Australia) drove on the opposite side of the road to the cars on tv (mostly US shows and movies).

I think these are both great ways to help teach kids left and right; I just like to point out the flaws since neither way helped me (and I still have to think about it). Of course, I'm far more messed up than most kids will ever hope to be!

<comment><USER14> Didn't I imply that cars drive on the right side i.e. the left side of the road?

<comment><USER15> Yeah - I was making the point about it being a confusing tool to use. When I'm outside, cars drive on the left; when I'm inside watching a movie, they drive on the right; so my brain isn't getting wired with clear signals.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Oh wow, this is spectacular. I can't tell you how many times I've done this:

      - USB plug doesn't fit. Must be wrong way. Switch!
      - Still doesn't fit. REALLY doesn't fit.
        Must have been the other way around. Switch again!
      - Finagle it a bit more than the first try. OK, fits now.

<comment><USER17> You forgot:

      - stop trying to push it into power connector
      - stick it in RJ-45 hole, that doesn't feel right

<comment><USER18> Actually USB plugs go into RJ-45 sockets remarkably well. I've done it before and it felt "right" to the point where I was confused why the mouse wasn't working.

<comment><USER19> That's why I always connect the ethernet before plugging in any USB peripherals.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> The preamble that talks about how USB is increasingly important in our lives is hilarious: typical hyperbolic introduction to student projects that try and fail to justify the importance of the project.

It is especially funny because it falls back on the "increasingly important" trope, when it is not only false but subsumed by a far better argument: USB is ubiquitous.

<comment><USER21> Yup, you could sum it all and simpl say:

"With the ubiquity of USB, here is a plug design that makes connecting more hassle free {pictures}"

HOWEVER,

This guy has been beat to the punch by guys at CES this year.

There was a guy handing out samples of a USB adapter that you plug into any existing USB cable and i does what this guys design does, except it doesnt have any moving parts. Rather than the sliding plastic thing, it is simply the contact board center-mounted in the metal shroud, regardless of which way you plug it, it works.

My buddy ordered 1000 to give away to customers.

<comment><USER22> Do you have the contact info for this company? I'd surely order a dozen just for around the house.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> Very cool but here's my initial concern. When the set of four contacts are flipped over on top of themselves their order will be reversed and that leads to a potential for a short. The center two pins being data aren't as big of a deal but the outside pins, namely the +5 and ground would be opposite each other and quite close. Since the surface they are mounted on slides, it could potentially also wiggle up and down. Careful engineering would be required to ensure these don't come into contact, which would make a nice little short to blow out one of your USB ports.

I would consider putting a sliding plate between the two contact plates to keep the two sides separated. It would be pushed back no matter which direction it was inserted exposing the correct set of contacts.

<comment><USER24> USB ports are probably current limited, so it's unlikely that a momentary short will burn them out. However, dissipating 2.5-4W (depending on the port's power capability) through a few small components will cause them to heat up over time, which may burn out the port.

<comment><USER17> USB ports are _supposed to be_ current limited. Given that those components cost money to buy and money to place… I think we know where low end equipment vendors are going to end up.

<comment><USER25> I'd expect current limiting to be a feature of even the cheapest USB interface ICs. It's really easy to test and potentially a short-circuit/fire hazard. Not the kind of thing any testing lab would be likely to overlook.

<comment><USER26> Funny story.

I assumed this as well - but while working on a school project I fried a very nice motherboard when our project got a short from a wire that had come loose. Lesson learned - use a separate power supply and keep the USB only for signalling.

<comment><USER27> Also in this vein: try explaining to your bosses why spending money for an AC adapter for a USB I/O device in a business-critical piece of hardware that does _not_ tolerate lost signals well is a justifiable expense when it is perfectly capable of getting power from a USB cable into a computer that is already powering entirely too many things.

I actually bought it myself and smuggled in the upgrade just because the headaches it would cause me, personally, weren't worth it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> FTFY: A USB plug that goes both ways

A word gets the 'an' article based on pronunciation, not the mere fact that it starts with a vowel. Say it: "a you es bee"

See? It has a consonant sound so 'a' sounds better.

<comment><USER29> The author is pretty obviously either a non-western or a non-native English speaker. Read some of the picture captions.

<comment><USER30> That's assuming the author and the submitter are the same person.

<comment><USER29> Oh, my bad. I assumed the titles matched. I guess based on our informal English usage comparison, it is likely that the author and submitter are the same person.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> OK kids, quit the bellyaching. There is only one way to get a USB cable wrong, even if you get it wrong 90% of the time. Remember the PS2. It came with round DIN connectors. There was only one right way to plug it in, but an indefinite number of wrong ways to try it. And we had to do it uphill...in the snow.

<comment><USER32> PS/2 connectors were actually more usable because you could apply light pressure and then without looking, spin it from side to side, and then push in when it "docked".

<comment><USER33> This sounds like it's more difficult

<comment><USER34> Not really, cause with a PS/2 connector you know you're probably inserting it wrong. With a USB-connector you think you're right, but you're not.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> I've always wondered why the USB port is the way it is. It seems such an unbelievably stupid design, but I assume there must be a reason for it. Does anyone have a link, or brief explanation?

Incidentally a search for "why is the usb port such a stupid design?" (without the quotes) brings up nothing remotely relevant on any of the major search engines. Strange.

<comment><USER36> Probably because it's just really, really simple. Short of audio jacks, it's one of the simplest computer plugs in existence. That's a good thing when you're trying to achieve universal adoption.

<comment><USER37> I wonder how that explains the over-complex multi-layer protocol. (Go look up OTG)

Or maybe because USB-IF is built of committees made up by (mostly) the least productive people in given large organizations.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> I've always wondered, why aren't USB connectors designed to be able to be inserted either way? Does having 4 contacts vs 8 really save all that much money?

<comment><USER23> Agreed, they should just be like a firewire plug that is bidirectional (ie. not tapered at one end) with the 4 pins repeated on each side. Much better design.

<comment><USER39> FireWire plugs only fit one way, just like USB. Yet, one of FireWire's advantages is that the connector doesn't have a fully symmetrical shape, that makes it more obvious how to insert the plug. Users don't even have to look, they can feel which side is narrowest or has a dent on one side (depending on the type of FireWire plug).

[http://pinouts.ru/connector/4_pin,_6_pin_or_9_pin_IEEE1394_F...](http://pinouts.ru/connector/4_pin,_6_pin_or_9_pin_IEEE1394_FireWire_plug_connector.shtml)

<comment><USER23> I should have made that wording clearer... by "like a firewire plug that is bidirectional (ie. not tapered)" I mean a symmetrically shaped firewire "style" plug, only with the same pins arrayed down each side... so no matter how you plug it in it's correct.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER40> I never understood why plugs like that needed to go a certain way. On a technical standpoint, yes, I get that the leads need to be oriented in such a way, but why design it so people have to think about it? Apple's mag safe connector is a perfect example of how plugs should work - it does not require anyone to think about what the correct orientation is.

Same with magnetic stripe readers for credit cards and transit passes. At this point, that reading technology is so ridiculously cheap that there should be no reason why we can't put in four different sensors so that it doesn't matter what orientation you swipe a card with.

<comment><USER8> Because the physical spec was dreamt up by electrical engineers, perhaps? I can cut them a little slack because they had to spec something everyone in the consortium could manufacture for peanuts, but not much.

The USB plug is far from the worst connector design out there. My favourite is the audio jack, where you are _guaranteed_ to short the signal lines to earth on connection and disconnection. Really smart, that one...

</comment></comment><comment><USER41> Reminds me of Microsoft's Instaload design for batteries: "The two batteries can be inserted in any of the four possible orientations as shown above and the device works."

Source: [http://www.microsoft.com/hardware/mouseandkeyboard/licensing...](http://www.microsoft.com/hardware/mouseandkeyboard/licensing/instaloadoverview.mspx)

HN Discussion <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1480059>

</comment><comment><USER42> Smart, but I wonder how robust it is. With a sliding mechanism that small that's going to be constantly barraged with fumbling fingers, will it be able to stand the test of time? Something tells me it'll go the way of floppy disks - accidentally mangled springs, which will make the user have to toss it and get a new one. The major difference being that USB cables don't come in packs of 10.

<comment><USER43> It has the lowest robustness possible: it's some student's design project and doesn't even physically exist.

All the illustrations are renders or bad composites.

<comment><USER42> I'm aware, but that doesn't mean I can't question the robustness of the (hypothetical) final interface. If a man looks at a blueprint and asks, "will it work?" he's not asking if the ink on paper has structural integrity - he's asking about the final product.

<comment><USER43> This isn't even a blueprint, though. It's a concept piece. You can make vague judgments about it, but the truth is that people here wondering whether this would be practical is probably the closest to actual engineering that this design has gone.

I wouldn't worry much about robustness - it's not certain that this would even _work_ in the first place.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER44> I feel like the problem is often the opposite one. I'm plugging a USB device into the back of my PC, and can't see the direction that the USB port is facing. Some of the motherboard shields sit out far enough that, even if you look back there, you can't really see whether it's pointing up or down.

Maybe it's always consistent, but I don't have an intuitive sense for that. I would definitely pay $1 or $2 extra for cables that can be plugged in from either direction.

</comment><comment><USER45> The USB 2.0 spec says that connectors have to stand up to 1,500 plug/unplugs.

I know people who have worn out their connectors. It's not a common problem, but . . . surely we can do better.

Too bad we can't get power over optical connects. Practical amounts of it, I mean.

<comment><USER46> Mini and micro USB (and I presume USB 3.0) are all rated for much more plug cycles. I'm sure most USB 2.0 plugs made now are actually rated for much more than 1500, but you can't exactly go about changing the spec now can you?

<comment><USER47> Mini USB has about the same robustness as big USB. It is micro USB that is much more robust, which is one of the reasons it was chosen for the European phone charger standard.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER48> "The double USB has two contact layers which are both sketchy"

What does that mean?

<comment><USER49> "Stretchy", not "sketchy". I'm not sure what that means either though.

</comment></comment><comment><USER50> That's pretty clever actually! Is this a real product?

If so how does it compare for number of insertions versus 'regular' USB plugs?

Is this a large enough advantage to justify the additional costs?

<comment><USER51> UltraTek makes something similar: <http://www.flipperusb.com/>

<comment><USER52> _End the frustration of broken USB connectors and end-user support issues_

I'm afraid to ask... do any significant number of users actually break their USB ports by trying to insert the plug the wrong way?

<comment><USER53> I've done it, busted a port on the back of my computer where I was inserting blind. Plus it's on it's side, so you aren't sure which end is "up".

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER54> Great design, although I doubt anyone will seriously benefit from it. Why not just plug it in where the USB symbol is on top? How does this solve anything?

<comment><USER8> Your comment amounts to "Why can't people know everything and never make mistakes?" I hope you see the problem with that.

</comment></comment><comment><USER55> Had the inventors of USB just made it a trapezoid or some other asymmetrical shape this all could have been avoided.

<comment><USER56> I suppose this is the reason why USB type B, mini and micro are designed as either trapezoid or have a beveled edge.

<comment><USER57> At least in micro usbs case, it doesn't really help. I still constantly try to put the cable wrong way in

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER58> "An USB"? Do you pronounce it _uss-buh_?

</comment><comment><USER59> He should patent this.

</comment><comment><USER60> This great new product will revolutionize the way we input usb cables into our laptops. I would compare its significance to being somewhere between curing polio and ending apartheid in South Africa.

</comment><comment><USER61> Who still uses USB regularly enough to feel this is a problem? Memory sticks are irrelevant in todays Gb ethernet as standard world, printers are wireless or networked, scanners don't exist for all intents and purposes, mice and keyboards are bluetooth... the list goes on!

<comment><USER62> Almost everyone still uses USB as the baseline for almost everything. Few people use Bluetooth mice or keyboards. Networked scanners and printers are expensive when compared with USB appliances. Gb network is only standard on high-end components, most are still 10/100. USB drives are the most common form of data transfer because of the assurance that they will be compatible with most machines.

<comment><USER63> USB drives are also good for storing changing files that need to be moved between work and home. You can burn more files to a CD but that takes more than 30 seconds,

<comment><USER64> A company where I used to work got paranoid about its employees walking out the door with its precious intellectual property on those things, and installed something called 'Hibun' to prevent just that. From then on, anyone who "needed" to move data to a USB drive had to use one specially made for the Hibun system, and a "key" to permit transfer in a form that could only be read on another "authorized" computer.

That was... fun.

<comment><USER14> And, let me guess, it was probably trivial to break for the black hat guys?

<comment><USER64> I can't say I really know. I didn't hear about anyone breaking it, certainly.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Twitter says a spear phishing attack led to the Bitcoin scam - <AUTHOR> https://www.theverge.com/2020/7/30/21348974/twitter-spear-phishing-attack-bitcoin-scam <comment><AUTHOR> [https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/company/2020/an- update...](https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/company/2020/an-update-on- our-security-incident.html)

> Last updated on July 30, 2020, at 5:45 PM PT with new sections below on > "What we know now" and "What we're doing to protect our service".

Previously on HN:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23878753](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23878753)</comment>


Show HN: Daptly – Gesture/voice controlled smart displays - <AUTHOR> https://www.daptly.com <comment><AUTHOR> Hey HN - I'm one of the cofounders of Daptly. We launched preorders this morning, and we're really excited to share it with the community and hear any feedback that people are willing to share. Thanks!

<comment><USER2> Alexa integration looks cool. Any other integrations on the roadmap? e.g., Google Home? Sonos?

<comment><AUTHOR> Alexa is the big one. We also connect into Hue Lights, Nest, Wemo, August locks, and basically anything that offers an API. We offer a few different triggers/responses with IFTTT which creates a lot of cool possibilities.

<comment><USER2> Awesome, thanks</comment></comment></comment></comment>


MakerBot Is Outsourcing Its Brooklyn Manufacturing Jobs to China - <AUTHOR> http://www.makerbot.com/blog/2016/04/25/makerbot-partners-with-contract-manufacturer-to-increase-production-flexibility <comment><USER4> A lot of people wonder why large companies can't just stay in the US and compete on quality, and here is a great case for why. It doesn't matter how great your workers are, you can't sell a product for $3,000 when others are selling it for $600. Especially when it's a technology still in development.

And I know we pay extra for the warm and fuzzies knowing that something is made in the states, but I'm sure the home tinkerer in Indianapolis doesn't get super warm and fuzzy thinking of paying an extra $2000 just to support some exorbitant Brooklyn rent.

<comment><USER5> I often wonder if costs could be lowered for many of these companies if they would stop locating in some of the country's most expensive places to operate and for their employees to live. I know the arguments about workforce availability and all that, but I've never seen a proper look into it.

<comment><USER6> Probably. But then there is shipping. If I may stray a bit. The price to ship a small package from Adafruit to a place less than 10 miles cost me around $10.00 - 4 days tops. I can make a similar purchase for a Chinese spoofed version and have it in 7 days, free shipping. I don't know how the heck the shipping from China is so cheap. While to ship anything inside the us is frigging expensive...to ship outside the us is worse. And we invented modern day shipping.

<comment><USER7> It's because the USPS is subsidizing the cost of that shipment.

"The Postal Service is losing millions a year to help you buy cheap stuff from China" [https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/storyline/wp/2014/09/12/...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/storyline/wp/2014/09/12/the- postal-service-is-losing-millions-a-year-to-help-you-buy-cheap-stuff-from- china/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> My crazy conspiracy theory is that Makerbot was acquired by Stratasys as a ploy to buy out the most dangerous and high quality big hobbyist 3D printer brand and then torpedo it with value engineering to allow them to sell their own in house brand (uPrint) better. Maybe that's not true, but the Gen 5 Replicator was Day 0 garbage.

My Replicator Gen 5 was not functional on launch, I never got a good print out of it. The self calibration function was non-functional out of the box after one print, and the inability to manually level was designed out from the Rep2, a design so good, international manufacturers copied it in the form of the Flashforge. The Rep 5 was completely redesigned for no reason, the integral filament reel was intended to bully you into buying Makerbot brand filament on their custom reels, the "new" software made it so you could CHANGE LESS SETTINGS, like you know, temperature, or feed rate. Basically Gen 5 was a corporate ball of dark patterns and poor regressive design, completely overpriced, and shipped before it was ready to boot. One could argue that making the Makerbot brand a more closed design was a choice of positioning, but I feel that is only justified if you can deliver the ease of use value, which Gen 5 didn't.

Sadly, those Brooklynite's jobs might have been doomed when the Stratasys logo first went up on the Makerbot sign.

</comment><comment><USER9> Caveat Emptor. If you can't fork you aren't free.

The Makerbot rose up from a spirit of sharing and community goodwill, made money and employed local Brooklyites - so it was a flagship for the sharing economy and open hardware.

Now there is an impression that they closed it off. Make4rbot was bought by the holder of a patent for the sintering 3D printing technology, seen as an impediment to this useful methods community adoption.

The price paid for Makerbot was handsome, but as everyone was doing OK already - this was perceived as 'selling out' and the goodwill began evaporating. The question then for Makerbot is: Does the momentum of being first to market trump the anger among the maker community & alpha adopters ?

When I bought Minecraft at alpha, Mojang suggested it would become open - <USER2> after making more cash than anyone needs they sold it to Microsoft. I felt a bit betrayed, not because of $20 but because I promoted it and gave it to friends children and now they are tied into Microsoft which was the opposite of my intention.

This problem echoes down the ages: traditionally bands sell out the truefans when they sign with the majors; the closing of the UNIX community when Bell was privatised; the emerging idea that cool hacks, hardware & software shouldn't be shared among friends, exemplified by Gates letter to the Homebrew Computer Club about BASIC.

This makes new communities wonder if there is a way to prevent this - <USER3> invented the GPL to stop the 'tradgedy of the commons' happening to his work & community.

Is there a community GPL that could have been used for MakerBot to ensure it stayed community orientated ?

Does this reflect the difference between Free and Open ? GPL & MIT, is this the tragedy of the commons that only the GPL ensures against ?

<comment><USER10> In a number of ways this echoes the early microcomputer industry (thinking the 1970s-80s), when dozens of competing and incompatible standards existed. Atari, Apple, Commodore, Amiga, just to name a few. And as the industry neared middle age in the 1990s, shopping for a "PC Clone" was a cornucopia of options: a copy of PC Shopper was hundreds of pages thick, each with ads for "custom made" PC clones "built to your specifications". Lead times of weeks, hundreds of case, motherboards, CPU, RAM and Video card options existed... and prices were in the $2000+. Now it's settled down to a few big players who essentially sell poorly-differentiated commodity items for paper-thin margins. It is to be expected as an industry matures.

A company must choose where to place itself. Go after the high-end boutique market and risk pricing yourself out (if one can't communicate the price/value argument to customers), or become another "me too" supplier in a race to the bottom, following all the same steps as the competition, facing extinction due to lack of margin.

<comment><USER9> Mature free markets that entail paper thin margins are naturally disrupted and conquered.

Jobs had seen Kay's Dynabook at Parc and had some vision of what portable computers could offer. Apple phones made $250 per phone, even with less than 0.5% of the market Jobs had already won as Nokia et al. made ~pence per phone.

Cartels and Monopolies naturally aggregate to protect incumbents from the needs & desires of the customer and society from the painful costs of over rapid progress, yet like great empires companies decline when their owners lose touch with their daily customers needs, demands or desires.

Intellectual property rights are not natural rights but a social contract, providing temporary monopoly in exchange for social benefit.

Rinse and repeat.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Totally understand being disappointed in MakerBot for a myriad of other reasons. But the whole, "omg stuff is going to be shitty because its Chinese" is a tired old trope. If you know what you are doing and aren't needlessly cutting corners you should be fine.

P.S: Not Chinese, I've just enjoyed enough Chinese mfg'd (even Chinese designed) products now to know that trope is old.

<comment><USER12> I've gotten about half my wardrobe from AliExpress, and I look like a million bucks.

The stigma is for the uneducated. Cheap knockoffs will be cheap. But if you know how to spend and where to spend it in China — regardless of industry — you will get amazing quality for the price.

<comment><USER13> Way off topic, but who sells good menswear on AliExpress?

<comment><USER12> Sort by "hottest"! Just read the reviews and pay attention to ratings. Read a lot of reviews them. Triple-check sizing. If you don't know, then send a message to the shop and ask. They're really friendly and great.

It might be worth going to a local tailor and getting measured. They'll gladly do it for free, but I'll usually give the person $20 as a thank you.

Regarding scores: I won't buy if the "Item as Described" metric is below 4.6. I can usually get stuff to Minnesota within 10 days via ePacket.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> First the Closed Source discussions [1], and now completely outsourcing to China? What sets them apart from any other hardware company now?

[1] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MakerBot_Industries#Closed_sou...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MakerBot_Industries#Closed_source_hardware)

<comment><USER15> We really should try to promote 3D printing companies that support the open source movement and local manufacturing. Maybe we should set up a wikipedia category for open source 3d printers?

Product Chart has a section for 3d printers with open source design:

[http://www.productchart.com/3d_printers/sets/4](http://www.productchart.com/3d_printers/sets/4)

<comment><USER16> They tried. And the result is that as they got press and notoriety people took their open plans and made replicas in China and sold them at a cost that massively undercut MB.

If they had stayed open source they would have gone under years ago, probably years before Systrays bought them.

Open hardware doesn't really seem to be a sustainable business, at least not when what you're making costs as much as a 3D printer. A brand name isn't worth a ton when an identical rip-off product is 40% cheaper and performs the same.

<comment><USER17> > Open hardware doesn't really seem to be a sustainable business

Neither does open source software tbh.

<comment><USER16> It seems to be, at best, something you try and use as a value add to your _real_ service like DB consulting.

<comment><USER18> Why not make your real service on-site repair? That's less outsourceable than consulting, even.

<comment><USER14> Who is going to pay for on-site repair for consumer 3d printers? Only a handful of businesses that actually rely on 3d printers use a MakerBot.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Of course they are. It's been lies and flim flam for a while. Worst printers on the market, just look at the reviews. They had US manufacturing going for them, but I guess even that much of their previous reputation, honor, and pride was too much to hold on to.

<comment><USER20> So what would you say is the best 3D printer on the market right now?

<comment><USER21> We've had good luck with the products out of formlabs (the print quality is awesome), although dealing with their resin is a royal PITA.

<comment><USER22> I've heard that the resin cartridges that Formlabs 2 uses are much easier to deal with.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> This company isn't even a shell of its former self. What a shame.

</comment><comment><USER24> I would have welcomed a more upfront description from Makerbot. Eg 'We're moving production to China - here's why'.

<comment><USER25> I had the same exact thought. Don't dress up bad news in corporatese, just rip the band-aid off and speak plainly.

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> 3D printing is a great technology but this is just sad, more jobs leaving to China.

<comment><USER27> So, the jobs that leave the US go to China, but maybe the company can increase sales/invest more because they have better economics, and then grow, and then hire more people. Its only a net loss in the short term, not necessarily forever.

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> MakerBot sucked at manufacturing. Laser-cut wood frames for a production product? Please. What they need from China is manufacturing expertise. People who can design injection molds and stamping dies. They were in love with their "replicator" fantasy of one-off manufacturing, forgetting that 3D printing costs orders of magnitude more than injection molding in quantity, and produces inferior plastic.

<comment><USER16> The laser-cut wood was when they were just starting out and more DIY. Their recent more professional printers have had steel frames.

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> Time to find a 'Made in America' 3d-Printer for my next fabricator

<comment><USER30> LulzBot might be of interest to you. Best power-user printers on the market IMHO, and made in Indiana.

<comment><USER31> Lulz is in Colorado...SeeMeCNC is in Indiana.

<comment><USER30> Whoops - I'm an idiot.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> To me the cool part to 3d printers was that they could make their own parts. Not be mass produced in China.

<comment><USER10> Other than a handful of minor endcap parts, everything is made in China: the control board, stepper motor, extruder, heat bed, wires, limit switches, lead screws, bearings, guide rods, filament, fasteners, cables and probably the laser-cut lexan or aluminum folded frame.

</comment></comment><comment><USER33> Moving to China means more communication effort and more coordination which can really hurt your business if you do it bad upfront. Same reason why enterprise usually hires consultants rather than hiring everyone as full-time under their paycheck even though the enterprise itself has to pay more money to the consulting company: enterprise doesn't need to pay for health benefit, bonus and even travel expense; pay a premium for a package. Of course, a smart enterprise talent management should turn consultants into full time over time if when the consultants are critical for the growth of a given project...

</comment><comment><USER34> Understandable as to why they're doing this, but the amount of spin in how they titled their press release is sickening. "Production flexibility," indeed.

</comment><comment><USER35> There are some comments here about the difficulty competing with Chinese knockoffs, but there are many small companies making high quality 3D printers, and they have good reputations: Ultimaker. Printrbot. E3D BigBox. Makergear. There are probably many others too that have been around for years but I'm not really plugged in.

Thomas Sanladerer on youtube is a good source of information, and reprap.org, if you're shopping.

</comment><comment><USER36> Makerbot is in a tough spot. They lost points with people when they announced closing off of some of their work vs remaining open source. And so customers thought they might (if they are paying premium for consumer level printing anyway) to go with Ultimaker which retained premium build quality and remained open. And month after month, other companies keep bringing printers out to compete.

Microcenter is carrying Makerbot but also much lower priced generic 3D printers I think which are house branded. Dremel has a very nice 3D printer for a lot less than Makerbot and apparently has pretty good tech support too.

In regards to competing with China though, it's important to know that the products from China are artificially low and that _seems_ to benefit us but it also means that so many of us are out of work or under employed. But if you straighten out trade balance and currency manipulation Chinese products become more expensive as they naturally should be, local U.S. goods become more accessible and less expensive to a degree and and we have more people with more buying power (because employment) to make the economy work.

<comment><USER37> The Dremel is a rebranded Flashforge Dreamer if I'm not mistaken. At home I have a Flashforge Creator Pro (a clone of a Replicator 2X, but with a lot of improvements) and I'm really happy with it.

It is more than (in Europe) half the price of a Makerbot and that for a printer that is certainly on par with it or maybe be even better. It scores very high in the enthousiasts category on 3D hubs ([https://www.3dhubs.com/3d-printers#enthusiast](https://www.3dhubs.com/3d-printers#enthusiast))

Regarding Chinese quality, I don't have the feeling that "Made in USA" is so much better if I see how many problems there are with the Makerbot Replicator 5th generation imo. That version is notorious for having a lot of quality problems.

These days most parts come from Chinese manufacturers anyway... .

</comment></comment><comment><USER38> Too bad I thought it had finally gathered the ability to manufacture itself. Turns out the owners suck, too bad.

</comment><comment><USER39> Simple solution: Impose tax on MakerBot revenues, not profits

</comment><comment><USER40> lol "increase production flexibility" that's some top-notch corporate-speak.</comment>