Blockly is a library for building visual programming editors - <AUTHOR> https://developers.google.com/blockly/ <comment><USER2> Is anyone aware of other visual programming paradigms which are not based on (or reduce to) the blocks&arrows model?

I cannot say I was _ever_ satisfied in in every context where I saw this model applied. My experience ranges from trivial languages such as this, to compositing software, DAWs or something more sophisticated such as programming-oriented signal generators (where blocks are often used as filters/generators and edges as I/O connectors), to workflow editors...

It "might" look intuitive at first[1], but the network just becomes unreadable as soon as you have more than 10 nodes or non-linear behavior (with edges eventually crossing). Auto-layout just becomes a major problem to be solved. Auto-layout also destroys the visual locality of your program, so it actually goes against the programmer for anything non-trivial. Manual layout is something I do not want to take care of either.

Is any experiment or research being done that goes in a _different_ direction?

[1] I would actually say "less scary". I'm not convinced a simple programming language in the spirit of "BASIC" is less difficult to comprehend in the technical sense.

<comment><USER3> > It "might" look intuitive at first[1], but the network just becomes > unreadable as soon as you have more than 10 nodes or non-linear behavior

It works for DSLs in video-compositing apps , "learn to code apps" , yahoo pipes like apps or VST plugin coding apps ( and to a certain extend you could argue that working with DAWs is programming, I mean Logic has some kind of visual programming environment, so does Ableton Live)

It doesn't work for anything complex that would be normally be done via typing actual code.

I mean it has always been the case.IMHO Anyone that says he can invent something that can replace typing instructions in a text editor[1] and give a better experience to a professional programmer that way is lying.

But VISUAL PROGRAMMING is great for learning how to code, I learned coding, OOP and all that stuff in Flash 15 years ago, dragging and dropping some stuff and seeing the result visually in a matter of micro seconds was enjoyable, felt rewarding and motivated me to explore programming further. It was a shoehorn into the world of programming.

1: It doesn't mean one cannot improve text editors and IDEs, I think there is a whole LOT of room for improvement in order to make typing programs painless, and I'd like to see more research and experimentation done in that specific area, because it feels to me we're still stuck into BORLAND era when it comes to IDEs and nothing has evolved since that time.

<comment><USER4> As a software engineer who have spent a fair amount of time building and modifying ensembles in Reaktor, I don't honestly see how these structures would be easier to build in code. Their conplexity comes not from environment, but from the meaning they represent; I doubt that connecting 5 LFOs, 3 oscillators and a step sequencer in VIM would be a much better user experience then dragging cords with a mouse.

<comment><USER3> How do you think Reaktor itself is coded ? that's the point I made in my comment.

<comment><USER4> What does this point prove? The point of visual programming is in user experience of completing appropriate tasks.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Look at the complexity of the solution needed to solve a simple challenge[1] on the demo pages:

[https://i.imgur.com/B6qFqww.gif](https://i.imgur.com/B6qFqww.gif)

The blocks nest four deep. It's a good illustration of how hard hard it is to make graphical programming easier than regular programming.

[1] [https://blockly- demo.appspot.com/static/demos/plane/index.ht...](https://blockly- demo.appspot.com/static/demos/plane/index.html?lang=en&level=3)

<comment><USER6> It's not really worse than a Lisp:

      (def seats (+ 2 (* 4 first-class-rows) (* 5 second-class-rows)))

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> See also Snap! which is very actively developed and used pretty widely, and open source: [http://snap.berkeley.edu/](http://snap.berkeley.edu/)

Or for iPads there is the Tickle app: [https://tickleapp.com/](https://tickleapp.com/)

and of course the code.org site which I believe uses Blockly: [https://code.org/](https://code.org/)

<comment><USER8> Yup, code.org uses Blockly.

Source: I worked on the original "Hour of Code".

Source Code: [https://github.com/code-dot-org/code-dot- org](https://github.com/code-dot-org/code-dot-org)

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> In the UK it is used in several schools to introduce children to programming.

Notable project: [https://www.codeforlife.education/rapidrouter/](https://www.codeforlife.education/rapidrouter/) (developed by Ocado) and here's the github [https://github.com/ocadotechnology/rapid- router](https://github.com/ocadotechnology/rapid-router). I've developed a couple of features and I have to say it has been a fun experience!

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Here's a cool demo that is interactive: [https://blockly- demo.appspot.com/static/demos/plane/index.ht...](https://blockly- demo.appspot.com/static/demos/plane/index.html?lang=en)

</comment><comment><USER10> I picked up a chromebook for my daughter the other day and was looking for web based programming apps. I came across "Run Marco", built using Blockly, which is fairly basic at this point but seems to be under active development.

[https://www.allcancode.com/runmarco](https://www.allcancode.com/runmarco)

(in the CWS [https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/run- marco/objdeaib...](https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/run- marco/objdeaibfajdoeikopmgincdhjifjfle?hl=en) )

Worth checking out if you have a child and you're looking for a lightweight web based programming intro.

<comment><USER11> Check out [http://www.code.org](http://www.code.org), the courses and levels are well done for beginners in programming. I use it to teach my 6 yr old.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> I'm using Blockly to teach basic programming concepts to 6 and 7 years olds in my son's class. I'm using the maze at blockly-games.appspot.com/maze .

So far, my results are pretty promising. I do two groups of two kids at a time, so I can give them tons of help and advice, and for the hardest levels they tend to copy ideas from the other group, but so far both sessions they managed to solve it all the way up to the end (with my help). Coolest part is that their solution for left-hand-search is always slightly different (and more elegant) than what I'd originally come up with.

I haven't created my own material yet, but I suspect I might want to do that at some point.

</comment><comment> a-saleh I have always had feeling, that this style of visual programming would be better suited to functional paradigm.

It would be nice to be able to visually plug a lambda into higher order function. Bonus points if it has some notion of reactive or data-flow programming built in :-)

Is there something like that?

<comment><USER13> Email me.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> Does anyone have a link to the history of this specific visual style? I know the MIT Scratch project uses the same visuals and I've seen a few other as well. I've very curious about the history here.

</comment><comment><USER15> It's actually pretty neat. I use it to program the Ozobots ([http://ozobot.com/](http://ozobot.com/)) my wife got me for my birthday.

</comment><comment><USER16> From this, it seems to me, it is just a small step to an indentation based language.

So why not just use python combined with a normal editor instead?

<comment><USER17> www.blockpy.com

Let's you switch back and forth seamlessly as you learn. Among other features.

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Here's the full featured demo with all the blocks:

[https://blockly- demo.appspot.com/static/demos/code/index.htm...](https://blockly- demo.appspot.com/static/demos/code/index.html)</comment>


Elon Musk Leaves Twitter - <AUTHOR> https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1190288216131170305 <comment><USER2> Of course, some cryptocurrency scammer is prominently displayed in the top replies. Several times.

</comment><comment><USER3> "Not sure about good of Twitter. Reddit still seems good. Going offline."

I miss IRC, people at least attempted to form proper sentences most of the time and knew that announcing your away status was kind of annoying to other people.

<comment><USER4> IRC would be no different today if Eternal September had its claws on it.

[https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/UsefulNotes/EternalSe...](https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/UsefulNotes/EternalSeptember)

Basically, any and all communities wide open for everyone reaching the mainstream are eventually going down hill, unless there's a paywall and or heavy moderation keeping the "unwashed swine" at bay and culture intact.

Your feelings about IRC are sadly misplaced, but you can easily recreate the glorious days by running your own _small_ community.

</comment></comment><comment> noah-kun He has done this before. Said he was quitting Twitter then just kept posting. Plus he has another account, @Tesla, which he posts under.</comment>


Paul Graham on War Powers - <AUTHOR> https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/477625-graham-paul-rift-deepens-over-trumps-war-powers <comment><USER2> The title is wrong: it's actually "Graham, Paul rift deepens over Trump's war powers" (which is a somewhat different slant!)</comment>


Why Don't People Adopt Black Pets? - <AUTHOR> http://priceonomics.com/why-dont-people-adopt-black-pets/ <comment><USER2> We have a black cat. She's a little skiddish and we had to have all of her teeth removed due to a really bad case of gingevitis but other then that, we have no more bad luck they we normally do (we think)

(she swallows her food; cats can do that, and we feed her soft food every other time, in case anyone is wondering how a cat eats with no teeth)

</comment><comment><USER3> I have an adopted black mutt, and she is the sweetest thing ever.

I fostered an old fat black cat for a year. He kinda hated me in the first month, but later he got around to liking me (I had the tuna!).

</comment><comment><USER4> The largest dog on my block is a big black Newfoundland, adopted from a shelter. Before he arrived, the biggest was probably a Rottweiler, predominantly black, also I'm pretty sure adopted.</comment>


Ideas for Startups - <AUTHOR> https://ideasforstartups.appspot.com/#

<comment><AUTHOR> The GitHub : [https://github.com/humanarity/ideas-for- startups](https://github.com/humanarity/ideas-for-startups)

All this was inspired by this PG article about how little ideas are actually worth: [http://paulgraham.com/start.html](http://paulgraham.com/start.html)

Well, now you can create them at zero cost, using randomness. Enjoy!

[doesn't work on Firefox, no plan to support, feel free to fork!]

</comment><comment><USER2> has render issue on firefox</comment>


A French expert says he's feared by hackers and he protects Google,Adobe,Linkedi - <AUTHOR> http://bfmbusiness.bfmtv.com/hightech/mohammed-boumediane-genie-de-la-cyberdefense-et-cauchemar-des-hackers-1213738.html <comment><USER2> It looks like total bullshit. I never heard about this guy and he pretends to protect some of the top companies around the world. Very strange...

</comment><comment><USER3> Non. Vraiment… non.</comment>


UK launches exceptional talent visa for founders - <AUTHOR> http://www.techcityuk.com/blog/2015/10/tech-city-uk-unveils-tech-nation-visa-scheme-tier-1-exceptional-talent/ <comment><AUTHOR> Surprisingly progressive and a big positive for the UK. Wish the USA was as forward thinking.</comment>


$39 USD CJDNS Router (Modified TL-WR703N with 64MB RAM Running OpenWRT) - <AUTHOR> http://enhide.com/

<comment><AUTHOR> I can only accept Bitcoins, Litecoins and Dogecoins for now. Credit Card payments will be enabled by next week. Free shipping within Singapore.

I have only manufactured 9 units. I will need 1 month to order more mods from Shenzhen. The default router has less than 64MB RAM, so I got a guy in Shenzhen to replace the RAM chip and ship it to my home in Singapore. I then add cjdns and Barrier Breaker openwrt, and then ship it you guys.

It works plug and play with Hyperboria. I can also give you SSH root access to the router so you can install anything you want.

It ships already paired with my nodes inside Hyperboria. Depending on the shipping address, I will configure the router to connect to my nodes in US/EU/Asia.

There is also a Web GUI for CJDNS which is easy to configure if you want to connect to different nodes inside the meshnet.</comment>


Fast Python testing with Vcr.py - <AUTHOR> http://venmo.github.io/blog/2014/04/30/vcrpy-at-venmo/

<comment><USER2> Author here. I'm happy to answer questions!

<comment><USER3> Author of VCR.py here, thanks for the great blog post! I really like seeing real-world use cases like yours. The decorator you created is very cool. I'm considering adding something similar to VCR.py itself where it introspects the test to automatically name the cassette.</comment></comment>


Brewing a Bitcoin Wallet: A Bitcoin Wallet on your Mac with one command - <AUTHOR> http://dghubble.org/post/brewing-a-bitcoin-wallet

<comment><USER2> For some reason _brewing_ made me wonder if it's possible to encode data in a liquid. Detect the presence or amount of 256 different compounds in tiny drops of liquid to store each byte.

<comment><AUTHOR> Interesting idea. You'd only need to be able to detect the presence or absence of 8 compounds to get the 256 unique states though. Makes it a bit more doable :)

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Moved to [http://dghubble.com/brewing-a-bitcoin- wallet.html](http://dghubble.com/brewing-a-bitcoin-wallet.html)</comment>


How To Get Banned From PyCon - <AUTHOR> http://term.ie/blog/how-to-get-banned-from-pycon/ <comment><USER2> Let me sum up:

How to get banned from PyCon:

       1. Get drunk
       2. Heckle a female presenter during a public presentation
       3. Light up a pipe full of weed in the middle of the audience

The rest of the article is irrelevant.

<comment><USER3> At least the guy didn't wear a Rails T-shirt...

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> FYI, here's PyCon's official statement on this incident: [http://pycon.blogspot.com/2013/03/pycons-response-to- inaprop...](http://pycon.blogspot.com/2013/03/pycons-response-to- inapropriate.html).

I think it may answer some of the questions people have here; if you have additional questions please email me (email@example.com) and I'll do my best to answer 'em.

</comment><comment> mkr-hn Let me help:

> _For example, during one of the talks on Sunday a woman took a photograph of > two men who had been joking to each other by lightly sexualizing some > computer jargon and she tweeted about it citing their remarks as offensive_

Jokes along the lines of "my dick is pythonic" may be hilarious among your python-hacking friends, but saying it in a space where you don't know who's listening and what they've gone through was not a good idea.

> _On the offensive remark I have very few details, but those I was given was > that it was something like "you're the hottest." That doesn't sound very bad > to me but I suppose that could have been a polite paraphrasing of what I > said_

There are many women for whom that's the low end of the sexual harassment they endure. It is pretty tame, relatively speaking, but another straw on the back in a culture that condones much worse.

> _Gray areas. Guys are pretty likely to make dick jokes when in the company > of like-minded individuals, how far from conference grounds should they be > before that becomes okay?_

Speak for yourself. I find it horribly inappropriate in anything approaching a professional setting. Basically, you seem to have limited perspective on the other half of the population, and a large part of your own. This is a great chance to learn.

<comment><USER5> I think your tone here is a little more combative than the article deserves.

>If anything, I hope talking about it reduces these sorts of incidents without anybody feeling like their rights are being reduced as well.

This (along with >I'm not fighting the decision to ban me) read to me like a guy who wants to spark a dialogue on what should be considered appropriate at these events.

Context is a huge issue here. I wouldn't come into any hacker-culture event with an expectation of professionalism and maturity -- maybe I'm not the majority.

What is the majority for PyCon?

<comment> mkr-hn > _I think your tone here is a little more combative than the article > deserves._

It's entirely possible it sounds combative. It's not intentional.

> _Context is a huge issue here. I wouldn't come into any hacker-culture event > with an expectation of professionalism and maturity -- maybe I'm not the > majority._

A big part of professionalism is avoiding certain low-value behaviors because some people you might like to get along with are bothered by said behaviors. Professionalism doesn't have to mean putting on a suit and spouting buzzwords.

<comment><USER5> >A big part of professionalism is avoiding certain low-value behaviors because some people you might like to get along with are bothered by said behaviors.

Which is something I personally wouldn't expect at a hacker-culture convention.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Conferences are a minefield. Conflicting opinions of if a particular conference should be, is, and what qualifies as, a "professional work environment" run rampant.

When you have everyone attending because it's necessary and/or just a break from the office, they have a professional setting because people are not excited to be there. I see this in the business domain (not-tech) conferences all the time, any recreation happens completely separate from the conference.

Tech conferences get tech enthusiasts. Suddenly people actually want to be there and have fun with the other attendees. An easy example is DEFCON, people treat it like a party with talks, because for over a decade it was unambiguously a party with talks.

Problems are multiplied when people want to relax standards of professionalism on _some_ axis but maintain it on others (or even ratchet it up beyond what people are used to in their own offices). Clearly defining socially feasible expectations of behavior and communicating that to attendees never happens, then "incidents" occur.

<comment><USER7> > An easy example is DEFCON, people treat it like a party with talks, because > for over a decade it was unambiguously a party with talks.

I would like to believe that even a party is possible without harassing or discriminating against other people. I don't think it has anything to do with trying to be a "professional" work environment. I just want to see it as being respectful to people around you all the time, everywhere. Fully believing that, I have never ever found a desire to hit on or make derogatory comments to another man unprovoked, put boobs on a presentation slide, or grab someone's crotch even while incredibly drunk, outside of where my partner is concerned when we're in private. I find it incredibly difficult to deal with the fact that I've encountered many men that think doing any of that is perfectly normal until someone says otherwise.

Sadly, I don't think defcon has ever met that standard so I haven't attended except with friends in a very long time and I've always swore off unofficial and after-conference events. Plenty of good people but it's always those couple rotten apples that like to be disrespectful...

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Google cache: [http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:http://...](http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:http://term.ie/blog/how- to-get-banned-from-pycon/&hl=en&strip=1)

</comment><comment><USER9> If I can put my 2c in here...

I think that one of the major issues facing conferences is the distinction between professionalism and private life. The way one behaves with good friends is very distinct from how one behaves in a group of strangers, which is distinct from how one behaves with your co-workers or other professional relationships. I think that the mixed culture of a conference might exacerbate this problem: despite the fact that you're attending with friends, and perhaps even going out for drinks, it's not the same as being in a solely social setting.

If I'm with my friends, I know what jokes are appropriate, and which ones aren't - I've had the experience to do that. On the other hand, if I'm at a conference, someone nearby could have a bad reaction to a comment that my friends wouldn't react to - people are different, and an "innocent dick joke" to a friend could really bother someone else.

I don't pretend to say that this is the sole problem, or even a real solution, but I think it might be worth recognizing.

<comment><USER10> Good point - I had never thought of it as friends vs. non-friends before - just professional vs. non-professional. So maybe the filter should be "is this something I would say _around_ a stranger regardless of whether the environment is professional or non-professional?" Still, for far too may, I think the answer might still be yes. It's as if people think there is some sort of sound-proofing around them - or don't care that there _isn't_.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> So wait, this guy was smoking some weed (I assume) in the middle of a con and got banned. Why is this even questioned? Whether you agree with smoking weed or not, he committed a crime during a PyCon event.

<comment><USER5> Nobody's questioning it. I'm not sure where that impression came from.

<comment><USER12> I'm questioning it. The behavior in question seems alcohol-spawned. If alcohol is tolerated it seems bizarre to treat cannabis draconianly.

If cannabis use is legal in the state, there is no prosecutable crime. Federal cannabis drug law is not enforced against cannabis users, only those who sell it and thereby more directly touch on interstate commerce.

If breaking unenforced federal law is ban-able behavior, then better ban everyone.

I think the unfortunate thing is that we all break federal law every day. (Most of us at least violate the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. Ever made a GET request potentially in violation of an API's ToS?) Scary thing is, the feds actually prosecute under the CFAA.

<comment><USER11> see [http://pycon.blogspot.com/2013/03/pycons-response-to- inaprop...](http://pycon.blogspot.com/2013/03/pycons-response-to- inapropriate.html)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> For being in the room, I have to admit that I have been shocked by the words. Not because it was a tech conference or the code of conduct but because but it's NOT A WAY of speaking anywhere and specially in public with or without presence of woman. Maybe I m too old school coming from the old continent anyway...

I appreciate the honesty of his post and to admit his fault publicly. But I guess that having somebody banned many years will make think some peoples for the next pycon about how to behave in public. Maybe I shouldn't but a part of myself still feel sorry for him.

Something I learned from professional event, if you don't handle well the booze then watch out your drinking to avoid of being a fool.

I hope that he won't move to ruby before 2015.

</comment><comment><USER14> > I realize a line needs to be drawn somewhere, and in this case that line was > chosen at me.

When you're the only one to cross a particular line among many other people, don't be surprised when you get called out. The lines may be fuzzy, sure, or it might be a pretty clear-cut case (such as, smoking weed in a crowded audience during a tech talk), but regardless you should try to have an idea of how your actions might affect those around you.

As a thought exercise, ask yourself if it would be okay for _everyone_ to be doing what you are currently doing. Say, heckling the presenter, or using illicit substances, or even just talking to the person next to you. If an audience full of people heckling, smoking up, or chattering to each other would be counter-productive to the presenter's ability to present and/or an individual's enjoyment of the event, maybe you should consider not doing it yourself.

</comment><comment><USER12> I absolutely understand not tolerating sexism or other bigotry, but a three year ban for cannabis use seems excessive. Ask him to take it outside?

<comment><USER15> If cannabis use is illegal where the conference is held, the conference organizers might be responsible for attendees' smoking.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> Gee, who knew that smoking illegal drugs at a conference would get you banned?

</comment><comment><USER17> He should not censor himself. If a person doesn't like what he/she is hearing he/she can just go somewhere else. Nobody is forcing him/her to stand next to him and to listen to his sex jokes.

<comment><USER2> Women should not have to stay sequestered in their own homes because some men are inconsiderate assholes.

How would you feel if you were at a convention populated mostly by 7' tall gay weight lifters, and one of them shouted "Hey, nice ass!" at you? I bet you'd feel pretty damn uncomfortable. That's pretty much how it feels to be a woman, not just at these conventions, but in the world at large.

Note: I am a 6'1 175 pound male. It's hard for me to conceive of what it's like to be a woman who is 5'2" and 120 pounds... that's why the 7' tall gay weightlifter analogy... it's the only translation that works in my head. Seriously, think about it. They're way bigger than you, way stronger than you, they think you have a tasty ass (or not, but for some reason they feel the need to sexualize you), and you definitely are not interested in them... and they're all around you all the time.

Also note: I'm not actually trying to say real gay people want your ass. They probably don't.

<comment> mkr-hn Role reversal isn't effective in these kinds of discussions.</comment></comment></comment>


Amazon Flexes Its Muscles in Fight Against Publishers - <AUTHOR> http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/05/23/amazon-escalates-its-battle-against-hachette/ <comment><USER2> Honest questions here...

What is _supposed_ to happen here? This article and each of the others linked don't offer much beyond jabs at Amazon.

As far as I can tell, publishers are unhappy with Amazon - period. Two years ago the hot news was about Amazon pricing books too low [1]. Now at least part of the complaint is that Amazon isn't discounting enough and allowing prices to approach list price - which I assume is set by the publisher. Isn't that a publisher problem?

Also, this all reminds me of what we used to hear in the music industry - creators hurting because the label (publisher) they're contracted with is feuding and refusing to eat whatever compromise rather than pass it on directly or indirectly.

Would it be a terrible thing if Amazon pressured books into changing the same way iTunes changed music?

1: [http://www.cnn.com/2012/04/11/tech/web/apple-lawsuit- cheaper...](http://www.cnn.com/2012/04/11/tech/web/apple-lawsuit-cheaper- ebooks/)

<comment><USER3> to be clear, the lawsuit was against apple and the publishers, who were accused of price fixing by refusing to participate in under-pricing books, but also refusing to price ebooks as high as ~$25.

it was a really odd application of antitrust law at the time, since Amazon is the one with monopoly power, and price fixing typically means competitors agreeing to price things higher than the market would otherwise bear.

antitrust has never been reasonably applied to tech, going as far back as DOJ going after microsoft for bundling IE, not for leveraging the Office team's relationship with the Windows team to push out competitors like Corel.

now you're seeing amazon flex that monopoly power - hey buddy, you had to pay a fine to the DOJ for refusing to participate in our monopoly, and we were able to hurt apple's book-selling business, and now we're shutting you off entirely unless you agree to our terms.

<comment><USER4> I have the different view: that the Apple/publisher case is a pretty straightforward case of a price fixing conspiracy.

Publishers are certainly allowed to, as you put it, "refuse to participate in under-pricing books". The problem occurs when they decide to act in concert.

I agree with your points about DOJ and the tech industry, and maybe there's something that needs to be done about Amazon right now. I'm not sure. But definitely the wrong thing to do would be to allow a cartel of publishers have any influence over the price structure of the market.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> These articles can really go either way, but NYT seems to continuously go the publisher side. Theres not a single Amazon statement in this article.

Remember that the majority of publishers just recently colluded with Apple to essentially fuck over Amazon. Why would we afford them the presumption of goodwill here?

<comment><USER6> > Remember that the majority of publishers just recently colluded with Apple > to essentially fuck over Amazon.

Well, that's certainly how the Justice Department chose to see it. That doesn't make that statement the objective truth.

I still don't see how anyone can say with a straight face that the new entrant in a market is "fuck[ing] over" the dominant player. Especially when countless economists have weighed in saying that the kind of corrective measures employed by Apple and the publishers are not (and should not be) illegal and that the Justice Department basically got everything wrong.

(Google is failing me here for finding these economist opinions that I've seen in the past, but amusingly, my search is chock full of articles from before the ruling saying that economists think the DOJ is going to lose the case)

<comment><USER7> "corrective measures employed by Apple" what were the measures and what were they correcting? And how did the Justice Department get it wrong. Apple colluded with the publishers to set the price, and forced Amazon to sell for the same price. With mainly the people being screwed (well in some cases the publishers actually lost money too) Unfortunately the corrective measures taken SINCE the ruling having really made much of a change.

<comment><USER6> > Apple colluded with the publishers to set the price, and forced Amazon to > sell for the same price

Apple gave the publishers leverage to use with Amazon, which is a wee bit different. But I'll give you "colluded", because it doesn't really matter.

I wish Google would actually find the various articles I've read in the past about this, but my recollection is that various economists have explained that this sort of "corrective measure" is actually legal and the right course of action under certain circumstances, and the ebook market (with Amazon's near- total dominance) qualifies.

You say "mainly the people being screwed", but that's not true. Amazon tried to claim that prices were lower before Apple came along, but that's actually only true for some (admittedly popular) books. Prices on other books were higher before Apple. Not only that, but the low prices that Amazon was talking about was not actually a sustainable market, but instead was Amazon engaging in predatory pricing. And predatory pricing is not something that the DOJ is supposed to be in the business of defending.

Basically, many people have looked at the overall book market both before and Apple entered it, and found that, when looking at the entire market instead of just e.g. the NYT bestsellers list, prices were not higher after Apple showed up.

It's also worth pointing out that Apple was being accused of violating antitrust laws, which are essentially laws designed to prevent unfair monopolistic practices. It seems rather ridiculous to claim that a minority player in a market could be guilty of monopolistic practices, since that generally requires being a monopoly. It's even more absurd when one of the main goals of antitrust is to promote fair competition, and yet it was used to punish the only real competition that Amazon had in the market. Basically, the DOJ used fair competition laws to hand a government-sanctioned monopoly to a single company.

\---

I did a bit more digging, and what Apple was found guilty of was a "per se" violation of a horizontal price-fixing conspiracy using a series of vertical agreements. I've found a MacObserver article[1] that talks about a 30-page amici curiae brief filed by two economists explaining why Judge Cote's ruling was wrong.

[1]: [http://www.macobserver.com/tmo/article/economists-on- apple-e...](http://www.macobserver.com/tmo/article/economists-on-apple-ebook- antitrust-case-judge-cote-got-it-wrong)

There's a 3-paragraph summary at that article, which should give you a good idea of what was wrong with the ruling.

I've seen a number of other articles since the ruling where other economists weigh in and say essentially the same thing, but Google is still being difficult.

\---

Edit: One comment about this brief says that the DOJ didn't make these considerations because it found Apple to be _per se_ liable, which is to say, the DOJ considered the actions to be illegal regardless of any possible motivation. Some of the other economists I've referred to argued specifically against this point, saying that these kinds of vertical agreements are _not_ a violation of the per se rule and that Judge Cote royally screwed up in applying it. Of course, Judge Cote's ruling also said she would consider Apple to have been guilty under a rule of reason as well, but I find it hard to believe given how much evidence there is that Apple's actions were indeed in its own independent business interest, and that these kinds of vertical agreements and the provisions they contained are not in fact illegal under these circumstances (my understanding is basically that they can be illegal when used by a dominant player in a market, because it's anti-competitive, but when used by a new entrant in a market with an existing dominant player, they are ok, but IANAL).

<comment><USER8> > Basically, many people have looked at the overall book market both before > and Apple entered it, and found that, when looking at the entire market > instead of just e.g. the NYT bestsellers list, prices were not higher after > Apple showed up.

Basically, many people have looked at the 5 publishers accused of collusion and have seen that prices were higher AFTER the collusion

<comment><USER6> Are you trying to claim that somehow this whole affair affected book prices for the smaller publishers that didn't have agreements with Apple? Because for both of us to be right, all the smaller publishers must have dropped their prices _precipitously_ to offset this supposed increase across the board in the prices of the 5 big publishers.

<comment><USER8> I'm trying to say that ebook prices from publishers other than the 5 accused are irrelevant.

The fact is that the ebook average price from the accused publishers went up, it is irrelevant for that case that the total market average prices were down.

<comment><USER6> Ok, so you _are_ saying that the price of the other publishers went down, and apparently dropped enough to offset the fact that they're, well, smaller publishers, and therefore a smaller part of the book market.

I don't think that's true. I have never heard that the smaller publishers kept dropping their prices.

<comment><USER8> [http://www.justice.gov/atr/cases/f298700/298794.pdf#page=1](http://www.justice.gov/atr/cases/f298700/298794.pdf#page=1)

<comment><USER6> Yeah, that's just a graph with no data behind it, and it comes from a biased source. Do you have anything actually _usable_?

<comment><USER8> Are you saying that DoJ lied with this graph?

If so, can you post a single proof of that.

You're asking for "usable" sources and in fact you don't have provided a single one.

It is clear that you won't believe any source so, have a good day

<comment><USER6> The graph said "weighted". Weighted by what? I'm saying the DoJ produced a graph that would back up their narrative, but didn't provide the actual raw data, or an explanation of how the graph was produced. That makes it useless.

> It is clear that you won't believe any source

I won't believe obviously-biased "sources" that have no real data.

In any case, I think focusing on the current prices of eBooks is not actually very helpful. Amazon has the power to set prices at whatever the heck they want. And the publishers had no recourse, because not selling on Amazon meant not selling, period. But the artificially-low prices Amazon was using for e.g. bestsellers was _not sustainable_ for the publishers. It was not a healthy market, and there was zero reason to believe, had Apple not entered the market, that Amazon would continue selling at those prices indefinitely.

Artificially low prices are usually assumed to be good for consumers, and the DOJ certainly made that claim, but that's not true. Consumers do not benefit in the long-term from an unsustainable market. They also don't benefit from a market with no competition. The latter is what Amazon was trying to create, by keeping prices artificially low on bestsellers. This is predatory pricing, and their goal was to control the entire eBook market. Once they had complete dominance, it's reasonable to expect that they would have raised prices so they would stop taking a loss on all these $9.99 books (in case you aren't aware, Amazon was actually paying the publishers more than $9.99 for the bestsellers they were selling at that price). And in a market without competition it's very likely that Amazon would be selling books at prices higher than a healthy competitive market (like the one Apple was creating with their entry). Here's an article from a year ago with evidence that Amazon was already starting to raise prices: [http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/05/business/as-competition- wa...](http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/05/business/as-competition-wanes-amazon- cuts-back-its- discounts.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0&gwh=6C43B94F37871245E11C270408988C54&gwt=pay)

<comment><USER8> > The graph said "weighted". Weighted by what? I'm saying the DoJ produced a > graph that would back up their narrative >I won't believe obviously-biased > "sources" that have no real data.

Perhaps Eddy Cue is not a biased source and he admitted in the trial that ebook prices raise

[http://www.cnet.com/news/apples-eddy-cue-yep-we-caused-e- boo...](http://www.cnet.com/news/apples-eddy-cue-yep-we-caused-e-book-pricing- to-rise/)

> But the artificially-low prices Amazon was using for e.g. bestsellers was > not sustainable for the publishers.

Why not? Publishers were paid full price. In facts publishers earned LESS money with the agency model than with the wholesale model.

> This is predatory pricing, and their goal was to control the entire eBook > market.

Any proof of that? Do you also believe that DoJ lied when its investigation of Amazon found no predatory pricing?

> Once they had complete dominance, it's reasonable to expect that they would > have raised prices

I think that precog police still don't exists >And in a market without competition it's very likely that Amazon would be selling books at prices higher than a healthy competitive market (like the one Apple was creating with their entry)

A competitive market where ALL the stores must sell the ebook for the same price? Where the heck is the competition?

Is this your definition of competition, fixing the prices for all the stores and books?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> > The paperback edition of Brad Stone's "The Everything Store: Jeff Bezos and > the Age of Amazon" — a book Amazon disliked so much it denounced it — is > suddenly listed as "unavailable."

I like a conspiracy theory as much as the next guy but couldn't the book just be... unavailable? If they wanted to impede its distribution why are they still selling the Kindle, Hardcover, and Audio versions?

<comment><USER10> > I like a conspiracy theory as much as the next guy but couldn't the book > just be... unavailable?

Its unavailable in the sense that Amazon doesn't make it available -- so it is, literally, unavailable _from Amazon_. Strictly speaking, this is not inaccurate, it just doesn't mean what people who trust Amazon's comprehensiveness are likely to think it means, as its not unavailable from the publisher, which is why its also not unavailable through other retailers.

<comment><USER11> It's unavailable in the sense that you can actually buy it now. I just did. That is, in the sense that it is _available_. And right now the claim made is demonstrably false, if not a deliberate lie.

Seriously people you need to confirm your facts. _Not everything you read in the papers is true_.

<comment><USER12> It's definitely unavailable right now, for me. Glad you were able to order it, but your ability to do so once doesn't mean many people aren't prevented.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> > "I have supported Amazon for as long as Amazon has existed. I've been > published for 20 years now and you have sold so many of my books," she wrote > in a Facebook posting she also sent to the retailer.

Why does she not blame her publisher for setting the price of her books to be too high[0]? This seems to be a regular merchant/vendor price dispute - nothing new about it.

The publisher is just a middleman here[1] - if she were trying to sell directly to Amazon at the same price, Amazon's reaction (presumably) would be to refuse to sell the book based on the prices she set. At that point, she'd have two options: (1) Lower the price of the book, or (2) Accept that the book won't be available on Amazon.

> "Your actions to raise the prices of our books, place banners touting books > that 'are similar but lower in price' and saying that our books will ship in > 3-5 weeks when they are in stock is not only a disgusting negotiation > practice, but it has made me tell my readers to shop elsewhere — and they > are and will," she wrote.

This is a minor point, but for what it's worth, it appears that Amazon is saying that the books are "unavailable", not "out of stock", from the screenshot. Amazon _does_ sometimes say that items are "out of stock" instead of "unavailable", so it's not that they're trying to imply any reason for the lack of availability - they're just saying that they are not available and not specifying the reason.

[0] This is mostly rhetorical - I can understand why she may not want to lower her price - but that's the way supply and demand works in a supply chain (ie, when you're not selling direct-to-consumer).

[1] As is Amazon, for that matter! She always has the option of selling the e-books herself, if she decides that that's a worthwhile endeavor.

<comment><USER12> > Why does she not blame her publisher for setting the price of her books to > be too high[0]? This seems to be a regular merchant/vendor price dispute - > nothing new about it.

Because Amazon's the one making it hard for her readers to get their hands on her books. We don't know it has anything to do with the prices they want for her books.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> Does this article still make sense if you click on this:

[http://www.amazon.com/The-Everything-Store-Bezos- Amazon/dp/0...](http://www.amazon.com/The-Everything-Store-Bezos- Amazon/dp/0316219266)

And notice that the book IS AVAILABLE?

<comment><USER15> Was that the case when the article was written though?

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> The main reason this is getting publicity is that the authors are getting punished but they have no power. Otherwise it's just a standard retailer/supplier conflict.

Also, note that Hachette is one of the publishers involved in the e-book suit who settled, so not exactly a great history with Amazon.

<comment><USER10> Another major reason is suggested in the earlier article -- Amazon's market power in the book retailing business (particularly if online book retailing is regarded as a distinct market) is so great that a lot of commenters have raised antitrust concerns about that power being applied as leverage for better terms in the e-book market (developing market power isn't illegal by itself, but applying it to use dominance in one market to acheive dominance in another can be an antitrust violation.)

<comment><USER17> The publishers are completely free to sell DRM-free ebooks directly to consumers that can be enjoyed on their Kindle or whatever. They insist on relying on greedy middlemen like Apple and are shocked when Amazon doesn't fall in line.

I have no sympathy for complaining publishers that refuse to actually circumvent these "bully" distributors.

<comment><USER18> They're also completely free to sell DRM-free paperbacks, and all of them do, but that's never helped them much when Amazon lists their paperbacks as "out of stock" as leverage tactics over physical book pricing because most people assume that if Amazon don't have it, it's out of print and there's no point looking elsewhere.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Why don't the publishers make it easy to buy books from them, instead of all this rigamarole about rights and regions? I want to go to your website, pay with a credit card, and you ship it to me, anywhere in the world, and fast.

No, instead, I go to a local bookstore, they don't have it.

I go to Amazon, they have it. I order it, two days later it's at my door, for 30% off the price on the back of the book.

So everybody does the same as me, and now Amazon is the 800-lbs gorilla in the room, throwing its weight around, and you're complaining?

You had the opportunity, 10 years ago, to kill Amazon, and you didn't, because you wanted to keep charging us more for less service.

Tough.

<comment><USER12> ... and since many people did the same thing, and many of the local bookstores have closed (particularly those with large selections), Amazon effectively has considerable influence over what kinds of things most of us read. Tough indeed. For _us_.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> What practice of Hachette is amazon objecting to? The article doesn't specify the cause of the conflict.

<comment><USER10> > What practice of Hachette is amazon objecting to?

Amazon isn't publicly objecting to any Hachette practice. Per the earlier article on the dispute linked from the source article, [1] Amazon is seeking more favorable contract terms with Hachette (and neither side seems to be disclosing what particular terms are at issue), and is working to discourage sales of their books -- and promote alternatives to people specifically seaching for Hachette books -- to force Hachette to agree to Amazon's preferred terms.

[1] The earlier article: [http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/10/technology/writers-feel- an...](http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/10/technology/writers-feel-an-amazon- hachette-spat.html)

<comment><USER21> Yes, of course the publishers wouldn't want authors to see the details of their Amazon deals.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> That's a vulgar way of demonstrating Amazon's muscle power.

</comment><comment><USER23> The article is short on details, but I'm not clear why Amazon is obligated to sell a publisher's books, much less at the publisher's desired prices. Wal- mart is famous for using its size to lean on suppliers ensuring "everyday low prices." Why is publishing different?

I sympathize with authors that are hurt by this battle, but it just shows that Amazon's marketplace is becoming more important to their sales than their publisher is.

<comment><USER10> > but I'm not clear why Amazon is obligated to sell a publisher's books, much > less at the publisher's desired prices.

No one has said that they are. Likewise, the affected publisher, and the news media, are not obligated to fail to inform the public of Amazon's tactics so that they are aware that Amazon having smaller-than-usual discounts, "not available" notices, and long shipping times may well be a sign not of any issue with the availability of the book, but of Amazon's disputes with the publisher, and that therefore if they are encountered when looking for a particular book, a consumer would be well advised to look at other online retailers, who, while their usual discounts may be lower, may have better discounts for the book at issue or have it available when Amazon says its unavailable, or have it with a more reasonable shipping time when Amazon does not.

Amazon is essentially leveraging the trust that consumers have in them as presenting a seemingly comprehensive catalog and best terms in the online book retailing business to selectively pressure publishers, and its completely fair to inform consumers that, in the particular case of these kinds of disputes, that trust may, however well earned it was previously, not be warranted -- and what the particular symptoms are that such a dispute is affecting the book you are looking for.

<comment><USER24> Amazon lying to customers - there's a winning strategy.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> [http://www.powells.com/](http://www.powells.com/) \- this is a great place to get books, although the best thing of all is to go there in person and wander around. I generally like Amazon, by and large, and I love my Kindle, but wandering around looking at that many books in person is great too.

</comment><comment><USER26> I have started two publishing companies over the last two years. What I can say on the economics of print is that the margins are not good compared to ebooks. What this article misses is the fight is not really between publishers and Amazon, but between printers and Amazon. Printers and their distribution system are getting squeezed.

</comment><comment><USER27> Looks like the publishing industry needs to consolidate further.

</comment><comment><USER28> Boy, aren't we all glad the DOJ protected poor little Amazon from the evil and all-powerful Apple e-book conspiracy and monopoly.

<comment><USER16> OK, so in this case, Amazon wants better terms than Hachette will give, so Amazon plays hardball.

In the e-book conspiracy, all the publishers wanted better terms than Amazon would give, and they didn't want to give Amazon the chance to play hardball, so they banded together and forced Amazon's hand.

Not really sure how the second is better. It's certainly way more illegal.

<comment><USER10> Assuming the first player has monopoly power (which its tactics wouldn't have any effect if it didn't) both are equally illegal.

<comment><USER16> You don't need a monopoly to have enough power to push around your suppliers.

<comment><USER10> You have to have monopoly power to do so by the tactics at issue (limiting consumer availability and manipulating retail prices) since in a market with effective competition that does more to direct sales of the product to competing retailers than to hurt the total volume sold by the publisher.

<comment> jack-r-abbit You just need more loyal customers. My first stop is Amazon. But I would not say I am loyal to Amazon above all else. If I really wanted something and they didn't have it, then I'd move on the next stop. In this case (that book about Amazon) I'd head on over to Barnes & Noble and pay just $0.31 more to order it there. No big deal.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Free Kindle anyone? How Amazon can dominate ebooks - <AUTHOR> http://www.ajaimk.com/2010/08/27/how-the-kindle-and-the-nook-can-win-the-ebook-market/ <comment><USER2> 1\. Estimates of units sold for both the iPad and the Kindle range from 3-5 million.

2\. Even with competition from Apple, Barnes and Noble, and others Amazon still holds 90% of the ebook market share.

3\. Publisher Author J. A. Konrath reported that on the iBookstore he sales 100 books per month. On the Kindle store he sales 200 books per day.

4\. Kindle is not just the physical device. You can read Kindle books on the iPad through the Kindle App. Kindle is also on Android and Windows and everything else that you could possible want to read an ebook on. This means that even if the iPad or an Android

5\. The production of the Kindle and price Amazon must purchase the ebooks from their publishers must be taken into account. Let's assume the Kindle Reader only costs Amazon $150 to produce and that for each $10 book sold they have to give the publishers $7.

19 x $7 = $133 in ebook costs + $150 for the Kindle = $283 in total that Amazon would spend on giving away the Kindle. $283 – $189 the customer pays = $94.

Amazon would go from making $39 on each Kindle Unit to losing $94. If you factor in the lose sales of 19 books x $3 Amazon gets for selling the book then Amazon is losing out on another $57 in revenue for a total of $96 in lost revenue by your brilliant idea. $96 in lost revenue + $94 from the unit sold = Amazon would be making $190 less by giving it away for free than they would by still selling it.

6\. Oh yeah, Amazon already gives away over 1.8 million out of print books for free.

</comment><comment><USER3> One thing they really need to work on is book quality. I bought a Kindle book and there are so many errors that it's hard to read. I know the hardcover version doesn't have this errors, so their conversion process probably needs a proofreading step added. There also doesn't seem to be an easy way to report these errors, so I don't I'll be buying any more Kindle books. I had even preordered one of the new Kindles, but I canceled it because of this.

<comment><USER4> Most kindle books I have purchased have been, for the most part, free of errors. For a few books that did have significant errors, they showed up in the free sample, the book's comments were all complaints about kindle errors, and the books were fixed the next time I looked at them.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Why did HN change its font? - <AUTHOR>

The new font is not easy on the eye. Please switch back or use something which is easier to read. <comment><USER2> Hacker News, like most websites, is rendered with the typefaces you've already got on your computer.

        font-family: Verdana, Geneva, sans-serif;

If your browser doesn't find _Verdana_ on your computer, it looks for _Geneva_. If it doesn't find _Geneva_ either, it loads a generic sans-serif.

<comment><AUTHOR> Its the point size which seems to have changed. From 9pt to 10pt.

<comment><USER3> Try hitting ctrl-0 when you're on the page, probably you zoomed in by accident.</comment></comment></comment>


Show HN: Slink – highlight and link a webpage - <AUTHOR> https://slink.to/ <comment><USER2> So it will serve a modified version of that same page?

</comment><comment><USER2> I like it, but why not hypothes.is (or others)?</comment>


The Bomb That Changed My Life - <AUTHOR> http://swombat.com/2011/12/19/bomb-changed-my-life

<comment><USER3> Fascinating account of post-7/7 behavioural trauma, and how hard it was to do the right thing; it shows up both in Daniel's reaction and those of other commenters who've been in similar situations. It's not just bombs ...

Accounts I've read of what happens immediately after a [survivable] plane crash are similar. Many physically uninjured passengers will just continue to sit in their seats, waiting to be told what to do, even if the plane's on fire. Another sizeable minority act through their roles as if the plane had made a _successful_ landing; stand up to grab their carry-on luggage, then form an orderly queue. Only around 10-20% actually behave appropriately (that is, follow the emergency evacuation drill, without guidance: pop the emergency hatches and get the hell out of the danger zone without encumbering themselves).

We are creatures of habit; we have great difficulty accepting the existence of an immediate and potentially lethal threat to our existence, so some of us behave as if it simply isn't there. (Which is why it takes training to instill the right reflexes for dealing with abnormal situations.) And even among those who unfreeze and start moving again, the impulse to revert to "normal" behaviour can be overwhelming.

<comment><USER4> Ive seen this phenemenon in person. I was the 2nd person on scene to a head on collision with two in critical condition. I was trying to open the doors and get the girl out by moving the seat back and testing for breathing and pulse. 5 minutes later I see a semicircle of people around the cars about 18 feet away with paralyzed people, 15 of them frozen. One lit up a cigarette. For 5 minutes.

I asked for crowbars or tools to dismantle the seat so the person could exit. No one moved, it was like a movie to them. I think it is a survival instinct that has atrophied to dysfunction. Playing dead, or waiting for a more experienced leader to emerge with instructions. I was unable to register myself as a leader to those paralyzed brains.

<comment><USER5> Next time this happens, don't let the circle happen, start shouting orders at people. Become a manager on the spot. Tell them to do anything. Something as insane as telling them to do jumping jacks will work.

I've been in that situation before, I've been the first responder on site and while I have limited medical knowledge I knew enough to check pulses and verify that people were "okay", as soon as the second and third people showed up I started yelling orders at them. For some reason this causes them to do without asking "why" whatever you are telling them to do. Call 911, block off the road, turn on hazards, warn people coming down the roads, get a blanket, get water, I need a knife to cut the seatbelt.

Shout status updates to the person on the 911 call.

In my case a vehicle had caught on fire and I wanted to get everyone away as soon as possible. I started yelling at people to get out of the way at least a 100 ft and get down, I didn't want to risk an explosion (yes, I am aware of how unlikely it is, and it didn't happen this time) but there was a fire in the engine compartment. At that point a doctor had stopped, I was yelling at him to get away when he mentioned he was a doctor, I told him to help me get the person out of the vehicle that was on fire. Two other strong volunteers had made their way over to the other vehicle and were pulling the three people out of that vehicle (which had fared much better).

To this day I still don't remember faces, I don't remember much of what I did or how I did it, but I do remember a police officer telling me that I should consider myself a hero because I did what I should have done. He told me how the other people told him that I was yelling orders like a mad man and that I seemed to have the scene under full control. In reality I have no idea what went through my head, I have no idea how I was able to do what I did and what my thinking was like at the time. I had heard of the "By Stander" effect you mentioned before this, and I had been told what to do, but I have had no training at all.

To this day I still have slight PTSD. I have had terrible dreams about what I do remember, the person on the passenger side of the car which was on fire whose head was so smashed in from hitting the front dashboard (no seatbelt, no airbags) that it was completely missing, blood everywhere (blood is also surprisingly slippery ...) and trying to make sure everyone was safe that was showing up to "help".

<comment><USER6> You do what you have to do to take charge of a scene like that. I've also had the misfortune of dealing with serious and even life-threatening injuries. I guess I'm lucky because my brain does _not_ shut down, but rather goes into overdrive. So I naturally end up taking charge whether I want to or not.

You're absolutely right about crowd mentality, too. You have to expect that most of the bystanders will be almost useless and order them about. I never told them to do jumping-jacks, but I do give specific instructions to specific people and that works a lot better.

But I know what you mean about seeing horrible things. I try not to think about Grandma lying in a pool of blood, even though I saved her. I hope I never see another compound fracture again.

<comment><USER5> Jumping jacks was an example I used because it is completely out there, but most people will find it an insane request and their brain will snap out of it. Generally becoming helpful at that point.

I've always given direct orders to anyone that I saw. Either by pointing at them, or by naming something they are wearing.

<comment><USER6> I guess I've never had to snap people out of it, I just started organizing them myself. It sure doesn't seem to take much to throw people into a panic, though.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> An eloquent description which captures the essence of one possible reaction. Mine was different (I live in Israel, had a similar encounter) but the core experience is similar.

It seems cliche, but there is a fundamental truth to the fact that most westerners are simply unaware of what the "I fear for my bodily integrity" sensation is and does to your life. OP's newly-discovered appreciation of how crowded buses present a potential security threat is a great example. It isn't that you suddenly see your life in a whole new light, it's that you regard various mundane things with a new, orthogonal parameter: is this situation more likely to result in harm to me?

Like all things, eventually you become inured and looking at a situation from a security perspective becomes a routine thought passing through your head along with "shit, I forgot to pay the gas bill." Without getting into Israel/Palestine, this is a slice of what living in Israeli society is roughly like.

<comment><USER8> I've spent a considerable amount of time in Iraq in the US military; it's very tough to explain to people how much energy I now spend assessing threats presented by very mundane acts/situations. It's exhausting. I constantly have to remind myself that I'm not in danger. So tired of it. I feel sometimes that if I were still in a combat zone or a constantly embattled place like Israel that energy wouldn't be expended for nought.

<comment><USER5> I was taught something really cool by a police friend of mine, and that is the traffic light of awareness. There is green, orange/yellow and red.

What you are describing is living above "red". It doesn't matter where you are, what you are doing or who you are with you are constantly looking at peoples hands, faces, posture, and constantly assessing threats. Many people in law enforcement and military have the same experience as you.

The way I have heard it explained is as such:

green = this is where you feel most safe, this would be when you are home in bed, or when you are back in your old childhood room at your parents house.

orange = You are slightly alert, this can be your condition while driving, or walking on the street. You are aware of your surroundings, but you feel comfortable and at ease.

red = You are highly alert, you are scanning every single person, you are scanning all situations, you are watching for unexpected movement, you are watching facial expressions and body language, you are looking for exits, you know what locations would be safe and what locations wouldn't be safe. Some people have said they experienced a sort of tunnel vision in that you don't nothing anything but potential threats.

People that spend a long time in the red zone can have significant issues with PTSD, it can put you on edge, make it difficult to function in society. The reason why law enforcement feels like such an outsider compared to the general citizen is partly due to constantly being in the red. When they are around other police officers they can let their guard drop a little and feel less stressed.

I hope you soon start feeling like you don't have to do what you are doing. I've heard from friends that were in the military that for them it went away after a year or two of being out, but it has been difficult for them, you forever see all situations and people in a completely different light. Best of luck to you.

Note: I personally spend a lot of time in orange and red modes, part of this may be my life long martial arts training as well as having had attempted muggings. Even while at home I never leave orange, I have a hard time finding a place where I feel completely at ease/in the green.

<comment><USER8> This is a great explanation and very apt. I'm generally at a red on this scale. I don't call that PTSD, btw, though a lot of laymen might. I just think it comes from the understanding that bad stuff happens regardless of how prepared you are, but you can minimize the damage if you're ready to react.

<comment><USER9> I don't know you and haven't seen anything like combat so sorry if this is presumptuous, but have you considered psychotherapy? A good therapist could teach you strategies to control your level of anxiety/stress/alertness whatever you want to call it. Doesn't mean you're crazy and there's no shame in it. thanks for our service.

<comment><USER10> Some cultures (US, in my personal experience) spend quite a bit of time convincing themselves that terrible things can't happen to them. For instance, I could be hit by a bus tomorrow in a freak accident and suffer a more painful end than a soldier in Iraq. That's not to say that Iraq isn't much more dangerous, but danger exists for everyone.

I feel for the soldier you're replying to because he is at odds with society in this regard. However, he's not at odds with reality because bad shit really does happen and I admire his not being so quick to label it some kind of illness.

<comment><USER11> Accepting that random dangers outside of our control exist is actually entirely different than the hypervigilance. Your bus example: Do you go into a panic at the sight of a bus? Do you check that every bus you see comes to a complete stop & doesn't have faulty brakes? Do you wait for buses to leave the area before you proceed?

With hypervigilance you are identifying threats that do not likely exist given the current context of the situation. Classic post-war examples are where someone needs to check their corners before exiting an aisle of a grocery store or fears slowing down at an intersection because it leaves them vulnerable, even though they are in their hometown. It can interfere greatly with someone's quality of life.

<comment><USER10> But you see what I'm saying? "quality of life" is an illusion because danger exists in those situations. my point is not hypervigilance, as you say. my point is... enjoy your life because it could be very, very short

<comment><USER11> The poster you were responding to sounded like he may be dealing with hypervigilance, which is why I brought it up. Hypervigilance is one facet of PTSD. PTSD should not be poo poo'd. People with PTSD cannot just say "oh life's short, I should enjoy it" & then get on with their lives.

<comment><USER10> The poster didn't sound like he's in such bad shape and doesn't deserve to be labeled as diseased. If he decides he needs that, sure, it should be taken dead seriously. He may not. Just let the man live his life and decide what he can or cannot say

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Thanks for posting that. It brought my awareness to something important.

I worked in 1 WTC and was about to get into the elevator when the first plane hit on 9/11. I was outside on the corner when the second plane hit.

When my head started to clear some time later--a week? two?--the clearest thought I had was: if my last act as a human had been connecting a data input form to a database table, it would have been a tremendous waste of my life.

Shortly thereafter I entered a new career and a new trajectory through life. The last 10 years have been amazing.

Living with the visceral awareness that sudden death is possible has changed me in many ways. Mostly for the better.

I do have some symptoms of PTSD. Low-flying planes freak me out intensely, as do sudden loud noises and low vibrations strong enough to shake things.

On balance, though, it has catalyzed tremendously positive change in my life. I'm glad that you've been able to make the same of it.

Cheers to being alive.

(Bizarrely, I was also in London on 7/7. A bomb squad truck nearly ran me over (on my bike) going the wrong way down the road near Liverpool St. station, and my wife was very nearly on the Hackney Wick bus.)

<comment><USER13> _I do have some symptoms of PTSD. Low-flying planes freak me out intensely, as do sudden loud noises and low vibrations strong enough to shake things._

Are these really PTSD symptoms? I have the same thing, though perhaps not as bad. I was 5 miles from the attack, and in fourth grade at the time.

<comment><USER14> I'm not a doctor, but my understanding from talking to doctor friends is that the difference between a "Disorder" and a "quirk" is how much disruption it causes your life.

If when you see a plane flying low you hit the ground and start screaming, that's certainly a disorder. If you glance up at the plane and feel "hrm, I don't like it much", that's not really a disorder. In between those two extremes is found the difference between PTSD and "I don't like low-flying planes since 9/11".

<comment><USER12> I have about 3/4 of a panic attack if a big plane flies low near me in an urban environment. It has to be low enough for me to feel (or imagine that I feel) the vibration from the engines in my body.

Now that I think about it, I also get freaked out in moving crowds now, which I never did before. (I can be in crowded places, no problem--it's just when a lot of people are moving and mixing, like at a parade, music festival or busy shopping district.)

The airplane thing is totally manageable; I just need to stop and take a few deep breaths. The crowds thing starts off that way, but can get outright panic attack inducing if I don't get somewhere less crowded, and quickly.

I'm with OP. It seems that to be a 'disorder' it needs to have outwardly visible and functionally maladaptive outcomes on your behavior.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Thanks for that. My girlfriend at the time, got off at Euston when they evacuated the station and decided to try take a bus to get to work. While waiting for her bus, a bus exploded not far from where she was standing. Her reaction was to walk through the city to work, asking for directions along the way, walking even past my office. I couldn't reach her because the mobile network went out of action. She didn't want to come to my office because she knew I traveled in early to make it to a meeting and didn't want to disturb me (the meeting obviously got canceled). It's been hard for me to understand the thought process that made her want to take a bus when the station was being evacuated, and made her want to walk to work after that. I think it's been a case of the initial evacuation making her worry about getting to work on time and even though she didn't know about any explosions at that point she was already reacting in a panic. With the trauma of being near a blast, it must have anchored that thought process into becoming the most important mission for her to accomplish.

I was on a train when they started evacuating a station, and I was praying to myself that the train leaves the station quickly in case the evacuation was for a bomb. Little did I know the bombs were on the trains themselves and not in the station, but my initial reaction was to get out of that station and to get out of the train network and away from public places and crowds as quickly as possible. This article helps explaining this thought process to me.

<comment><USER16> That's exactly what I did, I used to get the Piccadilly line from Kings Cross going south around the time the bomb went off. The trains on that line at that time are really packed, about 4 to 5 people per m2, I can only imagine what it must have been like down there. But, I was 10 mins late that day and couldn't get on the tube to connect at Kings Cross. People were running out of my normal station but I ignored that and walked down to Kings Cross thinking 'stupid Northern Line I'll get on there'. When I got to Kings Cross there were lots of people milling around and walking away from there, I think I asked someone and they said the station was closed. So I just got on a bus on Euston Rd and went to work as normal. I bumped into a colleague on the bus and she said she had been walking past an air vent outside Russell Sq station when there had been a huge inrush of air and a deep rumbling sound. I remember saying to her that it was probably just the power supply going out, maybe a transformer explosion or something (we had just been discussing mitigation of transformer explosions at work a few days before). Obviously, it was a weird day at work, nobody did anything really. It was too far to walk home, I ended up getting 5 different busses, partly because the service was all over the place and partly because I had to get off one because I thought someone looked suspicious. I grew up in London and the three lines and the bus route that got bombed were ones that I had used regularly all my life, I took it quite personally that they had attacked 'my places' in 'my city'.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> Very well written.

I had a similar experience with the tricks the mind can play after a bad car accident a few years ago. Although I didn't know it at the time, I had broken almost everything except my left arm and neck. But I could quite plainly see that my right femur bent in an unnatural curve like a floppy puppet's leg. Yet still I insisted that the rescuers couldn't phone my wife because she was 7mths pregnant and had gone back to bed that morning after feeling sick.

Subconciously, my brain was thinking I shouldn't bother her with this and I'd be patched up and home for dinner. I just couldn't process the obvious inputs like a normal rational person.

Also, although I remained concious throughout, I don't remember much of the incident and had no idea how they got me out of the car until I saw the police photos. The mind is a strange thing.

<comment><USER18> My friend, gravely injured in a nasty accident, told firefighters not to mention anything about the accident to his mother becuase she would be scared - just 5 minutes before he died. It seems that his brain worked the same way as yours after the accident.

<comment><USER17> I'm really sorry to hear about your friend. It gives me goosebumps to think that I might have reacted the same way but with a far worse outcome. On the other hand, it's comforting to know that others have taken the same attitude in similar circumstances.

To this day my wife still hasn't forgiven me. The accident happened at 0930 and she didn't get to see me until 1600hrs.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> _'I should be 1 of those people who can help others in this situation, not just a passive, helpless observer. I can help'_

Kudos Dan.

I've noticed first hand as both a first-responder & bystander the different ways people react. It's broadly in 2 categories, those paralysed by the automatic Fear/Flight/Freeze response and those Individuals who shape the instinctual response with a trained response, overriding the Survival Stress Reaction [0] most people exhibit. You see 2 groups of people: those frozen by instinct and others who run towards trouble. People who are trained to respond run towards trouble.

The story Dan has written is a natural human story telling response to traumatic events. Re-telling the story(s) lets you make sense of what has happened and re-gain control over their own destiny. Safety is also being sought here. Control, safety & the knowledge you won't die.

Which brings me to my next point. Not everyone wakes up thinking, today's the day I'm going to be injured or killed then watch other people get injured or killed? Police, Ambo's, firemen, soldiers are exposed to this threat every day. They train hard and have the necessary support structures (sort-of) to survive. Civilians don't, so _Scar_ stories of survival fulfil an important role.

People who have been in situations such as @swombat as a civvie or @mattdeboard in the military or @idan living in a potentially dangerous environment, the key thing they are striving for is to feel and be safe. Being safe is something you don't know you have until it's not there.

[0] SSR or Survival Stress Reaction is where _"a state where a 'perceived' high threat stimulus automatically engages the sympathetic nervous system."_ , Siddle.,B. "Sharpening the Warriors Edge: The Psychology & Science of Training" [http://www.amazon.com/Sharpening-Warriors-Edge-Psychology- Tr...](http://www.amazon.com/Sharpening-Warriors-Edge-Psychology- Training/dp/0964920506)

</comment><comment><USER20> This is really great writing. Brings back very vivid memories from that day, which in retrospect I can't believe I never wrote down.

I was playing hooky from school, in a flat in Kings Cross, with my then- girlfriend, after a very late night. I was alerted to what had happened around 10am, when I answered the phone on perhaps the 7th ring, figuring I was in trouble for sciving.

I think my mum had already started planning my funeral by that stage. There's probably a decent chance that, had I gone to school, given my lateness, I might have been a bit closer to the action - the moral of which I take to be "skipping school saved my life"

Looking back now, I remember how the sense of relief I felt very quickly turned to a sense of despair and numbness, as more and more pictures came on the TV and more details emerged. The entire city was bleeding, but in a very strange way, much like what the writer of this post describes, a kind of zombie-like state where everything feels disconnected.

</comment><comment><USER21> Amazing writing, thanks for taking the time out to lay out every detail. It is hard to put yourself into an event like this when you at home sitting on your couch watching it on TV. I watch and see numbers (56 dead) and it is hard to really get emotionally involved with people who you most likely don't know when you have such generic details. Reading this, I feel like I was there, even for a moment.

Thanks again for putting something horrible like a bombing in perspective. I'm glad to hear you came out of it stronger on the other end.

</comment><comment><USER22> Very well written thank you for sharing, very few people can put this into words. What changed my life about 3 years ago was getting hit by a car (was my fault ran across a street to catch a streetcar). I clearly remember the whole thing, rolling over the hood, having the foot broken by the wheel. Lying on the pavement with people around me. Changed my life for the better.

Funny thing, I was carrying a sandwich I just bought and got pretty upset when paramedic stepped on the bag where the sandwich was!

</comment><comment><USER23> Daniel, do you still think that following the driver's advice to not look right was a good decision?

I ask because I don't think, in the same situation, I would have been able to resist it, and I honestly have no idea what effect that sight might have.

When you do feel fear on public travel now (and I guess it was even worse in the past), what goes on in your mind? Is it one of those things where you know really that your worry is foolish but you can't help yourself, or is your entire brain telling you that you could be in trouble?

<comment><USER24> >>Daniel, do you still think that following the driver's advice to not look right was a good decision?

Advice: I know people with PTSD and believe it is a good thing if you can avoid getting it yourself.

Personally, I can handle blood. But as a Scandinavian, I have a hard time seeing suffering even for a Westerner.

<comment><USER25> It seems like iskander's account is hellbanned, I think it's one of those rare false positives. Anyway, he replied to your comment:

"On the other hand, seeing violence up close gives you a better understanding of experiences many people outside the affluent west have to deal with. I ran back toward my bus after it blew up in Jerusalem and I mostly don't regret it. I hav been haunted by the experience since (the smell most of all) but I also feel like I gained a lot of sympathy for people whose situations were previously totally abstract to me."

\</comment></comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment>-

Not everyone's meant to be a reality junkie. A body can only handle so much (like heroin). [http://unqualified- reservations.blogspot.com/2011/07/dispatc...](http://unqualified- reservations.blogspot.com/2011/07/dispatches-from-real-america.html)

</comment><comment><USER26> Thank you for writing about this experience. I'm sure it must not be easy to relate something so traumatic and intimate to thousands of strangers, even six years later.

Many people who experience something like this never find the lesson from these experiences as you have, instead ending up with PTSD or similar; I hope that our governments can begin to respond more humanely to tragedies like this and help those who aren't able to find their own path out of fear with counseling and other assistance.

Our response to terrorism over the years has largely been one of fighting the threat (and understandably so). We should add to it a response of compassion for those who, through misfortune, find themselves harmed mentally in a way that most of society cannot understand.

</comment><comment><USER27> Captivatingly written. I know what the author means regarding taking, "paralyzed by fear" as something figurative, not literal, until it actually happens to you.

I remember a few years ago (2006) seeing two very large military transport aircraft flying incredibly close together, very low, and directly towards the building I was in (on the 10th floor). I literally stopped mid sentence - <USER2> obviously turned away and went on to the nearby RAF base but for a while my brain just seemed to freeze. After the event, I felt a bit of a fraud and worried people might think I'd done it for dramatic effect, but it was totally involuntary - I just sat, motionless looking out the window for about 5 seconds.

</comment><comment><USER28> My wife worked in the city for one of the big banks. A chap who worked there was in a similar situation. He missed the train that had the bombers on board, but he decided to grab a bus to work instead. This also had one of the bombers upstairs which moments later detonated killing most of the people on the bus. What made it even worse is that everyone who died that day was taken to a makeshift morgue on Moorgate which is overlooked by the people who worked in his team. A really shocking day.

</comment><comment><USER29> I was in the tube that day (but at a station far from the actual bombs) and probably because of that plus travelling the next day, I saw almost nothing of the coverage or what actually happened. I only noticed that something had happened after exiting the tube and getting stopped when trying to get back down at Piccadilly. It's a strange thought to look back and know that only through random chance did I happen to be on a train that wasn't involved.

</comment><comment><USER30> Incredibly powerful writing, even more so when combined with that track.

</comment><comment><USER31> Thank you for sharing this - I was 17 and away from home (and news) when this happened and it never really struck home what happened that day.

</comment><comment><USER32> Thanks for posting this. A poignant reminder.

</comment><comment><USER33> Well written by a regular HN contributor, but not hacker news. If somebody is interested in Daniel's writings, they can just subscribe to his RSS.</comment>


Hackers in Space - <AUTHOR> http://events.ccc.de/camp/2011/Fahrplan/track/Hacker%20Space%20Program/4551.en.html <comment><USER2> FYI, it's a 3500 attendee camp. It is also almost sold out (presale currently), so if you plan to attend and don't have a ticket, now is a good time.

</comment><comment><USER3> Thanks to emerging low-cost satellite launches (like from <http://interorbital.com/>), fun projects like <http://sat.mur.at/> are already in the real of being possible. I may be an hopeless optimist, but some relatively low-bandwidth hacker-operated satellite network within 20 years is not _totally_ impossible.

<comment><USER4> In twenty years, as long as you got something up, it will be high bandwidth compared with today.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> _phase two: Put a hacker into orbit._

Phase 2.5: console widow, figure out how to get him back down. Alternate phase 2: send cat into space instead, start new meme and initiate hacker war with PETA. (jk)

<comment><USER6> Phase 2 is already in progress.

Check out the Copenhagen Suborbitals guys, they launch succesfuly their first suborbital rocket a month ago.

<http://www.copenhagensuborbitals.com/>

<comment><USER3> Nice video on their page. I especially loved their "caution fragile" marker -- on a rocket!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Considering how most hackers build stuff at hackerspaces ("i don't know how to build this, so let's go with trial and error and learn as we go!") this sounds dangerous.

But cool.

</comment><comment><USER8> By the way, we'll set up a Ruby village at the Camp. Come and join us:

<http://railscamp.github.com/ruby-village>

You can also just support our cause to spread some Ruby love with a few bucks in our Pledgie, which is only 50% complete at the moment:

<http://pledgie.com/campaigns/15397>

</comment><comment><USER9> Other interesting projects include an attempt to have a transparent open source leaking platform to carry on Wikileaks legacy.

<comment><USER10> OpenLeaks; "Instead of publishing the documents, OpenLeaks will send the leaked documents to various news entities or publishers."

Wish I was kidding: <https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Openleaks>

<comment><USER9> I agree this policy of OpenLeaks is a bit dubious. The project the Chaos Computer Club are working on is called 'GlobalLeaks'. I cannot determine if it is going to be respectable.

EDIT: Just saw that OpenLeaks are going to be at the conference. GlobalLeaks is a group attempting to create open source leaking platform. It might be that 'OpenLeaks' = 'GlobalLeaks'

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Are there going to be presentation slides / videos / ustreams? Would like to cross the atlantic to come see but can't.

<comment><USER12> They usually are recorded.

The last camp apparently was in 2007: <http://dewy.fem.tu- ilmenau.de/CCC/CCCamp07/video/m4v/>

(More events: <http://dewy.fem.tu-ilmenau.de/CCC/> )

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> I can't be the only one with a sudden, fond memory of the Muppets.

Which I find, indeed, hackerish. Jim Henson and crew hacked an entire presentation medium, mainstreaming an entire character type (the puppet, formerly relegated to kids shows and ventriloquists).

I hope this combination of earnest endeavor and levity can escape our gravity well.

</comment><comment><USER14> Sounds like it might be a little more expensive than an arduino kit and some free time.

Yet I remain optimistic that it might eventually only cost the same as a transatlantic flight does today to get a 180lb human into orbit.

PCs were started this way...

</comment><comment><USER10> The Hacker Space Program should tackle the next piracy: 3D printing (Formally known as Reprap) [0].

[0] <http://reprap.org/wiki/EndOfIntellectualProperty>

</comment><comment><USER15> This is absurd -- the hacker movement is too small and undisciplined, and it lacks substantial knowledge about engineering and physics, to make this its central project for the next 30+ years.

I'm all for big projects, but the hacker community should focus on what it knows how to do -- write software.

</comment><comment><USER16> Neat, but in order for me to take this seriously they have to at least spell 'satellite' correctly.</comment>


YT error: "This video is restricted. Try signing in with a G Suite account" - <AUTHOR> https://support.google.com/youtube/thread/22992384 <comment><AUTHOR> This happens frequently to my wife on her mobile phone even when on the same WiFi network as me, but doesn't on my phone. We're both not using YouTube app, but NewPipe, Firefox Klar and Firefox Fennec.

She tried logging into YouTube on desktop browser and turning Restricted mode on/off, but it didn't help.

The issue seems to occur with non-mainstream media covering (Serbian) oppositional topics.</comment>


A new neural network design could overcome challenges in AI - <AUTHOR> https://www.technologyreview.com/s/612561/a-radical-new-neural-network-design-could-overcome-big-challenges-in-ai/ <comment><USER2> I'm one of the authors. There's more discussion on this other recent HN thread [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18676986](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18676986) where David Duvenaud (Senior Author) answers some questions.

<comment><USER3> Does this article do a good job of representing your work?

<comment><USER2> As with all science communication, it is highly specific to the audience.

I would say if you are completely unfamiliar with machine learning then this article accomplishes the job of informing you that we've proposed something exciting and a bit different, and gives some flavour for what kind of problems we're interested in (like continuous time medical data).

However, this article assumes essentially zero technical background. So if you're comfortable with concepts either from machine learning (at the level of vaguely knowing some details about a neural network) or mathematics (taken some calculus or know about differential equations) then you will probably find this article lacking in details. Again, this is just that you're not in the target audience.

If you don't know where you fall on that spectrum of prerequisite background I highly recommend taking a look at some of David's responses in the thread I linked where he gives a pretty good quick primer with a bit more technical detail.

<comment><USER4> Presumably the target audience then is people who got there by accident.

> If your brain hurts (trust me, mine does too), ...

This brings to mind something Ben Goldacre said (sorry can't quote) about the average science journalist being less qualified than the average science article reader.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> The paper the article is based on is here: [https://arxiv.org/abs/1806.07366](https://arxiv.org/abs/1806.07366)

And there was mention on HN about a month ago of a PyTorch implementation for ODEs (the name for this new NN design) here: [https://github.com/rtqichen/torchdiffeq/blob/master/README.m...](https://github.com/rtqichen/torchdiffeq/blob/master/README.md)

</comment><comment><USER5> Is it me, or the picture opening the article looks like a Lorenz attractor ([http://mathworld.wolfram.com/LorenzAttractor.html](http://mathworld.wolfram.com/LorenzAttractor.html))... Which is a set of 3 differential equations.

<comment><USER6> It does, but that's just a coincidence. That's a visualization of the latent space for the toy time-series problem in our paper that has to learn to model spirals of different sizes and orientations.</comment></comment>


What programming languages should you learn? - <AUTHOR> https://zellwk.com/blog/languages-to-learn <comment><USER2> That article looks to me like the title should be

"What Programming Languages Should you Learn to Construct Websites?"

HTML isn't much use if you want to write an operating system.

</comment><comment><USER3> None. Learn how to think using computational principles and how to speak to people effectively. Solve problems with tools that suit your criteria.

<comment><USER4> I would argue that your first sentence contradicts the rest of your post. Yes, solve problems with tools that suit your criteria. But you might do that better if you actually _know_ some tools.

<comment><USER3> U dont need to know a tool at all, all u need to know is how to use Google and express ideas clearly and diversely. The rest is mechanical. Solve the problem first then worry about what tool is better. The whole idea of efficiency has destroyed heuristical discovery. Current state of life on this planet: patheticly lame.</comment></comment></comment>