Mega update: Dotcom's service now accepts Bitcoin - <AUTHOR> http://thenextweb.com/insider/2013/02/16/mega-update-dotcoms-service-now-accepts-bitcoin-will-expand-into-email-chat-voice-video-and-mobile/ <comment><USER2> I love Gmail, but I think I'd move my main e-mail to Mega if they launched a good one. I don't think foreigners' data is very safe with American businesses and on American territory. The US government seems to care very little about protecting the privacy of US citizens, let alone of foreigners, for which they feel no obligation to protect.

<comment><USER3> I would be happy to pay money for a a Mega mail service if they would somewhat match the Gmail functionality.

<comment><USER4> MegaMail would be a great name for an email service. It looks like they'd have to acquire the trademark first though[0].

0: <https://www.google.com/search?q=megamail>

<comment><USER3> Plus they should allow as early as possible to connect existing domain names with their service. I wouldn't want to know everybody that I'm sailing under an offshore pirate flag. Primary users would probably come from the grey'er corner of the Internet, so it will most likely lead to some flagging/spam/etc issues.

<comment><USER5> The reputation is typically assigned to outbound IPs or signing keys, so new domain names wouldn't do much. (Even then, a simple "dig mx your-email- domain.com" would reveal who hosts your email.)

<comment><USER4> The vast majority of people don't look at that info or know what it means though.

<comment><USER6> People who write spam filters do though.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> A business (Mega) whose profits will be mainly generated by exploiting copyright infringements will be accepting a currency that's mainly used for illegal activities such as buying drugs, money laundering...a perfect match!

Before anyone comments: I`m well aware that both Mega as well as Bitcoin CAN be used for non questionable purposes. Their main usage as of today are some sort of illegal or at least questionable activities.

I`m still surprised how much love Kim Schmitz receives from liberal minded HN fellows - unaware that he is gladly taking your believes as a thin cover-up to conduct at least questionable business.

<comment><USER8> Mega as well as Bitcoin have both a very liberal philosophical foundation by strengthening personal property rights. Bitcoin helps preserving and moving wealth without government intervention and Mega helps preserving and moving data without government intervention. In times of increasingly corrupt and dysfunctional democratic processes, this is the right thing to do. Note that legal and morally right is not always the same. This is a basic premise your our TV tells you every day (e.g. Jack Bauer illegally torturing suspects or Robin Hood stealing from the rich). I believe that both Bitcoin and Mega make the world a better place.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> especially ...

"Bitcoin is a perfect fit for Mega, which wants to distance itself from governments as much as possible."

my take ...

Bitcoin is a perfect payment option for global merchants who have customers in countries where credit card fraud is rampant - as well as those desiring privacy.

Coincidentally, I performed an international wire transfer today where the outbound fee was about 4%. If my merchant had accepted bitcoins it would have cost me only 1% to get my dollars into Coinbase bitcoin and my merchant would likewise incur a low fee to get their received bitcoin payment into Polish currency.

Indeed, the bitcoin economy is growing exponentially - from a very small base.

<comment><USER10> > as well as those desiring privacy.

Can you explain this part a bit?

<comment><USER11> Better than credit cards, worse than cash. There aren't any mixer services, for whatever they may or may not be worth, that work for credit cards (and you don't necessarily have to get bitcoins in a way that traces back to you. You could, for example, buy some weed with cash and sell it for bitcoins.).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I kind of hope these kinds of issues become more common. The more draconian and in the pocket of private interests the US becomes, the more it promotes use of services that no one by the copyright lobby see as illegitimate. I guess I secretly hope that we (the US) lose our hegemony over certain internet services due to our terrible framework for privacy and having so many laws written by the copyright fundamentalist lobby. Backwards laws and enforcement is increasing innovation with respect to privacy and financial innovation.

BitCoin is super important in terms of giving consumers the right to buy any service they want anywhere in the world regardless of legislation. This takes care of financial blockades by banks and credit card providers. The only other place to block things besides at the financial layer is at the network layer and that is easily solvable by using VPS services anywhere in the world that doesn't enforce a network blockade. These VPS services can also choose to accept BitCoin.

<comment><USER13> I apologise, but the pedant in me can't help but point out that your capitalization "BitCoin" is incorrect. For talking about the network and software, use "Bitcoin". When talking about the currency, use "bitcoin", no capitals, as one would with "dollar"

<comment><USER12> Haha. no problem. I've seen it various ways and I guess I gravitated towards BitCoin instead of bitcoin.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> What would it take for a major player in the the field of eCommerce to accept this? Let's say an Amazon.com, Newegg, etc. Any guesses to what would happen to the value of BTC?

<comment><USER15> I think Amazon accepting BTC right now would be a disaster, the value of BTC would have to shoot up very fast and high, and the resulting instability would look awful and then Amazon would be forced to remove support for BTC making a massive PR problem for BTC.

<comment><USER16> Dont you think there would be an initial sort of violent (I could use a better word there) revaluation which would quickly settle down in to something stable? I suppose a bit like initial trading of a new businesses on the stock exchange, perhaps?

My, granted ignorant, assumption is that BTC would keep revaluating each time a big organisation adopted it, but that "reaction" would smooth out as more and more organisations adopted it and its value settled.

So, yes, initial pain, but surely all interested would know and accept that in advance. As usual, early adopters accept the pain as it were. But early adopters in general are up for that for the thrill, if you like, of being there at the beginning. A bit like people who buy Tesla cars. They know its not perfect and that there will be some pain, but they love it anyway.

<comment><USER15> Your right, I just have a bad feeling about something as massive as Amazon getting in on the game this soon.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> With Mega, files are cryptographically safe. With Bitcoin, money is cryptographically safe. Of course they had to marry.

<comment><USER18> I still don't understand how files are "cryptographically safe" on Mega

The problem is, somehow they know if two people upload the same file even though this should be impossible if they do bullet proof client-side encryption.

This does make Mega anything but "cryptographically safe"

<comment><USER19> It does work, if you read up on how the encryption works, you'll see it's sound.

I don't know how secure mega is, but deduplicating encrypted data is possible.

<comment><USER20> but then 'duplication" only happens if the source file is shared post- encryption, which is far less common than sharing pre-encryption, sync post- encryption sharing requires sharing the key as well.

<comment><USER19> You should read about convergent encryption. You can deduplicate plaintext files without knowing what they are.

<comment><USER21> They don't use convergent encryption, they randomly generated keys when files are uploaded. The only deduplication that exists is when you copy a file that's been shared with you by another user, because in this particular case you also copy the key.

"Secure" isn't boolean. Although convergent encryption will prevent people from accessing your secret data, it does have different security properties: Mega would be able to determine whether you have a particular file, which they cannot with the current system.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: Is it feasible to have children wear "worldview protectors" in school? - <AUTHOR>

The idea is that parents could require their children to wear "worldview protectors" in school that automatically censor the teacher's speech whenever it conflicts with their parents' worldview. <comment><USER2> I'm not sure if you're asking as a business idea of to apply it to your own kids, but the explicit use of this method to controlling children's mind and hoping to mold them according to the parent's world view is a little scary IMO. I don't want to criticize how parents want to educate their children, but what's next, a hidden recording device to listen to all their conversation, transcribe them and spot conflicting opinions? Why treat kids as the parent's property? Could a child become a healthy critical-thinking adult after such a controlled and oppressed childhood?

<comment><USER3> I think they are speaking from a devils advocate -like perspective, rather than sincerely promoting the idea.

Alternatively, they are questioning whether they need to be concerned about others implementing the idea.

Alternatively they are planning on writing a satire, and they want to see if something is technologically feasible.

I don't think they are promoting the idea in a totally sincere way.

<comment><USER2> I thought the same at first, but then I remembered that many parents home- school their children among many -IMO- valid reasons, to 'protect' them from things that schools teach like sex ed. and evolution theory.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> No. It was recently revealed that even a much simpler problem, detecting genitals in on-line worlds, was so difficult that the world was shut down. It might be possible to detect certain words with speech recognition, but the teacher will just use different words. [http://fusion.net/story/143218/lego- universe-had-a-huge-dong...](http://fusion.net/story/143218/lego-universe-had- a-huge-dong-detection-problem-says-former-developer/)

Twenty years ago we learned that even censoring specific bad words in online chat rooms is impossible. [http://articles.baltimoresun.com/1995-12-02/features/1995336...](http://articles.baltimoresun.com/1995-12-02/features/1995336086_1_word- breast-breast-cancer-survivor-aol)

</comment><comment><USER5> Maybe I'm just short-sighted, but unless the device can catch non-verbal signs that someone is about to say something that conflicts with your worldview, it would be hard to censor stuff on-the-fly.

Also, are we really at a point where we want to protect children from opinions?

<comment><USER6> Rather than censoring it on the fly, the device could mutter 'he's lying, he's lying, it's not true' into the child's ear in a respectable, commanding voice. 'Your mummy will be so angry if you think he's right.'

Since we're already assuming solid AI to understand what the speaker is saying, it might as well have enough capacity to whisper counter-arguments to the child until it detects that the child's convictions have been sufficiently reinforced. Automated conditioning!

<comment><USER7> If we're being evil about it, you don't even need counter arguments. Hook it up to a taser colar and have it give the child a good zap whenever it hears phrases the parents don't like. The child will come to avoid 'bad' opinions all by themselves soon enough.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> It might be remotely possible if you have, you know, artificial general intelligence with a high reaction speed, and comprehensive knowledge of the parents worldview. Even then it would be very confusing, since it would have to cut in late into sentences or larger presentations when the conflict was detected.

Even if it works, it seems likely mostly to adversely affect the children's performance in school (and not just on the specific worldview issues -- the distraction and stress from all the incomplete thoughts would probably be a _general_ drag on their attention and performance), and their ability to interact with those there.

</comment><comment><USER9> 1) Ostracisation. 2) Parental hatred 3) _You_ couldn't perform that function, were you standing behind them with blinkers and earmuffs at the ready 4) Other children. Will talk. Should we censor them too? 5) Rationalising the views we have _in the face of conflicting opinion_ is what allows us to cement our own views 6) Guiding our children in how to accept / interpret / evaluate the plethora of opinions out there is the largest influence we have. Your choices of media, internet access, social groups, extra-murals, etc. are there to perform this function.

I really don't want to see the psychological damage this could cause, even if possible (I do believe AR and augmentation and weak AI will enable versions of this). Filter bubbles are dangerous, limiting, and foster intolerance. I don't think we need any more intolerance.

</comment><comment><USER10> Not feasible without AI that can understand natural language, which is a long way off. Bad idea even if it were feasible. If you are afraid teachers will teach your children falsehoods - which could happen, granted - then teach them how to be sceptical of falsehoods.

</comment><comment><USER11> I don't think it's _feasible_ , but that's a great premise for a scifi story.

<comment><USER12> As someone who just saw a theatrical performance of "1984" in London the other day, this Ask HN makes me queasy.

<comment><USER13> The whole world should make you queasy. We're entering an era where the constant surveillance is becoming more and more possible and more penetrating.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Next you are going to be asking whether it would be feasible to have Internet filters (browser plugins) that augmented the social media pages of other children from households with differing views. It could even, for example, replace words like "Jesus" with "Big Brother" (or Allah, Jehovah, et al). Then, of course, the child would need to wear augmented vision that made other children from disagreeable families or backgrounds look really ugly (or scary). Perhaps the system would simply detect the identity of each person (based on face) and use keyword profiling from social media and related to classify each.

</comment><comment><USER15> At what point would you pass control over to the child so that they can automatically censor any speech from the parent that conflicts with the childs' worldview?

<comment><USER16> That's built in the child. It's called "the teenage years."

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> Enter Socrates, just asking questions.....

(remember that the charges for which he was put to death started with 'corrupting the youth of Athens').

This is both a horribly bad idea for a wide variety of reasons, and to top it off, it won't work, not even in principle.

</comment><comment><USER18> [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BLIT_(short_story)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BLIT_\(short_story\))

Spoiler Alert.

A sci-fi story which mention a device that adults use to control what children can see.

<comment><USER19> Blit is not that story. Blit is about a fractal neuro-brain hack that kills people who see it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> You can try helicopter-parenting; be that weird parent standing up in the back of the class yelling at the teacher. That might work.

</comment><comment><USER21> it is called a "school voucher". With it, parents can send their kids to a school that conforms to their world view.</comment>


Ok Google – it's time you discovered cyclists - <AUTHOR> https://www.cyklistbloggen.se/dear-google-its-time-for-cyclists/ <comment><USER2> It's time cyclists discovered OpenStreetMaps. The cyclist community, as far as I can see (it's just a mode of transportation for me, so I'm not part of it), has been doing an excellent job of making sure cycling routes are properly mapped there. Doesn't solve the Street View problem, but you're really missing out if you haven't tried it for navigation.

Even in the Netherlands, it's often better than Google Maps. And it can serve as the basis for apps building on top of it like [https://cycle.travel/](https://cycle.travel/).

<comment><USER3> cycle.travel's my project - thanks for the mention! Always happy to hear suggestions and ideas.

It uses OpenStreetMap data plus a heavily customised instance of OSRM (Open Source Routing Machine, a fast routeplanning engine). The routing "profile", which calculates the weighting, is a few thousand lines of code alone, never mind various other stuff like custom elevation calculations.

It's a great project to work on, and the best reward of all is when people plan multi-day tours with it and say how much they've enjoyed the route.

<comment><USER4> cycle.travel does not work on iOS. Loaded page, green popup, Starting from: cycling to: I filled these out and pressed Find Route, nothing happens. Tried selecting Circular route, press Find Route, nothing happens

<comment><USER3> Curious - works for me but would like to debug! Could you ping me the start/end points you're entering? (email@example.com if you don't want to post them here.)

<comment><USER5> same thing happened to me on the home page (linux, firefox 66), but the actual map pages works great.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Interesting article. One challenge though is that there are a lot more gray areas in cycling than in driving. Driving is black and white - you want the fastest route thats legally possible. With cycling, everyone's tolerance for what is a good cycling road is different, and you are constantly making trade offs between road quality and scenery, and distance.

The cycling directions in my town, for example, are great in the sense that they take you on only bike paths with little cars. However, they are often 25% longer than just taking the roads which also have bike lanes. I am comfortable biking on the roads so I prefer the roads, but others might not be. Which set of directions do you present? I guess you could have options for both like "most scenic" and "most direct". However, there will always be people complaining about routes being too roundabout or not safe enough because of preference differences.

I think with cycling sometimes its best to just use the bike directions as a starting off point and then explore from there. Hopefully you can be in a place for long enough to discover the routes that fit you best and stick to them. For me, thats actually a fun part of the activity.

<comment><USER7> Most map apps allow some choices like 'avoid tolls', or 'avoid highways'. Biking should/could be similar. Prefer bike paths vs bike lanes. To be fair, it is hard for the Google Street view car to go down the bike lanes. Going to need to rig up a bike with the camera rig. They've done it for hiking trails, so why not?

<comment><USER8> > choices like 'avoid tolls', or 'avoid highways'

Those choices are _insanely_ expensive for Google to provide.

Every unique configuration of options has to be hosted by hundreds of servers in each region. The cost of running the routing service is proportional to 2 ^ (the number of options). It's because everything has to be precomputed for fast lookups, and the lookup tables for one set of options aren't valid for another. See [1].

This is why Google hasn't added any more options in ~a decade. Even then, some combinations of options use various approximations and in some cases don't return the mathematically best result, or take longer to do so.

[1]: [https://bib.irb.hr/datoteka/644571.MaueSandersMatijevic.pdf](https://bib.irb.hr/datoteka/644571.MaueSandersMatijevic.pdf)

<comment><USER9> That paper is old and definitely not what Google Maps actually uses. Techniques which people actually use (mostly Contraction hierarchies and CRP) are much more compact than what you describe. Routing isn't just a table lookup.

Google Maps' offline maps also include routing information. The downloads are pretty small, which definitely excludes the more space-intensive algorithms.

<comment><USER10> To be fair, contraction hierarchies are inflexible for exactly the reasons OP described. CRP (aka multi-level dijkstra) is more flexible, but there's always a trade off between query speed, pre-process/weight-update speed, and route quality. These services are very expensive to run at global scale if you need multi-modal or live congestion support.

<comment><USER9> Customizable Contraction Hierarchies go a long way towards solving that, they're quite similar to CRP with regards to both customization and query time. Also, route quality isn't part of the trade-off: all of these methods are exact.

I would argue that updating the routing algorithm's data structure isn't the expensive part of reacting to live traffic. Getting and processing the raw data sounds a lot harder than re-running the customization phase of routing preprocessing.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> The thing about bike commuting for a couple decades is you quickly learn that about half of the streets and and bike lanes are complete no go zone death traps, and there is no good way to really build this knowledge aside from just learning where you're going to get turned into repeatedly.

My city is super progressive and bike friendly, but even then it's effectively suicide to try and use certain bike lanes and everyone just has this communal knowledge.

<comment><USER12> This is interesting. I know of places where it's dangerous to ride in my city (for one of two reasons: 1. more accidents happen there statistically or 2. narrow shoulder / no bike lane so it's unsafe unless you occupy a lane of traffic) - but what do you consider "death traps"?

<comment><USER13> One thing I've heard of is "The Right Hook". The bike lane is on the right edge of the road. When a car is making a right turn, they don't look behind them, make a right turn, and a cyclist crashes into them. Seattle has a similar problem with some 1 way streets with a bike lane on the left side. At least 1 person has died.

<comment><USER14> This is a fundamental traffic design failure. Prior to the existence of bike lanes, motor vehicles never had to yield to something behind them (perhaps 30 or 50 meters behind them) while traversing an intersection.

In a busy intersection where one also has to attend to pedestrians, other cars, etc., moving in different directions, trying to track what's going on behind you can be almost impossible (and thus quite dangerous for all).

My "solution" to this problem is to carefully but fully occupy the bike lane before making such a turn. Yeah, it's illegal, and draws lots of swearing (and worse) from bicyclists. But there's just no other good way to keep everyone safe.

<comment><USER15> First off, thank you for doing what you're doing as a driver to prevent this kind of crash. You're right, cyclists are blithering idiots about drivers doing this, but it protects them even if they don't understand that.

As a cyclist (about 15,000 total miles, half touring, half commuting split between Boston and Cleveland), my solution to the problem is to not design the infrastructure in ways that sets cyclists up for the crash.

It is absolutely woefully bad design that cycle lanes on the right continue all the way to the intersection. A solution that works for experienced cyclists to to end the bike lane some distance before the intersection. This forces a merge in a zone where there's no risk of a right hook. I float this with the full understanding that it only works for cyclists who are capable of making the merge at around 20mph/30kmph. And/or where the topography is favorable.

No, you don't have to be able to sustain that speed, but being able to do it in short bursts greatly expands your choices when riding in urban traffic.

My experience has been that nobody minds much at that speed, especially if you merge back into the "bike lane" while you're still in the intersection but after you're past the lanes people would be turning right into. Turning traffic has to slow anyway to make the turn, after all.

This is a specific case of a general rule I try to apply when riding: Make people choose to hit you; don't let them do it accidentally.

I would add that this is really only a valid strategy in _urban_ traffic where even the major arterials only flow under 30mph because the density of turns and stop lights prevents higher speeds. Major arteries in the suburbs or around malls are a nightmare for riding because traffic generally flows a lot faster. Some of the most hair-raising riding I've done was near a mall while bike touring. It was basically unavoidable, and also absolutely miserable.

<comment><USER16> > A solution that works for experienced cyclists to to end the bike lane some > distance before the intersection. This forces a merge in a zone where > there's no risk of a right hook.

Unless the road has sufficient room for a bike lane of a minimum width of 5 feet, then you end up with a lot of close passes from cars in the right lane and also end up riding in the door zone of parked cars to your right.

In those cases, it makes more sense to just ride in the center of the right- most lane available for traffic and get more room from cars passing you. This would work for streets that have multiple lanes for same direction traffic.

> Major arteries in the suburbs or around malls are a nightmare for riding > because traffic generally flows a lot faster. Some of the most hair-raising > riding I've done was near a mall while bike touring. It was basically > unavoidable, and also absolutely miserable.

It really depends on how much traffic is present. I've ridden on roads in the center of the right lane with speed limits ranging from 35 to 45 mph without much of an issue. Drivers almost always change lanes to pass me or slow down behind me before passing.

<comment><USER15> > Unless the road has sufficient room for a bike lane of a minimum width of 5 > feet, then you end up with a lot of close passes from cars in the right lane > and also end up riding in the door zone of parked cars to your right.

Thank you for clarifying. Yes, cyclists riding in a regular traffic lane should absolutely take the center of the lane for all of the reasons you've listed. Again, make people choose to hit you; don't let them do it by accident.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> > _In short, it treats the cycle as a car, but with access to less > information._

This is just not even remotely true.

I cycle all the time in Manhattan and Brooklyn and for the same destination, the car and cycling routes are _drastically_ different.

Cycling routes give tremendous preference for roads with actual cycling lanes, and do their best to avoid main arteries to give you a safer side street instead.

You can verify this yourself in Google Maps by turning on the "Bicycling" layer to see the green-marked bicycle routes, picking random intersections to get directions between, and observe how it tries to route you along bike lanes. (Of course, Manhattan streets are tricky, so it's not the case 100% of the time because giving too much preference to bike lines can result in a _much_ longer trip.)

Quick searching also reveals that Google absolutely uses the elevation data to try to route riders along flat roads, that uphill shows a longer estimated time, and you can even see an elevation map of the route.

So as far as I can tell, this article is just 100% factually wrong, based on an entirely false premise.

Is Google Maps _perfect_ for cyclists? Of course not (e.g. it has no idea cobblestone streets are something to avoid), but it's not perfect for cars either (thinks I ought to drive down a pedestrian staircase in LA).

But there's clear evidence that Google Maps "discovered" cyclists sometime around 2014, if not before. It's been a while. (My biggest wish is for it to integrate bike sharing into directions.)

<comment><USER18> It varies greatly, depending on the country.

Portugal doesn't have any cycling info. The routes in Spain and France tend to go down things that are marginally identifiable as roads or cycling paths, and more likely to be hiking paths. Definitely the sort of thing that I'd not take a road bike down, but a MTB would be ok.

<comment><USER17> Yes. I wonder to what extent that has to do with countries/municipalities _providing_ data though?

I know there are huge variances in the quality of government-provided data, as well as whether governments provide them at all.

And that while Google Maps has Street View as a ground truth in some parts of the world, it doesn't everywhere, and especially often where there are bike paths that aren't next to a road for cars.

So without knowing more in any particular circumstance, the government may be just as likely to blame as Google.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> You can always tell what features the creator of a product use themselves!

Microsoft long ago (10 years?) added a great feature for bus routes on Bing Maps: "Previous stop is ___" / "If you reach ___, you've gone too far". That's a brilliant idea, and it tells me that the people at Microsoft who built this actually take the bus themselves.

It's pretty clear to me that everyone at Google drives.

<comment> dylan-m That one was a great feature! I'm really hoping someone will figure out landmarks for mapping directions at some point. Or has someone done that and I haven't noticed? :) There's so much data about buildings now, it wouldn't be that much of a stretch to say something like "head towards the Dominion building", or "once you've passed the school on your right, you are almost there". It would really help people who have trouble orienting themselves with maps, it would help in places with less obvious street signs, and it would be a hundred times more useful than that very cool and very unnecessary AR navigation feature Google made because they needed to work around the broken compasses in their phones.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> I'm amazed nobody has mentioned Komoot [https://komoot.com/](https://komoot.com/) yet. They have an excellent route planning tool for cycling, at least in Europe. I can't vouch for other areas of the world, though.

<comment><USER21> Strava just improved their mapping recently on the mobile. You draw with your finger a shape, and in seconds(it is impressively fast) it gives you a route to follow. Based on their heatmap probably.

I then still have to import it in Komoot before using it, to filter out unwanted surfaces or way types.

I tried it for a few rides already and the route selection was great.

<comment><USER22> I believe that feature only comes with paid Strava? When I try to activate "Explore Routes", it asks me for 59.99€

<comment><USER21> Yes, it is only for paying users

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> For someone who has done his faire share of bicycle touring using Google Maps, I can't count the number of times it has taken me to barren fields in the countryside pushing my bike through mud. It even got me almost arrested once in France, taking me riding on the shoulder of a 110km/h highway with no exit in sight.

For anyone getting into touring, Komoot is much better for cyclists.

<comment><USER23> > It even got me almost arrested once in France, taking me riding on the > shoulder of a 110km/h highway with no exit in sight.

It is very possible it was legal, so you wouldn't have been arrested.

For example, I ended up on that road: [https://email@example.com,-0.9627792,3a,75y,325...](https://email@example.com,-0.9627792,3a,75y,325.31h,90.66t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sAwsGvZzoN2Kmed4_qF-8xw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=fr)

110 km/h speed limit, and yet not a single "motor vehicles only" sign ([https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panneau_d'indication_d'une_rou...](https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panneau_d'indication_d'une_route_%C3%A0_acc%C3%A8s_r%C3%A9glement%C3%A9_en_France)) on any of the entrances. Not even a "forbidden to cyclists" sign ([https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panneau_d'interdiction_d'acc%C...](https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panneau_d'interdiction_d'acc%C3%A8s_aux_cycles_en_France)). Yep, that's crazy.

I actually didn't get "on" the road, I stopped before the insertion lane was over, and cautiously walked back 200 or 300 m to the entry point (because of course this part was one-way, and the last thing drivers expect is meeting a cyclist there, in a forbidden direction, especially right when they prepare to speed up to insert into highway traffic). I looked for the warning/interdiction sign I had probably missed: there was no sign. And you check any entrance on Streetview if you have time to lose, you won't find any.

Worst thing? I had to take that road anyway a bit later (farther), because it is the only bridge around, and I was late. I had already taken that horrendous bridge in the morning and I had sworn I would never take it again, but I had no choice.

[https://firstname.lastname@example.com,-0.9689672,3a,75y,140...](https://email@example.com,-0.9689672,3a,75y,140.98h,93.98t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sfDSbJtRka- imbKTRwHDS2g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=fr)

See how narrow both the bike lane and the car lane are? And when I was there it wasn't practically a car lane but a lorry lane. Speed limit is 70 km/h but all of them overspeed. And anyway, the bridge is damn high, so you are (well, I was) stuck at 15 km/h in your little painted lane with a wall lorries passing 50 cm away 50 or 60 km/h faster. Of course, over this kind of bridge, you may add some wind, possibly sideways, to fully enjoy your cohabitation. And then you go down, still in your 70 cm wide lane, as it is as steep as when you climbed, you reach 50 km/h, perhaps 60 km/h, and all of sudden, first you meet a large hole in the road where the bridge deck articulates with the ground part, and right after you jump over the hole, the bike lane turns right and the only possible way to turn is to come to basically a full stop. Then you stop for a while to calm down.

I think that's my worse cycling memory.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> Seriously. I have been waiting for a "public transit + bike" routing option for a decade at least. You know, where public transit is an option but using a bike to transfer between stations and destinations is preferable to driving or walking. It appeared finally sometime this year, from what I noticed.

</comment><comment><USER25> Also, pleaassee allow us to set the language of the text-to-speech manually on android without having to switch the lange of the whole OS. In the Netherlands, you are no longer allowed to hold your phone in your hand or look at it while riding a bike. Purely going by the English text-to-speech for Dutch streetnames is very frustrating, whereas translating the whole OS to Dutch just looks silly (UI concepts work much better in English).

See e.g. English: [https://translate.google.com/#view=home&op=translate&sl=en&t...](https://translate.google.com/#view=home&op=translate&sl=en&tl=nl&text=Ingenieur%20Driessenstraat)

Or

[https://translate.google.com/#view=home&op=translate&sl=en&t...](https://translate.google.com/#view=home&op=translate&sl=en&tl=nl&text=Herderstasjepad)

(I guess these examples are only salient for Dutch speakers, but I'm 100% sure that similar cases exist for all other languages, where people don't want to switch the language of their whole OS just to hear streetnames spoken in a non-....stupid way)

<comment><USER17> There are problems both ways.

For locals, having English pronunciation sounds absolutely ridiculous.

But for tourists, local pronunciation can be utterly unrecognizable. ("Rio Tinto" becomes "Hee-oo Cheen-too".) The mangled English pronuniciation, at least, is mangled to what a tourist can recognize/expect.

But I absolutely agree that a toggle would be a super-nice feature. As well as phonetic hints when a road has a different pronunication from what you might guess (especially in English).

<comment><USER25> Yeah, I understand the problem. I feel like all these UI design decisions are mostly due to a lack of recognition that language-use is not binary. Auto- correct used to be absolutely unusable if you mixed typing in multiple languages on your phone. Now that language toggling is easier it's only really a problem when you mix languages in the same sentence, mixed-language models do not seem to exist (yet?).

So yeah, tourists should not be forced to hear Dutch streetnames in Dutch, just as I shouldnt have to change the language settings of my whole phone to hear them in Dutch.

Several apps using OSM seem to handle the toggling just fine (e.g. Maps.Me), and apparently the cycling experience is superior on OSM anyway. I used it solely for the offline maps, but maybe I might start using it as my main maps provider.

<comment><USER17> > _mixed-language models do not seem to exist (yet?)_

They have since 2016, at least on iOS. [1] I thought it would be a godsend... but I ended up turning it off, because if I type 98% in language A and 2% in language B, it changed words in language A to language B far more often than made up for getting words in language B right.

[1] [https://www.cultofmac.com/441836/how-to-set-up- multilingual-...](https://www.cultofmac.com/441836/how-to-set-up-multilingual- typing-in-ios-10/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> Google Maps, from my experience, is unusable for cyclists - I don't know where they're getting their data, but one instance that stands up to me till this day is when it tried to get me on an express way, on a lane with opposite traffic. Or, when it tries to get me to go through pathways that are looooong overgrown. That's in London.

<comment><USER27> Agreed, in Germany half the forest paths near me are missing. It isn't rocket science, the crowdsourced OpenStreetMap data has them. (And Google would be welcome to use the data for the price of adding credits, since it's open data.)

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> Does Google do blue-sky software projects like this for the good of society anymore? I've heard rumors they've gotten more focused, I've seen their offerings shut down, and I am not sure this project would actually be profitable for them.

And I say this as an avid cyclist.

<comment><USER29> Google invests 10s of millions in their nonprofit google.org. They work on some software projects. Google Arts & Culture also comes to mind, I don't believe they make any money from it.

<comment><USER28> Do you think bike lanes are a good project for Google.org to sponsor? Is a nonprofit-sponsored collaboration within an existing product like Google Maps actually workable?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> I stopped using Google maps for turn by turn directions on my bike after every unfinished road told me to make a right followed by an immediate uturn for 10 miles. Maybe they should buy Garmin. They have the best data set in the fitness industry.

<comment><USER31> Google already placed their bet by buying Fitbit. There is zero chance they will buy Garmin. But Garmin might be willing to license their cycling heat map data for enough money.

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> As a frequent cyclist these are generally good suggestions. Google Maps is helpful for planning bike routes, but the biggest problem I've found is that it doesn't differentiate between surface types. Some of the routes it recommends are really only usable on a mountain bike and not suitable for a road bike with 23mm tires.

I prefer to use Garmin Connect most of the time because it does differentiate between road bike versus mountain bike courses, and can do popularity based routing for either type. But sometimes the routing algorithm goes crazy and gives you routes that make no sense at all.

Strava data is available for license without acquiring the whole company.

</comment><comment><USER32> Somewhat tangental: There used to be a website using google maps called roadbiketoaster that allowed you to select sections of road and strung them together as a route (instead of having to select points). It would then give you an elevation profile, total distance and a cue sheet detailing each turn. I think it went away due to some google API issue and I haven't found anything that can do something similar. Does anyone know of a comparable solution and/or what google changed about its API?

</comment><comment><USER33> If you are searching a good offline bike navigation app for Android and iOS check "Bike Citizens". Data is based on OSM. Works without internet connection. You pay per city once. Focused on Europe and on cities, but available around the world:

[https://www.bikecitizens.net/](https://www.bikecitizens.net/)

I'm not affiliated. Just a happy user.

</comment><comment><USER34> Rule #1 of bicycletouring: Never trust a computer.

I have several paper cycling maps that I maintain (sometimes they need to be updated) because one of my dearest hobbies is bycyclecamping.

I've let that computer betray me several times, no more.

I've used both Google maps and OSMAnd. One summer I tried using osmand offline feature to download my entire route.

I still prefer paper maps, a compass and dead reckoning.

<comment><USER27> How's that different from looking at a digital map and planning it yourself? I personally trust navigation most of the way (I'll double check where it tries to send me roughly, but I don't look at details), but I always check out the destination and put the marker on a place where I see or expect parking to be available instead of blindly going to the address. If you add waypoints on a digital map instead of using paper, you can still have turn instructions, time planning, distance measurements, etc. yet still plan how you like to drive.

Nothing against paper maps, just curious if there's a reason why that wouldn't be best of both worlds.

<comment><USER35> Directions for cyclists are just that much worse. On a long tour, unless you spend the time looking into every intersection, you may end up for a couple miles on a highway/expressway/avenue with cars going 40-60mph, and scaring the crap out of you. This isn't an argument against digital maps of course (you can still make a track and overlay that onto a map), but just wanted to add a bit more context.

<comment><USER27> Does that also happen in well known apps like OsmAnd or any of the OpenStreetMap.org default routing engines in an area where the roads are tagged correctly as car-only roads xor cyclepaths are available? Because that sounds like a bug we can fix.

<comment><USER35> The issue with OsmAnd and OSM.org in the US is often that roads are either not tagged properly or they are tagged as cycle paths because the local government has designated them as a cycling path, but the street itself is quite unsafe. There's no real problem with the path routing libraries, a lot of it is just the data.

I've thought about exploring an alternate set of tags to tag something in OSM as a "popular" cycle path, but I'm not sure how to go about proposing that tagging system.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> Google maps does give you elevation information. In the route selection there's a drop down that shows an elevation graph.

</comment><comment><USER37> Google's support for cycling is very location-dependent. I used it to plan a 16 day trip from Berkeley to Crater Lake and back in 2015. It was invaluable.

From my point of view the best feature is that Google shows elevation gain, which is a huge deal for a bike. I've checked this multiple times and it seems quite accurate.

The worst feature is that some routes simply aren't shown. Google _will not_ show a bike route from Grants Pass Oregon to the coast going directly over the Coast Range. The best route is over Bear Camp Road but Google no longer shows it. People have died on that road--most famously in in 2006 but there have been others. [1] The route it _does_ show is suicide for a bike. (Try Grants Pass to Gold Beach to see this.)

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

</comment><comment><USER38> Somewhat related, I find this channel about urban design and cycling interesting: [https://m.youtube.com/channel/UC0intLFzLaudFG- xAvUEO-A](https://m.youtube.com/channel/UC0intLFzLaudFG-xAvUEO-A)

</comment><comment><USER39> Google Maps recently added bike routing for Berlin. It chose a really fun route through small streets and over walking bridges.

Before that it was awful. No I don't want to play 7 bridges of Königsberg, I want to slip through the park and up the one way street.

</comment><comment><USER40> I usually pretend I'm walking when I use Google Maps in Amsterdam. Most of the time that's the shortest route on a bike as well or close to it at least. No hills and lots of bicycle paths here luckily :)

<comment><USER41> I do this as well, I find the walking directions are usually the most direct 90% of the time for cycling.

</comment></comment><comment><USER42> > It doesn't appear to factor in aspects unique to cycling, for instance > difference in elevation, when calculating the best route.

This quote is followed _immediately_ by a screen capture showing the text 'Mostly flat' underneath the journey time and distance.

In fact in Edinburgh, UK my experience with Google Maps has been that it automatically selects routes that use more cycle paths, roads with cycle lanes, and flatter or downhill options. Maybe this is different per city?

</comment><comment><USER43> I get that cycling is complex to route but when I ask Google Maps for directions to the city centre from my apartment, it sends me over a huge row of stairs.

I notified them of the issue a couple of years ago and it got fixed a few months later, but it came back again. At that point I gave up as I don't really use the service for cycling anyway. I know my city well enough and when I cycle outside of it, I use Strava.

</comment><comment><USER44> I think most cyclists tend to ride closer to home, where they know all the routes so wouldn't need Waze Vs going on long trips in a car where you don't know the route and the road is more likely to be blocked of by an accident/traffic (when did you last see a traffic jam of bike's?)

<comment><USER45> I don't know all potential routes in a 20 mile radius of my home, no. In a large metropolitan area, there are literally many hundreds, if not thousands of miles of roads within such a circle.

And something changes every year. Sure, someone who does nothing but ride, day in, day out, like a bike equivalent of an old school taxi driver, would learn them all after some time. I don't have that amount of time to spend.

I don't see traffic jams formed by bikes, no, but I regularly see construction crews regularly closing bike lanes and bike paths for work, for parking their construction equipment, or for setting up temporary signage.

</comment></comment><comment><USER46> There are a couple other mentions on this thread of OpenStreetMap, but what they don't mention is that half the value of google is in their mobile app. There are a few mobile cycling apps, mine included, that solve this while using OSM data for routing.

We use an open source routing engine called graphhopper. It's really good, the team behind it is great, and I strongly recommended it out of all the major routing systems. We tried them all, graphhopper is the most extensible, fastest, and best managed project. Graphhopper takes OSM data and computes a routeable graph based off one or more routing profiles you specify. There are default profiles, but we have spent a considerable amount of time making our own custom routing and weighting profiles to give the best directions for cyclists, and are in the process of extending it further so that it takes into account our database of about 50mm recorded bike rides by our users. The result is that our cycling directions are pretty dang good at this point. We hope to deploy the new popularity based routing stuff in the coming weeks.

We have both a web and mobile route planner that are worth checking out. The mobile route planner is a paid feature, but allows free demos without saving. The web route planner is free, though some of the more advanced bits (multi- route editing, advanced libraries of routes, etc) are paid.

[https://ridewithgps.com](https://ridewithgps.com)

Finally, another mention in this thread of a quadlock - they are awesome. I take my quadlock mountain biking and it has never budged. I'm not talking gentle mountain biking, but big jumps and drops and high speeds. They are super durable, the case is solid and is extremely protective of your phone. They are worth the premium!

</comment><comment><USER47> One big issue is Google ignoring good free data sources. In Vienna all cycle lanes are available as ODG data. The license is very liberal, just mention the source. Instead Google Maps shows old and wrong cycle lanes.

<comment><USER27> What's ODG data?

</comment></comment><comment><USER48> Google Maps is useless for biking or hiking. Barely usable, perhaps, for road cycling.

I have yet to find a better one than Mapy.cz. Great app, offline regional maps and (subjectively) beautiful map aesthetics.

</comment><comment><USER49> Google doesn't even know carpool lanes exist.

<comment><USER50> Sigalert does. Might be US only and only knows about freeways and big roads. I use it (in Los Angeles) to check the freeways before I use Google Maps to get my route.

</comment></comment><comment><USER51> Is it safe to be wearing headphones or looking at a bike mounted cell phone while cycling?

<comment><USER52> I would say it's multiple orders of magnitude safer than doing it while driving a car, if that's what you're getting at.

<comment><USER51> Interesting - I assumed it was safer for other people but less safe for the driver/rider

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER53> Seriously! This is even more valid for Apple maps.

</comment><comment><USER14> As a pedestrian, I'd love an "avoid bicyclists" option.

</comment><comment><USER54> Even more surveillance capitalism, now even on my bike? No, thanks. I'd rather see more community- or municipality-driven efforts with an ethical, open approach to data and customers.

</comment><comment><USER55> The title of this post is cynical. Make it opportunistic. It's an entrepreneurial site.

</comment><comment><USER7> I recently started using my bike as 100% of my personal transportation. The first time I went to my studio, I used GMaps to get me there. It took me through some very unsafe parts of town even though the normal route would have been so much safer. In this case, safer in the sense of getting jumped/mugged vs traffic safety. I trusted it the first time just to see wtf it was doing. Won't use it again, and went back to just using common sense.

<comment><USER56> That's a difficult problem to solve without getting into hot water about avoiding neighborhoods and appearing racist.

<comment><USER44> Can't they use the crime rates for each area?

<comment><USER56> Yeah, they can, but I can just imagine the headlines. Google actively avoiding compton. Is gOoGlE rAcIsT?

<comment><USER44> I suppose that depends on if they can say "we are using police data go ask the police about this, we just want to keep our users safe" as well as how much they care about such headlines .</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Asking An Employee To Leave The Company - <AUTHOR> http://www.avc.com/a_vc/2012/07/mba-mondays-asking-an-employee-to-leave-the-company.html

<comment><USER2> This article is full of good advice, but one thing Fred doesn't say which should be added: It's quite possible that the employee is already aware that things aren't working out - especially if it's a smaller startup.

I cofounded a company and hired a friend who moved across the country. I even went to the mat with another cofounder who questioned whether he was the right fit. Turns out he wasn't. It wasn't his fault. He's very talented, but he duplicated existing skillsets (mine most of all), and the hat we needed him to wear was one that he'd never worn before. And this increased the stress of his job, which only made it even harder for him to be productive.

Fortunately, the other founders agreed to be generous about offering him an exit (in line with Fred's advice), and so when he and I had the conversation it was much easier for his departure to be a mutual decision and we've retained our friendship.

I would never go into a conversation like this unprepared and rely on the assumption it will be easy or mutual. And I haven't had to do this often enough to know if this was a rare outcome. But if you look at it from both sides and are willing to be generous with the solution, then it is possible that sometimes the "mutual decision" really is a mutual one.

</comment><comment><USER3> > " I don't like using terms like "fire" or "terminate." To me they have too > much emotion attached to them to be appropriate when splitting with an > employee. I like to say that "fred was asked to leave the company" or "fred, > we need you to leave the company." That works better for me and, I think, it > also works better for the person who is being asked to leave the company. "

\--

Honestly, this seems a bit spineless. Don't describe it as "asking them to leave" if in actuality the employee has no choice. If you're telling them to leave and to not show up for work again, call it what it is, either a 'firing', 'redundancy' or 'letting go'. Anything else is just dishonest.

In my previous career path we eventually faced massive lay-offs/redundancy across the company. New tech had made our jobs practically obsolete and the layoffs represented an opportunity for me to move on to better things, which is fair enough.

However, it always annoyed me how the various communications from Head Office were phrased as 'we deeply regret asking you to leave', when it was so clear that they were delighted to be rid of us, and there was no 'asking' being done at any point.

<comment><USER4> 'Letting you go' is the best way to balance being direct, and also being (somewhat sensitive), I think. Although the appropriateness of any phrase is related to context. One place I worked I was aware some people were about to be fired, and I was staggered to see the boss taking one of these guys shopping for a new PC(!) The very next day - even before the PC arrived at our office - this guy was taken in for 'the talk'. He came out, sat at his (old) PC, and wrote the most blistering and blunt assessment of my boss, the company, and the rest of us. Quite reasonable too, given the circumstances. And I never worked out if my boss was intentionally being cruel, or if he just simply forgot this guy was about to be fired. As for the received email, I had just enough time to reply "If you put as much effort into the rest of your work as you did this email, you'd still be working here" before the guy left.

<comment><USER5> "and also being (somewhat sensitive)"

"As for the received email, I had just enough time to reply "If you put as much effort into the rest of your work as you did this email, you'd still be working here" before the guy left."

One of these things is not like the other...

<comment><USER6> The _boss_ needs to be sensitive. The email is from a coworker, who isn't held to the same standard.

That said, I wouldn't have sent the email myself.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> While "fire" and "terminate" (someone) might bear too much negative emotions, "asking to leave" leans too much on the rosy side. Usually "asking" implies they have a choice, right?

<comment><USER8> I've fired people and I've been fired. Its excruciating for both sides, and embarrassing for the person being let go. There's very little danger of it being too "rosy."

Fred's further advice of getting right to the point and giving them honest, clear reasons is spot on. He's not advocating for bullshitting the employee; he's advocating for not being a dick when there's no reason for it.

<comment><USER7> > There's very little danger of it being too "rosy."

I disagree. Using too rosy a term for something that's very bad for the recipient might be perceived as disingenuous or just lacking balls to tell the unpleasant truth.

<comment><USER9> Agree. I worked at a biotech startup where our CFO had to fire an employee. He went in soft and the fired employee showed up the next day wondering why his fob wouldn't open the door. Theres no need to be cruel, but clarity is key.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Any recommendations for someone who's been fired?

How can I help someone who's been fired bounce back?

What should someone who's been fired tell potential employers why they're no longer with a previous employer?

I'm trying to help a friend, but I've never gone thru this, so I feel powerless.

<comment><USER11> _What should someone who's been fired tell potential employers why they're no longer with a previous employer?_

There is virtually no answer to that question that makes you sound like a better candidate than you were before it was asked. I'd be strongly inclined to say some variant of "It's a tough economy.", which is non-specific, virtually guaranteed to be a contributing factor, and avoids faulting either party.

The canonical answer is some variant of "We weren't a good fit for each other." Then, again, refocus the conversation on how you'll be a great fit with interviewer's company.

<comment><USER12> Why not just say 'they hired me for a different role that I was not suited for'?

<comment><USER11> Because a) that sounds like you have a problem and b) that sounds like you blame your problems on other people, including people that the decisionmaker empathizes with more than he empathizes with you. That sets him to thinking whether you're going to blame him for hiring you in 6 months after you're fired from his company.

There's just no percentage here for you. (An American idiom: basically, no outcome of this line of thinking is going to help you.) Just handwave towards the economy and start talking about happy subjects.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> tldr: The author is actually talking about _firing_ an employee, but communicating it as "we need you to leave the company", while at the same time "being generous in financial terms and emotional terms".

Just some perspective: Not sure about the EU in general, but in Greece at least, asking someone to leave the company is synonymous to forcefully making one quit. This arm-twisting has far-reaching implications for the person leaving the company; Namely no unemployment benefits or severance package. I wouldn't want to work for such a company and would actively discourage others to do so.

Just wanted to add some cultural perspective; I am aware the situation in the US (and the author's) is totally different.

<comment><USER14> In the USA, you can run into serious trouble if you tell the employee they must leave and then tell unemployment that the employee left of their own free will.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> I've always wondered...how do you go about discussing such things as recommendations/references in this situation? If you are one of the employee's only employers, you'll likely be one of his/her only references...

Do you talk about the situation? And how much of is it contingent on the circumstances of their leaving (obviously a reference would be out of the question if the firing was for severe misconduct)?

<comment><USER16> The legally safest thing is just to confirm dates of employment and title, officially.

Anything negative at all, and a lot of positive things could be interpreted as partially negative, exposes you to risk if the employee doesn't get the job.

I am not a lawyer.

There are various ways to get around this when getting or giving references.

<comment><AUTHOR> Pretty much. When I worked at bars in college I knew of a guy who used to give glowing recommendations for bartenders he'd fired. To his competition.

Outside of that, the best thing to is to confirm employment with dates. Oddly enough, some people will list a reference from where they were fired for misconduct. I'd bet that said person doesn't even understand what constitutes misconduct, why they were fired and how to avoid it in the future.

<comment><USER16> The standard hacks for referrals are:

Call or email, leave a message asking to be called back IFF the candidate was exceptionally strong. Assuming you aren't a competitor, you'll probably get a call back if true. If the guy was meh, it is a nice way to pocket veto.

For when you do employee referrals, if employees are getting pressured by lames to refer them, let them do no-op referrals. Default bring meaningless, and "strong referral" being a real referral. Google, Facebook, etc do this.

<comment><USER17> Any company who wants to avoid a lawsuit will respond to your request whether or not they consider the person to be "strong". And the good ones will contact the ex-employee and inform them that you are trying to get around their reference policy

<comment><USER16> Not in the case where it is one fairly respected hiring manager calling another in a smallish industry. Not corporate HR (startups, not like HR is more than form filling).

It would be exceedingly difficult to successfully sue someone for failing to return a call or email from a random outsider. Plausible deniability.

This is also one of the cases where being part of a "mafia" is awesome -- you can actually call up and get unvarnished opinions, or at least, cagey "I don't think I would" "That might be difficult" etc.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Notice there is nothing in there about 'why' they're being asked to leave. Getting into the why's is exactly the wrong thing, even if the employee wants to know that. Also, it is possible you will stay something wrong in the explanation that a lawyer could then use against you. I'm speaking of the US only, in this case.

<comment><USER6> He does write this:

 _Most employees in this situation will ask for reasons. Have them lined up in advance and be clear and crisp when describing the reasons. The reasons for a split do not have to be the employee's fault. They can, and often are, the company's fault. In startups, employees are almost always at will and it is the CEO's right to ask anyone to leave the company for any reason. So just be as honest as possible, be clear and crisp about the reasons, and don't turn this into a long involved discussion._</comment></comment>


Elizabeth Warren has a plan to save capitalism - <AUTHOR> https://www.vox.com/2018/8/15/17683022/elizabeth-warren-accountable-capitalism-corporations <comment><USER2> Why not have ownership diversity requirements. The larger the company is the more voting shareholders it's required to have. With limits on total ownership by individuals. The larger something becomes the more democratic it becomes.</comment>


What's wrong with time tracking software? - <AUTHOR> https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1kPpzxotTBcO1Nd7RoumxkAAE5UaJBafOsV1a3YXE9fU/viewform

<comment><USER2> What's wrong is that all the current solutions don't get out of your way and let you get back to coding.</comment>


Alabama Sheriff Legally Took $750,000 Meant To Feed Inmates - <AUTHOR> https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/03/14/593204274/alabama-sheriff-legally-took-750-000-meant-to-feed-inmates-bought-beach-house <comment><USER2> "Sheets' investigation has also made headlines because of the arrest of a key source. Sheets spoke with a landscaper named Matt Qualls who mowed Entrekin's lawn in 2015 and noticed the name of the account on his checks — the "Sheriff Todd Entrekin Food Provision Account." He shared pictures with Sheets." "Sheets' initial story was published on Feb. 18. On Feb. 22, Qualls was arrested and charged with drug trafficking after an anonymous call complained of the smell of marijuana from an apartment.

Qualls, who had never been arrested before, faces six charges and is being held on a $55,000 bond, Sheets reports. He is detained in a jail that Entrekin oversees."

Can we do a cost benefit analysis on Alabama and see if we are in any from profiting from preventing them from seceding?

<comment><USER3> Its very close to port of New Orleans which is the only place in South the British attacked in 1812 war and its capture by Union forces in early half of civil war was pivotal for the outcome of that war. For strategic reasons its absolutely necessary for US to have complete control of Mississippi river system including the mouth of the river.

It would be a strategic blunder to let Alabama secede, also as much as HN loves to hate the south, Alabama has over 33% African American population, that has to be kept in mind.

The world is not static, before jerking off and spewing words like secession a deep breath and a mindful analysis helps.

<comment><USER4> > It would be a strategic blunder to let Alabama secede, also as much as HN > loves to hate the south, Alabama has over 33% African American population, > that has to be kept in mind.

Did anyone bring up race here? I don't see how a comment about race is relevant towards discussion of corrupt government.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Remember: county jail holds people waiting to go to trial. Many of these people _have not been convicted_. Often these inmates are coerced by their appointed attorney (who is swamped) to waive their right for a speedy trial. Torturing prisoners in the US is bad, but torturing the untried is truly evil.

<comment><USER6> > ...inmates are coerced by their appointed attorney (who is swamped) to waive > their right for a speedy trial.

Oftentimes in the US it is less about a busy defense attourney and more about the prosecution offering a plea deal to skip trial. I can't say with any certainty why this is done but I believe it's due to overcrowding in courts and jails.

Many attourneys will suggest the defendant accept the plea deal because it's a sure thing. It's a lighter sentence than if the defendant went to court and when a case goes to court -- especially a jury trial -- it is impossible to say how it will turn out and it could end up far worse for the defendant when compared to the plea deal.

<comment><USER7> It's also about the DA padding her own stats. Charge the defendant with every felony that even closely fits the alleged crime, then allow them to plea down to a misdemeanor. DA gets a conviction, court docket is smaller, and the alleged criminal "gets off easy".

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> There is no mention of starvation in the title of the article nor in the text. I'm not sure why it's in the title of the submission. There is a link to a related article "2009: Ala. Sheriff Jailed For Starving Inmates". I assume it's the same article referenced in this article:

"In 2009, then-Sheriff Greg Bartlett of Morgan County was briefly tossed in jail after acknowledging that he had personally profited, to the tune of $212,000, from a surplus in the jail-food account. Prisoners testified about receiving meager meals."

Still, I don't see the justification for the use of the word "starvation" in that context, either.

<comment><USER5> "Starving" probably not. Using expired food, creating gruels, making the inmates sick, forcing inmates to steal food with violence -- is a bit more accurate title. Here is an example Arizona sheriff laughing as he makes inmates rotten food [1]. I would suspect many inmates do begin the starvation process and become violently ill. (NOTE: many of these inmates have not been convicted of a crime, this is county jail).

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tGLDnRX10gA](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tGLDnRX10gA)

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> Prisons in Texas, right now, move to 2 meals a day on weekends. As far as I know, the money saved isn't pocketed by anyone personally, but it is happening.

Inmates that have some support system supplement with commissary purchases.

So it's a transfer of what should be government spending to spending by inmate families. The benefit seems to flow to the companies that run the commissary programs.

<comment><AUTHOR> I know one person who went to prison here in San Diego and with extra money he can buy a better food like a breakfast burrito in the morning rather than eating the standard breakfast.

<comment><USER9> That's how, in my mind, the commissary should work. At least in Texas, that's not what actually happens. They will, for example, withhold soap, toothpaste, and toilet paper. Ask yourself why these items are even offered in the commissary. Why would you need "extra"?

<comment><AUTHOR> The inmates even have to pay for their shoes. It is to force them to labor for few cents on the dollar.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> The law says he must "keep and retain" any funds not used to feed inmates. Well he didn't keep nor retain it, he spent it to buy a house. How is this considered "following the letter of the law" ?

<comment><USER11> "Retain" is probably best interpreted as "not give back". The law is shoddily drafted, considering "keep" and "retain" are usually synonymous.

<comment><USER12> > _The law is shoddily drafted, considering "keep" and "retain" are usually > synonymous._

It's a doublet. These are in general very common in laws, though this particular one doesn't appear to be.

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

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> He claims to follow the "letter or the law." There are many actions within the law that are nevertheless unethical and wrong.

<comment><USER14> It's shameful to see those responsible for upholding the law not acting in the spirit of the law, when it applies.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> The criminal justice system in this country is broken. I've long wondered what I can do to improve it but haven't figured it out yet.

The most common advice I've received is to go pass the bar or become a cop. I know "good" people who did this...I no longer consider them good people. The system got to them.

</comment><comment><USER16> In other countries it called corruption. Not in US, because it is legal, what don't you understand?

<comment><USER17> Smart criminals don't commit crimes; they change laws to make their goals legal and simply act freely.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> > "A couple people I knew came through the jail, and they say they got meat > maybe once a month, and every other day, it was just beans and vegetables," > Qualls told Sheets. "I put two and two together and realized that that money > could have gone toward some meat or something."

That's hardly "starving".

This article title is sensational and should be changed. It serves no one to misrepresent the truth, especially in a world dominated by hyperbole and sensationalism.

Edit: Those downvoting me, what about my statement do you disagree with?

</comment><comment><USER19> If the outrage over this law is perennial, why on earth hasn't it become a campaign issue for Alabama state legislature candidates?

<comment><USER20> It's Alabama. A majority of the voters are probably in favour of even more brutal and degrading treatment of inmates.

<comment><USER21> because they systematically oppress those who have or are likely to suffer from this type of treatment,

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> I am absolutely shocked that this is actually still in a law. How backwards for a place to be.

</comment><comment><USER23> Are there any historical lessons to be learned from others that have done this in the past? Is that Sheriff putting the lives of other corrections officers and jail staff at risk?

</comment><comment><USER24> > "Sheriffs across the state take excess money as personal income — and, in > the event of a shortfall, are personally liable for covering the gap."

Does that ever happen? What could cause it to happen? Could the state not just say, "we're reducing your budget by 750k this year, make up the shortfall Mr Sheriff." and he'll have to cough up?

<comment><USER24> ok, this is a little more complex:

When Entrekin's predecessor died while still in office, all the money in the food provision account went to his estate — as state law dictated, a county official told NPR. Entrekin had to borrow $150,000 to keep the inmates fed. He was paying down that debt for years, The Gadsden Times reported.

In 2009, while he was still in debt from paying for inmates' food, Entrekin told the Times that he personally thought the law needed to be changed. But he noted that it might cost more money for taxpayers if the county commission had to manage jail kitchens through an open bid process.

David Akins, the chief administrative officer of the Etowah County Commission, agrees with that assessment. He says the commission is not eager to take on that duty, as some other local governments have done.

"The sheriff can feed inmates cheaper than the county can," he said.

<comment><USER25> Giving the sheriff the opportunity to personally profit from providing meals may well create lots of incentive for efficiency, but where's the check that makes sure the food is adequate?.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> Let me guess. This article doesn't count as politics, either.

<comment><USER27> It certainly doesn't seem to have any particular HN merit beyond pointing and shrieking at somebody else's problems, no, and it's producing comments that I would consider to either be shading on racism or crossing the line. I've flagged it; feel free to join me.

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> People need to understand the same or similar occur in many localities across the US; I would suspect other countries might have related issues. it is also not confined to law enforcement but many in local and state government have similar setups

throw in pension abuse and you would be amazed at the dollars lost to all of this, dollars easily better used for other purposes

<comment><USER11> If you insist on calling everyone corrupt, you remove all incentives not to be corrupt: after all, why bother if you red-faced constituents will scream invectives at you anyway?

By and large, a tiny fraction of civil servants steal from official accounts. This case is a strange consequence of the rather peculiar legal standing of the sheriff's office, in one particularly backward US state.</comment></comment>


Facebook Founder's Favor Comes with Complications - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/23/technology/mark-zuckerberg-housing.html <comment><USER2> There's a weird disconnect in this article between the reality of what Zuckerberg is trying to do and the agenda being pushed by the author.

You have this paragraph:

"The social network has been lobbying to build more housing in the region, which Silicon Valley cities, worried about traffic and preferring a commercial over residential tax base, have fought against. In East Palo Alto, Facebook has invested $18.5 million into the Catalyst Housing Fund, an affordable housing initiative; the company has set a goal to grow the fund to $75 million."

Followed by this paragraph:

"East Palo Alto's residents have long felt disempowered against change brought by tech leaders like Mr. Zuckerberg. A 2.6-square-mile town where one-third of the school children are homeless, it has stood as a sign that Silicon Valley's wealth might not spread to those beyond its tech campuses."

If Silicon Valley's wealth is not being spread to those beyond its tech campuses it's not for a lack of trying.

<comment><USER3> Interesting, I didn't feel at all like there was a weird disconnect or agenda being pushed. In fact, it felt to me like a pained attempt to paint a contentious situation fairly and factually. It seems all too plausible to me that both of the following might be factually true:

• Facebook and Mark Zuckerberg are putting a lot of money into the local community and feel like they are going above and beyond their obligations in that regard

• various hardships that the local community has suffered and is suffering over the recent years are directly and visibly linked to Facebook and Mark Zuckerberg, and therefore they feel like Facebook and Mark Zuckerberg have and are continuing to harm them, not help them

The article seemed to be taking pains not to claim that any of the following were true, or that their opposite was true:

• Facebook and Mark Zuckerberg are wrong to feel that they are going above and beyond; they should instead be contributing to the local community more and/or differently

• the local community is wrong to feel that Facebook and Mark Zuckerberg are doing more to help than to hurt them; in fact, they have no right or claim to getting more from, or even what they currently get from, Facebook and Mark Zuckerberg

It sounds like you think it's clear that Facebook and Mark Zuckerberg are contributing plenty enough to the local community. I'd be interested in learning why you think it's so clear that they needn't be doing more or different things, in spite of the local community's reported continued hardships.

<comment><USER2> You missed the key fact here: Zuckerberg wants to do more for the community but his initiatives are being blocked by the city. I say that there is a disconnect because this is being presented by the author as a failure of Zuckerberg's rather than of the city.

<comment><USER4> The bit you quoted has Zuckerberg's initiative being blocked by other (richer) nearby cities.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> The proper way to improve education in a community is to get involved with the existing school systems -- the schools are already there. Be wary of ideologues possessing way too much money combined with an impoverished sense of ethics (e.g., Zuckerberg) who shun existing civic institutions and go off to start their own for-profit/corporate 'schools' instead.

<comment><USER2> >The proper way to improve education in a community is to get involved with the existing school systems

That didn't work out too well when Zuckerberg tried it: [https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/how-newark- schools-p...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/how-newark-schools- partially-squandered-a-great- prize/2015/10/20/ffff660c-7743-11e5-a958-d889faf561dc_story.html)

<comment><USER4> Having unaccountable billionaires with no knowledge of the field dump piles of money down (along with dictating how it should be spent) in a splashy PR stunt is a horrible way to improve public institutions.

Instead we should properly tax the billionaires, and then elect public officials who value public education, so they can figure out how to improve schools with the advice and help of all of the local stakeholders.

But a lot of the rich folks' education initiatives (including Zuckerberg's, probably) turn out to be more about gaming the tax code and sometimes immigration laws (with a bonus of good PR) than really helping the schools out. [https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer- sheet/wp/2014/06/...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer- sheet/wp/2014/06/04/why-hedge-funds-love-charter-schools/)

As an added bonus (more relevant to the Koch brothers than Zuckerberg perhaps), charter schools help break teachers' unions and destroy the public education system, which has a big knock-on political benefit for Republicans who want to undercut a major base of Democratic party support.

<comment><USER6> It would be nice if the public officials actually cared about education, and weren't using the position as a sinecure until a position with real power opens up. [https://www.thebaycitybeacon.com/politics/who-are-all- these-...](https://www.thebaycitybeacon.com/politics/who-are-all-these- candidates/article_98246948-a319-11e7-a03f-772054b65534.html)

I do not blame people who care wanting to work around this system.

<comment><USER7> > I do not blame people who care wanting to work around this system.

Agree.... But workarounds won't scale.

<comment> tea-flow Why not?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Facebook is more than welcome to come gentrify the city where I live. It would be a welcomed change from the influx of decrepit homes that are abandoned and/or poorly maintained.

</comment><comment><USER9> Another example of The Copenhagen Interpretation of Ethics.

[https://blog.jaibot.com/the-copenhagen-interpretation-of- eth...](https://blog.jaibot.com/the-copenhagen-interpretation-of-ethics/)

</comment><comment><USER10> As a free-market libertarian there is nothing worse that crony capitalism. And that's what happened here.

When the political leadership of my beloved former lunchtime basketball grounds of East Palo Alto tries to claim they didn't take the RV Park for the school, they immediately contradict themselves.

"She added that the flood-prone street would be rebuilt for the school, so the R.V.s would have had to move in any case."

And you known Chan-Zuckerman was behind it. Eminent domain should never be allowed to be used for one business, even a non-profit school, to take the property of another. It should only be used for the highest public purposes, and only with fair compensation.

</comment><comment><USER11> Am I the only one that noticed the alliteration in the headline? I wonder if they could have made it all F-words

</comment><comment><USER12> I feel like Facebook is like Trump, It doesn't matter what it does, media will always attack it.</comment>


Why "Safe Harbor" Laws Are Disastrous For Free Speech - <AUTHOR> http://torrentfreak.com/why-safe-harbor-laws-are-disastrous-for-free-speech-111225/ <comment><USER2> Once SOPA and PIPA are killed, maybe we should push for eliminating DMCA. It's time to stop being reactive by waiting until MPAA/RIAA come up with a new law, and start being pro-active and push back against them with the elimination of DMCA, elimination of the ridiculous and shameless century old copyright terms, and so on.

And also start pushing for stronger fair use and laws that will protect Internet freedom and will make illegal proposing laws like SOPA in the future.

</comment><comment><USER3> As soon as a company accepts the burden of safe harbor, it can no longer claim to be a common carrier, and that's the beginning of the endless slippery slope. Every new law just piles on the nonsense. Corporations are agents of the government because they exist at the government's pleasure, so they can't do anything which is overtly against the government's wishes. That's why Internet censorship prevails, and why it will likely continue.</comment>


Revision3 Removes Epic-Fu and Wine Library TV; Scoble Ponders a Restructuring - <AUTHOR> http://www.centernetworks.com/revision3-online-video-scoble-fast-company-tv

<comment><USER2> i wonder what scoble can cut - isn't he the only one?</comment>


Show HN: RDBTools – Why's Redis Eating Up Memory - <AUTHOR> https://rdbtools.com/ <comment><AUTHOR> Some background on RDBTools. Over time, more and more data ends up in Redis. It becomes difficult to analyze what is stored within redis, and so most projects end up increasing the memory / switch to a higher redis instance.

RDBTools tries to address that problem. It will analyze a RDB file, identify key patterns, show a breakup of memory by various dimensions including expiry, data type & encoding, key patterns and so on. It will also provide recommendations to reduce memory consumption. For example, it will tell you the right configuration for hash-max-ziplist-* and other small object settings based on your data.

RDBTools is available as a docker image. The analysis is done offline, so there is no impact to your production redis servers.</comment>


Apple, Google, and Others Hit With Patent Lawsuit Over Spam Email Identification - <AUTHOR> http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/the-lanier-law-firm-files-infringement-lawsuit-over-email-spam-patent-98916544.html

<comment><USER2> Wow...I've never seen so many typos in a patent before. From the claims:

        A method of obtaining context information about
        a sender of an electronic message using a mail
        processing comprising the steps of

Someone accidentally a word there.

        scanning the message, usinig the mail processine
        program

I suspect none of the defendants are "usinig" any "processine" program.

        context is information about the sender or the
        message that is usefiul to the recipient

The defendants probably aren't looking for "usefiul" information.

I know people make mistakes occasionally. Heck, on a patent I was co-inventor on and so had many occasions to read the application, I missed that the title was "Program Lunch Acceleration" rather than the desired "Program Launch Acceleration". The other inventor also missed it, as did our patent attorney, and the patent examiner. We only caught it after the patent issued, and had to do some paperwork to get it fixed.

But at least that's a typo that won't be caught by a spell checker, so we had a (lame) excuse. I don't see how "usinig" or "processine" or "usefiul" would get past the patent attorney's word processor.

I recognize the name of the patent attorney--he was an undergraduate at Caltech at the same time I was, graduating about 15 years before this patent was filed. So, it isn't the case that the inventors had some elderly patent attorney who still did everything on legal pads or typewriters and wouldn't have had a spell checker.

</comment><comment><USER3> "The InNova patent was awarded to inventor and mathematician Robert Uomini nearly 15 years ago when Internet email was still in its formative stages."

I understand the internet had a big bump in popularity in '95, but wasn't the "formative stage" of email much earlier?

<comment><USER4> It's a press release from a patent troll. They don't deal in facts.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Another day, another troll.</comment>


Teen invents 'Sit with Us' app so no high schooler has to eat alone - <AUTHOR> http://www.today.com/parents/teen-invents-sit-us-app-so-no-high-schooler-has-t103444 <comment><USER2> It's neat that young people are learning to code, and doing it via personal projects rather than rote learning.

However, I think that this app would be used to brand someone as a 'target' for bullying. I realise this is true for all social networks, but it's clear that the effect would be amplified greatly with an app that specifically targets kids with no one to sit next to. Also, a bully could say that they are "open to sitting next to others" and pick on those that take that invitation. I realise I might be a bit pessimistic but to be fair, most high schools are not nice at all.

The idea is not bad, but humans are pretty good at sucking.

Edit: Alright, went and downloaded the app to check. If a 16 year old made this by themself, I need to reevaluate my life. She would have needed to make a frontend, images, and a backend. The app does chatting too, and stores login data (not just oauth.). To top that all off there is a website[1]. They're also registering as a nonprofit. The website blocks right clicks, and in the keywords there are 3 names (presumably the other 2 people that made the app, presumably parents because of last names). The main page is 283K (before allowed to phone back home again to get images, etc)! <head> alone takes up 4.8k lines, and ends on

      <!-- START SHOPPOING CART -->

Which is a bit odd.

<body> ends on

       <!-- INCLUDE FLASH EMBED SCRIPTS -->

Which indicates that this was probably copied from another place with little to no editing.

It also phones paypalobjects for some reason, though I can't find a donate button. Also, the responsive design has been commented out? Though I can see why after uncommenting it, all the images don't scale at all.

I swear I'm not bitter.

[1] [http://sitwithus.io/#!/About](http://sitwithus.io/#!/About)</comment>


Ask HN: Clojure vs. Haskell? - <AUTHOR> Which of these would you recommend to someone with zero experience in functional programming? <comment><USER2> Which language(s) do you know already? If it's possible, have you looked at the state of FP in something you're already familiar with?

For example, this guide in JavaScript is pretty good: [https://github.com/MostlyAdequate/mostly-adequate- guide/](https://github.com/MostlyAdequate/mostly-adequate-guide/)

Or in Ruby, while you still have to create classes, you could explore writing pure functions and not changing state.

Personally I feel like there's too many stumbling blocks in both those languages (unless you've got Lisp experience or are really into mathematics), and just getting used to the concepts in a more familiar environment will be more useful than scratching your head about monads.

<comment><AUTHOR> C and Python are the languages in which I've done most of my work (I'm still a student). In fact I didn't look to see how's FP done in those languages with which I'm most familiar and that does sound like good advice. Thanks!

<comment><USER3> For a student, I would recommend Racket over Haskell and Clojure because:

1\. It is very easy to set up a batteries included development environment.

2\. The community is dedicated to teaching students functional programming principles.

3\. The Racket ecosystem provides tools for learning other programming paradigms including: lazy, statically typed, declarative, reactive, meta- programming, etc.

4\. The sweet spot of Clojure is professional developers. There is often an assumption of foundational knowledge of the JVM [or Javscript in the case of Clojurescript].

5\. The sweet spot of Haskell is programmers with a strong computer science background. The literature and discussion tends to be more toward the academic journal paper end of the spectrum.

Good luck.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> It depends: what do you want to build? I like Clojure a bit more, and for me the JVM + ClojureScript are a deal. I like Haskell's syntax a bit less, though Haskell types rock; the ecosystem is less developed as you cannot just import a gazillion of mature Java libraries.

</comment><comment><USER5> Haskell</comment>