Researchers Develop 'Trojan Horse' Drug That Tricks, Then Kills Cancer Cells - <AUTHOR> https://www.studyfinds.org/strategic-medicine-researchers-develop-trojan-horse-drug-that-tricks-then-kills-cancer-cells/ <comment><USER2> Paclitaxel, an existing chemotherapy agent, kills cancer by interfering with microtubule dynamics in cells, the same way that Fenbendazole and other antihelmintics (dewormers) attack cancer in the recent post about someone curing themselves by taking OTC dog dewormer [0].

Unlike the dog dewormer, today's Paclitaxel regimens are quite toxic. Interestingly, most of the toxicity comes from the method of delivery [1], not the drug itself. It's actually why the way we give it (infrequent doses) actually promotes recurrence in some cases. This post talks about a much less toxic method of delivery, which explains why they can up the dose of the drug significantly while still being much safer.

[0]: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20486893](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20486893)

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

<comment><USER3> There are several inaccuracies in your comment. Infusion reactions to paclitaxel are rare and not serious. Most of the toxicity arises from cumulative nerve damage with chronic use.

There is also no evidence it promotes cancer recurrence.

<comment><USER4> You better believe the infusion reactions can be serious, despite what any medical literature may be leading you to believe. My father went into anaphylaxis within minutes of his Taxol infusion. My family was kicked out of the treatment room while six medical workers stabilized him over the course of an afternoon.

<comment><USER5> My reaction wasn't as severe but I had a taxol based reaction as well. It's a barrel of fun, luckily mine was treatable with Benadryl. I don't envy you or your father.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> This language seems to be really gaining popularity. I believe this is the third or fourth time I've seen a cancer treatment referred to as a Trojan Horse. I have some stock in such a company, they're about to start Phase 2 clinical trials. It's a great time for cancer treatments in that I don't think there's ever been as much positivity as now about our chances to effectively treat various types of cancers. There's been lots of great progress. As someone who's father had to go through multiple cancer surgeries, I hope the day comes when we can consider cancer not much a bigger deal than the flu. Probably still a pipe dream, but it's a nice dream.

<comment><USER7> Out of curiosity

If your company is a for profit share company making inroads in this, then what is the point of donating money when the real progress seems to happens on the invested money looking for returns

<comment><USER5> You're typically donating to patient treatments, which are very expensive, and most treatment options don't work out long term if you're at the point where you're on clinical trials. There's also a lot of pure research into cancer itself.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I feel like we hear about _potential_ breakthrough cancer cures daily, but then never hear about them again. Do they not make it past animal testing or is our healthcare system so slow that it just takes forever for trials to move along?

<comment><USER9> Every cancer is different. There will never be a single drug that deals with all cancers at once. Every cancer originates from a specific organ and even though the cancer is a collective of degenerated cells, it's program will still resemble the program of the original cells.

The nasty thing about cancers is that their development is probabilistic. Some cancers may develop in a more common way for which there are already effective drugs. But you might also get unlucky and get a less typical/less studied form of a cancer and then your treatment options are much worse.

<comment><USER5> This is slightly inaccurate. Pan-cancer treatments are rare but do exist, for example checkpoint inhibitors. They just work differently on every cancer and have different outcomes for each type of cancer. The single biggest factor right now on treatment outcomes is how quickly you find the cancer, because surgery early on is the best treatment, usually followed up with chemotherapy. These "miracle" treatments really are most impactful for late stage patients, especially those that aren't very expressive which means it's harder to find something to bind to the cancer cells and kill them.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Would the molecules cross the blood brain barrier? Is there a trial of this anywhere? (I have an inoperable brain tumor.)

<comment><USER2> I'm not a doctor, this is very much not medical advice, and I've only been looking into these recently, but it does appear that the Benzimidazole class of medications from that recent cured-by-dog-dewormer post [0] like Albendazole and Mebendazole, both FDA approved as antihelmintics, do pass through the blood-brain barrier [1][2], and is currently used to that effect as a standard treatment for neurocysticercosis.

It appears a neurosurgery professor at Johns Hopkins that independently discovered the link was interested in it for that very reason [3].

[0]: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20486893](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20486893)

[1]: [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1874411/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1874411/)

[2]: [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5403762/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5403762/)

[3]: [https://www.npr.org/sections/health- shots/2017/01/30/5124002...](https://www.npr.org/sections/health- shots/2017/01/30/512400204/a-pinworm-medication-is-being-tested-as-a- potential-anti-cancer-drug)

<comment><USER10> Thank you.</comment></comment></comment>


Unix time turns 1500000000 today - <AUTHOR> $ date --date='@1500000000'
Fri Jul 14 02:40:00 UTC 2017
That's today at 7:40pm for those in the Bay Area. <comment><USER2> Countdown: [https://www.epochconverter.com/countdown](https://www.epochconverter.com/countdown)

See also: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14765198](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14765198)

<comment><USER3> And: [http://www.commitstrip.com/en/2017/06/15/party- time/](http://www.commitstrip.com/en/2017/06/15/party-time/) :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Duplicates [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14758615](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14758615) , and the date calculation is not actually measuring 1.5 Gs since the Epoch. See [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14760144](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14760144)

</comment><comment> King-Aaron I suppose you only turn One billion, five hundred million once

<comment><USER4> The time in the headline is actually when you turn 1500000027. "You" turn 1.5 Gs some 27 seconds earlier.

See [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14760144](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14760144)

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> makes me remeber my first steps with suse's yast. many, many years ago. those were the days when i wasn't afraid or too lazy "reverse-engineering" stuff and learn.

also, one friend once always used the password "susel". no joke.

</comment><comment><USER6> Remember when it was reaching 1234567890.</comment>


Show HN: Queu – Watch your Netflix, HBO, Hulu and more from one app - <AUTHOR> https://join.queu.tv/ <comment><AUTHOR> Hello everybody, I spent the last month-ish working on Queu, which combines all of your streaming subscriptions into one app.

I'm a die-hard cable cutter, but it feels like every month there's another new streaming platform on the block, which means another app I have to go flipping through when looking for something to watch. Queu is my answer to my problem, and I hope it can be a solution for others as well.

My immediate goal is to get some of the new "Network" platforms (ABC, NBC, Bravo, etc.) up and running on Queu. I'm also interested in getting a version of Queu running on iOS and Android.

I'd be happy to answer any questions people have.

Thanks, Jacob

<comment><USER2> If it's just a browser extension, why does it require signing up for a separate account from you?

<comment><AUTHOR> Good morning, Queu syncs your watch history on the website across devices.

The browser extension mostly just enables video playback on the main website ([https://queu.tv](https://queu.tv)).</comment></comment></comment>


Massive Attack celebrate Mezzanine's 20th anniversary by preserving it in DNA - <AUTHOR> https://www.residentadvisor.net/news.aspx?id=41581 <comment><USER2> How can you justify Mezzanine as their breakthrough album? What about the wide popular appeal and critical success of Blue Lines and Protection before it?

<comment><USER3> Presumably because Mezzanine was thir first album to chart number 1

<comment><USER2> I think it charted at number 1... because they had already broken through with the previous albums, so enough people knew about it and were anticipating it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> 15M would be listenable with a state of the art audio codec like Opus, but not transparent.

15Mb for 63.5 minutes would translate to 32 Kbit/s. Which is pretty low, but I'm going to compress it with Opus and listen to it. Apparently there have been some improvements on low bitrate speech coding which would make it good for saving podcasts or text to speech files.

I used to save some space on my PocketPC by re-compressing podcasts to wma acelp.net in the previous century.

</comment><comment><USER5> Growing up, Mezzanine and The Fragile were the two albums that shaped my musical tastes growing up. As cool as this is, I don't see how its practical, even for an archival purpose.

</comment><comment><USER6> Blue Lines was better

</comment><comment><USER7> I'm a bit disappointed they didn't inject the DNA strands back into their own bodies.</comment>


These cities are finishing strong as Amazon narrows down choice for new HQ - <AUTHOR> https://www.cnbc.com/2018/08/16/as-amazon-narrows-choice-for-hq2these-cities-finishing-strong.html?itx[idio]=6061611&ito=792&itq=0ca1c3eb-c8c8-4951-a54c-90ff436a65fd <comment><USER2> These are just a bunch of "what-ifs" from CNBC. Pretty "meh" overall.</comment>


Why Did ProtonMail Vanish from Google Search Results? (2016) - <AUTHOR> https://techcrunch.com/2016/10/27/why-did-protonmail-vanish-from-google-search-results-for-months/ <comment><USER2> [2016].

Having worked at Google's Search Quality Evaluation team, I can confirm that Google would only manually remove sites from its search results if they violate its webmaster guidelines: [https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/35769?hl=en](https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/35769?hl=en)

Of course, there can be other issues preventing a site from showing up in the search results (e.g. site migration issues, accidentally locking out Googlebot in robots.txt, ...). In such cases, the best way to raise the issue would be to report it on the webmaster forum, which is frequented both by smart and helpful users and by Googlers working on search quality: [https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!forum/webmasters](https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!forum/webmasters)

<comment><USER3> You mean violate the political stance of Google or any other arbitrary properties they got. You can go and compare search results across Duckduckgo, Bing and Google to get a full picture how much the search results are censored. When people talk about "net neutrality" I always wonder why isn't there outrage against this, because it is definitely not neutral. Same goes to many Google services, most notably Youtube.

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

<comment><USER2> No, this is an entirely separate process. The wikipedia link you shared relates to content that is illegal in a country, so consequently Google does not show it. E.g. in my home country (Germany), this includes some types of Nazi propaganda. I would assume all other search engines follow the same rules.

<comment><USER3> So in your country can you look stuff up about China and Tiananmen Square? Well you can't in China. This is censorship coming from the state. Now go on Youtube and look for PagerU videos. I understand that conservative views are not popular in Google but filtering legitimate content is just bad.

[https://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1406441&st...](https://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1406441&start=240)

What about Dave Rubin? Does he fall into the same category as nazi propaganda according to you? What about Christina Hoff Sommers? Same question. And the list goes on an on. I do not necessarily agree with these viewpoint but I strongly against censoring them just because it does not fall inline with Google's political agenda.

<comment><USER4> On much of this, it's not Google's political agenda here from what I see... it's advertisers in general.

You are aware that Youtube faced a huge backlash earlier this year from large scale advertisers over "hate videos" and "extremist content": [https://www.theverge.com/2017/3/24/15053990/google- youtube-a...](https://www.theverge.com/2017/3/24/15053990/google-youtube- advertising-boycott-hate-speech)

Defining what a "hate video" and is "extremist" can be vague, so it's not surprising that some strong political channels are caught in the crosswinds, even if they are not necessarily "hate speech" or "extreme". (After all, Youtube is probably relying heavily on user feedback to determine what to flag). It's also not surprising that other things are caught in the crosswind (as the Ars Technica article mentions, LGBT content was also caught in the crosswinds.)

Youtube's most recent advertiser-drive purgek came over "inappropriate" videos aimed at children. Again, advertisers are driving what some might call "censorship". [https://www.cnet.com/news/youtube-deletes-150000-videos- foll...](https://www.cnet.com/news/youtube-deletes-150000-videos-following- boycott/)

Basically, I feel like strong advertiser presence in the future is going to heavily focus Youtube towards more "mainstream" oriented material in the future, especially on what can be monetized.

Is it censorship? Not really -- no one is going to force companies to spend money to advertise where they don't want to. Feel free to start your own video platform that doesn't have Youtube's current corporate advertisement pressure.

At this point, in my opinion, the energy some are spending in fighting Youtube's monetization policy ("1st Amendment" lawsuits against Youtube are going to fail, in my opinion) would be better spent in making sure the web remains open. So that any Youtube competitors, some of which might focus on hosting "non-mainstream" content that Youtube might ignore in the future, actually have a chance.

<comment><USER3> I disagree. You are mixing together two categories: legitimately bad content (like the scary kid videos) and content does not fall in line with Google's political stance. As an advertiser you are targeting a very specific narrow population anyways and it is super easy to exclude your ads showing up in videos that you do not approve. And just a counter example to your point:

[https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/internet/facebook-halts- potenti...](https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/internet/facebook-halts-potential- anti-semitic-ads-following-report-n801566)

This was in production for god knows how long.

"Feel free to start your own video platform that doesn't have Youtube's current corporate advertisement pressure."

Well I do not use Youtube as much as I can. I use alternative video content providers. Anyways, this argument is silly at the very least.

<comment><USER4> Why is the argument silly? Any "solution" to this that I can think of would be awful.

Let's throw a counter example on another platform. Most American talk radio is conservative. ([https://www.forbes.com/sites/abrambrown/2015/07/13/why- all-t...](https://www.forbes.com/sites/abrambrown/2015/07/13/why-all-the-talk- radio-stars-are-conservative/)) IMHO the reasons for this are largely demographic oriented as specified in the Forbes article -- consequently, liberal specific talk radio has not done as well as a business model since, say, the 1980s. Conservative specific talk radio has.

It's pretty easy to Google grumbling from liberals about Clear Channel being conservative and crowding out liberal talk and whatnot. These arguments seem as silly to me as the arguments about the political stance of Google (which I also think is more driven by business dollars and cents, not explicit political lean).

At any rate, what's the solution here? Force Clear Channel to host liberal political talk via government decree? That would be about as awful as forcing Youtube to monetize conservative videos via government decree.

The only arguments that make sense in this direction to me is that American radio, in effect, is a monopoly. It might be difficult to start a "liberal specific talk radio" format even if there was a solid business case for it, because the airwaves are dominated by only a few corporations. (I would argue that this actually played itself out more in the world of music -- a lot of music never crossed into the playlists of corporate radio or MTV, because of various reasons. Which is why Napster was so heavily embraced by many once it showed up.)

Likewise with Google / Youtube: I would be much more receptive to arguments along these lines. If they became a defacto monopoly (I don't think they are there yet, but this is a danger these days), only one "content policy" would exist. And that definitely would be a problem.

Hence why I think the real issue here is keeping the web open and competitive.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Wasn't this at the same time when ProtonMail migrated their site from a .ch to a .com? I would be thankful if I would be able to get such a special treatment from Google for a borked migration. For most of us it is a death sentence when we bork a migration, protonmail gets help and then they whine about it.

<comment><USER6> What do you mean by borked migration? What could Proton mail have done better?

<comment><USER7> Without knowing their migration strategy it is hard to say. A few things I notice that get borked often with migrations are not handling redirects & internal links properly, not updating sitemaps & canonical tags, and not checking Google Search Console & robots.txt

<comment><USER6> My question was more specifically about ProtonMail's domain migration which the commenter I was replying to implied to have specific knowledge of.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> There are many major actors, both corporate and governmental, that don't like privacy enhancing services like ProtonMail. No conspiracy theory, just large actors acting ruthlessly in their own self interest.

This year old article is a bit bogus though. As other pointed out, the hit on SEO came from changing from .ch to .com

ProtonMail, and other similar services, deserve to be supported in my opinion. I have recommended ProtonMail to friends and family. I use them out of personal choice, and I also rely on Fastmail.

<comment><USER9> Is ProtonMail still free? If so, I dislike that greatly.

I switched to FastMail a while back and while reviewing options, I _wanted_ to use ProtonMail.. but a free option seems far too unreliable for something as important as email. I need to know how they're paying the bills, basically. I prefer their incentives to be perfectly inline with mine, because I am paying their bills for my portion of usage.

<comment><USER10> Protonmail's terms of service are better than Fastmail', IMHO. Fastmail TOS says that your service can be terminated anytime whatsoever on the whims of fastmail, whereas from what I remember, protonmail's TOS atleast laid out conditions under which your service could be terminated, like doing something illegal.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Search is now as vital to the Internet as DNS. As such, having it be run by an unregulated, for-profit monopoly is looking less and less acceptable. As a minimum remedy, Google should probably establish a defined email address or web site where complaints like this are answered within 24 hours by a human. It's not like they can't afford it, and it might hold off full-on regulation of their activities a while longer.

<comment><USER12> By saying "full-on regulation of their activities" do you suggest that it's some (which exactly?) government or committee is who would decide on search ranking algorithms and what shows up in the results and what doesn't? Or is it something else?

<comment><USER11> I'm suggesting that, in an effort to ensure fairness of opportunity and no anticompetitive practices are taking place, governments might begin to see Google as the public utility monopoly that it has de facto become, and start treating it like one. Google might want to get out in front of this by being a bit more transparent and responsive to its users.

<comment><USER12> I got it that you suggest the governments (all of them, authoritarian ones included?) to interfere by making some legislative decisions. But what exactly should the government(s) decide upon?

Just saying that $company_name has to be "transparent" and "responsive" doesn't mean anything on its own. I was interested in how you suggest to achieve those feats (read: enforce them)

So here's the problem I see: for the the accountability and transparency you suggest, to decide if Google (Bing, Yahoo, Yandex, Baidu, DDG... is it really a monopoly?) does things right or wrong governing bodies must invent some rules how search engines should work. Surely not a full set of algorithms (that would be an unprecedented disaster) but a set of constraints on those algorithm outputs.

And it has to be an extensive ruleset. I'm sure it's not enough to require that e.g. a registered trademarks must be the first result on exact query, or that querying for Tiananmen Square gets no results. It has to decide for what happens on the intermediate positions, what has more priority and what's legally irrelevant and mustn't show up any high. I think that would be just bad - too many ways to abuse this system.

I thought of also not writing any legislatures but doing some ad hoc rulings, when judges decide what's fair and what's not on the case-per-case basis (basically, civil vs common law), but I'm not sure if that would work any well. In such theoretical scenario I just foresee the insane amount "sue because my site is 5th result and I feel it's unfair to be anything less than 3rd place" cases. That would quickly escalate, judges would end up inventing some common criteria, and we're back to the abovementioned scenario, just sourced differently.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> This is extremely disturbing. I'm a recent convert to ProtonMail and I am not going back to the free, ad-based email world. Google and Facebook are not companies I trust any longer. DuckDuckGo, ProtonMail, Signal are.

</comment><comment><USER14> Relatedly, Google refuses to list my personal site (spinda.net) for reasons I can't discern. It only shows up if one searches for the exact domain itself, and even then as a bare entry with no description. I've tried submitting the URL through every avenue Google offers for recrawling—no dice.

<comment><USER15> I'm assuming you set up your site in webmaster tools[0]? If there is a problem, it should report it to you.

Besides that, there is not much on your site that is of value as to why Google would link to it. It just links to your other projects other sites that you are on. If I do a google search for your name + "spinda", your Github, Twitter, and Keybase entries come up. Then search result #12 or so is your website. I'd say Google is actually doing this right, as it's giving users a direct link to the sites of "value", while your meta-link site may not be as much value to people. Google would rather have people get directly to useful, than having to click through to other sites first.

Now, if you had something on your site that was changing (a blog or something), it may be ranked higher. But as of now, I don't see why Google would put it high up in the rankings.

[0] [https://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/](https://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/)

<comment><USER14> > Then search result #12 or so is your website.

Oh, that's new. Previously it didn't appear at all in the results, even for specific, targeted queries matching the site content. And I see it's now showing a title and cache link (but no blurb), whereas before it appeared as:

        spinda.net
        https://spinda.net

and only for the query "spinda.net", in a special position up at the top.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Anyone know a good alternative to ProtonMail with no ties to the Israeli Military? Preferably European.

<comment><USER17> * [https://posteo.de/en](https://posteo.de/en)

* [https://mailbox.org](https://mailbox.org)

posteo implements multiple encryption schemes: encrypt incoming mails with GPG (making them inaccessible by any end device not having the corresponding secret key). Or encrypt via the login passphrase with transparent decryption on authorized access.

<comment><USER18> It is great data hygiene to use encryption at rest. However, it gives no security guarantees. You still need to trust posteo.

If posteo wants, they can read all incoming email. Their security scheme depends solely on their good intentions. Still great that their data at rest is encrypted in a way even they cannot read.

The scheme does defend against third parties outside of posteo being able to access data, or coerce posteo to decrypt data. Posteo could probably still be coerced to push out a fraudulent client update that still breaks their encrpytion, but that is a very hard problem to deal with.

<comment><USER17> > Posteo could probably still be coerced to push out a fraudulent client > update that still breaks their encrpytion, but that is a very hard problem > to deal with.

They are based in Germany and would need to be coerced in accordance to german law. I don't think that there is something like National Security Letters in Germany, so doing such a thing without (eventual?) public disclosure seems unlikely.

Also posteo regularly releases as much information as they are allowed to regarding their interaction with law enforcement, e.g.:

[https://posteo.de/en/site/transparency_report](https://posteo.de/en/site/transparency_report)

<comment><USER18> There are other methods of coercion than courts, but I agree that the German courts are probably much safer than the American courts.

In any case, the fraudulent client update is a very hard hole to patch. The only solution for this I know of is local hosting. At the moment, defending against this in web-apps is simply not possible.

<comment><USER19> There's one way I know to stop that.

Ipfs. Its immutable, for a given key. And its easy to see what an IPNS link points to.

It may not be a way to verify, but others could do that hard work.

But it strictly shows proof that codebase for a web app hasn't changed.

<comment><USER17> The only real antidote against unauthorized access is using end-to-end encryption between email's sender and recipient(s), via PGP/GPG or S/MIME. Unfortunately this requires the sender's cooperation. As long as the sender does not cooperate, there will always be some leg of the communication path that is vulnerable.

<comment><USER19> Indeed. But that problem has been to "Show clients how to install the relevant plugins, make their certs, and then appropriately use certs." That's been error-prone since the beginning with PGPMail and PGPphone.

That's why this was switched to doing it in a webapp, to streamline the process and remove user error out of the equation. There's one problem, and that the owner of the script can change it to a bad one that does X.

With an immutable data structure, like what IPFS uses, can provide that chain of custody with a script they make that simplifies PGP usage, while still maintaining "We didn't change anything" \- and you can prove that.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Shouldn't we all be using DuckDuckGo anyways?

</comment><comment><USER21> I just use duckduckgo. I've tried it for years and it just wasn't good enough and then about a month ago I got fed up with Google's data mining again and tried it for like the 5th trial period and I haven't switched back. If you haven't tried duckduckgo for over a year then I suggest you give it a trial again.

I'm running a custom theme to remove the Google search bar from my Android phone, installed Firefox Quantum and set up a Mozilla account, so now everything is gone from Google except my Gmail and that will happen next along with Dropbox too.

If you want Google to be a better organization then you have to vote with your feet. Do that and your voice will eventually mean something, but until then Google won't listen.

</comment><comment><USER22> ProtonMail is the first result when I search for "secure email", even when not signed in.

<comment><USER23> Same here, even when using duckduckgo and !g.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> A friend of mine tweeted a couple of days ago:

On the one hand, net neutrality is truly a problem: evil ISPs decide for you what you will and will not see. On the other hand, google, youtube, facebook, twitter and others already decide this for you. But you don't even know that they don't show things to you.

(sorry for poor translation from Russian)

</comment><comment><USER25> Google needs to be investigated and broken up. Its beyond time for an investigation and regulation of Google from the united states government.

Other countries are already starting work against Google. The power Google wields over the general public warrants severe investigation at even the hint of abuse of power.

<comment><USER26> If that were true, then it would definitely also be true for Facebook as well.

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> What one could do to prove this type of abuse would be to do a daily search for terms you think should match your site and record how high in the results it appears, and do it for various search engines.

If you plot this over time and see a sudden drop you know Google has identified you as a threat.

</comment><comment><USER28> To me, this is why the arguments over Net Neutrality are really an argument over which corporations are favored by existing regulations. Google isn't neutral and it is integral to the way people use the net.

</comment><comment><USER29> I wonder if this will backfire somehow. Google (privacy nightmare) removing ProtonMail from its search results will only attract more privacy conscious people...?

</comment><comment><USER30> Sharing an article from an amp page when talking about Google manipulating search results is quite the touch.

</comment><comment><USER31> Must've been after it's feature on last night's episode of Mr. Robot....

</comment><comment><USER32> was there a reason given as to why the company was dropped from search results?

</comment><comment><USER33> This article is from 2016. Maybe this should be mentioned in the headline.

<comment><USER34> It should, because my first thought was: "What, again!"

<comment><AUTHOR> Sorry, that is my fault. If a mod can add it please do.

<comment><USER35> Done now.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> "Google's search results should contain exactly what I personally think they should in every case," said the HN commentator. "But they mustn't be personalized," said his boon companion. "Oh no, personalization is Evil." They nodded in agreement and upvoted each other's comments.

<comment><USER37> Google's PR monkeys hard at work I see!

I find it very, _very_ hard to believe that HN readers would vote such a comment to the top.

<comment><USER35> We needn't invoke foreign entities to explain why HN voters would upvote it. Smug comments routinely get upvoted. The fault is with us, not shadowy outsiders.

Apropos of which, it's in the site guidelines not to bring in insinuations of astroturfing unless there's actual evidence, so could you please not do that on HN?

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

<comment><USER37> Apologies all.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> Has to be a transient problem, I get ProtonMail as first unpaid search result for both queries they mention.

<comment><USER39> Did you not read the article? It was eventually "fixed."

> ProtonMail tracked this situation through Spring 2016, trying to get in > touch with Google to query why it had vanished from search results — and > initially having no luck getting a response. It only eventually got an > acknowledgment of the complaint in August after it had tweeted at Google > staff.

<comment> Joe-Z Please don't insinuate that someone hasn't read an article. HN-Guidelines tell us to: [https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html](https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html)

It wouldn't take anything away from your response just leaving that question out.

BTT: Why is this even an article on here anyway when the situation has been dealt with one year ago? The title should already mention that it's from 2016.

<comment><USER40> The missing guidelines:

* Please read submissions before commenting on them

<comment> Joe-Z The question "Did you even read the article?" adds nothing of value, if not downright hostility. When someone asks a question/writes an uninformed response and one wants to respond to it, fine. But don't complain that someone made you respond to it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER41> Don't depend on search for people to find your product. Just like you do not include vesting when comparing salaries between startups.

<comment><USER42> This is a bit naive in a world where the address and search bars in browsers have merged, and many physical adverts don't even feature a website address any more, just search keywords.

<comment><USER41> It's branding. You advertise for a trademark that you have control over. If the users are using Android or Chrome they'll see some ads on their way to your website, but they will eventually get there, but that's ok I guess. What I mean is you should not depend on, for the life of your business, that a keyword like "secure email" will send traffic to your website, unless that is your trademark or brand name, and in that case you better own secureemail.com

Back in 2006 or so when the address field became a search bar in most major browsers, I started to get a lot of traffic from Google, but 99% was searching for mydomain.com, I'm not talking about that kind of traffic, I'm talking about SEO keywords that will kill your business over night when (not if) Google change their formula or some algorithm removes your site from the search result.

It's a bit upsetting that web browsers have monetized the address bar, but that's another, yet important discussion.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER43> This needs a full anti-trust investigation.

If it's true that this has happened, then they need to have a regulatory oversight body right up in their operations.

The power of search engine is immense - they could change stock market outcomes, election outcomes, entire economies.

</comment><comment><USER44> >""[E]ven though Google is an American company, it controls over 90% of European search traffic. In this case, Google directly caused ProtonMail's growth rate worldwide to be reduced by over 25% for over 10 months," he adds."

If a substantial part of your funnel is attached to another company's whims then maybe it was past time to think about your strategy for building product and brand awareness.

>""The only reason we survived to tell this story is because the majority of ProtonMail's growth comes from word of mouth, and our community is too loud to be ignored."

Again it was up to you to diversify what sounds like an over reliance on Google for 25% of your growth. Portraying that as into "victim survivor" story is a bit dramatic.

This sounds like a yarn they are spinning for potential investors. And not a very good one.

<comment><USER45> I mean, if that one company is Google and the reason is search, you don't have many options. This specific case is much harder to avoid than the general one of over reliance on one entity.

<comment><USER44> >"I mean, if that one company is Google and the reason is search, you don't have many options."

The point is you shouldn't rely on the vagaries of a third party for your business growth period. More especially a third party you don't appear to have any relationship with. They even admit in the blog post that the majority of their growth comes form "word of mouth." Word of mouth and "hoping for the bes"t with Google searches is not really a solid marketing plan.</comment></comment></comment>


Rdd.me – Readability Powered URL Shortening Service - <AUTHOR> http://blog.arpitnext.com/2011/04/readability-short-url-rddme.html <comment><USER2> How is this not copyright infringement?

I visit <http://rdd.me/etjavojs> and I get the content of a scraped NY Times article served off of readability's server. All the ads are removed and they added an upsell for other Readability products.

How is this any different from me copy/pasting articles onto my own blog and slapping AdSense on it?

<comment><USER3> For me the link redirects to a NYTimes login page. Maybe you are already logged into NYTimes, and NYTimes claimed their domain through Readability's service?

<comment><USER2> It appears that Readability drops a cookie.

Since I created the link, I get the "clean" version, everyone I share it with gets the original site framed with an annoying Readability link. Makes me wonder what's the point. If I wanted to share a link on Twitter, wouldn't I prefer to send people to a page without an extra Readability frame on it.

I thought framing other people's content went out of favor a decade ago

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> As unnecessary as any other URL shortening; and features like this belong to user clients (and not content) where they're always available for those and only those who needs them.</comment>


Parents eye private schools that say they will have open campuses this fall - <AUTHOR> https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/as-public-schools-go-all-virtual-in-fall-parents-eye-private-schools-that-say-they-will-open-their-campuses/2020/07/26/1e446ab0-cc5b-11ea-b0e3-d55bda07d66a_story.html <comment><USER2> 2 points:

1\. Private schools will increase and they will become more affordable.

2\. What will be the impact on property taxes when public schools are not working and we are still subsiding public education which isn't reaching everyone?

What does this mean to tax payers who don't have children in the school system, private or public?

On a side note: this also brings home the fact that most of child rearing is subsidized by the state. Education, day care and food. If the state is playing nanny to the child, why do parents want to have children? Because: career? So are tax payers subsiding children's education or public sector employees public funds and parents career choices?

<comment><USER3> This conclusion is extremely myopic. Is this really the best you can come up with to the question 'why should people have kids?' and 'why should the government ensure that its citizens are educated?'

<comment><USER2> I will ignore the barely veiled contempt and give you my best answer. YES.

I don't think there is a shortage of kids in our planet.

Taxpayers are not 'taking care of kids' ..they are subsidizing parents' lifestyles and choices. I am really not very sympathetic towards this.</comment></comment></comment>


Forget the traditional passwords. A new authentication method for mobile devices - <AUTHOR> http://appthenty.com/ <comment><USER2> 2 things.

Firstly that website is not mobile optimised. Mainly the video on it.

Secondly. Ether it will be easy to copy or likely to do it wrong when drunk or a state like that. How do you make sure i dont lock myself out.

<comment><AUTHOR> Hi good point but you will be able to unlock the device using the traditional methods too, but you could use the tap code when you consider that its better no taking the risk of somebody watch your screen.

<comment><USER3> From an attacker's perspective, taking into account that people are generally worse with reusing pins than passwords, why would this make a difference in how hard it is to compromise a device. Also, how many combinations will this provide?</comment></comment></comment>


The origins of the class Meta idiom in python - <AUTHOR> http://mapleoin.github.io/perma/python-class-meta <comment><USER2> Nice post! I think to put it concisely, you could say it provides namespacing. Unfortunately, when your classes have inheritance, you end up hand- implementing inheritance for the Meta attributes. I've gone back and forth on what's better, but Meta seems here to stay.</comment>


Field testing of Spectre on various Power Macs – G3 and 7400 survive - <AUTHOR> http://tenfourfox.blogspot.com/2018/01/actual-field-testing-of-spectre-on.html?m=1 <comment><USER2> and POWER6, PowerPC 970MP, 7447A, and 7450 fail. PowerPC 7447B is maybe a fail.</comment>


You Could Almost Do Anything Pt. III - <AUTHOR> http://www.elischiff.com/blog/2016/4/27/do-anything-iii <comment><USER2> This whole series misses the trees for the forest.

Design for logos and branding doesn't happen in the platonic realm and isn't focus grouped against brand-unaware Martians; such designs are engineered to serve a real role in the real world, in the minds of real people.

When you propose a super simple abstract logo -- a dot, a circle, a slash -- it works or not depending on if the organization in question is already well known or not.

Thus, proposing such a logo to a client is a form of flattery -- you, yes you, are already so well known you, yes you, can get away with simply having a slash for your identifier! -- and that is all there is to it.

Like all things this can be cargo culted, and smaller clients often want to look bigger than they are, so sure a lot of un savvy operations wind up with fashionably vague and functionally inferior designs, but it's always been that way.

Lastly, it also matters that logos appear all over the place today -- print, web, tv, mobiles, tablets, etc -- and simpler, cleaner logos are easier to make work across all physical scales.

This isn't a problem vector assets solves, either; at smaller sizes you need to change proportions around and generally cheat the spacing -- in short, smaller physical representations look better if deformed into charicatures -- and it is hard to get external parties to respect your rules about which variant to use at which sizes.

Much easier to make something that looks reasonable at all sizes and scales and use it consistently.

<comment><USER3> It's also worth noting that he has essentially no aesthetic sensibility--the genuinely hideous logo at the top of each page being only the most obvious example of that. Time after time he praises ugly, inelegant logos over designs that are striking and memorable.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> This guy is good at baiting the clicks, but I'm not sure why his opinion holds weight. He's got a pretty average looking website & logo, and isn't really know for his work in any design circles..

<comment><USER5> I don't understand this sentiment; one mustn't have mastery over a field to be critic of it.

<comment><USER6> But it would help.

The web is full of critics who themselves couldn't hope to achieve what they call out as mediocre. All I've learned from this series of blogs is that forward slashes are bad. Criticism without showing a better alternative is so pervasive and so draining.

Teddy Roosevelt put it well:

"It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat."

<comment><USER7> > _But it would help._

Not necessarily -- it actually could hurt.

A lot of masters are too self absorbed in their own work and own preferences to have a wider appreciation of the field -- and especially to appreciate a valid style that's nonetheless against their own aesthetics. That's what a critic is supposedly above.

Plus, for them there are always potential issues of rivalry and personal interests at play (since they compete for the same gigs with people they criticize).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Eli Schiff, whilst pointing out potentially valid concerns about minimalist designs, is also himself with his articles a symptom of a much larger Soviet- style centralist attitude that seems to pervade the modern design community.

Right now, the Soviet Design System (SDS) has decreed that we must all have minimalist everything. Eventually folks like Eli will get us back to something with more flair and embellishment. And then that will be the correct way, and everyone must do that.

But the question is, when will we start designing for context and people rather than some arbitrary, centrally decided (by the fewest people) paradigm of correct design?

<comment><USER9> Part of the challenge is that design isn't viewed in isolation. A design leaves an impression on the viewer partly based on how it contrasts with other designs.

A minimalist logo in a sea of embellished logos says "We are smarter and easier to use". A minimalist logo in a sea of minimalist logos says "We are safe and normal."

So following a design trend can be one of the tools you use to design for an audience.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> I always thought that the 'Flag' was a window, perhaps because of the name association. It certainly has panes. If you look at the history, it evolved from Windows 3.1 which was assuredly a window. I don't see a flag in the most recent logo either, it just looks like a typical move to flat branding (and I think it works, it looks great on the back of a tablet).

>What I see in front of me is a rectangle with a green stroke. Perhaps Gomez- Palicio and I are looking at something different. Either way, ostensibly Whitman had fully justified the HP mark, so why did Gomez-Palicio feel compelled to invent metaphors where there were none? This compensatory narrative about server rooms shouldn't be necessary.

Yet this is exactly the rationale behind the 'Slate' thing which had some weird allusions to a corporate tower block and random space pictures. Why did everyone start gushing over it?

</comment><comment><USER11> Snarky and a fun read, just as part 1 and 2, but ultimately not very constructive... I'd be more interested in reading about what he thinks are great logos and why they work well.

<comment><USER12> Well, don't hold your breath. I've _literally_ never seen a positive word on this guy's blog. He posts over on Designernews quite a lot and it's predictably vitriolic every single time.

They're certainly fun to read, but does he actually think this is a remarkable insight into anything? You can pick any shape you want and then point out how logos are _all trending towards that shape._ Obviously by just selecting the logotypes that fit your argument.

It's a weak argument (what is it, anyways?) presented in an unhelpful way (criticizing a kid's school project?). Not that I buy into the idea that you have to be an artist to be a critic, but I do think your overall output to a community should be positive. You can either contribute critically by making good commentary or you can contribute productively by making good work. Eli does neither, and by the 3rd or 4th post you read by him it becomes painfully obvious.

Entertaining nonetheless, I suppose.

<comment><USER13> I had the same experience; signed up to the mailing list because the articles looked like there was real depth (at last!) really digging deep in the aspects of design. I was also excited by the fact that he appeared to be arguing from a non-modernist design perspective, and as an ardent believer in modernist design, I was excited to have my beliefs challenged.

Unfortunately I found there wasn't much there. Whilst some (most?) of the articles seem to dig into some depth, it's all over shadowed by a negativity that has nothing to back it up, just empty criticism. It's telling that I can't even determining if he's arguing from a pre or post-modernist perspective, or even from a different perspective completely.

I found it all a bit disappointing really. I _think_ he has a point to be made in there somewhere, he certainly begins his arguments from a position that seems tenable, but for the life of me I couldn't prune it from all the dead- wood of negativity.

I really hope the author does dig in and argue a point, because like I said, it certainly feels like he's arguing from a position.

I just hope that after all that, his point isn't "design is art" because he can GTFO :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Links to part 1 and 2:

[http://www.elischiff.com/blog/2016/4/12/do-almost- anything](http://www.elischiff.com/blog/2016/4/12/do-almost-anything)

[http://www.elischiff.com/blog/2016/4/20/do-almost- anything-i...](http://www.elischiff.com/blog/2016/4/20/do-almost-anything-ii)

</comment><comment><USER15> I never 'got' the Windows 8 logo. Something about the shape put me off. Something about that cyan color draws me back in time, it's just so abrasive to the eyes, and it's almost a match for the non-enterprise HP blue.

The color choices for the UI in Windows 8 were just so odd as a whole. It's as if Microsoft was so criticized for being too 'cartoony' with XP that they just completely went off the wall.

<comment><USER16> The windows logo makes much more sense to me now.

It literally looks like a window receiving light from the outside.

The windows logo before 8 did not make any sense at all to me. If I show it to the younger generation they will ask me what is that logo.

Just like when they ask what is the floppy disk icon and why is it used as a save

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> I have always liked Windows logos. I have fond memories of eagerly upgrading to Win98 or installing Windows on new PC builds and seeing the logo for the first time during setup. I also like the new Microsoft and Windows logos as well as the Store design. Surface looks great too. I don't know why Msft gets so much slack on the design front.

</comment><comment><USER18> Says the guy whose logo looks like a candidate for a Big Hero 6 emblem.</comment>


Idea: Mechanical Turk for page usability testing? - <AUTHOR>

My company provides a very unique service -- one that is difficult to explain properly in a few words.
As I've worked on designing our web site (particularly the homepage), it occurred to me that it would be nice to be able to do some simple testing with something like the mechanical turk: submit a web page to the service, which would flash it in front of a tester for 5-10 seconds, and then have the tester answer questions about their comprehension of the site's purpose and benefits, and perhaps their own objections or responses. (More in-depth testing processes wouldn't be difficult, but that's the first one that comes to mind for me)
I'm working in a pretty unique environment right now -- the market is somewhat small and difficult to target, but ridiculously high-margin (we're looking at creating $500+ profit per user within 1 week of sign-up, essentially.).
With low traffic, it's hard to get solid numbers out of page variation testing, and in a wholly new market, I don't even know if most visitors understand our service, so I see the value in turk-ish testing for myself, but I'm not sure if it would have a broad appeal. Would any of you find mechanical turk-based usability testing valuable? <comment><USER2> "Would any of you find mechanical turk-based usability testing valuable?"

Quite valuable, yes. :) Perhaps the people that create forum traffic to jumpstart new sites could expand into this easily. I can't remember the names of any of them at the moment...</comment>


Ask HN: What's your favorite way to organize information, notes or knowledge?   - <AUTHOR>

I've been using Evernote for quite a long time but it's not perfect.
I got really painful when I was trying to record some code snippet with it. On the other hand visiting notes in their website is not really satisfying.
A wiki might be a better solution but I can't find one with good desktop client.
So what's your idea? <comment><USER2> I like to organize my information using Anki [1], a spaced reptition system. Anki lets you input information as single flash cards - a question and an answer, and then tag that card by topic(s).

Breaking topics down into questions and answers is a great way to understand infomation deeply for reasons explained in detail at the supermemo website [2]. The crucial added bonus with Anki is that it will manage your memory, quizing you on previously input knowledge at intervals engineered to enhance long term memory.

[1] Anki: <http://ankisrs.net/>

[2] How to formulate knowledge: <http://www.supermemo.com/articles/20rules.htm>

</comment><comment><USER3> (shameless plug)

A short comparison of Evernote, OneNote and iKnow (my company's product)

\- <http://www.ppcsoft.com/blog/iknow-onenote-evernote.asp>

More information

\- [http://www.ppcsoft.com/blog/ppcsoft-iknow-2011-beta- released...](http://www.ppcsoft.com/blog/ppcsoft-iknow-2011-beta-released.asp)

\- <http://www.ppcsoft.com/blog/personal-wiki.asp>

Summary; Personal wiki/notes desktop application for Windows

(/shameless plug)

</comment><comment><USER4> If you use a Mac, try:

<http://flyingmeat.com/voodoopad/>

I tried several of the open-source wiki apps, and then was very happy to pay for VoodooPad. I use it and mindmapping apps quite a bit. I bought a notebook app from Circus Ponies, but I don't open it very often. I use DevonThink Pro Office extensively, and it saves me enormous amounts of time. I also use Emacs orgmode and a few other Mac apps that are probably overkill for most people.

</comment><comment><USER5> Microsoft OneNote.

Documents, screen clippings, random thoughts, notes, audios/videos - whatever, really - all sorted and searchable. And I have not found a better tool when it comes to handwritten to text conversion as well as full text searching of handwritten notes.

</comment><comment><USER6> I've been using Catch (www.catch.com) to organize and record just about everything. Their mobile app is pretty well designed, so I'm able to record any random thoughts I'd like to revisit later without much of a hassle.

</comment><comment><USER7> I have been using thinkery.me, and find it much less cluttered and way faster than Evernote. They also have a nifty bookmarklet to add the current site on your browser to your notes.

<comment><AUTHOR> I go around for it for a while and found it really useful, but I feel it a bit more a bookmarklet than a library.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> I use evernote, dropbox and dokuwiki. Depends on the kind of data and the need to have it available at all times (you know, sometimes you won't be connected to the intertubes.)

</comment><comment><USER9> orgmode for emacs (<http://orgmode.org/>) is a swiss army knife for note- taking. If you use emacs, you owe it to yourself to take a look. If you don't use emacs, take a look anyway; I know more that a few people who adopted emacs so as to be able to use orgmode.

<comment><USER10> I came back to emacs after years with another editor just for org-mode. I can't say enough how it's helped my workflow!</comment></comment>


Rocketbin – Flask Pastebin clone - <AUTHOR> http://rocketb.in/

<comment><USER2> Just to clarify, this is a very early project, and it needs a lot of work, this is some of the stuff that is in my TODO list:

\- Responsive Web Design

\- User management (login/register/etc)

\- Expiration time

\- Documentation on how to run your own instance of Rocketb.in

\- Use [https://mongolab.com/](https://mongolab.com/) for DB

That is what I have in my mind right now.

</comment><comment><USER3> MongoDB for a pastebin? Really? Why not Hadoop?

And you may want to remove *.pyc files from repository. You wouldn't want somebody to think you can't use git and Python properly, would you?

<comment><USER2> Rocketbin author here, this is my first Python and Flask project, so probably you will see a lot of stuff that is not a "good practice".

I only have experience in MongoDB that is why I'm using it, probably in the future I can use something better.

I have a common `.gitignore` file for all my projects, since I am a front-end developer I never had the need to ignore *.pyc files, because I never used it before

Also I really don't care what people think about me :)

Sorry if I sound like a dick but is true, that is my first project with a "back-end" so it won't be something amazing (yet) I'm still working on it.

<comment><USER3> > I only have experience in MongoDB that is why I'm using it, probably in the > future I can use something better.

It's a snippet paste application. Why use database at all? Mere flat files would be just enough. Or even SQLite, if you happen to really need data processing (although I fail to see what for in such application).

<comment><USER4> SQLite would suffice. Although I see no reason to change now.

<comment><USER2> You are right, it won't change, if someone want to use SQLite or another option (even Redis) they can fork it, this is an app for learning purposes.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


ADHD Drugs Make Big Money, but We Still Don't Know the Risks - <AUTHOR> http://www.wired.com/2015/12/adhd-drugs-are-big-business/ <comment><USER2> No science here... move along please.</comment>


SSDs prove difficult to securely erase - <AUTHOR> http://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2011/02/20/ssds-prove-difficult-to-securely-erase/ <comment><USER2> Securely erasing SSDs is easy. The hard part is securely erasing them _while still leaving them in a state where they can be reused_.

But seriously, given how fast SSD prices are dropping, is there any point reusing them? Just melt them and stop worrying.</comment>


Show HN: Swifty – Learn to code in Swift - <AUTHOR> http://swifty-app.com/ <comment><USER2> Sad to see ++ and -- among the first things you learn. Aren't they [slated](1) to be taken out of the language?

1: [https://github.com/apple/swift- evolution/blob/master/proposa...](https://github.com/apple/swift- evolution/blob/master/proposals/0004-remove-pre-post-inc-decrement.md)

</comment><comment><USER3> SHOW ME WHAT YOU GOT

<comment><USER4> Gotta get shwifty!

<comment><USER5> Pull down your repo and your assets!

<comment><USER6> Git on the floor!

<comment><USER7> It's Schwifty time today!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I started a Swift Cookbook a couple months ago. I've got a section on Strings and Arrays.

[http://www.h4labs.com/dev/ios/swift_cookbook.html?topic=arra...](http://www.h4labs.com/dev/ios/swift_cookbook.html?topic=arrays)

[http://www.h4labs.com/dev/ios/swift_cookbook.html?topic=stri...](http://www.h4labs.com/dev/ios/swift_cookbook.html?topic=strings)

I could throw up Dates and Dictionaries over the weekend. There's a Playground switch so you can copy-paste the text as a working Playground:

[http://www.h4labs.com/dev/ios/swift_cookbook.html?format=pla...](http://www.h4labs.com/dev/ios/swift_cookbook.html?format=play&topic=strings)

</comment><comment><USER9> This is awesome! More engaging than reading, but not full typing code on your phone.

</comment><comment><USER10> This is very cool indeed. I have spent a few minutes getting into it on an iPad and it looks like a great learning resource.

I'm very pleased that these resources are coming into being for people wanting to get started in programming and for Swift specifically. The Stanford course is great but too high-level for a lot of people. I have put up projects myself with pre-built modules to hopefully make it easier for people to get started - [https://github.com/timburgess/ScienceKit](https://github.com/timburgess/ScienceKit)

</comment><comment><USER11> I've been enjoying this as just a fun thing to do sitting on the couch in the evening. Sit back and learn a bit of swift. Mainly just getting info on syntax. It's surprisingly relaxing.

</comment><comment><USER12> Looks great, but on the wrong platform. Is there a Mac version in the works?

<comment><USER13> Why would there be a Mac version ? Xcode Playgrounds do that job for you.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> 1\. Why the hell is this an iOS app?

2\. How the hell is this an iOS app?

<comment><USER15> Because swift is for apple...?

<comment><USER14> In practice, nobody is seriously writing Swift code (or any other code) on iOS devices. My meaning was I don't understand why this is an iOS app instead of a Mac app or even a web one (like IBM's Swift sandbox[1]).

That being said, I'm kind of impressed someone managed to get an app on the App Store that can do this. I know that Apple loosened its restrictions on code execution on iOS a while back, but as far as I am aware there's no way to compile Swift on ARM… did they write their own compiler/runtime or something?

1: [https://developer.ibm.com/swift/2015/12/03/introducing- the-i...](https://developer.ibm.com/swift/2015/12/03/introducing-the-ibm- swift-sandbox/)

<comment><USER16> The lessons and exercises are limited in scope enough that they are entirely static. The work the app needs to do is limited to parsing, stylizing, checking (simple) syntax and matching user input to the task, not executing it. The lessons themselves are no more complex than a programming PPT presentation that looks prettier.

<comment><USER14> All the more reason iOS is a bizarre platform for this, then.

<comment><USER17> What's bizarre about it? Apple developers tend to own other Apple devices and are likely to want to learn Swift on the go.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Get shwiftyyyy

</comment><comment><USER19> Android version?</comment>


Ask HN: What is the best way of getting back into programming? - <AUTHOR>

A couple of months ago, I started learning Python. I got quite into it, before I became 'too busy' to do any programming.<p>So, my question to you guys is what is the quickest and easiest way to get back into programming? <comment><USER2> Just build something.

If python is your thing, find a tutorial to build a todo list app or a calculator or whatever.

Once you finish that, either build the same thing in a different language / framework if you're not happy with your current tech choice, or build something that's slightly bigger than what you just build.</comment>


API Half-lives - <AUTHOR> http://www.gabrielweinberg.com/blog/2011/11/api-half-lives.html

<comment><USER3> One of the things that we've been emphasizing at Google of late is to ensure that each API has a sustainable model prior to launching it.

By that I mean, evaluating each new surface to verify that it provides value to all parties — the end users, the developers, and to Google (in roughly that order, but all are essential) — and that this value scales as the popularity of an API or platform increases.

Over past years, we've launched a handful of APIs that perhaps met one or two of those criteria, but not all, and learned through practice that we're unlikely to achieve a sustainable ecosystem without first identifying a "virtuous cycle" such that success for each party is complementary to the others.

Nothing pains me more than seeing an API surface go away, so we've been working at getting consistently better at making sure each new launch has strong potential for longevity. Launching a new surface just because it's interesting (or to find out if it's even possible) is obviously tempting, and can be fun and even rewarding in the short-term, but each new API is also a promise being made to developers, and that promise is a commitment not to be taken lightly.

Now sometimes, the underlying products go away for good reasons, and we need to turn down the corresponding API surface (e.g., when the Buzz API was shut off when Buzz was sunsetted in favor of Google+), sometimes we grossly underestimated the potential for abuse (e.g., the old translate API, the first version of which didn't have quotas or require any real form of registration), sometimes we were able to declare victory and move on (e.g., Gears -> HTML5), and sometimes API functionality was never officially available to begin with, and as such when the underlying product changes and it's impossible to keep the unofficial surfaces intact (e.g., Reader), but in every case the decision to turn one of these down is a difficult one. Whenever possible we've gone through great lengths to keep the surfaces stable and available as long as practical to give developers time to find new solutions (6 months to a full 3 years is the norm).

Going forward, I think the additional up-front discipline is a win for all of us. It's a bit more work on our side to play out all of the possible scenarios (what if no one uses it? what if _everyone_ uses it? what if our fiercest competitors start using it?), but in doing so I have even more confidence that when we launch new platforms we're going to be able to stand by them for the years ahead.

Personally I'd still bet (heavily) on third-party services, both from big established companies like Google, Amazon, Microsoft, etc., and also on smaller and upcoming startups. Though I'd certainly ask myself the question: is there the virtuous cycle in the API that I depend on? Can the service provider reasonably sustain it for the long-haul? Does the API provider benefit when my usage increases? Do _I_ benefit if my own user numbers grow? Etc. Contingency plans are still a must — betting your entire company on getting something free from someone else forever is probably a bad bet — but I'm bullish on the future of web services in general, and plan to personally stay in this space for a long time to come.

Some day I should give a talk on lessons learned the hard way...

<comment><USER4> Can you share your insider perspective on Steve Yegge's infamous rant on SOA at Google and Amazon?

[https://plus.google.com/112678702228711889851/posts/eVeouesv...](https://plus.google.com/112678702228711889851/posts/eVeouesvaVX)

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> It is indeed vitally important to remember that external APIs are unreliable and temporary. The question to ask in any given situation, though, is: How much more reliable and permanent is the code you own and manage yourself? And at what cost?

However high the odds are that the founders of a given startup will leave their company within five years, the odds that the people who built your in- house widget will leave _your_ company within five years may well be higher. However high the odds that a given API will evolve away from your use case in five years, the odds that your use case will be obsolete in even less time may well be higher.

The underlying truth is that _all_ APIs everywhere, in-house and out, have bugs and missing features and finite half-lives, unless you control them and continuously expend resources maintaining them. As your project grows older and more stable you may eventually discover that its expected half-life is longer than that of your provider APIs, and that's when it's time to start moving stuff in-house. This is when you realize, if you haven't already, that open-source software is your friend.

<comment><USER6> ANSI C programs written in 1989 still compile and run unmodified on any modern 32 bit Linux or Windows box. C programs using the BSD sockets API from 1982 still work unmodified on Linux. Fortran77 code has an even longer pedigree and still builds in gcc. And while Common Lisp has seen a lot more library evolution, I believe most of its early incarnations still work in modern implementations.

I suppose you're right that any given code is unlikely to outlast its dependencies. But the corrollary to that is that _successful_ code is, by definition, almost _always_ going to outlast its dependencies.

Dependencies are hugely expensive. And it makes me happy to see someone try to explain that to the modern world of import-happy coders. Reuse isn't free. Solving simple problems with external dependencies can often be more work than it's worth.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> I think, the fact that people that advertise their "API" and "platforms" and provide a glorified REST frontend to their website are actually diminishing the value of true platforms and API, where actual thought was put in making a business case, architecting them, making sure they'll be there long-term and changes planned with regards of backwards-compatibility. You can actually see one of the comments here on NH that claims that it is "vitally important to remember that external APIs are unreliable and temporary". No, they are not, if we are talking about platforms. While this is true that new API subsets are being added with every new release (more: "Fire and Motion" by Spolsky), with platforms you can expect that existing API are still there for some time, and not until the end of next month, because "platform" vendor "pivots" while burning through VCs money.

<comment><USER5> Well, given the choice between a world where the only APIs in existence are "true platforms", backed by enormous corporations with tons of resources who pledge to make them absolutely backwards-compatible for ten years... and a world where, in addition to the true platforms, every half-assed hack also has some sort of API so that other people can build upon it with half-assed hacks of their own, my first instinct is still to prefer the second world.

Yes, this means that the word _API_ no longer connotes "true platformness". That's a branding problem for the "true platforms", but I'm sure Microsoft and Oracle can handle it. They have resources.

<comment><USER7> Now, what your instinct says about viability of business that is built on top of "half-assed hack"? Or we'll just stick with the business model where there's VC or an angel with extra cash to burn, while we're making sure our instincts are happy?

<comment><USER5> I'm not sure I'm reading your sentence correctly, but the scary truth is that many, many brand-new businesses are initially built on top of half-assed hacks. By design! That's what all this "minimum viable product" talk is about.

The canonical example might be Twitter. There's absolutely no question that their initial Rails-based infrastructure was not up to the task of running Twitter. But it _was_ up to the task of running Twitter _for a few thousand users_ , long enough to prove that they really needed a better, custom, designed-and-maintained-in-house-by-an-expensive-team-of-hardworking-experts architecture, which they then built, using money raised on the strength of the initial hack.

And it's absolutely true that businesses built on half-assed hacks generally aren't viable in the long-term. But most businesses aren't viable, period. The trick is to upgrade the viability of the codebase as the business continues to prove itself. Nobody said that this was easy to get right, and you can fall behind ("OMG our codebase is horrible and the fail whale has its own fan club"), or you can get too far ahead ("OMG we spent a fortune overengineering our product"), and sometimes you _don't even know_ whether you are ahead or behind, but that is the game.

Meanwhile, let's not get completely stuck on businesses. There's room in life for half-assed mashups that cannot possibly "work" long-term, but are a lot of fun. Even before Twitter was a rickety service with a dozen public users, it was a hilarious idea with no public users at all. The toy stage is important too.

<comment><USER8> > _But it was up to the task of running Twitter for a few thousand users, […]_

(Tens of thousands, actually, perhaps hundreds?)

<comment><USER5> Absolutely. I'm postulating a very conservative lower bound here.

(And, obviously, a very rough approximation of the actual history. If we could see Twitter's Git repository presumably we'd find that the service actually went through dozens, perhaps hundreds, of performance tweaks as it grew.)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> All API's are not made equal. Some may not be around in 2 years, some 10 years, but in the time you are forced to work with some of them, you might lose your sanity.

I'm working with pretty much every type of API through my startup Zapier.com and some of these API's I wouldn't wish upon anyone except maybe the deeply masochistic coder. They suck. I suppose that's good for us. However, we aggregate data from many dozens of APIs for the end user, so losing an unpopular service's API here or there doesn't hurt us in the least.

While I've got an API pedestal and a crowd of developers: please no SOAP or XML. And do NOT go off the OAuth spec. Bad documentation is the gravest of sins, which can mean lack of examples or, worse, out of date info/examples.

Good APIs: Github, Wufoo, Strip. All of them are more or less self documenting, use JSON, and RESTful. The docs are awesome. A joy. In and out.

Bad (or just annoying) APIs: Salesforce, 37signals, Google Contacts and co, Docusign... While they work, you'll struggle every inch of the way to make the simplest things happen. XML (or some derivative) and SOAP. No thanks.

<comment><USER10> You don't think there's a benefit to XML formats that have an XML Schema, so you can do automatic data-binding (at least in Java, with JAXB)?

There are also many visual XML mappers (mapforce, biztalk mapper, stylus studio, IBM and Oracle integration products)... but truly, these are enterprise-expensive tools which I think are only used in the enterprise (with its more complex data and, some say, unnecessary corporate inflexibility).

While it's true that disruptive tools tend to start at the bottom (e.g. with startups) and bubble up, the complex data needs of the enterprise have to be addressed in some way, either by sticking with conventional tools, or the new tools growing in ability. The common consensus seems to be that if JSON's ecosystem developed a schema language, a "JSLT" etc etc, it would be just as ugly as the XML ecosystem (i.e. ugliness is partly due to irreducible complexity) ... and we already have one.

I wonder if the technology development path might be similar to Twitter, iterating quickly with agile, featherweight Ruby, then switching to Java only when scaling demanded a heavyweight solution: start with light JSON when the needs are straightforward; move to XML when complexity demands a heavy solution. For many wildly successful startups, that might not happen, and JSON might remain perfectly fine; just as many startups stay with Ruby.

<comment><USER9> I think you make a good point, there are definitely complex situations that call for Java-esque and enterprisey tools. However, having a simple solution often trumps complex solutions when you just want to "get things done"™.

I suppose it boils back down to the most appropriate tool. Are you selling to enterprises? Use SOAP. Everyone else? Use REST/JSON.

<comment><USER10> Yep, as simple as possible, no simpler. (NoSQL is another example)

I think a _central source_ , like a database, needs to cater for every possible use in general (which the relational model does); but if you're doing something very specific, it's crazy wasteful to do it with full generality.

I am curious if someone can work out how to make a simple API that is also fully general (I think it has to be equivalent to the relational model - <USER2> it's early days yet).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> API churn isn't limited to small companies. The FedEx shipping API is on version 9 and my last conversation with their developer support indicated they are currently ending support for version 5 and supporting versions 6 through 9. I certainly understand that business requirements, security standards, and development practices change and that it doesn't make sense for them to support what they were doing in 1995. However, I'd expect a little bit of what Google is doing [1] in trying to build sustainable APIs. On the other hand, maybe it is a good thing for security and IT practice to have a forced requirement that the software and systems from 10 years ago change.

[1] <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3291136>

</comment><comment><USER12> It's ancillary to the argument, but I do think that the development world needs more chaos monkeys (<http://techblog.netflix.com/search/label/chaos%20monkey>). Not just because it's a clever name, but the implementation really drives availability and disaster preparation.

</comment><comment><USER13> API? Ha! In my day, we didn't have APIs. I started by scraping stock quotes off of web pages, with a daily-updating script of search-macros. They couldn't change their page fast enough to avoid NetProphet!

Before you cast stones, consider this all started as a side-project, we merged with Stockpoint after they noticed our scraping and arranged a meeting.

Anyway, with APIs it would seem useful to have an 'API watchdog' automated product that alerts when an API changes behavior. Similar to our watchdog for webpage changes when our scraping would fail. Or server-down watchdogs. etc.

<comment><USER14> I still do this kind of thing, and literally thirty minutes ago logged back on to an old server to fix the scraping script to deal with some bad data on the origin website.

It's quite pleasing when it works, and a hell of a lot easier to deal with as you just read the web page and scrape away.

I think when web pages become more clearly marked up we'll start seeing less and less of the API mess we've got ourselves into. If the websites did what we would hope they would, there wouldn't be a great need for a RESTful aspect of them.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> >> With so many startups, there are often several choices in any given category.

And having several choices is a great thing.

When I integrate with an external API, I look at 2-3 other APIs as well. I then write an interface based on the common features / constructs available across similar APIs. Then I write program to that interface.

If the external provider dies, at least I have an easy path to switch to another provider.

<comment><USER16> I smell opportunity for API providers to step up and provide Plan B and C service for the very commoditized types of APIs.

Model the API design after the leader... similar to how some have done with Delicious, AWS, etc.

I like your strategy.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> Speaking of software half-lives:

"Perl is another example of filling a tiny, short-term need, and then being a real problem in the longer term. Basically, a lot of the problems that computing has had in the last 25 years comes from systems where the designers were trying to fix some short-term thing and didn't think about whether the idea would scale if it were adopted. There should be a half-life on software so old software just melts away over 10 or 15 years." -ACM Queue A Conversation with Alan Kay Vol. 2, No. 9 - Dec/Jan 2004-2005

<comment><USER18> As I pointed out on Gabriel's blog. This quote is six (6) years old at this point. Even if it was arguably relevant at the time (Alan Kay giving witness to an internal transition period in the Perl community), I'm not sure how it's relevant now.

Without specifics on which ideas Perl has that you feel don't scale, and how ... this is merely trolling by appeal to authority.

<comment><USER17> If the ideas in Perl scaled, don't you think there would be a usable version of Perl 6 after more than 10 years?

And Perl 5 is certainly on its way out: <http://www.tiobe.com/index.php/paperinfo/tpci/Perl.html>

When Alan Kay made his remark, Perl had just hit its highest mark in popularity. And it just this year hit its lowest mark. So I think you've been holding your graph upside-down.

<comment><USER18> I'm sorry I completely fail to understand how either of these remarks have any bearing on scalability?

How does the Perl6 project's ability (or lack of) to deliver a project to your undefined criteria for "usable version" have any bearing on the scalability of the ideas involved in either it or Perl5?

Second, in what way does a self-described popularity contest have bearing on the scalability of a language?

I would also love to hear how you would explain <http://www.tiobe.com/index.php/paperinfo/tpci/Lisp.html> which Alan Kay also talked about during that interview ... far more than the single quote he made about Perl. Note that according to the scale on both the Perl graph and the Lisp graph, Perl's lowest point is roughly equal to Lisp's highest point. The obvious explanation to me is that TIOBE score has almost nothing to do with Alan Kay's comments or opinions as expressed in that interview. So I don't understand what connection you're trying to imply exists here.

Perhaps you had your book on logical inference upside down?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Gabriel's and everyones comments are great...definitely an area that needs constant discussion.

I can't think of any industry where your vendor / supplier guarantees it will be there forever and never change.

Even with contracts and commitments, the world moves forward.

We are just moving forward at faster and faster rates. I think there is a lot of opportunity here for API owners to provide copycat services for redundancy.

Also lots of opportunity to really keep interfaces dead simple and easy to integrate, adapt and change.

</comment><comment><USER10> If there's demand for an API, one would expect competitors to arise; or at least, for someone to fill the niche left by an abandoned/bankrupted/acquired API... (unless it's a non-feasible business, e.g. giving too much away)

Then, the problem is the difficulty of integration: how hard it is to switch to another provider? In a mature industry, standards eventually arise that make switching easier, but not in the early days.

</comment><comment><USER19> Just on a side note for the non-native speakers: shouldn't it be "API half- lifes" (as 'half-life' in terms of radioactive decay) instead of "half-live" or am I missing out the idea of the headline?

<comment><USER20> The correct plural of "life" is "lives." "Lives," the plural of the noun "life" is pronounced differently that "lives," the verb. Go figure.

<comment><USER19> Makes sense, thanks. This is like first class English and thus a bit embarrassing, but somehow it looked odd to me.

<comment><USER21> It IS odd. English makes many inconsistent and arbitrary rules.

<comment><USER22> This is true, although the "rule" in this case isn't entirely inconsistent:

life -> lives

wife -> wives

elf -> elves

half -> halves

leaf -> leaves

<comment><USER23> Except

chief -> chiefs

brief -> briefs

Maple Leaf -> Maple Leafs (Canadian Hockey team)

<comment><USER22> Yeah, my point wasn't so much that there are not exceptions, but that there are frequent patterns in the English language.

Rather than throwing up your hands in defeat and saying, "The English language is totally inconsistent; the only way to learn it is to memorize each arbitrary word form," the key is to familiarize yourself with these patterns so that at a minimum you can make a better guess next time.

Hopefully, WA learned today not just that the plural of "life" is "lives" but that, in general, when a noun ends in -f or -fe it usually changes to -ve. So if tomorrow he sees a sign that says "5 loaves of bread for $1" it won't catch him off guard like the title of this submission did.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Stop Complaining about Your PR Firm. Here's How the Media Works - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/on-startups/stop-complaining-about-your-pr-firm-heres-how-the-media-works-ba600f39a13d

<comment><USER2> Very poorly-written post. I'm not usually one to troll, but since the article has such a direct, condescending tone, I'll offer some advice of my own.

If you are going to make an assertion like the following:

" _At any rate, for a company, I'd say hands-down you're getting more out of an online hit than a print piece. So stop riding your publicist's ass about not getting you in the print edition of TIME and thank her or him for the mentions in various Time.com blogs. You may not get a photo of yourself in TIME to frame for your office, but chances are those blog posts will be read more and pay back more over time than that one print hit will._ "

It might make sense to cite some sources or have some basis for making that statement. Otherwise it is just your own perception which, please take no offense, I have little worry about.

In fact that brings me to my next point- people have no respect for online publications because a vanishingly small number actually do any research or care two shits about producing factual information. No, they want ad revenue, and sadly ad revenue does not have a direct correlation to fact-checking. In fact, it's precisely because reporters have to produce " _three times as much content in half the time and for half the pay_ " that you should doubt the validity of your claims about the value of online vs print media. Blogs and online news outlets are factories of eyeball-catching bullshit that don't care about accuracy.

This post does nothing to solidify my confidence in the direction of online media.</comment>


Debian ported to the android-powered T Mobile G1 - <AUTHOR> http://www.saurik.com/id/10 <comment><USER2> Not ported.

<comment><USER3> Could you clarify what you mean?

<comment><USER4> I believe he means that since Debian already ran on ARM processors, it didn't have to be ported for this to work.</comment></comment></comment>


Summary of MIT's Linear Algebra, Lecture 5: Vector Spaces and Subspaces - <AUTHOR> http://www.catonmat.net/blog/mit-linear-algebra-part-five/

<comment><USER2> I wished it had included the proof that the inverse of a permutation matrix is its transpose. That fact is cute but is not entirely obvious. Since it didn't, I'll outline an easy proof for anyone who wishes to fill in the details.

1\. The transpose of a permutation matrix is a permutation matrix.

2\. The product of two permutation matrices is a permutation matrix.

3\. If P is a permutation matrix and Q is its transpose, then from 1 we know that Q is a permutation matrix and from 2 we know that PQ is a permutation matrix.

4\. The lecture showed that anything times its transpose is symmetric. So show that the only symmetric permutation matrix is the identity matrix and you've shown that PQ is the identity matrix. Therefore Q must be the inverse of P.

QED

</comment><comment><USER3> wow that's so nice !! I'm actually studing that in my uni in France but my teacher is sooooo boring. Watching to those videos make me feel like I'm in his class. Real good occasion to profit from MIT's class without being at MIT ^^</comment>


Nick Bilton: eInk a possible future for paper - <AUTHOR> http://radar.oreilly.com/2008/10/eink.html

<comment><USER2> I've been hot for eInk since Wired ran a feature on it eleven years ago, when I was fourteen:

<http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/5.01/negroponte.html>

Unfortunately, it seems like all that eInk has really done in the mass-market consumer space is save battery life for eBook readers. I'm still waiting for the eInk product I can many-to-one my bookshelf into and read like a real book, but this doesn't seem to be anywhere close to reality.

imho eInk has Second Life status in reality:media hype ratio.</comment>