Quicksilver Roars (new features, Lion support) - <AUTHOR> http://lovequicksilver.com/post/11814325098/quicksilver-roars

<comment><USER2> I'd presume that Apple will integrate a Siri-like interface to the next OSX, in say the 2012/2013 region, so that you can do basic things like say "subscribe to the NPR politics podcast" and "play the NPR politics podcast". This could also have a keyboard interface like Quicksilver and perhaps even hooks for an Applescript user community (but Apple doesn't really do community). Ubuntu on the other hand has the very good Gnome-Do and the impressive Synapse[1]. However, Ubuntu doesn't have a speech recognition engine to even begin to match Siri so you'd be stuck with whatever Google evolves on top of voice in HTML5/Chrome. That would be limited to website interactions and perhaps Google apps (i.e. when in an email, only in Gmail, about a conference perhaps you could say "add this to my calendar", only to Google calendar).

One feasible path of exploration would be to use CMU Sphinx[2] connected to local NLP and Unity (or some underlying infrastructure that KDE and Gnome can share). But even if Shuttleworth hired a couple of developers now and had them getting some traction in 2012, you'd be looking at a usable beta for Ubuntu 13.04. At that point We'd be looking at the iPhone 6+ and one or two iterations of Android on top of ICS.

Microsoft has the base technology lying around in terms of speech recognition and Bing/MS Research/Kinect team and could probably come out with an answer on the next iteration of Windows (desktop and mobile). So you will have a first class solution on all Apple products, and a solid implementation on Windows as well as Android and perhaps Chrome. Nevertheless this forces Canonical's hand and they more or less have to move on this or they will be left behind.

My suggestion would be to take the following strategy (if Shuttleworth is reading): hire two or three developers or so for integrating Sphinx as a core service, and hire two or three developers to leverage NLTK on top of python (already the Ubuntu system language) and connecting it to Synapse. That's just four to six developers and two apt-gets being default rather than optional. Further, to save money, I'd contact a number of universities in the UK (Canonical is in London, logistics and legal are thereby simplified) to sponsor a few Masters and PhDs on basic research in the area with the proviso that their research goes open source and is patent free. In this way, a developer salary for one year turns into three years of research from a PhD. As I understand it they already have some people working on Kinect-like projects, but it needs far more resources otherwise it's just left to Google, who more or less don't care about the Linux desktop and tie the Android stuff to the cloud. Otherwise Ubuntu with a few tweaks is going to get slaughtered (if there is even one percent of market share to actually slaughter) by a cohort of competitors looking like you'd imagine OSX"11"/iPhone 6 and Kinect 2/Xbox 4 to be. The only other option would be to rely on the Google API from a native app, which would mean you could probably deliver something in Ubuntu 12.10, but you'd be totally beholden to Google then: and that's only if they wanted to let you use their servers with no ads going the other way.

[1][http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2010/11/synapse-gnome-do- launcher...](http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2010/11/synapse-gnome-do-launcher-app- review-ubuntu/) [2]<http://cmusphinx.sourceforge.net/>

</comment><comment><USER3> I ditched Quicksilver when Spotlight became fast enough.

<comment><AUTHOR> I tried this for a while, but found Spotlight's keyboard nav and available functions to be lacking. I couldn't, for example, choose to "reveal" a document from the keyboard rather than opening it, if I just wanted to copy said document.

Also, Quicksilver only indexes the things you tell it to, whereas Spotlight by default indexes the entire system. For certain searches this leads to a lot of chaff in the search results.

<comment><USER4> Cmd+Return.

<comment><AUTHOR> Ah... that does work! Thanks.

It also led me to my other issue with Spotlight - it can and will update it's list of found items, even changing which item is selected.

I've experienced this race condition quite frequently, and it's very annoying to have the right thing selected, then Spotlight swaps it out from under you and you've just opened something else.

QS doesn't have this problem, as it only changes the search results after receiving user input.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Here is open source software with a great UI and because of being open source had a resurgence. What a great story and a great piece of software.

<comment><USER6> I agree, open source saved QS :D

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> BTW, a great source of information about Quicksilver is Merlin Mann's 43 Folders blog: <http://www.43folders.com/topics/quicksilver>.

</comment><comment><USER8> How does Quicksilver compare to Alfredapp or other launchers? I've stayed away from it because of tales of crashes and poor performance.

<comment><USER7> Quicksilver is pretty much what every other launcher on the Mac has been based on, but for free. Alfred is a nice product and basic launching functionality is free, but most of the advanced features that are free in Quicksilver cost £12 (about $19) to add.

I've been running the previous version of Quicksilver on Snow Leopard and Lion, and it's been very solid; the new version should be even better.

<comment><USER9> agreed; i've been runing quicksilver non-stop since before the developer passed the project on to others. for a time, it was sluggish and caused some problems. but i have no complaints to speak of about the last couple iterations.

i switched to quicksilver from launchbar, in spite of the fact that i'd paid good money for launchbar. it's not so much that something was wrong with launchbar; it's only that quicksilver was noticeably better in many respects (flexibility, esthetics, flow), imho.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> For those who tend towards using linux, I've found gnome-do to be a fantastic alternative.

</comment><comment><USER11> someone got like a good intro to quicksilver for hackers? especially for running terminal related stuff</comment>


Visualizing Airline Flight Characteristics Between SFO and JFK - <AUTHOR> https://minimaxir.com/2019/10/sfo-jfk-flights/ <comment><AUTHOR> Fun note I learned while working on this post: it's very tricky to build data visualizations that work well in both Light and Dark Mode.

I had used the ColorBrewer diverging palettes for the rainbow box plot color schemes, but they're too light and have low contrast when inverted.

<comment><USER2> Interestingly, I was struck by the colors you used and instantly checked your code to find the palette. Your use of scale_fill_hue is beyond anything I've seen before. Where can I learn more?

<comment><AUTHOR> It's nothing too unusual outside what's stated in the docs: [https://ggplot2.tidyverse.org/reference/scale_hue.html](https://ggplot2.tidyverse.org/reference/scale_hue.html)

This is the first time I've used the start and direction parameters, though.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> I use to fly BOS <> SFO frequently.

One contributing factor is that the jetstream is stronger in winter months than summer months. Flights from BOS to SFO are up to 1 hour longer (heading into the jetstream) and 1 hour shorter from SFO to BOS (strong tailwinds).

In winter months, some airline's direct flights have to occasionally land and refuel mid-country[1]. I've experienced this first hand a couple times.

[1] [https://thepointsguy.com/2018/02/winds-forcing-virgin- americ...](https://thepointsguy.com/2018/02/winds-forcing-virgin-america- flights-diversions/)

</comment><comment><USER4> > Unlike the SFO → SEA charts, both charts are relatively flat over the years. > However, when looking at seasonality, SFO → JFK dips in the summer and > spikes during winter, while JFK → SFO does the complete opposite: dips > during the winter and spikes during the summer, which is similar to the SFO > → SEA route. I don't have any guesses what would cause that behavior.

This one seems easy:

SF "summer" is actually foggy winter, whereas the winter months are mostly pretty mild. (Admittedly less so at SFO than in the city but it's often still foggy.)

Airports tend to experience delays in wintery (wind and low visibility) conditions.

Thus the seasonal delay is from arriving at the airport experiencing "winter conditions."

<comment><USER5> SFO is even worse during the fog -- if there is insufficient visibility, they have to close one of the two runways because they're too close to use both using instruments.

<comment><USER6> It's actually a bit more wild than that! SFO is _always_ too close to land both runways at once via IFR alone. The second tail plane is required to land while maintaining separation _visually_ , which can't be done in bad weather. Also, since wakes are what they are, the _second_ plane has to be the heavier one. Which is how you get extremely large planes landing at a major international airport under requirements in part for VFR.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> The difference between eastbound and westbound speeds, and their inverse correlation, is to be expected, given that winds aloft are predominantly from the west. Just from eyeballing the speed charts, there seems to be about a 70mph difference on average, corresponding to average westerly winds of half that.

</comment><comment><USER8> The graphs talking about flight speed are pretty nonsensical. The distance is fixed, and they already graphed time, so the only difference here that wouldn't be measured on the previous graph is route differences (assuming they're actually using flown distance and not just straight line distance).

The comment: "he metrics from JFK indicate there's about a 20% drop in flight speed potentially due to wind resistance, which makes sense. " Also shows a lot of ignorance. Air speed doesn't change based on direction, but flying opposite directions sitting in the jet stream definitely does.

</comment><comment><USER9> 184 million rows is a lot? That's like when Dr. Evil asks the government to pay you "One Million Dollars". Do you know what's really impressive? One trillion rows, in just a second. [https://www.memsql.com/blog/memsql- processing-shatters-trill...](https://www.memsql.com/blog/memsql-processing- shatters-trillion-rows-per-second-barrier/)

</comment><comment><USER10> I'd like to see a version of this with data going back to the 1990's.

My memory is that before 9/11 and the aviation industry meltdown that planes used to burn more fuel to get from coast to coast quicker than they do now. But I'd like to see some actual numbers to determine if I remember that correctly.

</comment><comment><USER11> Hm these numbers look very different from the FAA's: [https://www.faa.gov/nextgen/snapshots/airportpairs/?location...](https://www.faa.gov/nextgen/snapshots/airportpairs/?locationId=14)

<comment><AUTHOR> The elapsed times in this post are totals and include taxi/runway idling; that link just does shows airborne time.

Adding an extra 20-40 minutes to the FAA averages seems to fit.

<comment><USER11> But the second table shows gate-to-gate?

<comment><AUTHOR> Oops, missed that chart.

The JFK → SFO data viz seems to track close enough with the average in that second chart (it's lower, likely due to less outlier skew). The SEA → SFO metric is the reverse of the displayed data visualization so that's not applicable.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> This is really interesting, I wonder what caused the spike in the summer of 2017? I don't remember it being especially hot, any instance a strike, or anything like that.

<comment><USER13> JFK runway construction : [https://thepointsguy.com/2017/03/jfk-runway- construction-201...](https://thepointsguy.com/2017/03/jfk-runway- construction-2017/)</comment></comment>


SQL Injection Attack happening ATM - <AUTHOR> http://isc.sans.org/diary/SQL+Injection+Attack+happening+ATM/12127 <comment><USER2> The code is T-SQL and will only do anything on SQL Server. It exploits web apps that are vulnerable to SQL injection, and won't cause you any problems if you encode user data correctly and use prepared statements, stored procedures, or a good ORM.

<comment><USER3> Sybase also uses T-SQL.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> To be clear, this is against SQL Server (Microsoft).

<comment><USER5> Splitting hairs but it relies on buggy websites using SQL Server, rather than exploiting a flaw in SQL Server itself

<comment><USER6> I think that's not splitting hairs at all; it's a major detail and it's appalling how many of the comments on that post are like "oh this is a SQL Server vulnerability"....yikes !

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I would think that if a site is still running on ASP they probably aren't currently maintaining it and won't care enough to fix it?</comment>


An 1828 Balloon Ascent on a Pony - <AUTHOR> http://mimimatthews.com/2015/12/17/an-1828-balloon-ascent-on-a-pony/ <comment><USER2> I was drinking in that pub a couple of weeks ago! Inexplicably, it has no monument or plaque commemorating this feat of equestro-aerial navigation.

<comment><AUTHOR> It should have one! This balloon launch was apparently a really big deal to to people back then.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> For some reason I was really anticipating an old timey video of the event.

<comment><AUTHOR> If only!</comment></comment>


Chinese police used facial recognition to catch a suspect in a crowd of 60000 - <AUTHOR> https://mashable.com/2018/04/13/china-police-facial-recogntion/ <comment><USER2> Chinese fake news. They didn't catch him from a "crowd of 60,000".</comment>


The Future of Not Working - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/23/magazine/universal-income-global-inequality.html <comment><USER2> With almost 8 _BILLION_ people on this planet soon, not everyone can meaningfully contribute to something that can't be done more efficiently by automation (which is also cheaper for everyone and easier on the environment) or done away with entirely. See [1], [2], [3] for examples from our not-so- distant past.

You just cannot expect everyone to "earn" money while expecting technological progress to continue unabated.

Don't want so many people? Mandate reversible sterilization at birth.

Don't want so many disgruntled and unemployed people? Endorse some form of guaranteed income, or incorporate basic housing, meals, healthcare and internet into the list of undeniable human rights.

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

[2] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Link- boy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Link-boy)

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

<comment><USER3> I do wonder about the "not everyone can contribute" perhaps they can't contribute in building cars, but with a cultural shift and education, well there are a lot of avenues of research and mathematics that only require thought and basic tools like chalk. I tend to view an unemployed human as an awful waste of computational resources. This ofcourse assumes we haven't figured out strong AÍ or we don't want to, cause that's an entirely different chat.

<comment><USER4> > I tend to view an unemployed human as an awful waste of computational > resources.

If we extend the metaphor, there are 4004s and there are i7s. You need a lot of 4004s to equal the output of one i7. That many 4004s use a lot more watts than the one i7, and at some point the value isn't there.

<comment><USER3> I see your point, however these humans are alive, thinking, using power you might say anyway. There is a nearly infinite task in improving our society and science, and we have strong evidence that humans become self destructive or just destructive when not actively engaged in something they enjoy doing.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> The article's title is misleading - it is not about not working, it's about giving money directly to poor villages for 12 years to provide what is similar to basic income but meeting fundamentally different needs in a very different part of the world. That said, I think it is a fascinating anthropological read.

We often do not realize how many layers of wealth we had to stand on to possess our current wealth.

<comment><USER6> What's most fascinating to me is the dollar amount: $22/month ==> $264/year. It's almost unfathomable from a Western perspective that this could cover someone's basic living expenses for a year.

I wish there were a simple way to participate as an individual. You don't have to be rich to cover one (or more) people's basic living expenses at this rate.

Edit: Here's the link to donate: [https://www.givedirectly.org/give- now](https://www.givedirectly.org/give-now)

You can even send money via Venmo to avoid the credit card processing fee.

<comment><USER7> > I wish there were a simple way to participate as an individual.

There is? You give money to GiveDirectly. They even take Bitcoin (I've done it).

<comment><USER8> Jeez, when did Bitcoin fees go to $0.3? Wow.

I've donated, thank you! Seems like a great charity.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> "One estimate, generated by Laurence Chandy and Brina Seidel of the Brookings Institution, recently calculated that the global poverty gap — meaning how much it would take to get everyone above the poverty line — was just $66 billion. That is roughly what Americans spend on lottery tickets every year, and it is about half of what the world spends on foreign aid."

Love this.

<comment><USER10> I'm really curious about the math on that $66 billion number. According to the world bank there are about 750 million people living in extreme poverty. We only need to give them $88/year to get them out of it? And that's just the people in "extreme poverty." It'll be even less if we move up the income scale a bit.

The number seems low to me.

<comment><USER11> The doc [1] below agrees that there are about 700m in extreme poverty now, which it defines as living below $2/day. If we gave each of those people $2/day, we'd need $550billion/year. So yes, $66b seems low for the $2/day threshold.

I wonder if this $66b is for those who are below $1/day. Looking at the plot in [1], we can guess that the number at $1/day is much lower; $66b would give 181 million people a dollar a day.

[1] [https://ourworldindata.org/extreme- poverty/](https://ourworldindata.org/extreme-poverty/)

<comment><USER12> You need to take into account that these people are not living on absolute nil - they have some level of income, be it $1 or $.50 - so you don't need to give each of them $2/day.

The OP article noted the amount needed in the village in the beginning was $22/month, so $.75 a day, give or take 10c.

<comment><USER13> And the system for means-testing at that level would be expensive enough to run, with opportunities for graft, false-positives, and false-natives, that means-testing would be a losing proposition. Just pick a level and make sure no one is double-dipping.

You still have the problem of regional thugs that will come round every "pay day" for their taste. Or beat you up. A pretty simple variation a protection racket, but I'm not sure how to protect against it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> The people with the wealth pay people for one reason and one reason only: they have to. Once they no longer have to, they will lobby the government to continue to lower taxes and squawk about laziness, welfare queens, and all that garbage.

This will go on for a few decades until there is an uprising of sorts, then those with the money will return to giving everyone else crumbs, or just enough to quell the uprisings. This will probably go on perpetually.

<comment><USER15> Marx predicted that...hundred forty years ago. Hasn't happened. History suggests revolts occur when basic needs are unmet, usually after a nation falls into debt and ruin as a consequence of war

<comment><USER16> What amazes me is that people keeping keep increasing the definition of basic needs and we wonder why things become unstable.

Universal healthcare is now considered a basic need. We're not even talking about basic healthcare either. I see people arguing all the time that everyone is entitled to a level of care that is for all intents and purposes a premium product that commands a premium price.

If you were to tally up all the entitlements people argue should be basic human rights, you'd have a economically unsustainable system, because you'd eventually take so much from those working that the motive for them to continue participating in the system would disappear. It got so bad in East Germany, that they had to build a wall to keep those that were productive from fleeing.

<comment><USER17> You could argue that "premium" universal healthcare can't be a basic need because it isn't sustainable, but the alternative, deciding who deserves it based on who can afford it, seems even worse. This growing sense of entitlement that many people complain about is mostly just normal people wanting all the same perks that modernity brought the wealthy, and I don't think thats unreasonable.

(As a thought experiment, imagine that premium health care was extremely cheap. It would be completely intuitive that everyone deserved it, since we are basically talking about ensuring that people stay alive/in good health.)

<comment><USER16>
        deciding who deserves it based on who can afford it, seems even worse.

What's wrong with this? Technology improves and productivity improves. Over time, more and more people are getting better and better healthcare. The healthcare the cheapest insurance available today can buy is better than what the richest had access to 100 years ago.

If premium healthcare were extremely cheap, everyone could afford it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> This looks so shiny only because the experiment is low-scale. In a country with an acute shortage of access to capital, small money explainably gives huge returns. If it was done to every, or even every poor, household in Kenya, it won't have resulted in anything but inflation and probably riots/genocide/burning of Give Directly workers for witchcraft. If everyone could buy that fishnet, fish in Lake Victoria will run out in a month, and almost everyone who did that will have simply lost that money. Further advancement will need a ton of capital AND education, and tradition of legal system to sustain complex companies that depend on intangible assets... Simply put, require a first world country to be done in. Handing out $22 a month to every Kenyan would do absolutely nothing for him - at least many times less than handing out $22 to 0.01% of Kenyans.

It's not like i don't believe in UBI. There are few other visible solutions to the automation problem (other may be economic incentivizing - like through tax breaks - and cultural promotion of resurrection of personal servants as a mass occupation) - but it can't work as good as this example simply because it doesn't scale so well.

<comment><USER19> This is the thing that irritates me soo much. People come up with an idea that doing X will solve problem Y but they ignore the fact you can't just change one simple thing in a complex system and not expect other variations. Giving everyone in the country X dollars will just result in inflation like you said. Plus, it will take wealth away from those people who had wealth currently make up to a small multiple of this new income.

Adding access to clean water, plumbing and electricity is enabling and the kind of investment that will have the most return. Returns can also be had by starting to give access to credit/loans to enterprising people. I liken this issue to Democracy. You can't give a country Democracy but you can help create conditions for its citizens to build it themselves. But there is also a chance that they don't want it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> As a form of foreign aid giving money directly probably works well. But idea that developing countries need basic income because of automation is just absurd.

If anything they need to get to work developing their country; those shacks are not going to be built by robots.

Fully developed countries on the other hand may face the situation where their country is so well run and have such a high level of automation and specialisation that there is too little work left for the population to be fully employed.

And thus they may lower their pension age, experiment with 30 hour work weeks, sabbaticals, maternity leaves, basic income and so on.

The countries that are closest to this are probably the Scandinavian countries. However at the moment they are all moving towards lower social transfers and higher pension age.

</comment><comment><USER21> I got to this on my reading list finally, realizing my first impression that this was a piece promoting an organization called GiveDirectly, wasn't a sound impression (lesson: don't comment till you read the article). This _is_ a higher level than that, it's testing Universal Income, frequently called universal basic income.

Public policy whether implemented by governments or by organizations should test, innovate, change, not just pick an approach and run with it as seems to happen with the largest programs here in the U.S. As far as I can tell there's not been much innovation in the implementation of the safety net since Johnson.

Like anything else humans try to do, there will be bugs, there will be blind alleys, there will be mistakes. Small scale testing is a necessary step so that a working model is ready for larger-scale testing or maybe it'll be found that the implementation will have to have configurations that vary according to local conditions and even just preferences.

I'm a Pacific Northwest guy perhaps out of touch with what Silicon Valley is up to, sometimes I'm critical, but for this initiative, I say thank you. I have no clue how I'd thank anyone for this so just in case anyone involved is reading my comment I would like to express gratitude for doing work that has a high probability of playing a part in making the world a liveable place for my young son and the rest of humanity in the years to come.

By the way, if you've got the chops to beta test UI any chance you could save the Amazon Basin?! Please.

</comment><comment><USER22> If every known resource acquisition task was automated, and the discovery of unknown non-automated tasks could be automated to be automated, we'd be post- scarcity and the concepts of working and income wouldn't be useful metrics anymore.

So, yeah machines are a big black hole and our jobs are doomed asteroids spiraling into the black hole. As they spiral into the singularity, humans will be displaced at an accelerating rate, and it will take more ingenuity and effort for humans to maintain "work". And, for what? In the asymptotic limit, the outcome _should be_ no more jobs and "work" in a the way we currently define them, and humans will be truly free to creative pursuits. Never shall a beautiful human mind be wasted on labor which a machine can do.

At some point, machines will be the dominant species pushing civilization forward, not us.

Until then, we're forced to work, we're forced into employment because our world does not simply give us what we want. Food and spears don't fall out of the sky, so we will waste our time hunting and farming until we figure out how to make those things "fall out of the sky".

</comment><comment><USER23> The African people would me much better off if we would stop selling them weapons and would pay a fair price for their work and natural resources. But hey, that wouldn't be a great PR action making headlines!

<comment><USER21> Acting as you suggest and programs like this aren't mutually exclusive propositions. I doubt that the people backing this program are the same people selling arms to Africa.

So nobody should do anything unless they can also solve all problems? I actually upvoted your comment because I agree that those things should stop but I don't have the slightest bit of power to stop it and those who are conducting these sort of studies have more power than me but when put up against giant problems, it's at the margins. That is, they can't stop the arms trade either.

<comment><USER23> My problem is that programs like this does not change anything except making us first world citizens feeling comfortable about not having the power to stop exploitation of a whole continent. It is like a drug for the society making us feel good when we should feel bad and ashamed.

And calling it "basic income" is just propaganda.

<comment><USER21> I don't think that's the point. This program's testing the basic income and I think the idea is there will be a number of tests under different conditions.

If this concept proves viable, then that could serve as a model to scale it up. The problem this is trying to solve isn't that of just the developing world, the developed world is sliding toward a catastrophic failure of the system that depends on there being a job (aka a way to make a living) for every adult who wants to work.

I'm not sure but we could be there now. If we aren't there now it won't be long. The trend toward automation and the rise of AI are enough on its own but there are other trends working against the current system. Add to that even for people who have steady work how well has the retirement saving system been going in the U.S.? There are millions of people who will retire completely unprepared to support themselves for even a decade of retirement.

The need will be global. Unless you're wealthy enough to have no worries at all about money, you might someday be grateful for these initial tests that led to the successful deployment of this system for you. I know I worry about how many years I can make it into retirement when that day comes and I really worry about my son who's a small child. The system is failing yet slow enough that perhaps it hasn't hit you yet.

Actually, even if you ARE wealthy, if the system becomes too unstable ultimately we all eat it. Instability is everyone's adversary.

<comment><USER23> >> This program's testing the basic income and I think the idea is there will be a number of tests under different conditions.

IMHO there have been enough test for basic income where the basic income was decoupled from the free job market. It is called socialism / communism. All of these tests failed badly and ruined whole generations. No sane person have lived behind the iron curtain would consider it as a sustainable economic solution.

<comment><USER21> No, you've got this wrong. First off, let's distinguish our terms to prevent completely muddled thinking. There are different flavors of socialism: national socialism, communist flavor socialism, democratic socialism. You seem to lump democratic (aka European style socialism) with the heavy handed- killed-20-million-of-his-own-people Stalin-style central planning socialism. You can be opposed to democratic socialism just fine without, perhaps unintentionally, confused thinking. If you would take the time to define your terms you can avoid crying wolf.

Basic income does not presume any of the flavors of socialism, though if your particular ideology is libertarianism or conservativism then you've likely been taught to throw any sort of government program into the same category in order to attempt to discredit it.

This is basic income with no strings attached. You can take that money to buy ramen so that you can be a half starving artist or you can take a chance on that job or start the business that you've been hesitant to take a chance on because you estimated the odds of falling hard and broke were too high.

If you retire and didn't save enough in your 401k and Roth IRA's to make it to the finish line without working when you're old and tired then this might make the difference. If you fall on hard times as many human beings do at some point in their lives sooner or later, the UI would be the floor with a little padding.

There's not a single thing about this that has anything to do with the "iron curtain." Nobody thinking this through themselves using reason would arrive at your conclusions and you're probably pretty damn smart. So I suspect the problem that it is not _your_ thinking, you are instead parroting some quasi- talking-points from some ideology or other that you subscribe to.

Please try to get beyond seeing everything that you encounter through the lens of your ideology or any ideology at all for that matter, but if you need your ideology for whatever reason, at least review and define your terms again to make sure you at least have that part right or what follows doesn't have a prayer of coming together as a cogent argument.

<comment><USER23> How long have you been living in a country where everything is basic? Your job, your income, your home, your education, your healthcare? What do you know about how humans living under sutch conditions act and how sutch systems end up? You call it ideology, I call it experience.

[Edit:] I appreciate your intent to build up a working socialism and not to fvck it up this time. But some systems simply does not work with humans, only with ants and robots.

<comment><USER24> I live in a country with a guaranteed level of education and healthcare (I guess that's what you mean) and I love it. No need to worry when I go to a doctor or whether I can afford university.

As far as I know what has never been tried on a large scale is to give everyone a no-strings-attached 'salary' and let them do whatever they want, without consequences for that income.

Communism definitely didn't let you do whatever you want, while still paying you for it. And in all socialist countries I know of unemployment benefits are decreased as soon as you start working, sometimes even at a net-negative rate (yes, I consider that stupid as well).

I don't know what you mean with a basic home. I guess you could call where I live right now 'basic', but only because I don't care enough to spend more for it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> It would seem like 'going to work' is becoming a thing of the past, at least for increasingly many people. Labor force participation at multi-decade lows. Gig jobs, welfare, disability, prolonged education, social security/retirement, and the 'underground economy' is replacing a significant chunk of the traditional job market.

<comment><USER25> Not in the UK. "The employment rate in the UK has hit another record high of 74.2%, and there are more people in work than ever before." [https://www.gov.uk/government/news/employment-rate-hits- reco...](https://www.gov.uk/government/news/employment-rate-hits-record-742)

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> > "The research wing of Sam Altman's start-up incubator, Y Combinator, is > planning to pass out money to 1,000 families in California and another yet- > to-be-determined state."

Oh, really? Where do we sign up? I'd love to be able to build my business(es) without taking investor funds.

<comment><USER21> That's a pretty cynical attitude. It's obvious the intent of this is to test a program that has the potential to keep people from drowning. I doubt you're now gasping for air as you sink below the waves.

<comment><USER27> That's the exact opposite of a cynical attitude. It's the attitude I hope all the participants will have. If everyone receiving BI are not trying to make something better out of their lives, then UBI is no better at helping the poor then any other charity -- the old give a man a fish thing.

No US citizen in California really has to worry about starving to death. They do have to worry about losing their benefits, and in some cases having to retroactively pay them back.

I have my doubts about UBI, though. I lived in a poor neighborhood in Las Vegas. About a quarter of the residents were drug addicts, and living among them were the drug dealers. They all were on public assistance, and spent most of their time trying to steal anything they could from the people and shops around them.

Ever wonder why so many poor people vote Republican? This is it. People there were afraid to leave their homes at night and the hope was a Republican government would clean up their neighborhood for them. But I digress...

<comment><USER28> Consider that if basic income isn't tied to a job, it makes it that much easier to move away from such places. (For example, look at all the retirees living in Florida.)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment> temp-ora we do not use money because it makes sense. money exists in the form it takes today because of human nature. we think someone has to earn their food. we think a homeless person deserves a handout because they look like they are at least trying to get on their feet (or not when they dont). machine intelligence is not the only problem that our wealth distribution system is facing. we have faced massive inequality before, and are facing it right now, and no solutions have been implemented. and like all the trials of equality before it, the automation of jobs will result in the smartest and fasted humans owning the vast majority of wealth and influence while the rest of us sit in mud.

<comment><USER29> > the automation of jobs will result in the smartest and fasted humans owning > the vast majority of wealth and influence while the rest of us sit in mud.

So you are arguing the rich are rich because they are the smartest? I would tweak your assessment. The rich are rich because wealth perpetuates the capture of wealth at a rate greater than the expansion of the economy.

<comment> temp-ora having wealth is one half of the equation when it comes to self perpetuation of wealth. being very smart is the other half. look at people who win the lottery. they spend it all away, often becoming broke. and the people who get wealth in the first place are more likely to be smart. smart people end up getting a lot of money because they are smart. and they use it to stay wealthy because they are smart.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> Interesting comment below the article regarding a government-run programme in Brazil trying something similar: "However, there is a trend of the part of these persons become dependent of this benefit and do not strive to change this situation..."

That was my immediate reaction after reading this. What about after the twelve years, when the donors ride off into the sunset? There are some encouraging stories there of participants using the money wisely, but not all will do so. You could argue that nobody is forcing them to participate, but it does seem at least a little ethically questionable. Particularly given the targeted demographic of a rural Kenyan community with (presumably - I could be wrong) low education levels.

<comment><USER31> If this solves their basic needs, housing, food, medical, education, ..., then why would they need to 'strive for change"? Seems to me the world would be a far better place if people could get more content with just living. We have no shortage of produce already, and that is before the automation revolutions coming in the next decades. Just living without exponential 'wealth' accumulation plans that invariably seem to include some form of over- exploiting natural resources while externalizing the effects, or rent-seeking schemes that create lopsided distributions, seems to be a far more 'civil' future.

</comment></comment><comment><USER32> Here's how I think the only possible way this will ever be realized: A non- profit organization will have one of the highest (top 10 to pick an arbitrary number) net-worths of any company on earth.

<comment><USER21> like a government but with a single mission to administer this program. It could be a good idea. I don't know.

<comment><USER33> Like a department or agency of government? In the US the SSA may be a good contender.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> I think that fundamentally, the thing we're going to run up against is population growth.

I think history has proven that we can live in extremely wretched conditions. By giving money to people, are we going to be increasing their living standards or just creating more mouths to feed?

Note that the basic income only applies to whoever registers at the beginning of the program. Would that amount of basic income cause the population to explode, so that the per-capita amount of goods/money remains constant?

<comment><USER35> wealth is strongly inversely coorolated with population growth. Keeping people in poverty means they have more children, not the reverse.

<comment><USER36> Only because wealth is positively correlated with education and impulse control.

There's no reason to believe handing a poor, uneducated person with no impulse control a big wad of cash will have the same effect.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> Sounds like a great programme with little reported short-term negative effects. By no way is this a _beta test_ to anything other than reproducing this in other similar cultural conditions, which may also require having seen previous aid attempts fail.

The worst-case scenario I fear is that UBI given without also providing outlets for activities that actually get used will result in an adult version of problem of otherwise well-off of suburban youth.

</comment><comment><USER38> Work will have to be redefined. It's a psychological need to form teams and solve your needs or some others. That is the underlying basis.

</comment><comment><USER39> In order for this to work, you have to define "universal" in the context of how automation affects the global economy, not just the US or any national economy. Example: are we going to send a stipend to Bengali citizens who are displaced from textile manufacturing jobs by robot factories in the U.S.?

</comment><comment> temp-ora the title does not reflect the article and the article does not reflect the subject. like everyone else here, i did not read it because after dangling a few hard facts and conclusions in front of your face, the article goes off on tangents about the personal stories of people who are involved but not instrumental. this toxic mix of novel-style story telling and actual reporting has made these articles unreadable for me. people dont give a shit about the narrative of the stupid author or even people involved in setting up this whole thing -- people want to know how the experiment went! did it work? did the people end up being lazy and unproductive like all the ubi detractors say they will? but no, i cannot know these things without fishing through pages of garbage. and when i know someone else has already done it here in the comments to reap the karma, why on earth would i even click the link?

</comment><comment><USER40> This is a nice article, but I'd like to remind everyone that it's probably also native advertising.

<comment><USER41> The New York Times discloses their native advertising. Also, I doubt that GiveDirectly has the budget for a $100k+ media campaign.

</comment></comment><comment><USER42> Can someone summarize the results?

</comment><comment><USER43> Why is "defining a problem called 'not working'" not called "massively manipulating the economy"? From the point of view of the people who work hard to make Kenya's economy work, this can't possibly be helpful. It sounds like an evil, abusive psychological experiment.

Forget about "fake news", the New York Times is literally evil news. It is literally promoting views that proliferate evil. Injecting this level of disorder into an economy and lying about it is a level of deception that goes into moral perversion.

Let me make this clear: I am directly accusing Annie Lowrey of promoting excessively morally corrupt views. She is responsible for promoting evil. This is a person who wakes up in the morning and works hard to promote evil.

Think about that.

Edit: I was down-voted without explanation or rebuttal. If you disagree with what I have written, don't attack my anonymously. I want my karma to be a healthy score, and I don't appreciate people (or bots) decreasing my karma score, and I consider it a personal attack against my reputation.

<comment><USER44> This is all speculation, but from what I've observed on HN there could be a number of reasons you were downvoted.

\- HN isn't primarily for political or ideological debate. Creating a new account and starting with a contentious comment probably looked like someone creating an account purely for ideological battle, which is an abuse of HN.

\- The HN community strongly values civil discourse, which usually requires keeping strong, passionate, strident language at a lower level, particularly on contentious issues. Phrases like "literally evil news", "literally promoting views that proliferate evil", and "moral perversion" don't meet the expectation of civil discourse, regardless of how strongly you believe them to be true. (Yes, this is "it's not what you say, it's how you say it".)

\- You've made a direct, harsh attack on someone without providing any support.

\- After receiving downvotes, you complained about it. This is explicitly against HN guidelines.

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

As I stated from the outset, this is speculation. For what people would consider obvious disregard for community standards, they may downvote and not think it's necessary to comment why.

As you express concern about your karma, as you're new to commenting on HN, I suggest refraining from commenting on contentious topics for a while until you become more accustomed to the HN community. There are plenty of other interesting submissions that you may find to contribute to and not find yourself as open to downvotes. I'm sorry you've found your first brush with the HN community to be negative. I hope you find what I've written useful and that you have a more positive experience in the future!

</comment></comment><comment><USER45> Anything that reduces the oppression of women is a good thing. Freedom is the ability to make choices.

</comment><comment><USER46> It's interesting how this runs counter to the two dominant political ideologies in the US.

Liberals believe that the poor are too dumb and helpless to figure out what they want, so the government should do it, both domestically and in foreign aid.

Conservatives believe that the poor are poor because they are unintelligent and lack good values (or they are acting rationally in response to liberal welfare programs), and domestic and foreign programs should be eliminated in favor of religious missions.

What programs like this are finding is the the poor are intelligent and well- motivated, and they just need an opportunity to get out of the hole they are stuck in.

Let me add that, from what I understand, foreign aid programs can be very helpful in areas like public health.

<comment><USER31> Non-amaricans often think that the US has just one dominant political ideology. Sure, it comes in two flavors, red and blue, but both are neo- liberal capitalist market ideologies. That ideology also strongly believes in personal responsibility, you are the master of your own outcomes. While there is a realization that yes, the system is rigged in favor of rent seeking and exponential accumulation, there is also the believe that at least some of the wealth is shared through 'trickle down' employment schemes. It is important to realize this 'sharing' is not a deliberate goal, but more like the man in the story hiring a day-laborer to help with his fishing, an accidental byproduct of accelerating rent-seeking wealth accumulation. The fishing aid is not hired for charity, but because the potential of the fishing net in maximizing return is higher even after deducting wages. He also has no concept of sustainability. His motive is immediate profit maximization, so he can go on hiring boats and fisherman until the lake is all fished up. By that time he'll be 'rich', probably living far away or at least long have crossed the threshold where is further wealth accumulation does not depend on any specific lake or industry. It is those hired fishing aids that will feel the brunt of this natural disaster, not the owner. Back to the US. What happens if trickle down stops because machines are better/cheaper/faster? What do you 'do' with 'people'? Let them starve in horrible circumstances while you hide behind big fences guarded by a ruthless G4S private army? Or do you somehow continue to trickle down? But on what basis? 'Meaningless' labor, just because you can't stand 'laziness'? Or do you provide the 'basics', like food, shelter, medicine, regardless of their inherently meaningless chore completion rate? I guess what it realy boils down to in the end is the question of what we believe 'being human' is all about.

<comment><USER47> > Non-amaricans often think that the US has just one dominant political > ideology. Sure, it comes in two flavors, red and blue, but both are neo- > liberal capitalist market ideologies.

I suppose that from 1992 until (but not including) 2016, looking from the outside only at major party Presidential nominees, it would be easy to miss the substantial dissent from the neoliberal consensus in the US (even within both major parties, and even in the segment of those parties in government.)

OTOH, since we elected an authoritarian populist whose economic approach blends mercantilist protectionism with corporatism, the idea that the only economic philosophy with any currency in US politics is neoliberalism isn't even something that relatively disengaged foreign observers can be excused.for.buying into.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER48> > _As automation reduces the need for human labor, some Silicon Valley > executives think a universal income will be the answer — and the beta test > is happening in Kenya._

This is not the situation I think of when I hear "basic income." Why Kenya?

> _GiveDirectly wants to show the world that a basic income is a cheap, > scalable way to aid the poorest people on the planet._

Oh.

I was under the belief that only the middle class protested for basic income. It would have been more interesting if the "beta test" was done on educated/ first world persons, so we can finally get progress (or a full stop) on this debate.

I believe this idea wasn't thought out past the "we want to put on airs" phase. Is injecting capital into a system that relies on crime to keep afloat, really the _best_ idea GiveDirectly could have come up with?

This is similar to the Toms fiasco where they would donate a pair of shoes to Africa for every pair bought -- it crippled the local fabrics businesses.

Perhaps if one wanted to fix the African economy, one would invest into economic think-tanks and their executionary tandems, instead of over glorified tax shelters.

<comment><USER15> Kenya is very cheap, as opposed to a UBI trial in America, which would be far more expensive

<comment><USER48> This is true.

It looks like Finland is doing the first experiment, even if it's only on the unemployed[0].

[0][http://www.news.com.au/technology/innovation/finland- begins-...](http://www.news.com.au/technology/innovation/finland-begins- universal-basic-income-trial-as-the-world-watches/news- story/7ae91901c856ca697ed6b30e18cbba00)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Giving money is a great short term solution but we all know that free always has a limit. 22 dollars per month is a good start but at 22 bux they will never reach the standard of living we enjoy in the west. The goal should be to ensure that everyone has a job or business that provides the person a decent living.

I think that in addition to the money they should help with the following:

1)Education and the ability to get it at will. Financial education should be a priority. 2)Entrepreneurship, make sure anyone that wants to start a business knows what to do. 3)Security and the enforcement of the law thru a judicial system, both criminal and civil. 4)A working financial system. Make sure businesses and people can borrow money. 5)A way to go bankrupt that will let people start over. It should not be too painful for both creditors and borrowers. 6)A political system that works for the majority. 7) Community leadership that works towards the betterment of the town. 8)A tax system that will let the town provide items that no single person can provide on their own. It's a reality as painful as they are taxes and their prudent use help improve the community's standard of living. 9) Secure property rights. If someone owns something they should do with it what they want without infringing on the community's well being and no one should be able to take it away from them by force.

What gets me railed up is the inability to use the town's human capital. Giving free money will not help forever. If you could get people to work together they would eventually get out of poverty. Maybe the current generation might not but eventually they would be able to do it.</comment>


Ask HN: How do you combat eye strain? - <AUTHOR> I just realized I have Computer Vision Syndrome[1]. I have most of the symptoms:<p>- Blurred vision - Double vision - Dry, red eyes - Eye irritation - Headaches - Neck or back pain<p>I already use eye drops and take frequent breaks. Any other ideas?<p>[1] http://www.webmd.com/eye-health/computer-vision-syndrome. <comment><USER2> My personal tips are to use daylight color temperature bulbs for lighting. Type with a rolled towel around the neck for reducing next strain and enforcing better posture.

I was just reading this guys blog post[1] titled "A Programmer's Ergonomic Workstation" and he mentions he uses these amber tinted glasses called gunners[2]

[1] [http://markshust.com/2014/03/31/programmers-ergonomic- workst...](http://markshust.com/2014/03/31/programmers-ergonomic-workstation) [2] [http://www.gunnars.com/how-they-work/](http://www.gunnars.com/how-they- work/)

</comment><comment><USER3> I turn monitor's brightness down to around 30%. It helps a lot with eye strain, at 100% my eyes get tired after only a few minutes, at 50% after a few hours, and at 30% I can go all day.

Obviously these % depend on the monitor or screen. Some screens are brighter than others. However most Dell and LG monitors are set way way too bright by default (something I call "showroom mode," essentially set to look nice, not work well).

30% is still plenty bright. Whites are still white, not washed out and gray (which happens around 10%).

</comment><comment><USER4> Follow the 20-20-20 rule: every 20 minutes, look at something 20 feet away for 20 seconds. I built a free little web app just for this purpose that I run all day [http://prntscr.com/5vpbxg](http://prntscr.com/5vpbxg) Check out [http://timerdoro.com](http://timerdoro.com) or use your phone's timer or something.

</comment><comment><USER5> I find a high level of correlation between eye strain with computer work and dehydration. When I drink lots of water, I experience less eye strain. I don't know if that will work for you, its just an idea.

I also know that it doesn't just have to do with taking a break, because drinking once from a large container helps more than multiple drinks from small containers.

</comment><comment><USER6> I am interested in more about your situation. Do you wear corrective lenses? Have you tried reducing the backlighting on your display?

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes, glasses. And I have my brightness way down, and good lighting at work (not too bright, not too dim).

<comment><USER6> I wear glasses too because of nearsightedness. It took me several tries at different eye doctors to find lenses that did not make me sick, but my negative experiences were not only with video displays. I had problems driving and reading, too. Of course I could read the letter charts in the doctors' offices and in the driving license office. (edit: i was experimenting with contact lenses at this time too)

Once I got the right lenses in front of my eyes, all was fine until I moved away from a CRT display, which I had no problems with at 100% brightness. My IPS display with CCFL backlight brought the pain back, until I set the brightness to 15%. But I still experience eye fatigue after several hours.

I have my display elevated so it's really at eye level, and it's about 1 meter away from my eyes so that looking at other clutter on my desk isn't a drastic change in focal distance.

I have two soft halogen lamps over my desk for lighting. It would be better if they were behind me. The lighting fixture has a switch to change the electrical configuration from series to parallel. In parallel the lamps are brighter and this produces a bit of glare so I only use them this way when I am working on something mechanical on my desk.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I use Gunnar glasses for gaming, and sometimes coding. The yellow tint from the glasses might help?

</comment><comment><USER8> Stop using IPS or TN monitors.

Buy monitors with VA panels and lower brightness. Your eye strain will go away.

</comment><comment><USER9> Give a try to f.lux.

<comment><USER10> This helped my eye strain at night significantly. Disabling it at night and seeing how intense the blue color was on my eyes sold me.</comment></comment>


Lenovo to pay $7.3M for installing adware in laptops - <AUTHOR> https://www.hackread.com/lenovo-to-pay-fine-for-installing-adware-in-laptops/ <comment><USER2> Seems like a small fine, compared to the potential financial benefit of that installation. Hopefully it serves as a deterrent for future adware installs. If not, maybe we start calling our lawmakers.

For those of you in the adware space, would you pay >$10 per head to install your adware onto a computer? My guess is absolutely.

<comment><USER3> The article mentions another $7M worth of fines, and that's just for the US.

Also, they sold their customers pretty cheap, so the combined fines likely significantly exceed the profit from the deal: [https://www.forbes.com/sites/thomasbrewster/2015/02/27/lenov...](https://www.forbes.com/sites/thomasbrewster/2015/02/27/lenovo- got-very-little-from-superfish-deal/)

While I do think the punishment should be significantly more severe (including jail time for executives), I suspect the scandal has made companies aware that this is a bad idea.

I still don't get why it didn't hurt them more in the enterprise space (read: why large companies didn't institute a strict "no lenovo" policy for a couple years). That would have been way more effective than fines.

<comment><USER4> > I suspect the scandal has made companies aware that this is a bad idea.

I kind of wonder how many people were like, "pre-install adware on PCs? Why didn't _I_ think of that?!?"

<comment><USER5> Preinstalled crapware for Windows based PCs has been the norm since I can remember - along with physical crapware stickers.

When I buy PCs, I only buy either the business line from Dell or from the MS store.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I recently was asked by my girlfriends sister to help her choose a laptop. After finding a model that looked good spec-wise I searched for that same model but without Windows pre-installed. It was 150€ cheaper. Then I got a 10€ Windows 10 key from ebay, installed O&O ShutUp and Winaero Tweaker and now it almost feels like a great system that you can actually work with.

Vendor-bloatware has been bad since Windows 7 but now that even Microsoft chose to ship Windows itself with ads, pre-installed garbage like Candy Crush Saga and that annoying Cortana I can't imagine going back to it.

<comment><USER7> > Then I got a 10€ Windows 10 key from ebay

A rather unfair comparison, don't you think? That's like saying "I got a really good deal on a Macbook, all I had to do was pick it up and sprint out of the Apple store!"

<comment><USER6> It also would have been a better deal if I bought it from the official MS- Store for 145€ because it wouldn't have had all the Lenovo bloatware on it.

I personally don't want to support what Microsoft is doing with Windows so that's why I bought it from a shady ebay seller.

Of course, the more ethical solution would have been to talk her into a GNU/Linux machine but I don't have the time and energy to play IT support for the next six months.

<comment><USER8> Why not a chromebook?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I still cant bring myself to purchase a Lenovo product because of this, despite the generally favourable reviews I see on HN regarding the ThinkPads. Its just such a revolting decision to me to do that to a paying customer.

I may just put my money where my mouth is and start the break up with Google too, as painful as that will be. I just dont feel like I align with these fucking companies at all anymore.

<comment><USER10> SuperFish and other adwares were installed on Lenovos lower-grade laptops and Thinkpads. The X series and T series, the choice of most consumers who care enough to own a Thinkpad, were not affected by this issue[1]. While it's unacceptable for Lenovo to be doing this on ANY machine, I still feel confident that the company understands how consumers view the Thinkpad brand and how reluctant they are to do anything that might tarnish the brand for business and prosumer users.

[1][https://support.lenovo.com/us/en/product_security/superfish](https://support.lenovo.com/us/en/product_security/superfish)

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> Absolutely ludicrous. This is basically an incentive for other laptop manufacturers to do the same thing, knowing the punishment (if it even ever comes) is a drop in the bucket compared to the reward.

</comment><comment><USER12> I'm always surprised that Lenovo use in the enterprise space didn't take a hit after all this came to light. I would have thought competitors like Dell and HPE would have used that opportunity to disparage Lenovo.

<comment><USER13> No enterprise is using the base windows image that came from Lenovo with the superfish malware. They all build their own standard operating environment image that would not include the Lenovo bloatware. I would be surprised if Lenovo enterprises even realized they were shipping this way and have no reason to react negatively. Their competitors also live in glass houses and so cannot throw stones.

<comment><USER12> So yes, in a normal case, one would expect to be safe because they are using their own built image. But Lenovo went much further than simply installing crapware, they added a firmware that updates files on startup in the OS to ensure that they had a way to install whatever they wanted onto your system [1].

[1] [https://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/08/12/lenovo_firmware_nas...](https://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/08/12/lenovo_firmware_nasty/)

<comment><USER12> To add to this, while the Superfish issue only affected their consumer laptop lines (e.g. IdeaPad), the LSE issue was found on their enterprise lineup (e.g. ThinkPad).

<comment><USER13> Wasn't aware of the LSE issue on enterprise models! This is a feature that would get enterprises angry if it messes with the OS by injecting bins full of vulnerabilities from BIOS. Gross!

<comment><USER14> Only a quick read, but both the lenovo pressroom and the guardian stated the thinkpads were not affected.

pressroom: [https://news.lenovo.com/pressroom/press-releases/lenovo- stat...](https://news.lenovo.com/pressroom/press-releases/lenovo-statement-on- lenovo-service-engine-lse-bios.htm)

the guardian: [https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/aug/14/lenovo- se...](https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/aug/14/lenovo-service- engine-pre-installed-security-superfish)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Didn't they also install some malware in UEFI at one point? Which is even worse, since you can install Linux on Lenovo laptops wiping out their pre- installed (but non refundable) Windows, but you can't easily replace UEFI there.

<comment><USER3> They did have a firmware-based malware dropper. The "only" thing it did was re-infect clean Windows installations, so installing Linux would still mean you'd be fine as the second stage wouldn't be dropped, but of course that's not a technical limitation - they could have built it to also infect Linux, but didn't.

<comment><USER16> They couldn't have.

The dropper was passive, abusing a Windows mechanism designed for installing vendor software, in which Windows looks for such software and executes it.

Linux does not go diving in UEFI looking for executables to run.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> I had to read twice and go through the article to make sure of the amount.

IMO they'd deserve _way_ more than that. The precedent is scary.

<comment><USER18> Yeah, that looks like a minor slap on the wrist.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> Hope the same step is taken against mobile phone manufacturers who fill the phone with unwanted apps

</comment><comment><USER20> I wonder how costly this particular class-action suit was for Lenovo?

This is, the 7.3 MUSD to be paid, plus the prorated expenses to compensate the employees handling the case, plus court fees, plus travel expenses, etc., but ignoring factors like lost sales, other fines and settlements, etc.; is the final figure still around 7.3 MUSD, or would it be significantly more?

</comment><comment><USER21> Maybe a step towards the possibility to buy lenovo hardware without forced m$ license ?

<comment><USER5> You don't actually pay more for the Windows license. The cost of the Windows license is usually offset by OEM installed crapware on consumer PCs.

</comment></comment><comment> murph-almighty Suppose I purchase a laptop from Lenovo. Do I have a surefire way to easily decrapify the laptop?

<comment><USER22> Reformat the computer?

I do this on 100% of my computers now. I thought there was a risk of losing some functionality like the touch screen, but everything works and far better than when I bought it.

<comment><USER23> But if you install Win10 don't you just get spyware/adware/crapware direct from MS then? (asking, I don't know, not a regular MS user)

<comment> murph-almighty Having done this in the past year... kind of. I view it as a lesser brand of evil though. Also it's possible to turn off telemetry.

Cortana still sucks though.

<comment><USER24> Can you? There was a security report posted last week on here recommending that enterprise users rotate their accounts to prevent some of it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> They also installed a "security" browser toolbar that was based on Conduit malware.

</comment><comment><USER26> I wonder how much M$FT should pay for all the adware in their OS :)

</comment><comment><USER27> IBM Thinkpad t43p was my first heavy duty laptop. In 2005 IBM made a mistake that someone in their management must regret to date, selling Thinkpad laptop line to Lenovo. Things went downhill for Thinkpads and I lasted 3-4 more generations before finally giving up.

Thinkpad had a shot at being the world's most loved laptop, by developers and businessman on the go.

Passion for great products and great user experience is clearly not what drives the thinkpad product line today, and that is regretful. It is one of those business that I would love to run.

<comment><USER28> To this day I want an older 16:10 thinkpad to run xubuntu on. Happy with my 2013 mbpr, however.

<comment><USER29> They are dirt cheap on ebay, you can get an X200 for ~$60 and a new battery for around $20.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> I really wanted to read the article, but, by principle, I leave websites that mess with the native scrolling. Bye hackread.

</comment><comment><USER31> Million?

</comment><comment><USER32> So, somewhat offtopic. I'd like to buy some tablets as presents and the Lenovo ones seemed well rated for the price. Are there others that are made by a, umm, nicer company? I'm looking for cheap and reliable rather than performant.

<comment><USER33> So what's your price range? Ipads were down to 249 which I'd consider pretty darn cheap.

<comment><USER34> Amazon Fire 7 were down to £30 ( $40 ). That's cheap.

$249 is still serious money for most families.</comment></comment></comment>


SearchYC Presents: Ask YC Archive & RSS Feed - <AUTHOR> http://searchyc.com/askyc

<comment><USER2> [http://blog.searchyc.com/2008/02/searchyc-presents-ask-yc- ar...](http://blog.searchyc.com/2008/02/searchyc-presents-ask-yc-archive/)

One of the finest assets of an online community has always been the hodgepodge of expertise brought forth from a diverse group of people. As Hacker News grew beyond just a link bank, the community naturally turned inwards for consultation. Submissions "tagged" with Ask YC started popping up more and more and the response solicited were both interesting and honest.

So to help people get the most out of past discussions, we've compiled a list of Hacker News community threads. The Ask YC Archive features a bar graph for visualizing discussions over time based on points. We've also set up an RSS feed (<http://searchyc.com/askyc/rss>) so you can keep track of new Ask YC threads in your favorite RSS reader. We hope these tools will allow our community to continually benefit from the wisdom of past discussions.

</comment><comment><USER3> Cool stuff. Love the graph. Keep up the good work!

</comment><comment><USER4> Nice hack. Thank you.</comment>


Ask HN: How do you maintain and organize JavaScript? - <AUTHOR> I have written so much javascript over the years, specifically nodejs. I have tons of folders and files of code that is in some half-baked state. It's safe to say I'm overwhelmed and unorganized. I feel like I write the same couple of functions over and over again, reinventing the wheel again and again.
I'm reaching out to the community looking for some alternative. I want to write code, test it, document it, and manage deps all in one place, and forget about it. I want naming conventions for files and folders as well as functions themselves. I'd love if every function I write was accessible, and nothing I ever write was locked away in some file or class. I'd love some way to manage all the code I write.
Does anyone else feel this way? Am I just too lazy to make things npm modules, or is there something larger at play here? Is this all an IDE / tooling issue?
What can I do to lower the barrier-of-entry to just write code, and stop fiddling with files, folders, modules, repos, function naming, etc?
I don't feel like anything exists to maintain all the code you write over a lifetime, rather than on a project-by-project basis. <comment><USER2> > What can I do to lower the barrier-of-entry to just write code, and stop > fiddling with files, folders, modules, repos, function naming, etc?

If your goal is to _write code_ with as little overhead as possible, put your code in a JavaScript file and bring it into the global namespace of your site with a


Ask HN: Favorite HN comment(s) - <AUTHOR> There are bunch of informative/interesting comments on HN. Throwing here just few of them:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14327829
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12941574
Which HN comment(s) are among your favorite ones? Which ones have created value for you? <comment><USER2> This is actually a feature of HN (but a well-hidden one). My favorite comments here:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/favorites?id=tptacek&comments=t](https://news.ycombinator.com/favorites?id=tptacek&comments=t)

<comment><USER3> Wow, your list of favorite comments is every bit as wonderful as your list of comments. No wonder yours was the first name here on HN I learned to look for to learn from (with dang's being the second)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Since our mental wellbeing plays a huge role in how we use our knowledge and skills, one of my favorite HN comments (which is actually a quote from another source):

"Human life the Stoics appear to have considered as a game of great skill; in which, however, there was a mixture of chance [...] In such games the stake is commonly a trifle, and the whole pleasure of the game arises from playing well, from playing fairly, and playing skilfully. If notwithstanding all his skill, however, the good player should, by the influence of chance, happen to lose, the loss ought to be a matter, rather of merriment, than of serious sorrow. He has made no false stroke; he has done nothing which he ought to be ashamed of; he has enjoyed completely the whole pleasure of the game. [...]

Our only anxious concern ought to be, not about the stake, but about the proper method of playing. If we placed our happiness in winning the stake, we placed it in what depended upon causes beyond our power, and out of our direction. We necessarily exposed ourselves to perpetual fear and uneasiness, and frequently to grievous and mortifying disappointments. If we placed it in playing well, in playing fairly, in playing wisely and skilfully; in the propriety of our own conduct in short; we placed it in what, by proper discipline, education, and attention, might be altogether in our own power, and under our own direction. Our happiness was perfectly secure, and beyond the reach of fortune."

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12995076](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12995076)

</comment><comment><USER5> "JavaScript Delenda Est", by zeveb: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11447851](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11447851)

Excerpt: _JavaScript is the XML, the Yugo, the Therac-25 of programming languages. The sheer amount of human effort which has been expended working around its fundamental flaws instead of advancing the development of mankind is astounding. The fact that people would take this paragon of wasted opportunity and use it on the server side, where there are so many better alternatives (to a first approximation, every other programming language ever used), is utterly appalling._

<comment><USER6> Js is clearly very popular. What are these fundamental flaws that js has that this comment mentions? I don't understand why it would be the "paragon of wasted opportunity".

<comment><USER7> let's see... Lack of a real integer type ?

The fact that {} + [], [] + [], [] + {} are all valid and all give different results ? [1]

The fact that it has some silent error conditions like NaN ?

The fact that, in v8 (which is the most common js engine out there), if you add a comment to a function, it can suddenly start performing poorly ?[0]

I love JS, I really do. Hell, I write nodejs for a living ! I find prototypical inheritance to be an awesome idea. The simplicity, and extensibility of the language is something that I really like from it. But I can see where people hating it are coming from. I wish lua had been used instead of JS.

[0]: [https://top.fse.guru/nodejs-a-quick-optimization- advice-7353...](https://top.fse.guru/nodejs-a-quick-optimization- advice-7353b820c92e)

[1]: [https://www.destroyallsoftware.com/talks/wat](https://www.destroyallsoftware.com/talks/wat)

<comment><USER8> Most of the issues you listed with the language itself are fixed by using either Flow or TypeScript. As for that V8 issue, it's not ideal, but how about just putting comments of that size outside of the function, or not overcommenting functions small enough to be inlined.

I know a lot of people view using so much tooling as a con of the language, but if you use Babel + Eslint + Flow/Typescript, JavaScript becomes a lot nicer and safer to program in. For small to mid-sized projects, I think JavaScript is pretty great.

<comment><USER9> > Most of the issues you listed with the language itself are fixed by using > either Flow or TypeScript.

Hence the initial comment about putting effort into fixing something fundamentally broken.

<comment><USER8> Ah true. I guess what I was really getting at was that even though JavaScript has some fundamental missteps, it's not beyond being fixed and definitely not the worst language in existence i.e. that behind the quirks, is a quite nice and powerful language that isn't a waste of effort.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Graphs of the memory hierarchy: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4048204](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4048204)

What's bayesian and frequentist statistics: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4741146](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4741146)

Again: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=384399](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=384399)

DSA math: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6195606](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6195606)

Automotive development: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10496625](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10496625)

QNX and message passing: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9872640](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9872640)

Path through InfoSec: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11710028](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11710028)

What does performance in Erlang mean: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6359493](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6359493)

Emacs and C/C++: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8617300](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8617300)

Money and self-publishing: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8373185](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8373185)

Kerbal Space Program: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12640451](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12640451)

Bush v. Gore: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12187666](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12187666)

Teaching a class: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=818367](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=818367)

Precedence climbing: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13915458](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13915458)

</comment><comment><USER11> Best HN comeback: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35079](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35079)

<comment><USER12> How did I guess this was going to show up again?

<comment><USER13> You do the math.

<comment><USER12> Speaking of math, despite being easily my most _famous_ comment, it's nowhere near being my most _upvoted_ comment.

<comment><USER14> Which is the most upvoted?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> There's a whole series of (long) comments by arcfide [0] about APL, and code in general, in the "Smaller Code, Better Code" thread [1] that I thought were great.

In particular this one [2].

"I'm pushing the other direction. If you can see your entire compiler at one go on a standard computer screen, what sort of possibilities does that open up? You can start thinking at the macro level, and simply avoid a whole host of problems because they are obviously wrong at that level. When you aren't afraid to delete you entire compiler and start from scratch? What sort of possibilities does that open up to you?"

[0] [https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=arcfide](https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=arcfide)

[1] [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13565743](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13565743)

[2] [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13571160](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13571160)

</comment><comment><USER16> [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=287767](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=287767)

 _anamax 3190 days ago | on: So, you 're gonna code the whole thing, do the serv...

If they don't have the money to pay you, you're not an employee, you're a founder and you get the same deal that they get.

If they balk, suggest that they find another code monkey while you find another biz monkey and let the market decide who ends up with the bananas._

</comment><comment><USER17> Here's an old spreadsheet I have of the Top HN Comments (by point score) for each month until October 2014: [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ZwonVX_KlDYhuhPnAAnV...](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ZwonVX_KlDYhuhPnAAnVpdVRgu4LxldP74-c_kvOd5k/edit?usp=sharing)

</comment><comment><USER18> On chef and cucumber: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13209760](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13209760)

On Knuth, C, and Haskell: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12741430](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12741430)

On npm and In Praise of Idleness: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12209300](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12209300)

On revenue: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11307264](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11307264)

On cranks: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10931403](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10931403)

On "Great Men": [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10166372](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10166372)

On the vastness of space: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9937353](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9937353)

Advice from a doctor: [https://www.are.na/block/324266](https://www.are.na/block/324266)

A+ dig at pg: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7140065](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7140065)

A+ troll: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7229519](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7229519)

</comment><comment><USER19> Loved cubano's explanation of how Snapchat would be the end of him sharing networks with his young daughter: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11076284](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11076284)

</comment><comment><USER20> User Steuard explains why EmDrive doesn't work and responds to an ad-hominem attack

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9473209](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9473209)

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9476202](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9476202)

<comment><USER21> Sorry to point out that Steuard comments are as valid as me stating that because I don't understand how to calculate the integral, there can be no way anyone else can . Just because some people don't know how to do something doesn't mean its not possible.

<comment><USER20> > because I don't understand how to calculate the integral, there can be no > way anyone else can > Just because some people don't know how to do > something doesn't mean its not possible.

While this is a wrong place to continue this, I still think that I must answer this.

This analogy is incorrect. Let me rephrase your statement about the integral: "I'm incapable of calculating the integral therefore it cannot be calculated"

It's not a question of human _capabilities_. The problem with EmDrive is not that we say that humans are _incapable_ of inventing a reactionless drive.

The problem is that all working physics theories embed conservation of momentum, and reactionless drives contradict conservation of momentum. This is equivalent to saying "here's a proof this integral cannot be calculated in all useful mathematical formalisms". Please note that there are no "proofs" in physics, and I'm only using this as an analogy.

Of course you could _define_ a formalism that makes it possible to calculate the integral, which EmDrive proponents don't do.

I would be glad to be proven wrong. If there was a rigorous experiment that invalidates all modern physical theories, I would change my mind really fast, so would the majority of scientists. However, EmDrive proponents produce no rigorous experiments. The analogy would be saying "oh those silly mathematicians saying I _couldn 't_ calculate this integral, here's my calculation!" while having many errors in your calculations.

> By the way we saw the same thing in algo trading, were a cabal of finance > professors argued for more than 10years that the EMH theory holds and algo > trading is a hoax. Just saying..

Again, this analogy is incorrect, because you won't find an adequate physicist that disputes conservation of momentum. And EMH was/is disputed.

<comment><USER21> I agree that it might be a false assumption emdrive works. But I don't think you should state that the standard model is evidence of that emdrive cannot work. Again I agree with conservation of momentum, but what if your assumption is wrong? What if emdrive don't violate it? My point is, rather focus your energy on building your own version than throwing out statements which also have no proof.

<comment><USER20> > But I don't think you should state that the standard model is evidence of > that emdrive cannot work

I specifically said that _reactionless_ drives contradict conservation of momentum. This is a direct result of _all_ useful physical theories.

> what if your assumption is wrong? What if emdrive don't violate it?

Believe it or not, but I've answered this question before. If EmDrive doesn't violate conservation of momentum, then according to standard model it cannot produce more thrust than a photon drive, which makes EmDrive utterly useless.

> My point is, rather focus your energy on building your own version [...]

My own version: EmDrive inventor is a crackpot, which can be deduced from papers he writes and statements he makes. I'm not obliged to explain every single crackpot claim. The burden of proof is on the side making extraordinary claims.

> [...] than throwing out statements which also have no proof

Please quote specific statements rather than making broad accusation of baseless speech.

I'm tired of dissecting every single one of your sentences.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> Raise your rates: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4247615](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4247615)

</comment><comment><USER23> This one, about doing 40 million req/s in Lua on a single box, still blows my mind. [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7180672](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7180672)

</comment><comment><USER24> This one about furniture and why there's no okay quality furniture: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13743311](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13743311)

</comment><comment><USER25> [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4759660](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4759660) edw519's response to "I am a terrible programmer"

</comment><comment><USER26> This history lesson.

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9048947](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9048947)

</comment><comment><USER27> [https://news.ycombinator.com/favorites?id=shpx&comments=t](https://news.ycombinator.com/favorites?id=shpx&comments=t)

JumpCrisscross's comment about perfectionism being bad [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12729864](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12729864) and pg with a similar thought [https://twitter.com/paulg/status/855342574063800320](https://twitter.com/paulg/status/855342574063800320)

</comment><comment><USER28> [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4540459](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4540459)

This one from 'How To Die With No Regrets'

</comment><comment><USER29> Dan Luu has a good list of HN comments: [https://danluu.com/hn- comments/](https://danluu.com/hn-comments/)

</comment><comment><USER30> The HN comment - "comeback of all time".

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35079](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35079)

The thing I liked about the thread is also has Drew Houston from Dropbox talking about his then startup idea.

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35095](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35095)

</comment><comment><USER31> About the "free choice" when you sign some Terms of Service: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12958035](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12958035)

Why backdoors are bad: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12751461](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12751461)

</comment><comment><USER32> some of my most-upvoted comments...

energy systems [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8386603](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8386603)

delayed IPOs [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13831214](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13831214)

desktop v mobile [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7182345](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7182345)

free fruit [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10728601](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10728601)

role of self-experimentation [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13965307](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13965307)

</comment><comment><USER33> burntsushi's performance analysis of string parsing in Rust vs. Go: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13268051](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13268051)

I learned quite a few things about both Rust and Go!

</comment><comment><USER34> Related, I am learning to code and in the process I built this simple website that randomly shows the most upvoted HN comments:

[http://www.opusnota.com/hnbc](http://www.opusnota.com/hnbc)

<comment><USER17> HN comment scores are not public, so I am unsure how you find the "most upvoted comments"

<comment><USER34> Algolia's API show votes for older comments (not sure how old is the line when it stops showing).

Edit: naturally, there is a strong bias for older comments in the list.

Code I use:

<comment><USER17> The Algolia API cutoff for comment scores is October 2014. (which I know because it was cut off after I made a blog post on the subject: [http://minimaxir.com/2014/10/hn-comments-about- comments/](http://minimaxir.com/2014/10/hn-comments-about-comments/))

There have been quite a few good comments since then.

It is worse to make an incredibly biased list than no list at all.

<comment><USER34> It is just a learning project. Feel free to not access it and downvote my comment advertising it if you think it is dangerous.

<comment><USER17> My comment was not a criticism, but a warning. It is very important to note where the data is coming from and any associated caveats which may influence the results.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> Ask HN: What do you use Machine Learning for? - [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14358120](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14358120)

</comment><comment><USER36> This one will always be my favourite: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7932261](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7932261)

<comment><USER37> I love that. Sometimes the lack of whimsy on HN wrecks my head.

</comment></comment><comment><USER38> Nice idea. I actually save the gems I find here. So in no particular order, wisdom from the archives -

enobrev 673 days ago on 'The self-hating web developer':

> _I 've always been a fan of collecting money for solving problems and > letting others worry about whether what I'm doing qualifies as "real" > programming. Knowing how to listen to potential clients has gotten me a lot > further than worrying whether PHP is a real programming language._

\- \- -

kingsidharth 2356 days ago on 'Evernote makes $800,000 per Month':

> _This is the biggest mistake most of the people make. If it worked that way, > every weekend app released here would be making tons of money. (We have > better apps here as weekend projects than out there in market).But this is > NOT app v /s app game. This is business v/s app. And you can't take down a > business with an app. You need to create a business._

\- \- -

knob 1217 days ago on Your best passive income? (2014):

ozh: > _" Do some freelancing during office hours & double the income."_

viach: > _This would not be passive._

knob: > _You have to think bigger man. Outsource the outsourcement... Interact with top-level outsourcer once per week... he interacts with low-level outsourcer daily. Profit._

\- \- -

mcphage 653 days ago on Japanese mini Segway "WalkCar":

> _" Can you remember the Segway?"_

> _Yeah._

> _" And how we all thought of it as the new way of human transportation?"_

> _No, I don 't remember that bit._

\- \- -

cableshaft 619 days ago on ''Give Away Your Legos' and Other Commandments for Scaling Startups':

pbreit: > _I dunno, hopping on board the rocket ship still seems a lot easier than building the rocket ship._

cableshaft: > _But building the rocket ship is more fun. Especially if you know it 's going to explode midair once it's launched and you don't have to be in it when it does._

\- \- -

graycat 760 days ago on First Round Capital Open Application for Startups:

> _Can a solo founder of an IT startup hope to be successful without equity > funding? Should be: All across the US, cross roads to the largest cities, > solo founders do well mowing grass, selling pizza or hamburgers, pumping > gas, paving driveways, ..., big-truck, little-truck distribution businesses, > etc. without equity funding. IT should be an advantage._

\- \- -

puranjay 838 days ago on 'Why Learning to Code Is So Damn Hard':

> _I have the same issue (find the time). I 've set aside 10pm-2am every > weekday to learn how to code, plus entire Saturdays and Sunday mornings. I > can, at most, manage 20-25 hours, usually when I'm already bogged down. I've > been toying with the idea of quitting everything and going all-in for 3-6 > months. Would that be 100% retarded or just about 70% retarded? I can live > with 70%._

\- \- -

And my favorite:

blake8086 1962 days ago on 'How Trello is different':

spolsky: > _We wouldn 't provide that kind of support, nor would be it be expected, for a free and easy-to-use product._

blake8086: > _I think you deeply underestimate the sense of entitlement people get about products they enter lots of text into._

</comment><comment><USER39> I really love this comment on finding a job at a startup by patio11: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11118880](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11118880)

So much so that the comment and surrounding discussion is much more valuable than the actual article it's on! Has helped me and many people I know interview at phenomenal companies.

</comment><comment><USER40> Failure by fiaz

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=121413](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=121413)

</comment><comment><USER41> [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14225059](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14225059)

This one for me, it's so apt for HN.

Edit. I'm laughing, didn't take long for the down vote!

Come on guys, take a joke will ya!

</comment><comment><USER11> This one, about recursion: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14396692](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14396692)

<comment><USER42> How did you do it? Put some text in first get the id and edit the comment to retroactively add the link to itself?

<comment><USER43> Yup, that's the easiest way.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER44> From user smacktoward:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7314434](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7314434)

> For all the intellectual firepower of people in the tech community, there is > a curious strain of anti-intellectualism that comes forth in projects like > this; an eagerness to discount the expertise of people who have studied a > subject for their entire lives, just because they weren't CS majors. It's > like trying to send a man to the moon without working with any aerospace > engineers. I honestly do not understand it.</comment>