Twitter temporarily bans Donald Trump from tweeting - <AUTHOR> https://mashable.com/article/twitter-temporarily-bans-donald-trump/ <comment><USER2> "UPDATE: Aug. 5, 2020, 6:07 p.m. PDT: A Twitter spokesperson incorrectly confirmed via email that the account of @realDonaldTrump was temporarily banned from tweeting. Instead, as the Washington Post now reports, it was the account of the Trump team, @TeamTrump, that was temporarily banned."

</comment><comment><USER3> they got banned on a technicality: they said children are almost immune from covid. this, to a regular person means there is almost no danger to children. which is absolutely true. so the thing to do here, is to ditch twitter and move to a free platform. one that let's you post text, and for others to reply. so about a thousand other services. twitter can do what it wants, and we are free not to use it. free speech is free speech, and to have our government's speech censored by corporations is just funny.</comment>


Why Can't the I.R.S. Help Fill in the Blanks? - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/24/business/24digi.html

<comment><USER2> I lived and worked in Norway for several years, and each year I received a pre-filled tax return from the government. If I recall correctly, I had three choices:

\- Send a PIN code by mobile phone which acted as a digital signature to file "as is"

\- Log in to central location on the Internet and click a button to file "as is"

\- Sign it and send it in.

If I needed to make adjustments, then only the third option was viable (I only had to do that once).

It literally took me less than 5 minutes to verify and send in. Fairly painless - the only pain being in the amount of taxes I paid, Norway being a socialist country, and all.

The resistance from third party tax preparation companies and software providers reminds me of the Parable of the Broken Window <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_broken_window>

<comment><USER3> Accountants need to eat too (to paraphrase a rallying cry of the music/creative industries).

<comment><USER4> Accountants are relatively talented people and should be doing useful work, not makework.

<comment><USER5> I Agree. My father is an accountant and hate doing taxes. He would much prefer a more simple method like this where it would be harder for errors to occur and avoid lengthy audits. He makes much less from those government audits than from other type work.

The complexity of the Tax code is also stupid. A lot of it could be simplified but that would eliminate government jobs quickly. Accountants won't care, there's a lot of lucrative work that still needs be done. In fact, most tax returns aren't done by CPA (or CA in Canada) anyway. H&R Block and others might be pissed and try to block this but they charge too much anyway.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> _Requiring taxpayers to file returns without being told what the government already knows makes as much sense "as if Visa sent customers a blank piece of paper, requiring that they assemble their receipts, list their purchases — and pay a fine if they forget one," said Joseph Bankman, a professor at the Stanford Law School._

Agree.

The problem is that the "big box accounting shops" like H&R Block, Jackson Hewett, et al. throw their weight around and complain. Paper tax returns are horribly inefficient, but that's how the big box accounting shops make the majority of their income.

Given that taxes (withheld) are essentially an interest-free loan to the government, it seems _more_ than logical that the government could pay a "dividend" of sorts to people by simplifying the filing process without the use of some overpaid H&R Block agent, a CPA or tax lawyer.

<comment><USER7> Wow, isn't a democracy with such a powerful lobby grand?

<comment><USER8> It's even better now that the supreme court ruled that they can start spending as much as they want on political advertising. :-(

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> The core issue isn't "the government already has this data".

The core issue is "the how-much-tax-do-you-owe algorithm is terrificly complicated". Sure X counts as income ... unless you're blind, or you've got 3 kids, or you adopted a windpower system conforming to X,Y,Z standards during the tax year (but not between 1 July and 15 Aug), etc., etc., etc.

Why is the code base so complicated?

Look to something called "public choice theory". If the tax system is really complicated and easy for politicians to modify, then they can sell modifications to the tax code to campaign donors (never listed in the clear as "Joe's Trucking pays no taxes this year", but always obscured as "a measure relating to certain income deductions for firms within 16 miles of an interstate but not more than 24 miles from a navigable body of water connecting to the Mississippi, excluding all firms that have filed for a rebate on depreciable expenses in the preceding four tax years".

As long as the tax code is monstrously complex and rapidly changing, it's a nightmare to keep a SOFTWARE code base in sync with a LEGAL code base.

</comment><comment><USER10> I have moderately complex tax affairs here in the UK. Each year it takes about an hour.

I log on to the Revenue and Customs website, it asks me some basic questions about what I'd like to declare and then optimises the sections of the 'form' I need to fill in. So for example I don't need to declare any offshore assets so I never see that section of the form.

At the end it presents me with the entire form which I can download as a PDF for personal filing. I declare it to be true by clicking a check box and I send a cheque to the government (or in a bad year they send me a cheque).

It's all SO easy. They have a great phone line with people who answer questions honestly.

The only caveat being that you should do it well before the January deadline for personal tax as the website gets a bit slow in January.

<comment><USER11> You're lucky. When I did it the site kept crashing. It was more awkward in my opinion than you seem to make out. However, from what I gather it's nothing compared to the US system.

<comment><USER10> I have had it stumble a few times. I usually just log out and log back in. Only once has it lost any information from a previous session.

I'll admit there is a chance I've been lucky but I still think it's a great system.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> If you read product reviews for Intuit's software on Amazon, you'll find that it's horrible and most people have to suffer through using it because they have no choice. A huge market exists for tax and accounting software, especially for small businesses, until the IRS figures out how to do it for us. eg: [http://www.amazon.com/Intuit-409578-QuickBooks-2010-for/prod...](http://www.amazon.com/Intuit-409578-QuickBooks-2010-for/product- reviews/B002KINBBU/ref=cm_cr_pr_hist_1?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=0&filterBy=addOneStar)

<comment><USER13> I suspect that's mostly people complaining about the actual byzantine nature of our tax code and the inherent complexity that it causes. Plus, they're in a bad mood realizing just what all that government cheese is costing them personally.

I doubt that it's actual disatisfaction with TurboTax itself. (No connection with Intuit, other than a happy user of their products for almost 2 decades now.)

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> For several years I didn't file on time, rather I filed for a 6 month extension. Then I would walk over to the I.R.S. office during lunch and request all my reported income. Those are the forms that I used to file at H&R Block.

This was much easier than me keeping up with all the W-2 forms that arrived in the mail at different times.

I asked the I.R.S. agent why I couldn't just use this method to file by 4/15 and he said that they don't have all the info together until about the sixth month.

I agree with the article but I think the real problem is all the deductions that people tell the I.R.S..

<comment><USER15> Why did you stop?

<comment><USER14> well this year I bought a condo and want to file for the 8K tax credit sooner rather than later.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> One big reason is fraud: It's much easier to catch someone who is trying to lie to you if you don't start by telling them what you know.

<comment><USER17> Ah, but, it is possible to call the national tax hotline and find out exactly how much income has been reported in connection with you via W-2s and 1099s. In fact, many people who don't keep good records have to do this every year just to find out how to start calculating their AGI.

It's a rather obscure feature, but it can be done.

<comment><USER18> Interesting. How safe is this hotline? does it log callers and automatically mark them for eye-balling?

Gonna have to ask around about this.

<comment><USER17> I am not sure of the details. For all I know, it may involve speaking to a live person, and in so doing may be a red flag for an audit. I've just heard about it...

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Coming from Denmark I can tell that you that we do get pre filled Tax papers. Often there is nothing to change.

The fraud part has nothing to do with whether they can prefill papers or not. In fact even if they do make mistakes they will often catch them a year later.

So it's in your interest to make sure the numbers are correct.

Most often they are.

Also if you think about it. The investment the IRS should invest in getting a system that makes it possible to do this would be an investment easily paid back.

Having a incremental tax system it do require you to tell your expected annual salary up front as this will affect how much you are taxed. But it's all pretty automated theses days.

</comment><comment><USER15> Timely article as I sit here filling out my returns thinking at every step "doesn't the government already have this information somewhere? and if I were to get audited, wouldn't they just call on those same resources?"

There are probably no more than 4 things I would have to add (charitable contributions, out of country property ownership, working abroad income, etc.) to make it complete. Literally everything I'm typing in has already been submitted, withholdings, gross incoming, marital status, employer(s), stock ownership, education, medical expenses and insurance, personal property and on and on and on.

</comment><comment><USER20> TurboTax can download my W2 from ADP (our payroll provider) and get the rest from my previous tax return. Then it submits it all via e-file

(This isn't an ad for TurboTax since I assume all the other packages also do this)

In the end I didn't have to type a single thing this year. Just click continue and a few radio buttons. Which I assume is what it's like for most people with simple returns.

<comment><USER21> Downloading the W-2 never worked for me (and I worked for the University of California, so not a small employer). I suspect the number of people that can download their W-2 is small. Same for the 1099 forms, not a very high success rate.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> This would be a dream-like scenario for Germany. Here you have to fill out all the fax forms you get sent (empty) and include copies of all receipts. This includes receipts of your payroll, earnings from bank accounts, etc. They have a new software so that you can submit your tax return online but there is nothing pre-filled unfortunately.

<comment><USER23> Well you have to keep the receipts, but you don't have to send them in.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> The South African Revenue Services implemented e-filing two years ago, with great success. Most income tax payers can file online in minutes, using information gathered from employers. IIRC, the number of tax Rands gathered rised significantly.

Obviously, fraud can be commited by omitting income generated from non- registered employers or informal employment, but as far as I know, they keep quite close tabs on people's bank accounts.

One factor that contributed to the success of the initiative, is the ease with which companies can submit their employees details, using software provided for free by SARS.

</comment><comment><USER25> I wish Dan Brown novels were 1% as complex as the US Tax Code. At least then they would've been interresting...</comment>


Instapaper for Retina iPad - <AUTHOR> http://www.marco.org/2012/03/16/instapaper-for-retina-ipad

<comment><USER2> I'm very impressed by the year over year continued refinements and improvements to Instapaper. Back in 2008[1] Marco mentioned he only spends a few hours a week on it. I wonder how many hours a week he spends on it these days.

[1]: <http://blog.instapaper.com/post/60070053>

<comment><USER3> He left Tumblr back in 2010 to work full-time on it.

<http://techcrunch.com/2010/09/21/marco-arment-instapaper/>

<comment><USER2> Ah yes I remember that now. Thanks for the reminder!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Instapaper is one of the main reasons I got an iPad 3.

<comment><USER5> That doesn't really make much sense. If reading articles is your main application for the device, why not buy the iPad 2 especially after the huge price drop?

<comment><USER6> Because the retina display makes it so much better for reading.

<comment><USER7> More beautiful, sure, but _better_? I doubt it, my guess is it'll strain your eyes just as much as any other backlit display.

<comment><USER4> I've been relatively happy with the IPS panel in the iPad 1 not straining my eyes. My main gripe is that the brightness of the backlight doesn't go low enough -- in a dark room (i.e. in bed with no lights and someone else sleeping nearby), it would be nice to be able to use the iPad with very minimal backlight. E-Ink would require a book light (which is kind of lame). This seems to be one of the places where OLED would be superior.

It's frustrating that IPS LCD, OLED, and E-Ink all have such distinct advantages, so the idea of having a single device with the best screen in all contexts isn't really possible. I assume OLED will eventually be that.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I uncovered a bug when naively recompiling a universal (iPad/iPhone) app with the 5.1 SDK. The app had high-res assets for the iPhone but not the iPad.

Apparently the @2x modifier takes precedence over the -Landscape and -Portrait modifiers, resulting in retina iPads preferentially using the high-res iPhone launch screen over the low-res iPad launch screen (which are optimized for each launch orientation).

So you end up with a mildly- (portrait) or greatly-distorted (landscape) launch image on high-res iPads if you simply recompile. I imagine this is what Apple was trying to avoid, with reneging on what their API docs say about modifier precedence.

</comment><comment><USER9> The screenshot is looking great. Ignoring form factor, is the new iPad going to match Kindle's reading quality? I generally read fiction on the Kindle (2nd gen) and anything that has graphics or requires rapid page turning on the iPad (1G).

<comment><USER10> Having used a retina screen iPhone and iPod I'd say in my opinion the new iPad (which I haven't seen) is going to far exceed the kindle's screen in readability.

Where I think kindle probably still has the edge is in ergonomics, specifically weight. The iPad is too heavy for me to hold like I would a physical book. (but I make do with this fact and use it anyway as one... and I've got the heavier first generation iPad.)

All the other things the iPad does have a big impact, but as a pure reading device (iBooks is my killer app) the iPad is working out great for me, so I look forward to getting a third generation.

<comment><USER11> It does make me wonder if a higher DPI screen would really help the Kindle in readability. Or if the major issue now is just the contrast.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Competition is good. Readability is certainly making him stepup. I still think ignoring android is a mistake (assuming he continues to do so in the future.). I foresee sharing happening within these read later apps and the size of the network matters.

<comment><USER13> I don't really know. Assuming that this is a free market, I think the fact that nobody stepped up on Android (with a noticeable success) is probably an indicator of the fact this could not be an error. More seriously (hoping we can have a quiet discussion about differences in market between iOS and Android): Instapaper makes (probably serious) money selling the app. Can you make (serious) money in Android without Ads and without going the freemium way? Enough money to justify the additional effort and the fact that this will probably slow the development on the current platform?

<comment><USER14> Marco has implied that he makes a "six figure income" from it (on the Planet Money podcast) but has never given more details than that that I'm aware of.

My reading of a lot of the commercial Android developer pieces is not that it's impossible to make money on Android, just that where you have limited resources it tends to be the case that they can more profitably be utilised on iOS work. The issue for someone like Marco where it's just him is is less can you make money in Android (with or without ads, that's kind of secondary), more is working on an Android version going to bring him more money than putting that same effort into keeping Instapaper close to the top of the iOS pile.

Obviously if you're a company with several programmers and you're happy with that model then so long as the cost of building an Android version is less than money it brings in, it makes sense because you can just bring in someone else to do it without detracting from your other work. If you're a one man band (or similarly small outfit) with no interest in taking on and managing more people it might not.

<comment><USER15> May I ask is that "six figure income" is per month?

<comment><USER14> He didn't specify.

Essentially he was talking about what an iOS developer "might" earn. If memory serves he pitched that the equivalent of a six figure salary was possible / reasonable if you were successful and I think agreed that that was the sort of thing he was getting.

Obviously that puts it at between $100,000 and $999,999 a year, so fairly wide error bars on that.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> I didn't know Marco had a podcast until I heard about it in this thread. Got it this morning and I'm listening to him say how he was ready for iPad Retina back in October. I've had that being ahead of the game feeling before then something comes along at the end to throw a wrench in it. I think that's why releasing/shipping is such a good feeling.

Even then, once I built the free version of my app without a necessary ObjC linker flag and shipped it with a bug that caused it to crash on a couple of screens. Was always testing in debug mode...

</comment><comment><USER17> _This is slightly embarrassing: Instapaper doesn't show Retina-resolution graphics on the new iPad yet._

It's only slightly embarrassing for Apple's culture of product secrecy, which prevents them from releasing tools in time for devs to have gear ready for release.

<comment><USER11> I'm pretty sure the simulator that devs use supports the Retina iPad, and was available before release date. The tricky bit is that the Retina iPad is higher resolution that most people's desktops, so simulation becomes difficult.

<comment><USER8> I saw a tweet from him the other day saying he's got a 2650x1600 display (HP ZR20W, I believe). So that just barely fits.

The simulator now scrolls, however, so you could in theory test retina iPad apps full size in portrait mode on an 11" MacBook Air.

My 27" iMac (2650x1440) isn't quite tall enough even in landscape mode, but it's not unusable thanks to the scrolling.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Just got the update Marco. You nailed it with the new fonts. Looks really nice in retina!

</comment><comment><USER19> > _the new selection of six beautiful, professional fonts designed for maximum > legibility and long-form reading_

I haven't been following the iPad 3 closely. Are these new fonts included with iPad 3, or are they included with the Instapaper app? If it's the latter, are they available elsewhere? I'm still on the lookout for a nice serif font that looks good on screen.

<comment><USER20> From the developper's podcast, these are custom fonts included in the app, that he bought from foundries directly.</comment></comment>


Is cryopreservation still relevant if we can build digital brain models? - <AUTHOR>

<comment><USER2> It depends of if you consider a copy of your mind to be "you" in any real sense. If there was an exact copy of me right now, I would not consider that copy "me" \- rather it would be a duplicate person, but not me. There could be 10,000 identical duplicates of my brain out there and not one of them would be me. That being said I doubt that freezing has any chance at all of actually being able to revive someone to their previous mental state...

<comment><USER3> Technically you are not the same person as the 5 year old you. Every cell has been replaced.

It would only be a facsimile of you at a specific moment in time... which would make each facsimile on parallel paths... scary

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Yes, for the Catholics who believe storage kills your soul.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altered_Carbon](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altered_Carbon)

</comment><comment><USER5> Oh come on, chances of either of those ideas working within the next 1,000 years are effectively zero.

We get 80 years if we are lucky, and we waste so many of them, that wondering if we could get a magic save point is foolish.

Take those valuable brain cycles and work on fixing code used by cancer research charities

<comment><USER6> Slicing up a brain and scanning it with a microscope is something we can do fairly well now. Given that the EU just put a billion euros towards a brain modeling project, I'd say the odds aren't so bad. I'd bet on it happening by the end of the century.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> No. Here's a billionaire's ambitious and "plausible" plan on transfering his brain into a model and using a holographic body rather than a physical one. [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=01hbkh4hXEk](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=01hbkh4hXEk)</comment>


Far from Utopia: Jeff Bezos and the Space Cowboys - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/dialogue-and-discourse/far-from-utopia-jeff-bezos-and-the-space-cowboys-97214a1cbcff <comment><USER2> Bezos's space plans strike me as typical billionaire transhumanist nonsense. Instead of working to make our own planet better (the only one humanity has ever known), they think we should leave.

To my way of thinking, this is shortsighted, amoral, unacheivable, and frankly ridiculous.</comment>


Sweden Has a Sub So Deadly the US Navy Hired It to Play Bad Guy (2014) - <AUTHOR> http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/sweden-has-a-sub-thats-so-deadly-the-us-navy-hired-it-t-1649695984 <comment><USER2> Sweden has a sub so small....

The US wanted to train against attack subs that are much smaller than what Russia is using since North Korea and Iran were developing small subs that can be used in effectively what would be suicide missions against US carrier groups.

Sweden built a small sub because it cannot afford large ones and because it allows the sub to operate in shallow water and the narrow passes in the fjords.

Since the US can't ask North Korea to play the red team since they do it in real life they've rented a Swedish sub as an agressor.

<comment> bjelkeman-again I don't think the Swedish navy needs a bigger submarine. The use case was only for defending Swedish territorial water and there wasn't need for a bigger one.

<comment><USER3> Also, Sweden does not need a sub that can travel the world under its own power.

From the article, a larger ship was used to move the sub from Swedish waters to the Pacific for these war games.

Nuclear subs can go wherever they want, whenever they want.

For Swedish use, however, the sub will never have to be far from home, so the tradeoff is worth it for them.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> So, a small country develop their own high tech sub, airplane [0] , ships [1], special modification of one of the most advanced tanks [2], special order helicopter from EU project, advanced artillery [3] and light tank [4]. And I probably missed a few other expensive toys.

So how good are their defense? ~1 week will it take to invade Sweden according to them self... With the help of the militia. [5].

My concern is that they basically just develop expensive military stuff because they want to feed the industry. A political dance with money.

[0] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saab_JAS_39_Gripen](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saab_JAS_39_Gripen)

[1] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visby- class_corvette](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visby-class_corvette)

[2] [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stridsvagn_122](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stridsvagn_122)

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

[4] [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combat_Vehicle_90](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combat_Vehicle_90)

[5] [https://www.svd.se/forsvar-med-tidsgrans](https://www.svd.se/forsvar-med- tidsgrans) (swedish)

<comment><USER5> Well, in the article you refers to in link 5 I think between the lines they are talking about russia, I dont think any small country can withstand a attack by a former super power for very long no matter their army bt it might serve them well to have a good defence for deterance.

I dont see who else in the neighborhood would and could attack sweden in all seriousness.

<comment><USER6> Finland begs to differ:

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

<comment><USER7> In all fairness, that was before the advent of modern weaponry, including precision guided munitions, cruise missiles etc. I highly doubt, for instance, Finnish supply chains would survive a sustained attack by Russia today.

<comment><USER6> Afghanistan begs to differ :-)

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_Afghanistan_(2001%E2%80...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_Afghanistan_\(2001%E2%80%932014\))

<comment><USER7> The US invaded Afghanistan in a matter of months. What is being questioned here is not the ability of Russia to hold control over Finland, but whether it could quickly topple its Sovereign government, which it couldn't do in the linked war.

<comment><USER6> They invaded, but that's not "winning".

Plenty of people died and the US didn't really accomplish very much on the ground. Karzai has very weak control and his enemies multiply.

Vietnam could also be used - they just destroyed us with attrition and a culture that had acceptance of heavy losses.

Fancy weapons aren't a panacea - "war is politics by other means" \- the people in the end are all that matter.

<comment><USER7> Whoever talked about winning? Do you have a point you want to make or do you just want to have the last word? I have specifically stated that the question was not whether the war was won, but whether an invading military could quickly topple the country and gain control over it.

The Vietnam war was never fought as a war of invasion, but rather one of propping up an anti-communist ally. They are not the same.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> CIA and Pentagon forced Finland to cancel this: [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mir_(submersible)](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mir_\(submersible\)) (too good submarine)

<comment><USER9> it's wasn't the submersible, which only had extremely limited military uses, it was the transfer of advanced technology to the USSR.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Not mentioned in the title, but Sweden thinks they have surrounded an enemy sub in their territorial waters! Pretty crazy.

<comment><USER2> Russian subs patrol those waters all the time they like pushing boundaries it's nothing new really.

<comment><USER11> These kinds of activities are really immature for adults regardless of country

<comment><USER12> Assessing the reaction and capabilities of a country you might one day be at war against? Seems fairly sane to me even though I don't particularly like Russia nor do I want them to go to war with anyone.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Here's a nice article on Air-Independent-Propulsion (AIP) submarines: [http://www.hisutton.com/World%20survey%20of%20AIP%20submarin...](http://www.hisutton.com/World%20survey%20of%20AIP%20submarines.html)

The Swedish Gotland class was the world's first purpose-built AIP sub.

<comment><USER2> It wasn't it's was the first and I think only subs that use a Stirling engine based AIP that runs on LOX but AIPs were present in subs since WW2.

<comment><USER9> Yes, the first operational was a german uboat only launched a few weeks before end of WWII.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I wonder what the shift arrangement is for the crew of 24. Do they have some laws in Sweden about working hours so that the vessel only needs six crew but has a staff of 24 to cover all shifts and weekends?

If everything could be automated to video-game easy so that you didn't need someone to chuck more rods in the nuclear reactor or do things with bilge pumps, what would be the minimum complement for a submarine that played the deterrent role, lurking under the waves for months at a time?

The problem (allegedly) with submarines is remote control drone submarines that are clever enough to know how to communicate. Apparently it is possible to program one submarine to follow another without having to carry 24 people plus their lunches, dinners and oxygen supply. There is a danger that mutually assured destruction assured by submarines with nuclear weapons could end.

<comment><USER15> Probably something like 3 watch sections of 8 sailors, with additional working hours off-watch. (I don't know why anybody would want a weekend off aboard that bitty-little boat anyway.) At least in 'merica, the military is exempt from labor laws.

 _Choose your rate, choose your fate._

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> Is there any requirement to disclose possession of a submarine like this? If it were I, as a military commander, I would rather enjoy having a few of these lurk until I had to play my had.

then again, IANAGeneral ;)

<comment><USER12> Sub's do sort of do that already to some extent, their whereabouts is not normally a matter of public record - they could be lurking anywhere.

If you were ordering submarines around you'd more likely be an Admiral :P

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> Did anyone else think that the language used in this article was really hyperbolic and over-dramatic? Loads of unnecessary superlatives I thought.

</comment><comment><USER18> They mention that the submarine uses liquid oxygen. How are they storing this cryogenic liquid, and compressing it? I imagine that would take a ridiculous amount of equipment, and power in the first place?

<comment><USER3> I imagine that it is topped up by either a tender ship or at port.

This sub was shipped to the Pacific in another ship for the war games, indicating that it is not practical for it to travel that far on its own.</comment></comment>


Do Tech Contractors Earn More Than Full-Time Employees? - <AUTHOR> https://insights.dice.com/2019/02/21/contractors-earn-full-time-employees-2019/ <comment><USER2> No. This article is trying to imply that because a staffing agency is paid more the contractor is. That is FALSE! The staffing agency takes a large cut, while they pay the contract worker as little as possible. A Contractor is not an employee. Look at the lawsuit: vizcaino v microsoft

Contractors dont get the bonus's, the benefits or the same level of compensation a normal employee gets. The contract worker system is abused by many companies for tax purposes, while contractors get paid less, with bad benifits but do alot of work while full time employee's get the credit.</comment>


GRPC.io is interestingly different from CORBA - <AUTHOR> http://eighty-twenty.org/2015/08/28/grpc-dot-io.html <comment><USER2> I've been using gRPC for the last several months. It's a reasonably nice API and integrates nicely in with protobuf, which I think is it's main draw. We were already passing data around as protobufs, so we just took the dive.

Unfortunately, gRPC is still very much at the release level of "it works at Google and also on some developers laptop once", so while we haven't really encountered any bugs, dealing with gRPC has been a bit of a devops headache. That being said, we don't have a full-time devops person or anything, and I bet someone who knew their way around automated configuration and deployment better than myself could handle gRPC fine.

<comment><USER3> In what languages have you been using it ?

<comment><USER4> Don't know about the OP, but I've tried it with Python and Go. The Go stuff works pretty well, the Python stuff is buggy and incomplete (and the code looks overengineered)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Cap'n'Proto (& by extension Sandstorm) very much intends to allow references (capabilities) to be passed around, which is in direct conflict with the "#1 and in bold" on this list, gRPC being "first-order", which I think the author is saying means that systems have to marshal all the data to communicate.

This is discussed- in relation to Sandstorm- in a Sandstorm blog post dating from last December. Other notables- the post mentions CORBA explicitly, and it discusses persisting capabilities (anti "First Class" objects extreme if I'm reading OP right). [https://blog.sandstorm.io/news/2014-12-15-capnproto-0.5.html](https://blog.sandstorm.io/news/2014-12-15-capnproto-0.5.html)

<comment><USER6> I assume that the author is indeed referring to the fact that all APIs are about simple, marshallable values. You can't pass references to a remote server, and the remote server can't return a reference to a remove object.

I don't know Cap'n'Proto's RPC at all (I looked at it briefly for some projects, but rejected it since we needed Ruby support), but I've worked with CORBA, Microsoft's COM (specifically, DCOM) and Java's RMI. These all let you pass around references to remote objects.

The danger in these systems is that that every API is locality-transparent, you don't know if any given call will be to remote object or a local object. You can be super careful about what you pass around, and still end up doing remote calls by accident.

It also leads to "normalized" API designs that too easily incur 1+N roundtrips even for basic information retrieval; for example, an endpoint that returns Book[], where each book has an Author, accessing book.author ends up with a network roundtrip to get the author.

I very much prefer the dumb-but-explicit approach where APIs only exchange data, and you only exchange data.

Another big challenge that DCOM struggled (and, I think, CORBA and RMI) with was object releasing. DCOM, for example, had explicit reference counting. This meant that a client could hold onto an instance for a long time, and that while doing so the server also had to keep the instance around. If a client died, keepalive logic in the DCOM framework would eventually release the object.

Perhaps the biggest challenge in any DCOM server was thread safety. Since any client could come in on a separate thread, your entire API model had to be thread-safe, or rely on thread-safe wrappers that acted as proxies for your real internal data objects.

I should say that locality transparency is very nice to work with — until you start having issues.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> I've been testing gRPC a bit. It's promising, but the tools are clearly alpha quality, so if you're going to build apps on top of it, you're in for some early-adopter hurt.

For example, you need the latest Protobuf 3.0 beta release, which no current OS distro currently has, and build gRPC from source. The language-specific packages (Ruby, Node, etc.) have releases that lag behind gRPC itself, so you'll probably have to build those from source, too (linking directly to HEAD from a Gemfile or package.json doesn't work, last I checked). Performance also seems decidedly lackluster, though it's been a few months since I did some casual benchmarking.

As for the API and feel of the library, it's similar to Thrift, and much like CORBA without the OO and attempts at location transparency. With the current generators, you'll get some low-level and not very friendly wrappers generated from the Protobuf declarations that don't attempt to hide the fact that you're writing RPC requests and responses as Protobuf structs.

One disappointing aspect of gRPC at this point is the lack of discoverability. Clients have to connect to a specific host and port, and you have to build your own glue based on ZooKeeper/etcd/Consul/DNS/whatever. Since no fault tolerance is built in, things like retries and load balancing is left as an exercise for the reader.

<comment><USER8> That is good to know. Do you have any recommendations for a more mature version of grpc (cross-platform communication with a high speed encoding)? Thrift?

<comment><USER7> I've never used Thrift. One option I have evaluated is NATS [1], which is a very fast, non-persistent, distributed MQ written in Go, with client libs in all sorts of languages. It's extremely fast and supports RPC-style request/response.

You get load balancing and discoverability for free, since NATS will distribute messages equally to consumers: Just fire up new consumers, and they will get messages to the topics they subscribe to, and all a client needs is the host/port of the NATS server, which is going to be the same for all parties. Couple that with some hand-coded serialization — Protobuf, Msgpack or even JSON — and you have a fairly resilient, fault-tolerant RPC.

You could trivially do streaming RPC if you handled the request/response matching yourself — if you look at the clients, NAT's RPC is all handled on the client side, using ordinary messages with a unique topic name generated for each request/response. Extending it to support multiple replies per request would be simple.

There are other, more feature-rich message queues, of course, such as RabbitMQ. NATS' advantage is that it's extremely simple.

Another option is ZeroMQ, but it's a bit lower-level and doesn't solve the discoverability part. You'll end up writing much more glue for each client and server.

[1] [http://nats.io](http://nats.io)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> We've been building a new system that uses gRPC. We really like the gRPC model and will eventually switch over most of our internal rpc systems to use it.

The main benefit we get from gRPC vs something like thrift is a nice way to do bidirectional streaming.

</comment><comment><USER10> "Much of the complexity I saw with CORBA was to do with trying to pass object (i.e. service endpoint) references back and forth in a transparent way. Drop that misfeature, and everything from the IDL to the protocol to the frameworks to the error handling to the implementations of services themselves will be much simpler."

Drop that misfeature and you have no reason to invoke its name in the same breath as CORBA, other than to confound people under the age of 35.

</comment><comment><USER11> I find it hard to take seriously w/o exceptions.

<comment><USER9> Does HTTP have exceptions? No, it has error codes and error messages. gRPC is a protocol. Implementors can choose to use exceptions or not, but that choice is tangential to the actual protocol.

<comment><USER12> That is right. gRPC and Google APIs share one simple error model, as defined by [https://github.com/google/googleapis/blob/master/google/rpc/...](https://github.com/google/googleapis/blob/master/google/rpc/status.proto). The goal is to make it easier for developers to handle errors.

PS: I was the co-author of it.</comment></comment></comment>


Funnel: functional distributed monitoring system - <AUTHOR> http://oncue.github.io/funnel/ <comment><USER2> As a sysadmin, I don't see instructions how to use it. Neither do I see an explaination _why_ I may want to use it instead of anything else or instead of _what_ could I use it.</comment>


Software is just a vintage by-product of Microprocessor era, but for how long? - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/@ggonweb/software-is-just-a-by-product-of-the-microprocessor-era-b027c1698aa8

<comment><USER2> That is an interesting hypothesis. One that early pioneers thought would have been reached a long time ago. Various platforms have (prematurely) announced that they have achieved it!

For references start here :

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth- generation_programming_l...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth- generation_programming_language)

<comment><AUTHOR> I Agree.</comment></comment>


Clojure, Node.js and Concurrency Fail - <AUTHOR> http://dosync.posterous.com/clojure-nodejs-and-why-messaging-can-be-lame

<comment><USER3> In what way is pushing 20K requests/second "concurrency fail"?

Node.js doesn't make it easy to share state between processes, but once you're scaling to multiple processes, the jump to multiple machines probably isn't far behind. You'll need to design a distributed algorithm, or just centralize your shared state in something like Redis anyway.

<comment><USER4> "The processes end up with incorrect states pretty much immediately."

Concurrency failure.

<comment><USER5> If you consider the multi-server case, this is a consensus problem. To solve it, you need to either use an algorithm like Paxos, or use some central synchronization point like a Redis or memcached server. Yes, node.js fails compared to Clojure when it comes to taking advantage of multiple cores on this example. Clojure's concurrency primitives are really slick. But that's not the whole story.

<comment><USER6> It would be interesting to see Clojure's transaction support extended across multiple machines.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Seems like a rare edge case. Also a bad design IMHO

Expanding your network IO handling code to use multiple cores sounds like fun, but it's the wrong way to do things.

Network handling code is not CPU heavy. Have a single process handling the IO, and for CPU heavy tasks hand off to other threads, handled with callbacks.

I also wish we'd stop benchmarking these sorts of things in NNk requests/second. As if most use cases will get anywhere near that in production.

<comment><AUTHOR> Seems like a generalization. People are interested in evented web programming for applications/services that are less traditional in design - <USER2> memcached doesn't buy you anything and NNk requests/second do matter. If you're putting your evented application on an 8-core box, you most certainly want to leverage a good number of those cores.

<comment><USER7> >> "If you're putting your evented application on an 8-core box, you most certainly want to leverage a good number of those cores."

Unless you're CPU bound, there is absolutely no point.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Some enterprising hacker want to add an Erlang version and compare it with the Clojure version?

</comment><comment><USER9> This is fascinating, but for a lot of us building web apps we have to scale beyond a single box, which means shared state needs to be in something like memcached.

I love Clojure, but it's concurrency constructs aren't that relevant to most web programming. Which is fine, but let's keep in mind that developing a web app with Clojure is painful now due to a lack of libraries / a large enough community. I'm eagerly awaiting the day that changes.

<comment><USER10> I'm still trying to figure out exactly where the Clojure concurrency model is useful. How many problem domains require extremely high throughput in a single shared memory space? It seems to me that you're usually either well within the bounds of what a single cpu can handle or you're going to need multiple machines and can just keep throwing procs at the problem.

<comment><USER5> It's great for doing things like k-means clustering or Delaunay triangulation. Those might not come up a lot for you, but _some_ people need to do them, and would love to be able to speed that up by throwing several processor cores at the problem. Solving them on a cluster is a lot harder, and often unnecessary.

(On k-means clustering, in particular, Clojure-style transactional memory gives an almost linear speedup with the number of processor cores, without significantly changing the code. That's worth something.)

<comment><USER11> Could you please provide a link to the implementation? I'm really interested in learning how this is done. Thanks.

<comment><USER5> Sorry, I can't point to any code, but in both cases the approach is the same: you have some shared data structures, like an array of regions containing points, or a red-black tree, or a priority queue, and several threads all read and write these data structures. Since transactional memory lets you run concurrently unless there are actual memory conflicts, this often gives better concurrency than locks.

Of course, for examples like these, the tricky part is designing data structures that don't have many inherent memory conflicts. Red-black trees, for example, are tricky because the rebalancing transformations tend to step on other threads' toes.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> How much memory were each using?

<comment><AUTHOR> Amazon Compute Clusters have 23gb of RAM. If top is to be believed Node.js by the time it's done is around 1.6% memory and well above 420% CPU. Aleph is at 9% memory and steady around 380% CPU the whole time. No surprises really.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> So wait, in his first post, "aleph (~8.5K req/s) edges out Node.js v.0.1.100 (~7.0K req/s)" which was with one node.js process on one core. Node.js scales fairly linearly (from what I've seen) as you add additional processors and processes, so I find it very hard to believe that running an additional node.js process would still be slower than aleph. I say testing fail.

<comment><USER14> I think Amazon EC2 cannot be trusted for these benchmarks.

On the _physical_ hardware I tested node scales very linearly with the amount of cores added.

On Ec2 I have seen very strange results / bad performance. There is something seriously odd here, and I suspect it has to do with Amazons virtualization.

On the box the author tested with, I would expect node (or nginx) to easily serve 50k req / sec.

I'll have to do some more research to figure this out.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> Please, try to use some external database/key-value storage lookup instead of printing "hello world" and show us memory and CPU usage. ^_^ Especially for Clojure.

</comment><comment><USER16> This is the best Hacker News story in years. Finally a post about both Closure and Node.js.</comment>


Harvard cs50 - <AUTHOR> https://cs50.harvard.edu/ <comment><AUTHOR> For more information about the course: [https://medium.com/@cs50/this-shall- be-cs50-2016-faed96945f8...](https://medium.com/@cs50/this-shall-be- cs50-2016-faed96945f81#.qbiufbw9w)

they've moved beyond just 4k res video recorded lectures and are recording VR lectures</comment>


Ask HN: Anyone interested in branded swag? - <AUTHOR>

My company just pulled the plug on our mobile app Sip, a campus photo and video sharing app.  We have a bunch of left over swag (branded with Sip), such as glow sticks, cups, shot glasses, and ping pong balls.  Anyone interested in taking this stuff off our hands? <comment><USER2> Bay Area? Any Tshirts?</comment>


Linking to free web content is legal, says EU Court - <AUTHOR> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-26187730

<comment><USER2> The USA had a similar ruling back in 1996. Many people were engaged in "Deep Linking", that is, linking to a page that was not the front page of the website. The plaintiff won the case and it was briefly illegal to link to anything but the front page of the sites. This was overturned shortly after.

Nowadays, we refer to "deep linking" as "linking", but it was legally contested for a long time. This was published as late as 2004:

""Deep linking" is a special kind of hyperlink: it defeats the remote website's intended method of navigation, taking one to a page deeper than the home page [4] A deep link leads the user to an interior page of a website, rather than to the home page thereof. "

Searching on Google, I see that the courts, in the USA and Europe, were ambivalent about deep linking, in the mid 90s when the Web was just emerging. For instance:

[http://www.linksandlaw.com/linkingcases- deeplinks.htm](http://www.linksandlaw.com/linkingcases-deeplinks.htm)

"The lawsuit against an online news search engine which allowed users access to articles in the database of the plaintiffs via deep links was based on paragraph 87 b of the German copyright law (UrhG). This paragraph derives from European Union Directive 96/9/ECC of March 11, 1996. A decision, which had banned deep linking by search engines to databases could have influenced other EU member states' jurisprudence and caused significant difficulties for search engines outside the European Union as well. "

also:

"Shetland Times v. Shetland News

"In 1996 the Shetland Times newspaper filed a lawsuit against the Shetland News for linking to Times' articles. Scotland's Court of Session issued an interim interdict banning the links. Before Scotland's highest court could rule on the legality of the links, the two publishers settled the case."

also:

[http://www.ibusinesslawyer.com/cyberlinks/linking.htm](http://www.ibusinesslawyer.com/cyberlinks/linking.htm)

"Ticketmaster Corp. v. Microsoft Corp., No. 97-3055 DDP (C.D. CA, complaint, filed 4/28/97) First major linking case in US. Microsoft's "Sidewalk" site allowed visitors to buy tickets to entertainment events via "deep" link to Ticketmaster site. Ticketmaster alleged trademark dilution and other unfair competition causes of action. Case settled on undisclosed terms, although Microsoft removed its deep link."

"Ticketmaster Corp. v. Tickets.com, Inc., CV99-7654 HLH (BQRx) (C.D. CA, Mar. 27, 2000) [requires acrobat reader to view] Tickets.com deep linked to Ticketmaster's site to provide its visitors the opportunity to buy tickets to certain events. Court dismissed contention that linking constituted copyright violation, because there was no literal copying. Court also found that absent specific evidence of assent, allegation that defendant breached site's "terms of service" failed to state a claim. Literal copying claim and certain unfair competition claims not dismissed, however."

This is from the American Library Association:

" "Deep linking" is the practice of providing links to interior pages within a Web site without directing people using the link through the host site's main page. Some site owners see deep linking as problematic because it takes control over the viewer's experience away from them and may create confusion over whose site is whose. For sites with commercial advertising or subscriptions, for example, deep linking may mean users get to see the content of the site without having to "pay" for the information by first accessing advertisements placed on a welcome page or by paying for the subscription. Other people see linking as a necessary part of Web design and argue that deep links actually provide a service by steering users to the linked sites."

and also this:

"Some court decisions have been seen as very supportive of linking. In 1997, in an opinion striking down a Georgia Internet statute, a federal district judge suggested that the practice of linking is protected by the First Amendment (ACLU of Georgia v. Zell Miller). In a federal court in September 1998, a California judge dismissed a suit in which the plaintiff claimed that the defendants maintained Web sites that included links to a Swedish site containing copyright infringing material. The court ruled that the copyright infringing material was "several links removed" from the defendants' site (Bernstein v. JC Penney, Inc.)."

Needless to say, Google (and Hacker News) would be illegal if deep linking had been banned.

<comment><USER3> _This was published as late as 2004:

""Deep linking" is a special kind of hyperlink: it defeats the remote website's intended method of navigation, taking one to a page deeper than the home page [4] A deep link leads the user to an interior page of a website, rather than to the home page thereof. "_

Wow. This sounds so anachronistic today it's hard to believe it was written only 10 years ago.

<comment><USER4> Overton Window; memories are disturbingly short and we use them to anchor. Related: I forgot about the utter vileness of Zell Miller:)

<comment><USER5> I think that's a misuse of the term Overton Window. It has more to do with selective memory.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> > The "position would be different" for links that bypass a paywall.

This is interesting. It seems there is a growing burden on consumers of information to understand the intent set up by website owners and technology maintainers: Aaron Schwartz died because his use of curl was deemed hacking. A judge here is making a distinction between linking and linking that bypasses a paywall.

I'm afraid that people will one day be required to divine whether or not a site was meant to be viewed by them: suppose page A displays links to a paywall-less version of page B when the user agent is "GoogleBot" in order to allow news to be indexed. Meanwhile, all other user agents see a link to a paywalled version of page B. Suppose a bug causes that page to display paywall-less links to all agents, and visitors to that page follow through to the non-paywall version of page B.

Under this interpretation, visitors to page B's non-paywall version could be exposed to allegations of unauthorized access to computer systems (or its EU equivalent) and be charged with hacking. What's worse, it seems the burden to prove that the link was shown to them in a legitimate fashion falls _on the accused_ , and there's basically no way they can prove that.

I'm not a lawyer, so my interpretation could be way off, but this seems like a credible threat.

<comment><USER7> I came here with the same quote copied to my clipboard to say pretty much this.

The idea that the incompetence of paywall implementers should be patched up by the law and consideration of clients' intent is worrying at best and honestly closer to insane.

If paywalls are implemented by covering page content with a white rectangle, will viewing source be considered unauthorised access?

If they are implemented by putting a large notice prohibiting unauthorised users from scrolling down, will such a notice stand up?

In both of these cases, the intent of the user viewing the content is clearly to bypass protection mechanisms that were put in place, but if such protections are implemented so incompetently, the burden (as it seems to be in real life, w.r.t. trespassing and similar laws) could well fall upon the consumer.

My suggestions get closer and closer to hyperbole but from a technical standpoint some of these 'protections' are scarcely distinguishable from some of the simple, meaningless protection schemes that have already been enough to trigger unauthorised access laws. :/

<comment><USER8> I think there's a legal doctrine along the lines of "open door" or "unenforced property", wherein if a person does not put up a minimum standard of defense of their property, there are limitations to what legal protection they have against trespassing and theft.

For example, if I leave my house with the doors wide open, all the time, I think the doctrine means I can't accuse people of breaking in if they simply walk in ... especially if they do so repeatedly without me doing anything to stop it.

Similar if my property has no fence, gate, locks, etc and people are in the habit of walking across it - and I haven't taken ordinary measures to stop them - then I can't accuse people of trespassing.

The examples are not great, and I don't recall what it's called ... but I believe there's a legal doctrine along those lines.

Oh, and, IANAL.

<comment><USER4> [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weev](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weev)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I wonder if it will become illegal to change my user agent someday.

<comment><USER10> It will when and if a lawmaker ever understands what a user agent string is.

<comment><USER11> User Agent is the new evil bit.</comment></comment></comment>


Show HN: Catch up on your video backlog by converting them to an audio podcast - <AUTHOR> http://listenlater.io/?ref=hn <comment><USER2> This is really really useful idea.

I've been looking for something like this for a while. I generally like to take my YT playlist of mostly talks, etc and hear while driving.

Would love to see this turned into a mobile app.</comment>


The New York Times Introduces a Web Site (1996) - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/1996/01/22/business/the-new-york-times-introduces-a-web-site.html <comment><USER2> >Subscribers will have limited access to archives of Times articles and features dating to 1980, and will be able to copy articles to their own computers for $1.95 each, Mr. Nisenholtz said.

Any idea on how this download-fee was implemented?

<comment><USER3> Yes, if an article was older than 7 days you only got a summary with the option to get the full article (maybe a PDF too?) for $1.95. Not unlike buying an archive article now (I think its greater than 90 days now).

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> It looked like this then:

[http://web.archive.org/web/19961112181513/http://www.nytimes...](http://web.archive.org/web/19961112181513/http://www.nytimes.com/)

Love the image at the bottom that gave instructions on how to size your browser window.

<comment><USER5> All the news that's fit to width!

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> I like the http:/ typo. It really shows how unfamiliar the general public was with the internet just fifteen years ago.

<comment><USER3> And while they clearly anticipated Twitter, they put in the wrong Twitter handle _@times_ versus _@nytimes_

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Would not have imagined that one day the website will become mainstream. Congrats!

<comment><USER8> Ummm, this is NYTimes we are talking about. Probably in the top newspapers of the world by popularity. Not becoming mainstream would have been a greater feat of imagination. :)

<comment><USER9> I think he meant _the website_ as in _any_ website. Like "website" as an item, not this specific one. eg: "Would not have imagined the mp3 player..." not iPod etc.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Wow. 15 years. Congrats!</comment>


Russian FSB cybersecurity implosion continues with more arrests - <AUTHOR> http://www.prevendra.com/russian-fsb-cybersecurity-implosion-continues-with-more-arrests/ <comment><USER2> I wonder if this is a result of Obama ordering American intelligence agencies to stir the pot. The January 26th article[1] seems to suggest that the crackdown began around the time of the U.S. election. Although, maybe the phrasing was merely intended as an editorial flourish that implies a more specific timeline than intended.

But it would make heaps of sense for Obama to make threats of future retaliation all the while plans had long already been put into motion. It would be an especially smart strategy considering that one of the dilemmas of retaliation was risking exposing American intelligence sources. And Obama participating to such an extent in the deception and distraction is not only ingenious, but probably would have been quite cathartic for him given his personal dislike of Putin.

Obviously quite speculative and perhaps wishful thinking. But Russian meddling in the election was known to the US long before the November election. Obama even said he personally spoke to Putin about it last summer, after which Obama claimed it stopped. And for all his faults, Obama is still a rather principled man as far as politicians go. Obama may have never have had any intention of letting it slide, whether or not Hillary won. And indeed, setting plans in motion before the election would have insulated Obama from some serious ethical criticism regarding his motivations. (Albeit quaint ethical criticism in our brave, new political era.)

[1] [http://www.prevendra.com/russias-fsb-cybersecurity-team- impl...](http://www.prevendra.com/russias-fsb-cybersecurity-team-implodes/)

<comment><AUTHOR> Good question .. I crafted a piece back in October and another in November on the Russians targeting the US elections (the RNC, DNC and all the candidates in January 2016 were given a warning directly from the FBI to tighten up their cyber).

Re the implosion within the FSB cyber team .. additional names continue to be revealed, and it would appear that the timing is politically driven for the best effect, while the case itself was put together in Oct/Nov and arrests made in December --- but not publicized until post Trump inauguration .. jury is still out on the rationale - I offered one person's opinion in the second piece on the implosion. CB

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Followup to: Russia's FSB Cybersecurity Team Implodes" of 26 January</comment>


Man Says He Can Make 20-Year-Old Rum in 6 Days - <AUTHOR> http://www.wired.com/2015/04/lost-spirits/ <comment><USER3> Reminds me of Peter Norvig's whiskey story:

[http://www.norvig.com/speech.html](http://www.norvig.com/speech.html)

"Before I answer that, let me return for the moment to Dewey Decimal 663: beverage technology. It turns out that in my very first professional job, as an intern thirty years ago, I had a colleague, a chemist, who had worked in beverage technology. The summer before he had been an intern and was given the task of figuring out if there was a particular chemical that gave whisky the distinctive taste of being aged in an oak cask. The company figured if they could isolate the chemical maybe they could just mix it in, and skip five or ten years of aging. So my friend went into the lab and isolated what he thought might be the right compound. He ordered a small vial from a chemical supply company (remember, this was before online shopping and email, so they had to actually write words on paper) and mixed up a batch. It tasted pretty good. (Why can't we computer scientists get research projects that involve consuming alcohol?) My friend was duly congratulated, and he wrote to the chemical supply company and asked for a 55 gallon drum of the stuff. They wrote back, saying "we regret that we can not fill your order because we are currently low on stock and, as I'm sure you know, to produce this chemical we need to age it in oak casks for five years."

<comment><USER4> It's a cute story, but in this day and age of designer drugs where you can draw the chemical you want, email it to China, and have them synthesize a batch (marked "not for human consumption), does it still hold true?

Eg [https://medium.com/matter/the-drug-revolution-that-no-one- ca...](https://medium.com/matter/the-drug-revolution-that-no-one-can- stop-19f753fb15e0)

<comment><USER5> I came to write the same.

I wonder what other products could be created this way? First thing that comes to mind is quality soy sauce and balsamic vinegar.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I'm surprised that this is the state of the art. Compare this to the manufacture of, say, orange juice: from the input oranges, the chemicals are all individually distilled out, put into separate bioreactors at exact concentrations along with additives and catalysts, each reaction product is filtered to remove waste products, and then the results are mixed back together in prescribed concentrations. Effectively, they're making a completely synthetic product, like a plastic or a mouthwash, except that (almost) all the input chemicals happen to be extracted from the same source.

<comment><USER7> Wow. I never knew that.

I do know that I far prefer the taste of fresh-squeezed (and, in fact, won't buy anything that is not). But I never really knew why.

<comment><USER6> Note that whether or not it says "from concentrate", this process is still happening. If it wasn't, they wouldn't be able to screen out pesticides and bacterial agents, and wouldn't be able to keep each jug to the correct concentrations of its component chemicals (which each have very different molecular weights, and so would band in industrial mixers) and so forth.

If you mean that you prefer actual juice you get by juicing an orange yourself, then sure. But "fresh-squeezed" orange juice at the supermarket is just organic synthesis without a freezing step. (Which is an important-enough distinction; freezing fruit, or its juices, denatures a lot of the nutrients.)

<comment><USER8> I think that "fresh-squeezed" is just what it means; if you look at the chemically de- and re-constructed juices (like Tropicana), they have some super evasive language on them about their juice being "squeezed from fresh oranges" or similar.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> There is an apparently not apocryphal story about a Scottish University that was charged with helping develop a synthetic "scotch whiskey taste". The labs identified the complex molecules and started looking for ways to synthesise them. Amazingly one day they found someone able to supply just the chemicals - they ordered a large supply and it worked. The new additive gave a rich full body to poor scotch. They were about to tell the distilleries the good news when they decided to ask how fast the supplier could provide this - "oh about twenty years, you see we buy barrels from these distilleries in the Highlands and then ..."

Cannot at all remember who told me that, but it seemed apt.

<comment><USER10> Sounds similar to [http://www.norvig.com/speech.html](http://www.norvig.com/speech.html) which mdonahoe quoted shortly after your post: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9371086](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9371086)

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> I'm really looking forward to trying a product of this system. As a fan of complex whiskies (mostly Scotch) and wild, chaotic rums, I'm wondering how close it can get to the myriad of flavors and textures those aged drinks provide. Differences in barrel types are immediately obvious in whisky - <USER2> Balvenie or other distilleries that offer different barrel-aging options.

I worry some, because as a musician, I'm all too familiar with the shortcomings of digital emulations of classic sounds. They can get 98%, but that last two percent is really bothersome and weak. I hope these new whiskies aren't like that!

<comment><USER12> Off topic, but I'm always bothered when people say something like "It's the last 1% that counts the most". It's misleading to say that any single percentage point is more important than any other. If the last 1% is the most important, doesn't it make more sense to call it the last 99%?

I suppose if you are considering only the top percentiles of whatever you're talking about, it makes more sense. If you're only looking at the 95th-100th percentiles, then 1% of total quality is actually more like a 20% change in the space you're considering. But at that the same, to arbitrarily say that only things in the top 5 percent are worth considering is, well, arbitrary.

/rant

<comment><USER11> In genetics, that last 2% is the difference between a human being and a chimpanzee.

<comment><USER5> Is it really the last, or just 2% spread across the code?

<comment><USER13> It's not the last.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> There's a little more on the chemistry from this story in an email sent to K&L (bay area liquor store) by the distiller: [http://spiritsjournal.klwines.com/klwinescom-spirits- blog/20...](http://spiritsjournal.klwines.com/klwinescom-spirits- blog/2014/2/5/rum-super-geekdom.html)

FWIW, I'm a bit of a rum nerd and have been super impressed by the Lost Spirits Navy and Polynesian rums. I also noticed Longitude, a newish upscale Oakland bar by a veteran Tiki bartender, was using the Navy rum in a drink, so there are at least a few folks in industry who are believers as well.

</comment><comment><USER15> I'm sure traditionally aged sprits would remain with luxury-pricing if this took hold, but this is fascinating from a scientific perspective.

</comment><comment><USER16> Man has been trying to do this for decades. There's this AMAZING old movie called Gizmo! from the 60s (I think) with some guys running wine through a series of tubes and declaring it aged...

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gaVwqraUKxA&feature=youtu.be...](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gaVwqraUKxA&feature=youtu.be&t=2267)

I found the clip! Must watch.

</comment><comment><USER17> Doubt it, but these experiments are interesting because they let us discover the unknown unknowns in these chemical reactions.

If laboratory-aged whiskey is, to the best of our understanding, identical to normally-aged whiskey, what are the odds that it's actually identical? Pretty low, but it's how we expand our knowledge.

Also, it often trickles down and makes low-end products way better.

</comment><comment><USER18> Can we assume that the big spirit producers would embrace this kind of process, or instead, seek to tighten laws as to what can actually be called X or Y spirits, in order to specifically exclude these new processes?

<comment><USER19> many laws already exist. for example, scotch has to be aged at least 3 years in scotland.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scotch_whisky#Legal_definition](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scotch_whisky#Legal_definition)

<comment><USER20> Only sort of. Their laws have no jurisdiction outside of Scotland. Except in some cases based on trade agreements, as the wiki says. You could probably distill and sell Scotch in the US if you like. Various state regulators may not give you the necessary licenses to sell but it's probably not illegal.

<comment><USER21> Except you couldn't call it Scotch due to the name being a protected mark, with most countries, the US included, participants in treaties that protect those marks.

<comment><USER19> same with Champagne and a few other protected names.

all scotch is whiskey, but not all whiskey is scotch sort of thing.

he is essentially just creating hard liquor with aging characteristics as I see it. He could technically create any new name to differentiate his product and make it more marketable as the other protected names have done.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> Cleveland Whiskey is using what I must assume is a similar process. I've had it several times, and rather enjoy it.

<comment><USER23> Cleveland Whiskey says they do something like use pressure to force it through the wood I think, where this says he, "forces the creation of the same key chemical compounds."

If those in the end mean the same thing, I don't know.

Friends snobbier than me say it's ok but not at the price it was originally going at, but I liked it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> Then why is he giving wired the story on this and not in a Diageo boardroom right now?

</comment><comment><USER25> Good luck to him. There have been tricks to fake aged flavors wine, whiskey, and other aged alcohols for centuries. In CA mass-produced Chardonnay is aged in giant stainless steel with wood chips. Others make Bourbon with charred wood chips. There are tricks with pressure and temperature, wood, and other things that I'm sure that is secret and proprietary. It's not always clear where tradition ends and modern tricks begin because they've been doing some of these things for a long time.

But in the end these 'tricks' always produces an inferior product and are really only good for mass-produced wine/alcohol on the cheaper end.

As an aside, two things, there are some excellent aged rums out there. The complexity can be almost as good as aged whiskey and the texture/mouth-feel (don't know the proper word) can be like a 20-year+ scotch for something not aged as long.

Second, I see that he produced Absinthe in Spain which has similar thujone levels to absinthe that is legal in the u.s. USA absinthe is nothing like the real thing - it is more like drinking Pernod. In Switzerland, where Absinthe originates, the thujone level is 100x (?) what you get in the u.s. When you drink a fair amount of it it is like you have a high-contrast filter on your eyes. Further, modern absinthe is clear although I still prefer the green.

<comment><USER26> > But in the end these 'tricks' always produces an inferior product and are > really only good for mass-produced wine/alcohol on the cheaper end.

Double blind proven or asserted by experts?

<comment><USER27> Blind drunk experts</comment></comment></comment>


Analyse Asia 79: Hadoop, Cloudera and Big Data with Doug Cutting - <AUTHOR> http://analyse.asia/2015/12/05/episode-79-hadoop-cloudera-open-source-with-doug-cutting/ <comment><AUTHOR> Episode Synopsis: With Doug Cutting, the chief architect of Cloudera and the co-founder of Apache Hadoop, we discussed his journey from a software engineer to a contributor and creator of several open source software which are widely used today. We also deep dived into Cloudera and Hadoop, and discussed various topics from talent shortage to how Hadoop has been adopted across various industries, most notably, in the finance and banking industry. Along the conversation, Doug shared his perspectives on open source software and advice to aspiring coders in building and maintaining their own software. Finally, we discussed the trend of big data and its implications to security and privacy and how Hadoop will evolve in the near future.</comment>


GUI Architectures (2006) - <AUTHOR> http://martinfowler.com/eaaDev/uiArchs.html

<comment><USER2> I've lately been building a lot of Javascript-based GUIs, and the persistent thought in my mind has been how all those frameworks must be reinventing the wheel that was doubtless invented years ago for desktop GUI development. MVC seems to be all the rage, and this article looks like a comprehensive overview of various alternatives. Looking forward to reading it thoroughly.</comment>


I would happily ditch the selfie camera for a full-screen phone - <AUTHOR> https://techcrunch.com/2018/05/31/i-would-happily-ditch-the-selfie-camera-for-a-full-screen-phone/ <comment><USER2> There is no way mass-market phones are giving up on the camera that allows for video conferencing / FaceTime. Don't trivialize the utility by calling it the "selfie" camera. And don't claim you've confirmed it's useless by checking your camera roll.

</comment><comment><USER3> I've been thinking lately about why all PCs have a light that indicates when their cameras are in use but smartphones don't. My conspiratorial self can't help but wonder if that omission could be intentional.

</comment><comment><USER4> The OnePlus 7 Pro (their new flagship phone) has a hidden selfie camera that extends out when in selfie mode.

I'm like the author of the article and largely I don't need a selfie camera. It's useful to have in the rare cases where I need to video chat or need a digital mirror real quick.

I'm actually very disappointed that the newer OnePlus 7T went back to having a camera notch but I suppose that means that enough of their customers didn't like the feature.

</comment><comment><USER5> This problem has been solved: Xiaomi has put the selfie camera behind the screen [1]

[1] [https://www.theverge.com/circuitbreaker/2019/6/5/18654365/xi...](https://www.theverge.com/circuitbreaker/2019/6/5/18654365/xiaomi- camera-under-screen-no-notch-transparent-display-technology)

</comment><comment><USER6> The selfie camera is useful for video chatting, but I do wish they could tuck it into the display or shrink it into the small bezels of the iPhone.

Selfies were the near death of asking strangers to snap a group photo for you. I offer whenever I can, crack a lame joke to get the group smiling. It's sad to think how many things we've done that have inadvertently put up social walls with strangers.

</comment><comment><USER7> Xiaomi's 9T Pro[0] has a pop-up selfie camera. If I actually wanted an Android phone then I'd be all over that one in particular.

[0] [https://www.gsmarena.com/xiaomi_mi_9t_pro-9791.php](https://www.gsmarena.com/xiaomi_mi_9t_pro-9791.php)

<comment><USER8> Just bought the Xiaomi Mi 9t pro, excellent display and it's kinda interesting to see random camera popups (and collapse) of the selfie camera while using certain apps. The motor is activated when the camera APIs are called so you could tell if the app is shaping on your face easily.

Snapchat is the worst offender and keeps the selfie camera on even on non camera uses

<comment><USER7> Do you have a way to disable apps' ability to pop up the camera?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I think almost everyone has forgotten that the reflective Apple logo on the back of the original iphone was described by Apple as the selfie mirror. I doubt they used the word "selfie" which may not have been coined back then, but I can't remember the exact phrase.

I used to think that those cases with a hole to show the logo were for people who wanted that mirror but now I just wonder why.

</comment><comment><USER10> Yeah "the notch" has been around for a long time now. Anyway, the notch is very functional and very useful. Without it, you can only handle the phone by its sides. With it, you can easily pass the phone by placing your thumb on the notch. A full screen phone would be very cumbersome especially with how big phones are nowadays.

</comment><comment><USER11> I don't mind borders around the screen. Screens have been plenty big for the last 5 years anyway.

<comment><USER12> Especially considering borders help you handle the device without accidentally touching the screen and protect the glass.

The borderless/curved screen trend is why I fear the day I will have to buy a new phone. Unfortunately, I don't see this trend reverting in the future.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: How to prioritize on hundreds of issues? - <AUTHOR> Hi!
I'm struggling with prioritization, and would like to know how people are tacking in, as I think it is a very common problem. Article and book recommendations are welcome (already read Time Management for Sysadmins).
I work on IT at a SMB company, and our issue control software has ~300 open issues. Issues are related to problems/adaptations on our ERP, developing/fixing problems on dozens of small systems we developed, help desk, systems administration, etc.
We already classify issues by priority:
Urgent/Important (currently ~5% issues) Normal (currently ~20% issues) Low (currently ~75% issues)
I currently split time as this:
- Morning - projects (bigger transitions like ERP upgrading, internal software development, studying and making internal processes better for other departments, etc). - After lunch - high priority issues. - Two hours after - low priority issues. - One hour before leaving - sysadmin stuff (maintenance).
This method works nicely, but... the problem arises when my brain must decide what is the next issue to tackle, when the time comes for low priority issues. Deciding what will be worked, and select on 200+ items with the same priority is very difficult, and I feel that I waste a lot of time deciding the next step versus acting.
Deciding on higher priority issues is easier.
Anyone can relate? Is there any tip, mental model changing that can help?
Thanks! <comment><USER2> Try adding a couple more dimensions, each rated on a scale of 1-3 or 1-5 or so:

A field for number of users (or $ in contracts) affected (for instance, does it affect every single user for every interaction; or only enterprise users with the Foo setting on "bar" when the moon is full?)

A field for severity/impact (Direct impact on cash flow? Data loss? Can't use the feature at all? Open up new markets? Decreased feature functionality? Significant bug with workaround? Minor bug?)

A field for centrality of the affected feature (whole purpose of the product? Important to most people's workflows? Peripheral feature that only adds minimal value?)

A field for complexity / level of effort to fix (rate this one on an inverse scale so that the highest numbers are the easiest to fix).

A field for urgency (is there an external deadline attached to this? A vague manager expectation? Is the expected completion time next week? Next year?)

For each ticket, multiply those numbers together, and you'll get a pretty decent and comparatively granular ROI ranking.</comment>


Show HN: I made a better website builder - <AUTHOR> http://plebu.com

<comment><USER2> Love it. I see that the UI and design is well thought through. Interesting pricing model too. Client gets to change their designs when they want and you end up getting more in the long run.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> My market is small businesses who offer a service. Please let me know what you think of the UI/UX, design, homepage copy, etc.

<comment><USER3> Your homepage isn't displaying properly on my iPhone (iOS 6, Chrome).

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks. I never made a responsive website since the builder doesn't work on phones. It has been on my to do list for a long time.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> The tech behind it is ROR, Backbone, jQuery, Coffee Script, Redis</comment>


Are We Experiencing an Information Technology Fin de Siècle?   - <AUTHOR> http://al3x.net/2012/03/06/tech-criticism.html

<comment><USER2> I often think about a quote that I cannot recall the source for, but the gist was, "A technology doesn't change the world until it becomes boring." Meaning that technological paradigms don't alter the way humans interact until they become weaved into our common culture to the point where we no longer think about them. I believe this is starting to happen with much of the internet technology that has been maturing for the last 20 years. What once was limitless and magical is now commonplace and banal, yet the sands have shifted beneath our feet so much in the last 20 years and we don't even realize it.</comment>


What different genres of music "look" like - <AUTHOR> https://www.lunaverus.com/visualizations <comment><USER2> How about what a few different PIECES of music look like? You can't draw any conclusions about whole genres from 3 or 4 examples.</comment>