Do you read? - <AUTHOR> I enjoy reading. I have actually devised a time table to organise all of my activities and reading takes most of the time (although not easy to stick to it).
I was wondering though if you read and by read I mean books. If so what are you currently reading and why? What is your most favourite book and why? How many books would you estimate you read a month and finally do you think all this reading is worth it, would it not be better if you spent your time doing something else and why?
Now I know that's a lot of question, I am not doing a study or anything, I am just curious to know what you guys (I assume slightly more intellectually curious that most) think about engaging in reading. <comment><USER2> I read and I read fiction for the most part. I want to make the case though that fiction is not necessarily non-educational and is rather uniquely educational or educates in a unique way.

One common excuse for fiction reading is to suggest you learn passive facts about the setting as you progress pleasantly through the story, but that's not a particularly strong argument in favor or reading fiction. Sure I could pick up a book about Austen-era England or I could read an Austen novel and get a slightly inferior product education wise with a nice romantic chaser.

That's not what I'm talking about. Specifically I think fiction is a way to learn though experience vicariously, and I think there are some things learned best and perhaps only that way.

For example I could read a terse description of objectivism or I could read a Rand novel and walk a moment in the shoes of her characters. I would argue that the chance of fundamentally understanding what her philosophy is about through channel one is very low, although it takes a lot less time.

Another example: I could say "Sentience is not mutually inclusive or exclusive of understanding" or alternatively read Speaker for the Dead. "Morality resides entirely with intent rather than result" or read Ender's Game. "What is self?" or read Down and Out in the Magic Kingdom.

The deepest and perhaps most important topics can best be addressed this way. Regardless of how you feel about the historical accuracy of the Bible or Qur'an, certainly someone found it valuable to tell stories and parables to covey abstract concepts.

<comment><USER3> Here's the problem with learning through fiction: the only thing you can learn about through fiction is the mind of the author. When you read a Rand novel, you don't learn anything about how objectivism works, you only learn about Rand's imagination of how it works. Similarly, sentience may in fact be mutually inclusive or exclusive of understanding; just because you can describe a circumstance in which something is true doesn't mean it can ever be true.

This doesn't mean that fiction is useless for learning about the world. It just means that fiction does not contain the tools necessary to decide if something is true (or accurate, or possible). Fiction may spark an idea or make an argument, but you must go outside of fiction to see if those ideas have merit.

<comment><USER4> Granted most fiction wont provide an objective audit of views on any subject, but to say that the only thing you can learn is the mind of the author oversimplifies the cognitive process that takes place during reading, as well as the issues addressed by fiction. Reading in any non-topical sense forces you to evaluate what you are reading and helps create those new connections in your brain. At the same time, many of the deep issues addressed in fiction are completely outside the realm of factual verification.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I love books and reading, although I'm finding as I get older I'm much more willing to "bail out" of a book. I also find myself in multiple books. Quite honestly I think this is due to a decreasing attention span.

I think there are two types of reading. The first type is conversational or fun reading. It's like having a dialog with the author. The second is structured reading, where the goal is information transfer at the expense of readability. It's great when you can get a book that does both, but the trick is to be able to make yourself read the second type when the information is worth getting.

So the books I have open right now are "Expert F#", "Getting past Ok" (recommended by another HN'er). "Practical ML", and "When Genius Failed"

I'm also watching a series of college lectures on the history and evolution of spoken language -- very interesting!

I read 2-4 books a month. It's definitely worth it to me. Many times consulting is just being able to consume and process information that most people don't have time for. That means a lot of reading. So while everybody else is watching football or dancing with the stars, I'm either working on startup stuff or learning.

<comment><USER6> "...as I get older I'm much more willing to "bail out" of a book."

I used to feel honor-bound to finish any book I started, but now I'm smarter than that. Life is too short to keep slogging through something that doesn't interest me.

<comment><USER7> "Another way to read quickly is to cut bait on the losers. I start ten or so books for every one I finish. I don't mind disliking a book, and I never regret having picked it up and started it. I am ruthless in my discards."

Tyler Cowen [http://www.marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2006/12...](http://www.marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2006/12/how_to_read_fas.html)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I'm a book collector, if that counts! Some months I only buy a few books, some months I will buy 30. Very few are technical. Most are non-fictional on topics such as marketing, PR, design, information theory, grammar and language, anthropology, social sciences, and art. I am not particularly good at _finishing_ books but I read dozens of books each month in terms of pecking out chapters here and there where it seems appropriate.

I find it necessary to have books covering a wide range of topics - even those I have no practical use for - to act as a sort of "mental compost" to inspire me in my usual pursuits. I find that books on art, architecture, graphic design, medicine, and fashion all help me be more creative in other disciplines. This also goes for magazines. I'm no yuppie, but I subscribe to both Wallpaper and Monocle, simply for the inspiration.

</comment><comment><USER9> I _love_ reading; to the point that I avoid buying books when I am in middle of any important projects, just get too obsessive about it. In fact I remm as a teenager I used to have "reading marathons", would finish entire book in one go sitting on my window for 12-15 hours. I used to be a fiction guy and only recently have started to heavily dabble into non-fic also.

At the moment I am reading The Black Swan by Nasim Nicholas Taleb. In the fiction category I last read Haruka Murakami's (hope I spelled it right) After Dark.

<comment><USER10> Is the black swan worth reading? The first couple pages were fairly interesting in b&n

<comment><USER11> Absolutely. Some people have trouble with the style, I found it amusing. If you're willing to accept its message, it's definitely a book that can change your approach to life.

Also, anything by Murakami is worth reading.

<comment><USER5> So I bailed out of Swan. I got about 150-200 pages in and it seemed like he was saying the same thing over and over again, as if it got more profound with re-telling.

I must have missed something. To me the premise seems like something you could communicate and grasp in like 5 minutes or so.

<comment><USER12> I find Black Swan and its ilk perfect audio-book material. Not important or complicated enough that I care if I miss some details in one pass, but with enough ideas in them to merit passive attention while doing something else requiring my eyesight.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I'm currently re-reading _Joseph and His Brothers_ , a 1200-page heavy-weight monster of a book by Thomas Mann (himself a heavy-weight monster of an author).

Do I recommend it? Yes, but not for everyone. The preface itself is one of the heaviest essays on theology/philosophy out there, but the whole book is crammed with brilliant ideas/wisdom and is a masterpiece of literature (but it's heavy and the story moves fairly slowly).

Something lighter along those lines would be _Narziss & Goldmund_, by Herman Hesse - also heavy-weight, contemporary and compatriot to Thomas Mann, but capable of a lighter style!

But yeah, I love to read (and not just German literature... those are just the examples that spring to mind right now out of the countless ocean).

To answer your other questions...

 _What is your most favourite book and why?_

What's your favourite movie? If you read any significant number of books, naming a single favourite is impossible - unthinkable, even.

 _How many books would you estimate you read a month?_

It really depends on the books and the time of my life... sometimes I've finished a book in 3 days, but other times it's taken me months to get through a single book (such as the Thomas Mann brick I'm currently reading).

 _do you think all this reading is worth it?_

I think life would be pointless without it. At the very least, it would reduce my mental freedom to not read books. I made an argument for that on my blog: [http://inter-sections.net/2007/12/13/sapir-whorf-books- and-y...](http://inter-sections.net/2007/12/13/sapir-whorf-books-and-your- personal-freedom)

 _would it not be better if you spent your time doing something else and why?_

It really depends on what you're reading. If you spend your time reading Dragonlance novels (I've done that, it's nothing to be ashamed of, so long as it's a phase that passes), then yeah, you could probably do something better with your time. But books are still far and away the deepest and most fruitful repository of human wisdom that we have available to us. Sure, you can learn all you can learn from books, from your own life. But you'd be a fool not to climb on the shoulders of those giants who have come before us if all it takes is a few hours of comfortable, enjoyable time with a good book.

<comment><USER14> I read Mann's "Doctor Faustus" and it was SO rich...every sentence needs to be read 2x to be internalized. 2400 pages of Mann sounds insane!

;-)

(thanks for the tip, I'll try and peep the preface at least)

<comment><USER13> Make sure you take a peep at Hesse too. Narziss and Goldmund is a must-read - the kind of book that changes your perspective on life. He's Thomas Mann's intellectual equal, I would say.

As for _Joseph_ , a word of encouragement: the further you get into it, the more the story starts to come together and pick up pace. The first 300 pages or so, it feels like you're reading random shreds of a story... but keep faith, it's all packed with mental wealth and well worth it!

<comment><USER14> Narziss... looks good, I put it on my list. It's going to be a good while before I get back into classic fiction though ;-)

You might like Eco's "The Name of the Rose" since you seem to be into really good fiction set in Medieval Europe ;-)

<comment><USER13> Read it, of course :-)

I still need to read his other book, the Pendulum...

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> I don't just read books; I wallow in them. I remember well the acute pain of not knowing how to read and the relief when my mother taught me. I was five, and I just haven't stopped reading since. I'll be 38 in a couple of months.

I'm reading _Wise Blood_ by Flannery O'Connor, because O'Connor is wicked and funny. Favorite book? As others have pointed out, this is a ridiculous question -- my favorite kind! Some books I love: _Lolita_ , _As I Lay Dying_ , _The Ghost Writer_ , _Goodbye, Columbus_ , _Blood Meridian_ , _Anna Karenina_ , _Where I'm Calling From_ , _Huck Finn_ , _Dubliners_ and on and on. I read mostly literary novels, but I read fairly widely -- genre stuff (skiffy, crime), history, philosophy, pop science, whatever's good. I average around 1 book per week, but I read in jags and sometimes go a couple of weeks without reading anything but blogs and news.

I'm sure there are any number of studies that will show the benefit of reading, but I much prefer to classify books with whiskey and cigarettes. How do you measure the utility of whiskey and cigarettes? I like the Romantic idea that books are bad for you. You know, the kind of thing that destroyed Emma Bovary and robbed Señor Quixote of his sanity. Maybe I just need to manufacture a vice. I don't like cigarettes, and a beer (and a book) after the kids are in bed is about all I can handle these days.

</comment><comment><USER16> I'm trying to read more as of late. Sure, I read a lot online but it's usually smaller articles and quick tidbits from my RSS reader. My girlfriend has even urged me to read atleast 20-30 minutes before bed but most of the time mental, and sometimes physical exhaustion just kicks in and .. oh god bed is so comfy :)

I always find a lot of great PDF books but it's hard to read them on the PC. I really want a Kindle, but its price range is too much for me just yet.

<comment><USER17> AirSharing + <http://www.pdfsam.org/> makes an iPhone/Touch a pretty good lay- in-bed reading platform. I have SICP, Patterns of Software and other books split into chapters and I can read them a little at a time.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> Probably too much (in that the expected utility of reading more books significantly drops off after a certain point). I own way too many books. about 1/3rd literature and non-fiction and 2/3rds science fiction. I can't bear to part with the really good ones. But the problem is that at 4-8 books a month my collection grows on average 50-60 books a year. Since i started when i was 8 or 9 I'm up to about 600 books (a couple reductions here and there) that i don't want to get rid of. this is a hassle for moving and for space planning.

But it is worth it. Science fiction authors and computer scientists (lots of overlap there) seem to be only people on Earth that have zero respect for bullshit. Ideologically, those are the people who raised me. One of the ways in which I've been very lucky is that I have pursued very few blind alleys compared to most people. I can go back to the material I consumed at a young age and not shake my head in disapproval at my younger self as many other people seem to do. My life has largely been a continuous iterative process of ever better approximations of reality with no restarts (so far, i might still decide to live in the mountains and contemplate the pebble).

<comment><USER13> _Science fiction authors and computer scientists (lots of overlap there) seem to be only people on Earth that have zero respect for bullshit_

I call bullshit on that statement and point you in the direction of a certain L Ron Hubbard.

<comment><USER18> What's wrong with L. Ron Hubbard? He made a bet with a friend that he could start a religion. so he did, and got rich. You wouldn't do the same? I would.

<comment><USER13> No, I don't think I would. I don't think starting a nefarious organisation of religious nuts is an achievement that anyone should be proud of. It's easy to cause more grief - what's hard is to build something better.

<comment><USER18> I think he was too pilled up in the end to care. an easy vice to fall prey to. But given the chance, yes, I would start a cult and take money from morons for my own luxury.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> When I was in Phoenix,AZ I used to spend 8 am to 5 pm reading books at Barnes and Noble every Saturday and Sunday.

<comment><USER20> I love bookshops that let you do that. Many near me even have in-store cafes, but I do wonder if this is effective in increasing sales or if the coffees subsidise those people who read the book but not buy.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> since there are a lot of science fiction fans on HN here is an easy way to find quality sci-fi: [http://home.austarnet.com.au/petersykes/topscifi/lists_books...](http://home.austarnet.com.au/petersykes/topscifi/lists_books_rank1.html)

<comment><USER21> i'll add <http://www.locusmag.com/SFAwards/Db/Locus.html>

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> I read non-fiction related to business strategy, sociology, economics, and technology constantly. In fact I went down the the LA public library and picked up 10 stellar titles just this weekend, I highly recommend all of these:

\- Perspectives on Free and Open Source Software [MIT] \- Prisoner's Dilemma [William Poundstone] \- Thinking Strategically [Nalebuff] \- Co-opetition [Nalebuff] \- Cluetrain Manifesto [Searls] \- Open Sources 2.0 [O'Reilly] \- Innovator's Dilemma [Christensen] \- Net Worth [Hagel] \- Democratizing Innovation [von Hippel] \- Fooled by Randomness [Taleb]

Other books I always keep around are "Last Night a DJ Saved My Life" (a history of DJ's and electronic music), The Singularity is Near, and some Calvin and Hobbes ;-)

All the reading is most definitely worth it, if you don't feel that way you're not reading the right stuff.

The best book I've ever read is probably Anna Karenina (Magarshack translation, not the Oprah version, which is ironically much drier). Other very influential books on me include The Wealth of Networks, Shaping Things, and Free Culture. In fact, all 3 of those were given to me at different times in my life by the smartest person I know (a family friend of my parents)

Maybe the key to the non-fiction reading is having an agenda. I always feel like I'm downloading knowledge that is going to help me make bank and/or help people so that keeps me riveted (beyond the intellectual stimulation, which I'm a total whore for, too ;-)

</comment><comment><USER22> Startup Idea: Hacker News reading recs.

I use Goodreads now, but it doesn't really solve the problem recommending books to me that people like myself enjoy. It shows me what my mom and other people I know read, which is interesting, but most of the time not particularly relevant to my interests/career.

If there was a review site that essentially did what this thread does--let people with common interests recommend books to each other, I'd look there first when I was choosing what to read next.

</comment><comment><USER23> I read about 5 books a month.

Math books: always worth reading.

Programming books: never worth reading.

Fiction: a pleasant way to spend time, but rarely pays off.

History: mostly crap, but personal memoirs are often insightful.

Books that changed me: Orwell's "1984" (role of words), Hunter Thompson (personal courage), Henry Ford's "My Life and Work" (work attitude).

Good stuff that should be better known: Eric Hoffer's "True Believer", Jerome K. Jerome's "Idle Thoughts of an Idle Fellow", Marcus Aurelius.

</comment><comment><USER24> Anywhere between a book a day and a book a month (with occasional extreme outliers in either direction), depending on work pressure, nuisance from small child, etc. The ready availability of reading matter on the internet -- interesting but mostly unimportant, coming in small digestible chunks, the reading equivalent of fast food -- has a pernicious effect on the amount of real reading I do.

Definitely worth it. Probably worth it even in purely financial terms since some of what I read is job-related, but the main reason is that I (1) enjoy reading and (2) have omniscience as a primary goal in life.

I usually have several books on the go at once. The two I had open most recently are Chris McManus's "Left hand, right hand" (a book about asymmetry, especially in human beings; recommended) and Peter Winkler's "Mathematical mind-benders" (a selection of mathematical puzzles ranging from tricky high- school level to harder-than-IMO; highly recommended to those who like such things).

</comment><comment><USER25> I'm currently reading 'The 4 hour work week' and I just purchased 'God created the integers'. I tend to read most of my non-fiction in bits and pieces when i have spare chunks of time. I tend to do most of my light reading on holiday and go cover to cover in a couple of days. I've followed Grisham for what seems like forever, and while its a bit hit and miss i've liked alot of the short stories by stephen king / richard bachman. Over the past couple of years I've enjoyed 'making money' - Pratchett, 'The Godfather' - Puzo, 'grapes of wrath' - Steinbeck, 'vernon god little' - Pierre & 'shogun' - Clavell. Whenever I travel I'll try and read a book set in the country I'm traveling to.

As a child I just couldn't put down the Macdonald Hall series of books by Gordon Korman - they were side splittingly funny. Highly recommend Christmas present for any child you know.

</comment><comment><USER26> I'm either crawling or racing through _Infinite Jest_ at the moment. Comments on the book are withheld until I've both finished it and have had about a year to digest.

I'm also reading _GEB_ , _The Interpreter of Maladies_ , and _Confederacy of Dunces_ , but, really, I'm reading _IJ_.

</comment><comment><USER27> I try to read at least two books per month, and I force place into my schedule to read. I just finished "Circles in a Forest", a foreign book from South Africa, and I'm about half-way through "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance". (Lots of parallels to coding in this one). I've read and reread the Tolkien books as well as Ayn Rand's works multiple times, and they're on the top of my favorite list.

I can't think of any better activity to spend my time on than reading. Eloquence in writing and speaking is built partially from reading, reading can make great practice for formal reasoning, it helps me think of creative solutions. So much so that often, when I'm stuck, I will sit down and read a couple of pages, maybe a chapter, before going back to what I was working on.

</comment><comment><USER28> I read, and as Daniel noted above, I tend to read several at a time. Generally, I read philosophy and theology (my undergraduate degree is in philosophy), though most recently I've been picking up some of the collections of essays my wife is reading for her graduate work. I'm also a huge fan of anything about the history of Pittsburgh.

Current reading list: _Christianity and Anarchy_ Jacques Ellul _The Gulag Archipelago_ Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn _Third Ways_ Allan Carlson

My reading time seems to come in fits. Some days I won't pick up a book, and others I'll read for several hours. As for my favorites:

 _The Town and the City_ Jack Kerouac _The Death of Adam_ Marilynne Robinson _The Presence of the Kingdom_ Jacques Ellul

</comment><comment><USER29> I too enjoy reading. I commute and read books on the train. I also read a bit before going to bed and otherwise opportunistically. I read multiple books at once, and this can be a problem. I have sworn not to buy any more books from Amazon this year. I borrow books from my local library.

My favorite book this year is The Naked Ape by Desmond Morris, because it made me think about people and their behavior from a new (to me) perspective. His autobiography is also good fun.

Why do I read? Reading properly is like entering into a fully immersive virtual world, where your imagination paints the pictures, sounds, etc. You also get to learn new stuff and when reading fiction or autobiography experience many worlds vicariously.

</comment><comment><USER30> I read. I tend to reread older books nowadays: you get to the point where new books really stop seeming interesting.

I have Anathem, for instance, and it's not a very pleasurable book for me to read. Stephenson is not deft enough with words, I feel: he lacks a certain subtlety. I'll end up reading Anathem, but it's taking me a while. And I find much value in rereading books that I'm certain I don't fully comprehend. I read Joyce and Beckett a lot.

I also put lots of books on my Kindle. That's where I get new books, mainly, unless the new book is special to me in some way.

But yes, I read. I read a lot. I love reading. I devour novels. I also like nonfiction, though there are fewer nonfiction authors that I enjoy.

</comment><comment><USER31> I don't read nearly as many books as I used to, but that's because I now look after two kids. I used to read on the way to work on the Tube every day.

I am reading two books at the moment though - Iain M Bank's latest - Matter, and Dennet's Darwin's Dangerous Idea

</comment><comment><USER32> Nope!

I really wish I could bring myself to sit down and read, but if its not in my feed reader (or Hacker News), then I'm probably not going to read it.

I've always had quite a short attention span and when I sit down, open a book and start reading, within five minutes I'm thinking of everything else I _could_ be doing instead of sitting there doing virtually nothing.

Don't get me wrong -- I don't consider reading to be doing nothing, but it just feels that way while I'm doing it... so I have to stop and go do something else.

I have countless programming books and a lot of Terry Pratchett Discworld novels... and when I can get over my attention span, I'll hopefully sit down and read.

</comment><comment><USER33> Love to read - I used to read a lot more fiction, but as of late, have been reading a lot of non-fic to include magazines like Scientific American, The Economist and Harvard Business Review. My current reading list includes the following books, currently on my desk at the office:

 _Good in room_ by Stephanie Palmer About giving good presentations and pitches

 _The design of future things_ by Donald Norman Many of you have probably read or heard about his previous book, 'design of everyday things'

 _A class with Drucker_ by William Cohen Lessons learned by a former student of the renowned business/management professor Peter Drucker

</comment><comment><USER34> I am currently finishing _Atlas Shrugged_ by Ayn Rand for the first time and it is has become my favorite book by far. I began reading it after someone referred it on here.

Next up is _Crime and Punishment_ by Dostoyevsky.

</comment><comment><USER35> Check out www.bookhuddle.com, a site where you can track the books you want to read, are reading, your favorite books, etc. Find out what books are newly released, top selling, in most users' lists, and more, by book category.

Here are the books I want to read: <http://www.bookhuddle.com/list/4/Books-I- want-to-read> Here are some of the books I've read: <http://www.bookhuddle.com/list/2/Books-I-ve-read>

</comment><comment><USER36> I love reading.

I usually read something to help me further my knowledge base, right now that means a lot of teamwork and business books. I usually read on the Kindle, highly recommended, it makes airplane travel a godsend.

My favorite book is definitely Ender's Game. The psychological twists and turns in that book (plus a very cool concept and game) makes it mesmerizing. Once I start it, I can never put it down until I finish.

I read about 2 books a month, all books are worth reading, everyone has something valuable to share. You just need to skim through the fluff.

</comment><comment><USER37> I read about a book a week, more if I'm traveling.

Currently, I read while working out on the elliptical for an hour every weekday. This has me going through a lot of books (I have a Kindle, and many friends who are avid readers as well, so I get new books that way).

Favorite book, if I had to pick one: Guns, Germs & Steel or Omnivore's Dilemma.

Is it worth it? Yes and no. I think it definitely has expanded my knowledge and given me interesting perspective, but I've definitely had diminishing returns quickly (did I really need that fifth book on linguistics?)

</comment><comment><USER38> I read all the time, no matter what my schedule is. It is an anchor in my life. Mostly sf and time-tested classics.

I'm starting to read Aubrey-Maturin by Patrick O'Brian. I finished Master and Commander and I'm on the next one, Post Captain.

I'm reading Bad Money by Kevin Phillips, which basically called the market failures early this year.

I've got A Canticle for Leibowitz and Anathem, which I'm doing as a pair.

I started reading Stephen King in chronological order a while back, and I'm up to Pet Sematary (early 80s).

Also, Crockford's JavaScript book.

</comment><comment><USER39> Definitely. Aside from reading anything I can online, and coding-related stuff, neither of which I really count as legit reading, I always have a book on the go.

I never know where to start with new books, so I just stick mainly to classics and lately non-fiction as well. My problem lately is I don't find enough time to read, so I only get through a few pages a day and then "catch up" in spurts here and there, as opposed to having a set time to sit and really dig in...

</comment><comment><USER40> As a kid I probably read 20+ hours a week, half fiction half non-fiction. I even worked at a library when I was younger.

That dramatically slowed during late high school and university, probably only a few hours of reading a week (other than coursework).

I am back to reading 10+ hours a week, but all non-fiction. I have basically stopped reading fiction. I just have too many books I want to get through to have time for fiction these days.

</comment><comment><USER41> A read I found both insightful and interesting:

"How to talk about books you haven't read" by Pierre Bayard

Not only as a result of this book, but during the time of its reading (in my first year of college) I progressed to a 'style of schooling' in which I no longer read assigned texts for classes. Call it what you will, but I find myself learning a lot more, and having many more interesting things to say when I skip reading the textbook.

</comment><comment><USER42> Not really. Not proud of it, but I just don't see that much value in reading. It seems like a waste of time to me. I'd rather use that time to get more done.

I might start reading about web design and related topics, since that's what I do and I could probably learn a lot from this kind of books, but honestly I'm not interested in reading fiction at all.

Maybe it because of all those boring books I was forced to read as a kid at school.

<comment><USER43> Interesting question, but what's so great about "getting things done."? I'm guessing it's just a matter of personality, but contemplation is at least as important to me as any accomplishment.

</comment></comment><comment><USER44> I pretty much exclusively read technical books. Most recently, _Hacking Vim_ and _Programming Collective Intelligence_. I own all the classic tomes; GoF, _Refactoring_ , _Code Complete_ and so on which I re-read occasionally. I haven't read a piece of fiction in quite a while.

Although, when I did read fiction, I enjoyed Chuck Palahniuk, Orson Scott Card and for pure entertainment, Clive Cussler.

</comment><comment><USER45> I try to read a novel a week. All fiction writers should strive for at least this much, and many times I feel like I should be reading more. I also try to read books about my career field and personal growth material. I used to have three books going at a time (one of each), but have reduced it to two. It's much more manageable that way.

</comment><comment><USER46> I always avoid reading fiction. When there are non-fiction books which are as gripping as the fiction ones, why read the latter as you get knowledge plus pleasure reading the former.

Examples of the books I am talking about are: The Black Swan, Brief History of Time, God Delusion, Selfish Gene, Predictibly Irrational, etc. etc.

<comment><USER43> What difference does it make if the events really happened? It's all in the past anyway, so fiction is just as "real" as non-fiction. What matters is the insights gained, which are often just as common in good fiction and often more eloquently presented.

</comment></comment><comment><USER47> I am an avid reader myself, but it is hard to find free time. I mostly read technical books these days, currently Cocoa Programmers for Mac OS X by Aaron Hillegass, excellent book. Other days when I do have a spear 5 mins I usually go the www.slapastory.com (sorry for the plug). Its one of my little startups.

</comment><comment><USER48> Before reading pg's essays, I believed that any problem that can be solved using C, must be solved using C. However, after reading pg's arguments in his essays, I decided to study language design and functional programming. So currently, I am reading "The Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs".

</comment><comment><USER49> I love to read. Unfortunately I don't have a lot of time to read right now. I'm working my way through the hitchhiker's guide to the galaxy series for my first time. I'm listening to the Now Habit right now. Probably my favorite non-fiction book is Godel Eshcer Bach. Catch-22 is my favorite fiction book.

</comment><comment><USER50> I'm an avid reader, I read as much as I can, including computer related books, economics, fiction and non-fiction.... here's the library link: <http://www.librarything.com/catalog/zemariamm>

</comment><comment><USER51> I wish I could read like I used to, but I have a full time job and I'm building a prototype for a startup simultaneously. I usually get through every month or two reading in the same spare moments a lot of people take for reading (:

</comment><comment><USER52> Yup, who doesn't?

"Expert F#", "Founders at Work", "Walden", and "On Intelligence" are all part- finished right now. I read a lot of fiction in high school, but I don't much anymore.

"The New Yorker" every week. "The Walrus" and "The Economist" occasionally.

</comment><comment><USER53> I'm currently reading:

The Blank Slate by Steven Pinker

Guns, Germs, and Steel by Jared Diamond

It varies, but I probably read 2 to 6 books a month (really depends on length).

Two of my recent favorites are Godel, Escher, Bach by Douglas Hofstadster and The Moral Animal by Robert Wright.

</comment><comment><USER54> Yes, and a lot. You can read too much about my reading habits here: <http://jseliger.wordpress.com> if you're curious.

</comment><comment><USER55> I read a lot. Everyday. I mostly enjoy fantasy books -- My girlfriend forced me to read "The Magician" and it's probably the best book I've ever had the pleasure of reading.

</comment><comment><USER56> My favourite ever book as a film buff: High Concept by Charles Fleming. He mercilessly ribs high-charged, deceased producer Don Simpson and I couldn't stop laughing.

</comment><comment><USER57> My reading list is on my web site: <http://www.jgc.org/writing.html>

</comment><comment><USER58> I just finished a 1,000 page novel. It took me 2 weeks. A nice break after reading 2 or more business books a month.

</comment><comment><USER59> I sometimes get depressed knowing that I won't be able to read everything, or even a sliver of a fraction of it.

</comment><comment><USER60> I love to read, in fact I think reading is the reason I love writing too and keep looking up jobs in the writing business ever since I left one (money reasons).

Currently I'm reading New Moon from the Twilight series, my girlfriend got me to read the first book because of the movie coming out and it's a seriously great read, hence why I'm reading the second book about 2 years before she forces me to because of the 2nd movie.

I'm also reading 'What Do You Care What Other People Think?: Further Adventures of a Curious Character', it's the sequel to 'Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman!'. It's based on transcripts from Richard Feynman's conversations and is a funny but thought-provoking read (both should be read). It's probably the only book illustrating how a true genius was shaped through his life. He developed a serious lack of respect to authority, which is why he became such a monumental figure in science and probably the reason he was the only one on the Rogers Commission into the Challenge disaster that didn't trust NASA's engineers.

I'll explain his key point in the Rogers Commission. NASA engineers figured a rubber O-ring in the SRB's had a less than 1/50 chance of failing. So to avoid this they installed three O-rings, assuming that 1/50 x 1/50 x 1/50 = 1/125,000 chance of failure, or something equally ridiculous. In reality the rocket still had a 1/50 chance of failing because 1 O-ring failing would mean all would fail. He then showed that under the conditions of the Challenger launch the O-ring had a 1/1 failure rate; the NASA engineers ignored the fact that material strengths change below freezing, the O-rings shrank and allowed hot gases on ignition to burn through all 3 O-rings well below the temperature they were rated for.

I also have Jared Diamonds 'Collapse' on the go. Ender's Game and probably whatever else is on my bookshelf when it grabs my attention.

The most important book I've read was The Strange Life of Ivan Osokin. I was around 15 when I first read it. The story starts near the end of his life when the woman who's been trying to date him for years finally gives up and leaves. He progresses to the point where he's suicidal, but then he crosses a magicians house who he knows and goes in. The magician tells him, you can relive your life and try to make changes or you can work for me and actually change it. The rest of the book follows his life as a relives it with the knowledge of what's going to happen, but as he lives it (as the magician warns him) he gets so engrossed again that he makes the exact same mistakes and only realizes he knew what he did wrong moments later when he remembers. In the end he finds himself back at the Magician who basically says 'I told you so' and says if he keeps going back in time to try to fix things the universe will eventually overwrite him with someone who'll act. The magician then tells him he can either serve him for a hundred years (in a very devil-esque scene) or he can relive his life again and he won't intervene. He takes the deal with the devil and then the story ends.

This book made me realize that there were no second chances, and that just doing nothing wasn't an option. That summer (at 16) I got a job as a reviewer, I decided that I wanted to move to Canada and that I didn't have time to waste with the 'friends' I had. Now at 20, I've worked as a reviewer for 2 years, I've had a couple of short stories published and I'm currently writing my first novel while I can't work because I'm immigrating to Canada.

So for the last part of your question, I definitely think my life would be a lot worse if I didn't read. In fact, I don't think I'd ever have got the motivation to actually -DO- something. I'd probably be in university getting into debt and would have got stuck in the town where I grew up in England.

<comment><USER53> Well, that was a bit all over the place, and I would have appreciated a spoilers warning, but thanks for sharing.

Where in Canada are you going to?

</comment></comment><comment><USER61> Yes. Good books are full of ideas. And that is never a waste of time.

</comment><comment><USER62> skim one, once in a while - mostly directly in the book store and only non fiction. Severe ADD for fiction - can't stand long prose.

</comment><comment><USER63> reading "Brave New World" by Aldous Huxley

just in time to get a kick out of the "brave new obamian world" video

</comment><comment><USER64> Yes

</comment><comment><USER65> I read lots, mostly randomly what falls in my hands, catches my attention, or I can pull out of the internet.

Privately, I call it procrastination. It has plenty of good side effects. Without reading, I would never come up with the list of silly ideas I have per day; some of which pay off for the rest in excess.

If I was to buy every book I read, I'd be broke. "Public libraries"--in its most extended meaning--are the best idea ever.

</comment><comment><USER66> Right now, I am chewing through The God Delusion.

I both read and buy a lot of books. Infact, most of my funny money goes on books, as I go through them fast. I have a reading speed of around 6 ppm for fiction and 3-4ppm for non-fiction.

$100 of books barely lasts a few days :(

<comment><USER67> you read 6 ppm reading fiction! Holy shit! I don't think I read even half that.

You should get your books at the library. Its much cheaper and then you give it back and somebody else gets to read it. Far fewer dead trees and moving is infinitely easier.

<comment><USER66> And even faster if it's a good day and I really get into it.

I tend to read a sentence or paragraph at a time.</comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: How much are you spending on marketing? - <AUTHOR> Are you spending on marketing currently? If yes, how much are you spending and what's your ROI? Do you outsource or you DIY? If you outsource, are you happy with your existing marketing agency/partner? By marketing I mean spending on UI/UX, copy, social media, google ads, landing pages etc. Edit: How much time do you invest in marketing on a daily/weekly/monthly basis? <comment><USER2> I often see questions asked in this manner on HN and they usually go without answers. I think the reason is that asking without telling us about yourself first feels kinda strange / egoistic. I'm pretty sure if you answer these questions yourself first and provide some background on what you do, people will fee much more inclined to join your discussion.</comment>


PeopleAhead takes on Monster.com with qualitative job-matching algorithms - <AUTHOR> http://www.xconomy.com/2008/06/11/peopleahead-has-forward-looking-take-on-the-online-job-board/

<comment><USER2> An interesting take on the age old "person can do this" and "company wants to pay someone to do that" how do we unite the two parties problem. It'll be fun to see how the "fuzzy" criteria can help improve matches with some real, more random (ie: not just Biz school folks) user profiles.

Finally, I'm sure they worked hard to get the LinkedIn stuff to work, but there it is again - another site asking for my user and pw ... though I do like that they have a nice note about their privacy policy and how they'll use your credentials. Still, what happens when I update my LinkedIn account? Are they storing user/pw and syncing? Somehow I doubt it. Will they prompt me regularly to update/sync?</comment>


Facebook Hires Up Three of Its Biggest Privacy Critics - <AUTHOR> https://www.wired.com/story/facebook-hires-privacy-critics/ <comment><USER2> Money talks and most people will sell out for money. :-(

<comment><USER3> Capitalistic ethics</comment></comment>


The Lesson of the Great Pyramid - <AUTHOR> https://www.nasdaq.com/article/the-worlds-greatest-wealth-secret-cm1161738 <comment><USER2> I've never read an empty self-help text that also felt so sleazy.

> ...owning a business essentially comes down to harnessing the efforts of > others and directing them towards the happy goal of you being rich.

 _Yikes._

<comment><USER3> Indeed, truth is almost always unpleasant, and ignorance is bliss.

<comment><USER2> It's not about truth and ignorance. Nothing compels a business owner to run a business with the mindset to do nothing but extract value from human laborers for no purpose but his own enrichment. You only do that if you're unabashedly selfish.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I'll summarise for anyone who is time short: 'become a business owner, get other people to make you rich'.

</comment><comment><USER5> * * * Spoiler Alert * * *

The article is pointless. It starts out a fun read, but leads to nothing of value. Save your time!

</comment><comment><USER6> It's a pretty sad time we live in when one of the biggest American exchanges is posting clickbait self-help garbage from the CEO.

<comment><USER7> nasdaq.com reposting investorplace, zerohedge tier trash

very cool very nice</comment></comment>


Open-Sourcing Pinot: Scaling the Wall of Real-Time Analytics - <AUTHOR> http://engineering.linkedin.com/pinot/open-sourcing-pinot-scaling-wall-real-time-analytics

<comment><USER2> Would be interesting to see a comparison to Druid: [http://druid.io/](http://druid.io/)

They both seem to cater the same use case: scalable real-time analytics.

<comment><USER3> I'm biased in that I had the honor of writing the first line of code of Druid, but from looking at what I could find on Pinot it looks like architecture- wise, we share a lot of similarities. At a minimum, the thought behind how to scale and how to ingest data appears to be the exact same. Druid clusters are presently ingesting tens of billions of events per day (with a 50b number from Metamarkets in the venturebeat article) and housing trillions of rows. From a high level architecture, I don't see a reason Pinot couldn't as well (when they are the same, it's kinda hard to say that one can't handle what the other can ;)).

On the query API-side, it appears like Pinot exposes "PQL" which is a SQL-like query language. In Druid, for better or worse, we use JSON-based HTTP calls. Once you are using a client for querying in a programmatic manner, the difference doesn't really matter, but it is true that something like PQL makes it simpler for humans to write their own queries.

For management of distributed state, it looks like Pinot depends on Apache Helix, which is an interesting framework. This was the first time I had heard about it and, I really would've liked to have something like that to build on when we started Druid. We instead had to implement it all ourselves. Helix sounds like it provides all the hooks to enable the various levels of integration that we have needs for in Druid, so I can only imagine that there is little difference in capability there. My biggest fear is that the majority of operational issues that we run into with Druid is around zookeeper integration, losing an entire ZK cluster is painful (and does happen) and from my read of the Helix docs, that would likely cause a loss of all shards of data as well (it looks like they are persistent znodes?).

In terms of storage format, Druid enforces bitmap indexing and the Pinot docs appear to indicate that they have multiple types of indexes available, which is pretty cool. It looks like Pinot doesn't have a way to plug in user-defined column formats, though, so it would likely be require a bit of extra work to extend the system to be able to handle more complex types of aggregators like sketches. And, really, enabling sketching extensions is one of the most important features of any "scalable realtime processing" tool, in my opinion.

On the ingestion side, it appears that Pinot reads data from kafka in real- time and then restating from batch, which is the model we've employed in Druid for the last 4 years, so we know it works. I'd love to know how Pinot guarantees high availability and replication of the real-time stream, there are many ways of doing that (over the years, we've implemented 3 different ways in Druid and are still not particularly happy with any of them).

Anyway, I still haven't had a chance to play with Pinot, so this could be completely off-base, but those are my initial reactions.

<comment><USER4> Both architectures are indeed similar. The distinction between PQL and JSON is mostly a client issue, as you could have a client that converts a hypothetical Druid query language to JSON.

Pinot does use Helix, as it's been used successfully inside (and outside) LinkedIn to manage distributed state and coordination with a state model that's easily understandable.

To recover from losing the entire ZK cluster (which would be quite a bad operational failure, Kafka and other services depending on ZK would also break), you'd need to recreate your tables, repush your data from Hadoop and start consuming from Kafka again. We only use ZK and Helix for coordination and storing segment-level metadata.

There are some other differences with Druid. For example, when data is pushed into Druid, it can be persisted in another deep storage system (S3, etc.), which is something we don't support at this point in time (it wasn't necessary internally at LinkedIn). We also don't have integration with R, nor documentation that's as extensive as Druid's.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Is the advantage of pinot that it is not as strict on data format as Druid (which requires json/delimited)...?

</comment><comment><USER6> Url changed from [http://venturebeat.com/2015/06/10/linkedin-open-sources- its-...](http://venturebeat.com/2015/06/10/linkedin-open-sources-its-pinot- real-time-analytics-software/), which points to this.</comment>


Woman Drives for 900 Miles Instead of 90 Thanks to GPS Error - <AUTHOR> http://gizmodo.com/5975787/woman-drives-for-900-miles-instead-of-90-thanks-to-gps-error

<comment><USER2> *Thanks to a GPS error combined with complete human stupidity

<comment><USER3> Exactly. That's the more salient point. There's no way that this person didn't realize that she went 10x further than the 90 miles she was supposed to travel.</comment></comment>


31C3 Streaming: Saal 1 – SD Video - <AUTHOR> http://streaming.media.ccc.de/saal1/

<comment><USER2> You can find the complete schedule and talk descriptions here: [https://events.ccc.de/congress/2014/Fahrplan/](https://events.ccc.de/congress/2014/Fahrplan/)

<comment><USER3> And for those who couldn't make it to Hamburg there is more information on how to get info on the congress outside of CCH here: [http://events.ccc.de/congress/2014/wiki/Static:Congress_ever...](http://events.ccc.de/congress/2014/wiki/Static:Congress_everywhere)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> There are concurrent talks going on (most in English and few in German). Right URL is this [http://streaming.media.ccc.de/](http://streaming.media.ccc.de/)

Here is schedule [https://events.ccc.de/congress/2014/Fahrplan/schedule.html](https://events.ccc.de/congress/2014/Fahrplan/schedule.html)

</comment><comment><USER5> ccc's events, like 31c3, are some of the best produced I've ever seen -- great speaker, press, and new attendee support, great wifi, great video streaming. Even more impressive because it's done by volunteers.

<comment><USER6> I was blown away last year. Very very impressive.

<comment><USER7> I wish I could say the same. While it is a great event and everything rdl said is true, it seems like it's suffering from trying to do too much at once. I didn't walk away feeling I had to go again this year.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Also noteworthy: the GSM network at the congress works like a charm, it's really awesome!

It's by the guys from eventphone.de running Osmocomm (more info at [https://events.ccc.de/congress/2014/wiki/Static:POC](https://events.ccc.de/congress/2014/wiki/Static:POC))

</comment><comment><USER9> Streamdumps (not the finished, polished final videos, just raw rtmpdumps): [https://events.ccc.de/congress/2014/wiki/Streams#Streamdumps](https://events.ccc.de/congress/2014/wiki/Streams#Streamdumps)

</comment><comment><USER10> Chrome complains about their SSL certificate on [https://events.ccc.de](https://events.ccc.de) Anyone else gets the same error?

<comment><USER11> It is signed by Cacert web of trust. You can add the root certificates in your browser here: [https://www.cacert.org/index.php?id=3](https://www.cacert.org/index.php?id=3)

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> Alec Empire just gave a great keynote, I highly recommend checking the archives.

<comment><USER13> It felt very convoluted to me, can't say I was a huge fan. No accounting for personal taste though, and I'm sure I'll greatly enjoy some of the later talks!

<comment><USER14> We live in a convoluted world. The message seemed simple enough for me.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> The wiki with much more information: [http://events.ccc.de/congress/2014/wiki/Static:Main_Page](http://events.ccc.de/congress/2014/wiki/Static:Main_Page)

</comment><comment><USER16> Do they have any information on the software they used for this livestream?

<comment><USER17> Member of the streaming team here. We're using a modified version of nginx- rtmp for HLS and RTMP and Icecast for WebM. There's some information about last year's setup in the 30c3 Infrastructure Review talk: [http://media.ccc.de/browse/congress/2013/30C3_-_5609_-_en_-_...](http://media.ccc.de/browse/congress/2013/30C3_-_5609_-_en_- _saal_6_-_201312301430_-_infrastructure_review_-_kay_-_peter_stuge_-_florolf_- _sebastian_-_m.html)

<comment> TD-Linux The WebM stream works great for me in Firefox. Thanks for taking the effort to put this all together!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Does anyone know if these will be recorded so they can be played back later today?

<comment><USER19> They are released as talks finish.

[http://vod.c3voc.de/relive/](http://vod.c3voc.de/relive/)

<comment><USER18> w00t, thank you!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Anyone can watch the Citizenfour stream? Overload? Or cutting us out?

<comment><USER21> "Public service announcement: no #Citizenfour won't be streamed or released. #31c3 (We are sorry.)" [https://twitter.com/chaosupdates/status/548967780243222530](https://twitter.com/chaosupdates/status/548967780243222530)

<comment><USER20> Money before information. Well done Miss Poitras, I'm now truly convinced of your altruistic intentions! /s

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> Woot! I can't wait until djb + Tanja Lange's talk :D

</comment><comment><USER23> thanks to CCC for streaming this :)

</comment><comment><USER24> It's called the Chaos Communication Congress, not Chaos Computer Congress.

<comment><USER25> Someone forgot to tell them then :)

At the bottom of the video:

by Chaos Computer Club e.V, FeM, ags & c3voc

<comment> nezza-_- It is the Chaos Communication Congress done BY the Chaos Computer Club.</comment></comment></comment>


Apply HN Aggregator (repost) - <AUTHOR> http://thefinac.tk/applyhn/ <comment><AUTHOR> Hey guys made this quick hack to view the "Apply HN" posts by ranking, date or random. It got to the front page of Product Hunt and I am glad people are finding it useful. Trying to let the right audience know of it in case someone missed it ( credit to someone who posted in Apply section with a daily aggregator a while back ). Sorry for reposting. Cheers :)

</comment><comment><USER2> Recent: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11453443](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11453443)

Apply Link: [https://news.ycombinator.com/applyhn](https://news.ycombinator.com/applyhn)

</comment><comment><USER3> To avoid confusion, I think that a better title is "Aggregator of APPLY HN (repost)"

<comment><AUTHOR> I totally agree but it only appears in this section (where the intended audience is) if the post is prefixed by "Apply HN" :/</comment></comment>


'Oldest' Koran fragments found in Birmingham University - <AUTHOR> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-33436021 <comment><USER2> as already mentioned in the article[1], the velum may be much older than the text written on it since it was very valuable and regularly reused:

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

really surprised that they did not test for any previous washed text underneath since this is both common and the test quite simple and easy to perform

EDIT: [1] my mistake, it was in the NYT article on the same topic: [http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/23/world/europe/quran- fragmen...](http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/23/world/europe/quran-fragments- university-birmingham.html)

Saud al-Sarhan, the director of research at the King Faisal Center for Research and Islamic Studies in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, said he doubted that the manuscript found in Birmingham was as old as the researchers claimed, noting that its Arabic script included dots and separated chapters — features that were introduced later.

He also said that dating the skin on which the text was written did not prove when it was written. Manuscript skins were sometimes washed clean and reused later for new writings, he said.

<comment><USER3> I didn't see that mentioned in the article - can you paste the precise line you mean?

<comment><USER2> ah, my mistake, I read it in the NYT article: [http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/23/world/europe/quran- fragmen...](http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/23/world/europe/quran-fragments- university-birmingham.html)

"Saud al-Sarhan, the director of research at the King Faisal Center for Research and Islamic Studies in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, said he doubted that the manuscript found in Birmingham was as old as the researchers claimed, noting that its Arabic script included dots and separated chapters — features that were introduced later.

He also said that dating the skin on which the text was written did not prove when it was written. Manuscript skins were sometimes washed clean and reused later for new writings, he said."

<comment><USER4> Parenthetically, the "dots" mentioned were a later diacritical feature added to Qur'anic texts to mark the placement of short vowels; since Arabic, like Hebrew, elides short vowel sounds in the written text, Muslims without Arabic fluency need markers to show them how to verbalize the Qur'an. (Arabic is seen in Islam as a particularly holy _language_ , and while the Qur'an is widely translated, it is considered especially pious to recite and memorize the text in the original Arabic, even if one does not know the language.) I believe diacritics were introduced some 250 years after Muhammad, as they were only needed as Islam expanded beyond the Arabic-speaking world.

<comment><USER2> Yes, it would seem so. Not an expert but my guess is the earliest use of diacritics appeared around 100 years after Mohammad's death. So even, being generous the claims they make in the article don't hold water.

The probability is fairly high that this is a very old piece of animal skin with some Quranic text written about 100 years or so after his death (being generous).

It should also be noted that there is absolutely zero contemporary historical evidence for the existence of Mohammad. Zero.

We have piles and piles of contemporary historical evidence in multiple forms (statues, tablets, pottery, artwork, etc.) for many important and lesser important persons in history both much more ancient and equally ancient, but for him, nothing. It is only after a significant time gap after his death that we find a trickle of evidence and then a torrent. Exact same thing for Jesus.

If anyone is interested, Tom Holland's "Islam the untold story" is a fascinating introduction to this sacrilegious line of thought.

<comment><USER5> "It should also be noted that there is absolutely zero contemporary historical evidence for the existence of Mohammad. Zero."

Yes there is.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Muhammad#Non- Mu...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Muhammad#Non- Muslim_sources)

<comment><USER6> Thanks. Still, on the same page:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Muhammad#Views_...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Muhammad#Views_of_historians)

"It is not possible to write a historical biography of the Prophet without being accused of using the sources uncritically, while on the other hand, when using the sources critically, it is simply not possible to write such a biography."

I believe both Jesus and Mụhammad existed and both were just humans, the former just a prophet who managed to be ingloriously killed, the later just a military leader who invented a surprisingly effective ideology for his bloody conquests (or the prophet who had the "luck" to live his bloody character, whatever). How these things develop can be easily seen on the more recent and good documented example of

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

One of the most interesting parallels:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad%27s_wives](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad%27s_wives)

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Joseph_Smith%27s_wives](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Joseph_Smith%27s_wives)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Perhaps coincidentally, on BBC Four tonight a programme was shown which describes vellum (the material on which this manuscript was written) and the process behind creating it.

A clip is here: [http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p01pr4ty](http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p01pr4ty)

A slightly longer clip on the same subject: [http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p00n3rdf](http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p00n3rdf)

</comment><comment><USER8> I would also like to point out amongst Muslims there is a concept of multiple Qira'aat(readings) where there are multiple dialects in which the Quran is read. These readings may differ by a couple of letters for a specific word every so often. This was the reason the Quran was compiled into one form during the time of 'Uthmaan, to prevent confusion amongst the common Muslims.

Nevertheless these "readings" did not die, but rather continue to thrive to this day. This allows for a broader range of meanings, so it is not something avoided by Muslims rather accepted openly as a part of what they believe was revealed.

</comment><comment><USER9> What does this even mean to find it in the University? This is almost more interesting to me than the text itself, which has been remarkably well attested through the ages (or at least, versions of it have been independently attested).

<comment><USER10> People collect old manuscripts and books. People donate old manuscripts and books. Not that surprising

<comment><USER9> There's a story here. Not implying anything special, no da Vinci code here.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> My interest was piqued so I googled the oldest complete copy of the koran and found this[1].

[1] [http://www.commdiginews.com/world-news/middle-east/worlds- ol...](http://www.commdiginews.com/world-news/middle-east/worlds-oldest-quran- discovered-and-may-be-linked-to-imam-ali-30011/)

</comment><comment><USER12> Is it just me or is there something strange about the way this piece is written. Feels like it is written by an bot or somehow optimized for search.

        The manuscript, written in "Hijazi script", an early form of written Arabic, becomes one of the oldest known fragments of the Koran.

        Because radiocarbon dating creates a range of possible ages, there is a handful of other manuscripts in public and private collections which overlap. So this makes it impossible to say that any is definitively the oldest.

        But the latest possible date of the Birmingham discovery - 645 - would put it among the very oldest.

Oldest, Oldest Oldest. Ok, I get the picture.

</comment><comment><USER13> No mention of what chapters/verses? And no digitized images so we can compare it to current mainstream versions...

Too bad.

<comment><USER14> 3rd image from the top. The verses are highlighted and a translation is presented

Here's the digitized version: [http://vmr.bham.ac.uk/Collections/Mingana/Islamic_Arabic_157...](http://vmr.bham.ac.uk/Collections/Mingana/Islamic_Arabic_1572a/Page_1r/viewer/)

In case you know how to read arabic: [https://www.facebook.com/yasir.qadhi/photos/a.10150091939643...](https://www.facebook.com/yasir.qadhi/photos/a.10150091939643300.277936.19667888299/10153217261258300/?type=1&theater)

<comment><USER13> Thanks!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> It's funny how Muslims claim it's a "miracle" of Koran that it hasn't changed since it was published. Of course it hasn't changed, technology was at a point that it was possible to keep a book from forgers but publishing it heavily and also, there were many muslims trying to protect Koran from day one.

P.S. I born Muslim so I get to be critical about Islam and I think everyone should be able to do so.

<comment><USER16> There was no day one Quran. It was compiled many year's after Muhammad's death. There were many versions of the Quran that were destroyed.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Quran#Uthman_ib...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Quran#Uthman_ibn_Affan_and_the_canonization)

"When the task was finished Uthman kept one copy in Medina and sent others to Kufa, Baṣra, Damascus, and, according to some accounts, Mecca, and ordered that all other variant copies of the Quran to be destroyed. This was done everywhere except in Kufa, where some scholars argue that, Ibn Masʿūd and his followers refused."

Thousands of people claim below:

The famous ten People who form the chains of narration regarding the Quran are as follows.

        Umar ibn al Khattab [26]
        Uthman bin Affan[27]
        Ali ibn abi Talib[28]
        Abu Musa al Ash'ari[29]
        Ubay Ibn Ka'b[30]
        Abdullah ibn Masood[31]
        Zayd Ibn Thabit[32]
        Abu Hurairah[33]
        Abdullah Ibn Abbas[34]
        Abu al-Darda[35]

Amongst those ten the two most important people were zayd ibn thabit the personal scribe of Muhammad and Ubay ibn Ka'b who was the foremost authority on the Quran after zaid.[36][37]

So 12 people were essentially responsible for Quran, mostly through hearsay.

<comment><USER17> Thousands of people had the entire Quran committed to memory during the lifetime of Mohammad. The standardization of the written Quran, and the many "versions" you speak of, deal essentially with dialect and the addition of symbols that guide pronunciation. As far as I know it is generally agreed that the standardization process was carried out in an unbiased mechanical way.

By the way, it is relatively easy to memorize the Quran, because it is in verse form. You can go to any mosque and find children from the age of ten who has it memorized.

<comment><USER18> This is absurd, where did you learn this?

<comment><USER19> Common knowledge among Muslims. I memorized the entire Quran word-for-word when I was 12 years old myself, as did many of my friends.

<comment><USER20> >Thousands of people had the entire Quran committed to memory during the lifetime of Mohammad. //

Your comment doesn't address the claim.

Once the canonical written version of the Koran had been established memorising the entire text is relatively easy. Prior to that you would have had to be present when Mohammed revealed the narrations or had a precise rendition of that oration conveyed to you. At times Mohammed only spoke to one or two people when revealing surah. Having thousands of people memorise a number of separate orations exactly without any problem of conflicting versions is really impossible. Conveying the general meaning is within the realms of possibility; surahs revealed to large groups might even allow the preservation of some of the actual wording too.

Take an example - Armstrong's speech when stepping on to the moon, was it "one small step for a man" or was the "a" not spoken? This is probably the most pored over of all speeches ever, millions of witnesses. Did no camel ever brae in the tents of the Qureshi tribe in Mohammed's time?

Abrogation causes further problems to this claim as not only do all "thousands" have to remember the exact wording used but the exact order too, and they have only a couple of months from the end of Mohammed's narrations to learn the last of them. Not only do they need to know the order, for abrogation purposes (to learn the way to act) but they have to remember the narrations in the same non-temporal order as everyone else. I can believe even that many of Mohammed's followers remembered surah, mostly that they agreed on wording, but not at all that they remembered it in the "wrong" (ie not the delivered order) and that the order it was remembered in was identical (ie was "the entire Quran").

Doesn't 2:106 say that Allah causes ayats to be forgotten, those ayats must have been in the original - else they wouldn't have been narrated by Mohammed - but aren't now remembered and so are not in the "entire Quran".

Of course if surah 25:32 ([http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=25&verse=32](http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=25&verse=32)) that says the Koran was revealed piecemeal is wrong and surah 2:185 is right then the whole Koran was passed on in one month (including future conversations) which makes it easier to attain unanimous agreement but also means that [if tradition that the Koran was passed on in 10 days is correct] the hearers were remembering > 600 ayats of prose each day for 10 days in a row; quite a feat for illiterate desert tribesmen regardless of whether they had a tradition of oral history or not.

I'm very interested in the Muqatta'at too - how were written character variations conveyed by the "thousands"?

<comment><USER19> Very fair argument. However there also existed a consistent, full-time effort by significant numbers of people, around 70 in number, (known as Ashab as Suffa or People of The Platform) whose sole job was to memorize the Koran (and learn its interpretations) during the lifetime of Mohammed. They lived in the mosque pretty much all day, and did nothing else. Their learning was regularly checked, and presumably feedback given by Mohammed, until his death. It is not impossible to imagine that they were able to memorize and organize the current canonical text in the right order, even though it was revealed piecemeal. After Mohammed's death, these people went on to travel all over the Islamic world and teach students, giving rise to the "thousands" of memorizers within the 2nd generation of Islam, with no recorded incidents of version conflicts among the 7 established dialects.

However even with that, it is understandably difficult to believe that no mistakes were made in transmission. That's why the Quran calls it a miracle, and calls it Allah's job, to safeguard the integrity the Quran. That fact there is an established canonical version today with zero conflicts among all major prints in all countries is somewhat of a miracle, considering the fact that Muslims across cultures argue and disagree about a lot of other things within the religion.

As for the Muqatta'at, they are a part of regular recitation - they are not simply written characters.

<comment><USER21> There is an established canonical version today because Uthman set about the task of destroying all texts except the one he preferred. It's obvious why Muslims would wish a standardized text, but from a secular perspective, this was no miracle, but a tragic loss of historical sources and artifacts.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> "If it had been from anyone other than God, they would have found much inconsistency in it." (The Holy Qur'an, An-Nisa'; 4:82)

"Truly, We have revealed this remembrance, and We shall, for sure, preserve it." (The Holy Qur'an, Al-Hijr; 15:9)

Digitized version: [http://vmr.bham.ac.uk/Collections/Mingana/Islamic_Arabic_157...](http://vmr.bham.ac.uk/Collections/Mingana/Islamic_Arabic_1572a/Page_1r/viewer/)

In case you know how to read arabic: [http://tinyurl.com/nr5gvz9](http://tinyurl.com/nr5gvz9)

</comment><comment><USER22> Not really an insightful comment but I first read that as Brigham Young University which makes it all that more impactful... and funny</comment>


A Loud Sound Shut Down a Bank's Data Center for 10 Hours - <AUTHOR> http://motherboard.vice.com/read/a-loud-sound-just-shut-down-a-banks-data-center-for-10-hours <comment><USER2> This didn't surprise me, only because the video of the guy screaming at the hard drive has been stuck in my head for years -- [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tDacjrSCeq4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tDacjrSCeq4)

<comment><AUTHOR> "the guy" is Brendan Gregg, you might know him from his work on Linux performance tools.

[http://www.brendangregg.com/linuxperf.html](http://www.brendangregg.com/linuxperf.html)

<comment><USER3> I only knew him from screaming at hard disks. Now I know he was behind some great work on performance tools. Thanks for the link. :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> While being directly affected by the outage (could not make card payments on Saturday), I have noticed that none of the communications team was clearly aware of the situation. Here are some facts: \- the first public announcements - FB news and tweet confirming the issue have been posted at ~17.25-1735 local time, after four and a half hours \- there was a lot of wasted energy on excuses and social-media damage control, while no clear explanation and status being posted \- at 17.41 there was a FB response stating that "one unfunctional server" is the cause of the downtime; all services were down at that time \- the corporate communication director declares for press "we know about the issue, we don't know the cause of it" \- after almost 11 hours, problem is solved

Now the nice part: next day, the bank issues a press release stating that malfunction appeared after a programmed [fire suppression] test.

While accidents can happen, this looks more like "fail to plan is plan to fail" issue, as well as very bad communication.

</comment><comment><USER5> Both Siemens and IBM seem to know a good deal about the problem and the ways to mitigate it: [http://www.datacenterjournal.com/inert-gas-data-center- fire-...](http://www.datacenterjournal.com/inert-gas-data-center-fire- protection-and-hard-disk-drive-damage/)

The irony is that these systems are maintained by IBM :)

</comment><comment><USER6> Risking an ignorant question - will this accelerate adoption of SSDs? Or is there something about data centers that makes them lean toward spinners?

The issue in the article is that as spinners have become more dense, the track tolerance has decreased. Those small tolerance high density disks must already be expensive, and if they further can't reliably survive the environment (which includes fire suppression), then replacement with SSDs starts to look mandatory on the near horizon.

<comment><USER7> HDD technology has maxed out, they're struggling to get past 8TB. SDD meanwhile is already at 60TB and scaling upwards rapidly.

It's only a matter of time before SSD prices cut below HDD and all that spinning rust is thrown in the garbage.

<comment><USER8> Except SSDs aren't very good for long term storage as their data will decay if left unpowered for 6 months.

<comment><USER7> If you're going to believe every rumor you read you'll be convinced of anything. SSD devices are very durable _except_ if they're subjected to repeated and extreme levels of heating/cooling.

Also I'm not sure what datacentres you work in but I've never heard of one being turned off for six months. You can spin down drives when they're not in use, but that's mostly to save energy. An idle SSD uses almost no power, there's no reason to spin it down.

<comment><USER8> No you wouldn't switch an in use disk of in a data centre; but you would for archival cold storage; such as legal evidence: (From: [https://blog.korelogic.com/blog/2015/03/24](https://blog.korelogic.com/blog/2015/03/24) )

> Digital evidence storage for legal matters is a common practice. As the use > of Solid State Drives (SSD) in consumer and enterprise computers has > increased, so too has the number of SSDs in storage increased. When most, if > not all, of the drives in storage were mechanical, there was little chance > of silent data corruption as long as the environment in the storage > enclosure maintained reasonable thresholds. The same is not true for SSDs.

...

> For client application SSDs, the powered-off retention period standard is > one year while enterprise application SSDs have a powered-off retention > period of three months. These retention periods can vary greatly depending > on the temperature of the storage area that houses SSDs.

...

> The standards change dramatically when you consider JEDEC's standards for > enterprise class drives. The storage standard for this class of drive at the > same operating temperature as the consumer class drive drops from 2 years > under optimal conditions to 20 weeks. Five degrees of temperature rise in > the storage environment drops the data retention period to 10 weeks. > Overall, JEDEC lists a 3-month period of data retention as the standard for > enterprise class drives.

> A check of various drive manufacturers, in this case Samsung, Intel, and > Seagate, shows that their ratings for data retention of their consumer class > drives are what would be expected for JEDEC's enterprise class drive > standards. All three quote a nominal 3-month retention time period. Most > likely, the manufacturers are being conservative; however, it demonstrates > the potential variability the manufacturers associate with data retention on > any SSD in storage.

<comment><USER7> As SSD explodes in capacity and HDD struggles to keep up look for "archival grade SSD" to emerge as a serious product.

I know there's a ridiculous amount of offline data that must be maintained and tapes aren't always a practical solution.

Manufacturers are being _very_ conservative when it comes to retention times. I haven't heard of anyone losing data because they left their SSD powered off for two long, but if you have any anecdotes or reports to share, by all means.

Early SSDs were temperamental, flaky, and would burn out quickly. The current generation is durable, almost impossible to burn out, and seems to hold data for years even when powered off. It's like the bad rap that plasma screens got for burning in even when that problem was addressed by the manufacturers.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> > The site is currently offline and the bank relies solely on its backup data > center, located within a couple of miles' proximity.

> "Moreover, to ensure full integrity of the data, we've made an additional > copy of our database before restoring the system," ING's press release > reads.

What? Am I to interpret this to mean that ING has a _single_ backup of its data under normal conditions?

</comment><comment><USER10> In this case, a _really damn loud_ noise, at _over_ 130 db. That's a _badly_ set up fire suppression system.

<comment><USER11> Oxygen-breathing beings are not supposed to be in a room being filled with Halon

<comment><USER12> True, but there is a chance of humans being in the room when a fire breaks out. That's why they breathing apparatus scattered around (hopefully).

<comment><USER13> I don't think of the DCs I've seen have breathing apparatus around - they rely on strictly enforced signin sheets (so when the alarm goes off, a person outside the room immediately looks to see how many people are in the DC), and a 30-45 second delay to evacuate the DC before the suppression system activates.

<comment><USER14> Halon is not too toxic and you only need a concentration of less than 10 % for it to be effective. And I even once read that Halon helps breathing, i.e. in the presence of Halon humans can survive at a lower oxygen concentration than they normally could but I am unable to find a source right now. All in all it is probably not to bad to be in a room flooded with Halon and the fumes of burning stuff are probably the larger hazard.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Yelled at mine and the front fell off. [https://youtu.be/NtvNSg69P7g](https://youtu.be/NtvNSg69P7g)

</comment><comment><USER12> So was the problem the sound of the gas coming out resonating with the drives?

If so it's quite a big co-incidence, and goes to show how hard it is to mitigate against every event.

<comment><USER16> Everything in the article sounds like trigger-happy speculation at best. Their equipment was brought down during a fire drill, but reading the article, it doesn't seem like anyone actually says or knows why.

      According to people familiar with the system, the
      pressure at ING Bank's data center was higher than
      expected, and produced a loud sound when rapidly
      expelled through tiny holes.

      The bank monitored the sound and it was very loud,
      a source familiar with the system told us. "It was
      as high as their equipment could monitor, over
      130dB".

      Sound means vibration, and this is what damaged the
      hard drives.

Those are the words of the author, in that last sentence. It's simply journalism at this point. It's not something worth construing as a technical assessment.

They (the staff at Vice) just want to scoop the article, and get Vice into the action. Was it a siren that was too loud? Was it pressure differential, triggering a head crash in a bernoulli box?

Since we're at least two degrees removed from the actual events, and we'll probably never get direct information from a postmortem report, this article, to me, reads as: Data Center Outage in Eastern Europe, Reason Unknown

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> At this point, will they just scrap all the hard drives? Is this sort of thing covered by warranty, or is it "you broke it, not our problem"?

</comment><comment><USER18> Don't shout at your JBODs, they don't like it.

[https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=tDacjrSCeq4](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=tDacjrSCeq4)

<comment><USER7> That's literally in the article.

<comment><USER18> So good I repeated it.</comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: Have RAM needs leveled out the way processing power has? - <AUTHOR> I'm planning on the next laptop I buy remaining solid for at least the next 5 years, hopefully more. With the kinds of tasks I do, 8GB only just gets the job done right now and 16GB is comfy. I'm trying to decide whether to bump it up to 32GB to be safe.
It just feels like the increases in RAM on laptops (and the need for it?) have slowed in recent years. I bought an $1,800 laptop ten years ago with 8GB RAM. Today, a laptop around the same price has 16GB. Seems like a 2x increase over ten years is much slower than things used to progress. So then, will 16GB last me another 5+? <comment><USER2> Generally "planned future-proofing" never works, but I would configure as much memory as you can.

> It just feels like the increases in RAM on laptops (and the need for it?) > have slowed in recent years

Are you sure? Both the 16" macbook pro and Dell XPS now support up to 64GB.

[https://www.dell.com/en-us/shop/dell-laptops/new- xps-15-7590...](https://www.dell.com/en-us/shop/dell-laptops/new- xps-15-7590/spd/xps-15-7590-laptop)

[https://www.apple.com/macbook-pro-16/specs/](https://www.apple.com/macbook- pro-16/specs/)

<comment><AUTHOR> The MacBook is what I'm looking at, actually. The _maximum supported_ is certainly higher, but it seems like the roughly-corresponding price on both of those laptops has 16GB.</comment></comment>


All together now. Introducing G Suite - <AUTHOR> https://cloud.googleblog.com/2016/09/all-together-now-introducing-G-Suite.html <comment><USER2> I'm waiting for a G Suite/G Spot/G Men/G String joke.

</comment><comment><USER3> Ewwww. I'm not a big fan of that name. It might grow on me but my initial reaction is...

</comment><comment><USER4> So nothing changed but the name it looks like . How underwhelming

<comment><USER5> We got lucky. They just renamed it instead of creating a new suite with their redundant apps. Gmail\Inbox, Hangouts\Allo, etc.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Um, I don't want one plus one to equal three.</comment>


Free KPI dashboard for your cloud services - <AUTHOR> http://databox.com <comment><USER2> A look! Another BI app! There's definitely a need for that!

<comment><USER3> In all honesty, there's probably more need for that than for this comment.

<comment><USER2> Seriously doubt it.

<comment><USER4> Please don't post unsubstantive dismissals to HN.

Edit: Your account unfortunately has a history of breaking the HN guidelines. If you can't or won't abide by the rules here, we will ban your account. Please post civilly and substantively, or not at all.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


London's Super-Recognizer Police Force (2016) - <AUTHOR> https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/08/22/londons-super-recognizer-police-force <comment><USER2> _When volunteers presented passport applications containing photographs of other people, the officials did not recognize the discrepancy fourteen per cent of the time. One might attribute this alarming statistic to reckless inattention. Yet the system for hiring passport officers likely rests on the faulty premise that applicants have essentially equal skill in recognizing faces._

The obvious low-tech solution to this problem is disallowing bringing your own photo, and having a photo booth at the passport application site, where you have to take the photo in front of the officer. Why do many countries still permit bringing your own photo?

<comment><USER3> Cost?

The setup you described would be really expensive and cumbersome compared to people submitting their own photos, assuming of course you can apply for a passport by post or online and don't have to go to an office with an appointment anyway, in which case it may make some sense even if it only increases the quality of photos by a few percent -- to be honest I'd be skeptical that the improvement would be more than this, the parameters for self taken photos are rather strict after all, such that it's quite hard to take photo that 'doesn't look like you' because of light, hair, makeup etc and have it be accepted.

<comment><USER4> Just last week I applied Indian Passport because of some changes in my address & othet particulars, the process was to fill an online form, pay fees online, book appointment online, show up with a confirmation SMS & old Original Passport alongwith one more ID Original. So basically no photocopies, no paper. Went in at pre-opted time, entered a number from my SMS in a kiosk machine, confirmed all particulars filled in online as correct, stood for photo, put fingers on scanner when asked, got another token number, where when called, a single person asked me to show him my original existing passport & second ID, all ok, received a SMS & Email with all the details, & a case number to follow the progress. All paperless & interacted with only one human. All this was managed by Tata Technology & Indian Government.

Fun Fact, Machine didn't show me my photo till the very last step, & I thought of changing & having one more try to pose with looking bit good, got an error that Photo will he taken only once, & only them can initiate the re-click of photo, not me.

<comment><USER5> Do you think that they process your data in a secure manner?

<comment><USER4> I think yes, as Tata is a reputed brand & group of companies (auto, tech, steel, infra & many) & also because whole passport office & operation is always supervised by government officials. Before this, it was always a big bundle of original & photocopied documents & forms.

<comment><USER6> Putting trust in TCS just because it is Tata is very worrisome. Tata products are 'reputed' only in local Indian market bubble, propped up by government protectionist measures.

[https://techcrunch.com/2010/02/07/indian-it-giant-tata- consu...](https://techcrunch.com/2010/02/07/indian-it-giant-tata-consultancy- services-hacked/)

<comment><USER4> Its not that we, as in public, have a choice of passport issuers :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I'm fascinated by the Cambridge Face Memory Test (direct link: [http://www.bbk.ac.uk/psychology/psychologyexperiments/experi...](http://www.bbk.ac.uk/psychology/psychologyexperiments/experiments/facememorytest/startup.php) ). I got 99%, which seems remarkably and unrealistically high even though people say I have a good memory for faces. Of course, I can't just go take the test again, because now I know what the faces look like.

I've had moments like what the other super-recognizer officers did, though. Before I got married and I was on a dating site I shall not name, I immediately recognized one of the secretaries on there from the C-suite, someone I interacted with a couple times but only that. I quickly broke the match, hopefully before she noticed, since that might have been a little weird.

More often I know faces but not names, which makes things awfully awkward at professional meetings. "Hey, ... guy!"

<comment><USER8> Heh. I got 97%. I like to think I have a good face memory, but some of the noisy images felt like guessing. Also: weird that the test consists entirely of remembering the faces of white guys.

<comment><USER7> Yeah, that was weird too. I don't know how reliable this would be for someone who hasn't primarily been around "white guys." At minimum I was expecting some pictures of female faces, but there wasn't even that.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> This tells us that automated face recognition can get much better. It's now approaching average human level, but there's no reason it has to stop there.

<comment><USER10> The headlined article actually explicitly tells us that it is in fact _nowhere near as good_ as an average human.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> The article is interesting and raises interesting points. For instance about the "face-recognition" impairment in police officers, which is a serious problem.

I was however surprised that this ability was not well known, I remember clearly reading stuff about it a LONG time ago. Using it in a systematic way & in a police unit may be new however.

And, of course, as EVERY TIME the topic is raised, I was aghast by the complete off-hand dismissal of the human right issues of the CCTV network. It is a HUGE mistake to underestimate the abuse potential, that's why it must be addressed NOW, because when surveillance will be 100% widespread and accepted as "normal" by people, it will be too late to go back. And we are going there very fast as the example of the UK has already shown us.

Some of the worse things are created out of very good intentions, here the police officer is clearly very honest & sincere about his use of the CCTV footage to catch criminals, but he forgets that he will NOT be the only one with access to it. I'd like to ask him: okay, so can you vouch personally for ALL the people who will use that system in the future, most of whom you have never met (and never will)? Do you REALLY believe that there will not be criminals, corrupt public servants or authoritarian officials who will access it (for nefarious purposes)? Note that this is already a HUGE issue with the secret services in all countries: there IS abuse, a lot of it is publicly known, here we'd be giving "the eye in the sky" enabling even worse abuses (more information available to more -potentially bad- people)!

From the article:

> "There is a friendly eye in the sky," a Home Office minister proclaimed in > 1994. "There is nothing sinister about it, and the innocent have nothing to > fear."

Stupid quote. The simple fact that he feels the need to say that there is "nothing sinister" is already raising a huge red flag. The truth is that history showed us that Nobody is EVER "innocent", there will always be someone to blame you for something: too thin, too fat, too short, too tall, too religious, not religious enough, etc. You know what I mean, it's a constant in humanity's history: the "need" to find an enemy, a scapegoat, someone who is "different" to blame for whatever issues are currently happening.

It is unfortunate (and worrying) that that stupid belief is so widespread (I hear and read it very often)...

<comment><USER12> Completely agreeing on the dangers of CCTV. They even say in the article that the efficiency of the system is quite disputed: most crime footage will rot in a database. In general i would always be wary of an approach to security which tries to capture exhaustive information about something:

* there can and will be some form of misuse, even indirect: anti-terrorist laws in france being used to harass activists--ecologists and other; implies making things centralized which defeats security (like TLS PKI) * costs a lot of money to get a pile of mostly useless data * someone will throw some big data/machine learning at it and this gets dangerous because we start to base our police (and justice) on opaque statistical tools

Yet seeing that they use people instead of machines to do this job makes me a bit less angry.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> As I'm reading this, this post is #1 on HN with a mere 9 points and zero comments. This is frustrating me because I cannot conceive how this can possibly rank higher than other articles with such weak data points .

Can anyone here shed some light on this ?

<comment><USER14> The poster has a karma of 35285.

<comment><AUTHOR> As far as I know, karma doesn't help submissions.</comment></comment></comment>


LuneOS on Necuno Mobile by WebOS Ports - <AUTHOR> https://necunos.com/blog/necuno-solutions-and-webos-ports-collaboration/ <comment><USER2> Announced 1,988 days ago, I'm happy this is out of Alpha. It's as Debian- derived as WebOS and PureOS are... will be chrootable to Debian like the Palm Pre was?</comment>


The Lounge – A FOSS JavaScript Self-Hosted Always-Connected IRC Client - <AUTHOR> https://thelounge.github.io/ <comment><USER2> This looks like a total ripoff of Shout, down to the website and everything.

[http://shout-irc.com/](http://shout-irc.com/)

EDIT: Maybe you should've said on your website that it is a FORK of Shout and not only on Github...

<comment><USER3> The repository for Shout prominently lists The Lounge as an official fork in it's README.

[https://github.com/erming/shout/blob/master/README.md](https://github.com/erming/shout/blob/master/README.md)

<comment><USER2> Great, so why not on the website of The Lounge?

<comment><USER3> Maybe a pull request would solve the concern?

Or opening an issue?</comment></comment></comment></comment>


New calculation refines comparison of matter with antimatter - <AUTHOR> https://phys.org/news/2020-09-refines-comparison-antimatter.html <comment><AUTHOR> >Direct CP violation and the ΔI=1/2 rule in K→ππ decay from the standard model

[https://journals.aps.org/prd/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevD.102.0...](https://journals.aps.org/prd/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevD.102.054509)</comment>


Let's Build a Simple Interpreter. Part 8 - <AUTHOR> https://ruslanspivak.com/lsbasi-part8/ <comment><USER2> The FAQ says it's ok to repost a small number of times, but I think we have to call 10 times excessive.

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

<comment><AUTHOR> Good point. I should have counted before posting.</comment></comment>