Chirpss – Hear and see people visiting or leaving your website - <AUTHOR> http://chirpss.com/?2018 <comment> duncan-donuts This is fun! Reminds me of the visit counter everyone had back in the 90s.

<comment><USER2> Same nostalgic feelings here. Only this time you're the only one that gets to see it. Its fun when launching a new project and wanting to celebrate every visitor that you gain.

<comment> duncan-donuts Yeah, totally! I'd love to throw it on my blog so I can see when I actually get _a single user_ (and then hear the crushing blow as they leave)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> I spun up a pageview notifier just for fun by creating a webtask to ping a service on my home automation system. This enables the usual stuff - real time UI, audio alerts, webpush notifications, history, etc.

The webtask keeps the HA connection secrets but also works on static sites. On the HA side, the custom service pulses a binary sensor device created from {title, pathname}.

[https://github.com/theatersoft/test- device/blob/master/webta...](https://github.com/theatersoft/test- device/blob/master/webtask/index.js)

</comment><comment><USER4> I find myself thinking about JWZs diary from the Netscape days, where on launch day someone in the office had rigged up a script that played a cannon shot whenever a download completed successfully.

</comment><comment><USER5> Neat concept, though I do wonder whether you'd go nuts if your site turned out to be extremely popular. I can imagine the sound being something like a machine gun firing if you tried this on say, Hacker News.

Still, seems like it could be fun to play around with none the less.

<comment><USER6> I believe Netscape or Mozilla did this - every download triggered a sound, and release day was like a machine gun of downloads.

<comment><USER5> [https://www.jwz.org/gruntle/nscpdorm.html](https://www.jwz.org/gruntle/nscpdorm.html)

Apparently it was a cannon sound; damn, that must have been loud as hell on release day.

<comment><USER7> Apparently that site redirects to a picture of a testicle [0]when the link is clicked from HN, seems the author of that blog hates HN. Figured I'd give a warning that it's NSFW for anybody at work

[0] (NSFW): [https://i.imgur.com/32R3qLv.png](https://i.imgur.com/32R3qLv.png)

<comment><USER8> why would somebody hate HN?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> This looks cool. The title of this post is a little (scary) ambiguous - 'see' and 'hear' people who visit your site!?

Glad it's not what I thought :D

Will give it a go soon!

</comment><comment><USER10> This reminds me of the classic "network auralizer" ([http://peep.sourceforge.net/intro.html](http://peep.sourceforge.net/intro.html)).

</comment><comment><USER11> I'd love to use this if it works with Piwik.

</comment><comment><USER12> I don't like the fact that you silently assume everybody has Google Analytics installed on their site. You don't even consider telling people that they need that.

<comment><USER13> Let's put this in a more positive way.

This is great! Have you considered adding a Piwik-compatible option?

<comment><USER12> Piwik? I don't want a Piwik-compatible option. I'm not even complaining about Google Analytics, I'm just saying it doesn't sound well to just tell people to open Google Analytics.

I would complain the same way if a website promised a guide to calculate interest rates and started the article with "Open Excel...".

Adding a "For this to work you'll need Google Analytics installed in your site" notice would solve everything.

<comment><USER14> Why is that necessary? The "open Google Analytics" part makes it clear enough. It's not as if they're an interpreter that is going to crash when they see something they can't logically do ;)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Why would you want to be disturbed every few seconds? It's bad enough with interruptions from emails, chats, skype, calls, messages, coworkers walking in etc. This might actually have the potential to kill your remaining few productive spells.

<comment><USER16> Auditory feedback can be useful in certain circumstances.

<comment><USER4> All manner of non-visual feedback is highly undervalued these days for some reason.

<comment><USER16> I feel that web users have made it very taboo to use auditory feedback.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


How to get people to pay for content and apps online? - <AUTHOR> http://blog.kachingle.com/2012/04/the-first-penny-problem/

<comment><AUTHOR> My own experience with monetization makes me agree with this:

""It is just as hard to get a potential customer to pay one penny as it is to pay $10. I like to call it the 'First Cent Syndrome.' If you, as a consumer, are used to getting something free, you are even more reluctant to pay for that thing. The goal is to overcome the hurdles to getting that first cent, that first penny. Once you are able to get it, you have made the initial, tiny crack into someone's pocketbook and psyche, converting a non-paying customer into a paying customer." Fred Dewey, CEO at Kachingle"

I like the phrase "The first penny problem".</comment>


Greenwald exits Guardian for new Omidyar media venture - <AUTHOR> http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/10/15/us-usa-security-greenwald-idUSBRE99E18D20131015

<comment><USER2> Hopefully this will see integrity return to real, good quality investigative journalism in the media in general instead of "news" being used as fodder for political and commercial interests. It becomes tiring having to scroll through Fox, CNN, CBC, BBC, Al Jazeera, The Guardian, The Times and other news agencies trying to piece some form of the truth based on reading between the lines of half truths and unchecked "facts" put in place to suit the story rather than the other way around.

Perhaps I've romanticized journalism in my mind and see the past through rose coloured glasses as we all tend to from time to time, but I feel like journalists used to have integrity and that we could once trust that when they put pen to paper, we could believe in what they wrote... or perhaps we never could and its only as age removes our naivety that we see the world's media for what it is, a sham designed to further political and commercial interests.

I for one should like to see a news agency that spends their time chasing down the facts like CSIs to present the cold hard truth rather than some dumbed down version of events designed to have some political sway. Lets hope the vision for whatever venture this may be is that. Perhaps I can dream.

<comment><USER3> The Guardian is actually one of the few organisations with its ownership structure set up for editorial independence: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Guardian#Ownership](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Guardian#Ownership). I guess Greenwald knows what he's doing but I'd struggle to give more credibility to a news organisation backed by some billionaire than one with an editorial board deliberately structured to provide independence.

<comment><USER4> I agree the Guardian is probably one of the few news sources i trusted more than most. I'm thinking he was offered freedoms that the guardian COULDN'T offer him or the chance to run a full team of journalists like himself. I doubt he will be tamed by any organization. We will see.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I'm interested to see what the financing model will be. One of the biggest structural problems with the MSM is their reliance on advertising and the editorial constraints that inevitably imposes. While I respect and admire Greenwald, a key takeaway from the NSA leaks is that a system that relies on the beneficence of its key actors is a system that will be abused. If the only defence against editorial degradation is the personal ethics of Greenwald and Omidyar, then it's only a matter of time before the venture's editorial oversight is captured by its financial interests.

As much as I dislike paying for news, I'd far rather see them model themselves after the Economist than CNN.

</comment><comment><USER6> Civil Beat is a really incredible news source that has done some really deep reporting on Honolulu's local politics. If Glenn Greenwald will be joining CB then it's likely the website will grow out of its regional roots into a more national news site. I'd love to see the same investigative reporting done at a national level.

<comment><USER7> It's a new venture.

<comment><USER6> Ah! My mistake.. I was a little too excited when I saw Civil Beat in the article.

<comment><USER8> Hopefully this new venture is a bigger version of CB though.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I read a few weeks back that Greenwald has wanted to publish more information at a higher pace, and The Guardian didn't as they thought it'd be too much. It's probably a golden opportunity for him to publish as much as he wants, whenever he wants.

Either way it'll be interesting, I certainly can't see The Guardian stopping with it's interest in the security apparatus even without Greenwald.

</comment><comment><USER10> This is disappointing to me. I see it as Greenwald using his new found publicity for a better deal. After reading the recent Guardian profile in the New Yorker it's hard not to root for them.

It's also upsetting that this will dilute and interrupt the NSA reporting, something Snowden has worked so hard to avoid.

<comment><USER11> Greenwald only had a New York Times Best Selling Book on the Bush Administration and its abuses of power. And he had one of the most-read blogs on the Interent, after 9 months of blogging.

If Russ Feingold can read from his blog during Censure hearings, he can handle a little bit of well-deserved fame for his hard work.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> > Beat aimed to create a new online journalism model with paid subscriptions > and respectful comment threads

Well good luck with that. To lose faith in humanity, one has to look no further than comment threads on news sites. The current comments on the Reuters article are already facepalm-inducing.

<comment><USER13> I don't think one should judge humanity based on comments on the internet. The people behind those comments would respond (and debate) much differently in real life, when they get direct feedback (verbal and/or nonverbal) for the opinions they unfilteredly and impulsively spout onto the interwebz.

<comment><USER14> That's exactly the point: these are people's unfiltered thoughts, and it makes me lose faith in my fellow man (or at least fellow American) whenever I read such comments.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Worth noting that Pierre Omidyar has been a non-stop critic of the NSA's spying activities since the Snowden leaks first broke:

[https://twitter.com/pierre](https://twitter.com/pierre)

Given the extraordinary power of the villains on the other side of this, Omidyar seems to be taking a lot of risk here. It's trivially easy for the US Government to burn a billionaire on any number of trumped up SEC charges. Whoops, small trading rule infraction, better be careful not to declare your innocence in a way that materially affects a stock price or it's off to prison for you.

</comment><comment><USER16> I wonder what happens if Snowden decides to stick with The Guardian? :-)

<comment><USER17> I'm sure this decision wasn't made without Snowden's consent. Further, originally Snowden sought out Greenwald himself not the Guardian at large.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> Does this mean that he is done with the "first wave" the of Snowden revelations, and or that he doesn't trust me The Guardian, and or that he wants to to capitalize at his peak popularity moment? Was this planned before the Snowden story?

<comment><USER19> Good point, does he take the snowden documents with him, or is that "owned" by the guardian?

<comment><USER20> he hasn't given all the documents to guardian. only greenwald and poitras have them.</comment></comment></comment>


Want an Unbreakable Password? Write It in Iambic Tetrameter - <AUTHOR> http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2015/10/22/how_to_choose_an_uncrackable_password_use_meter_and_rhyme.html <comment><USER2> test generator: [http://www.isi.edu/natural- language/people/poem/poem.php](http://www.isi.edu/natural- language/people/poem/poem.php)</comment>


Windows 10 runs on Raspberry Pi 4 and 3 - <AUTHOR> https://www.windowslatest.com/2020/02/09/heres-how-windows-10-runs-on-raspberry-pi-4-and-3/ <comment><USER2> Excellent. This will make another fine addition to my collection of devices that I don't run Windows on.

</comment><comment><USER3> Marcin's original guide has a few more details [https://discourse.pi64.win/t/how-to-installing- windows-10-ar...](https://discourse.pi64.win/t/how-to-installing- windows-10-arm64-17134-on-your-raspberry-pi-3-and-4/488)

Once someone cracks the 1 GB RAM problem I will probably give this a go, seems like the cheapest way to mess with full Windows 10 on ARM on real hardware.

<comment><AUTHOR> The 1GB RAM limitation has been there since January 2019. I wonder if they'll be able to crack it...

<comment><USER3> rpi3 didn't have more than 1GB of RAM for the software issue to be a limitation in the first place. Rpi4 launched in summer 2019 but nobody was able to get it to boot Windows 10 until January 2020.

I.e. it's only been a known limitation for 2 weeks. I'm sure someone will figure it out.</comment></comment></comment>


How only Ubuntu ever works - <AUTHOR> http://blog.gadr.me/some-days-are-not-so-easy/

<comment><USER2> -2th mistake: consider dual booting when trying out a new version of an operating system

-1th mistake: not using the wonderfully powerful command line tools available in GNU/Linux to make a copy of the Ubuntu 12.04 system. Some use dd or dress it up with CloneZilla, others use filesystem level tools like tar then restore grub with a live image. Point is you can always get back...

0th mistake: going out to work without a USB stick containing a _known working_ live image. You can boot of a USB even if the hard drive dies. Plug another USB stick in for storage.

Not gloating, I've made _all_ these mistakes at least once!

<comment><AUTHOR> All valid points! I hate dual booting, however. Tried many times and I never actually boot into the second OS. And, yeah, definitely should have not left my usb stick at home.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> I run Ubuntu at work and Fedora at home; i also ran Fedora at my previous job. Ubuntu has been very far from a "trusty rock" (eg two weeks ago it wouldn't boot to X because it had somehow installed two conflicting versions of the Nvidia drivers, and was running the kernel module from one and the userspace client from another, wat), whereas Fedora really has been hassle-free, despite generally having fresher versions of packages.

Given that Fedora is so good, and given that it has an impeccable pedigree and is not exactly obscure, why do i never hear about people using it?

<comment><AUTHOR> AHAHA that error was f'd up. Yes, it has its crazyness', ocasionally, but I had a mighty good time with 12.04. Let's see how 13.10 behaves as my main driver.

About Fedora, I have fiddled with it in my Linux-discovery days (not that I'm any kind of pro! on the contrary) and found it to be rather OK, but right now I dont want to waste any time getting to know a different structure, different package manager, etc etc. That takes time and I'd like to focus on some important objectives on 2014.

Thanks for the tip though! (And for the read! Very excited for being noticed on the big orange ocean.)</comment></comment>


Honey Game Engine Tutorial – v0.02 – Set Up OpenGL - <AUTHOR> http://www.friendsonmountains.com/blog/2018/07/08/lets-make-honey-version-0-02-set-up-opengl/ <comment><AUTHOR> Ayo! I'm making a game engine, learning as I go, and writing a tutorial about it!

In the third post, we set up OpenGL in a very basic way.</comment>


'The Punisher' and 'Jessica Jones' Canceled by Netflix - <AUTHOR> https://deadline.com/2019/02/the-punisher-jessica-jones-canceled-netflix-marvel-krysten-ritter-jon-bernthal-1202535835/ <comment><USER2> This is all ramping up to Disney's own streaming platform. To which, as a Marvel fan, I will of course subscribe. It's just unfortunate that the streaming world starts to saturate, because of $.</comment>


Finding Creative People Is Easy (And Here's How) - <AUTHOR> http://www.theatlantic.com/life/archive/2011/06/finding-creative-people-is-easy-and-heres-how/240069/

<comment><USER2> Oh jeez. At the first sentence I hoped the answer was not going to be 'Everyone is creative', but yup, there it is.

No, they aren't. 'Creative' as a attribute for a person means that they have creative impulses and aren't afraid to express them. Nobody is arguing that people are born without brains. They are arguing that people are disinclined to use their brains in that fashion, or that it's difficult for them.

When it comes to coding, I'm amazingly creative and I have no problem admitting it.

When it comes to visual, audio, or any other artistic expression, I cannot claim to be creative at all. I'm simply not that kind of person. I would love to be! I want to play piano, and draw, and write novels... But I know the effort involved in doing those things far surpasses the effort needed to be creative at programming on the same scale.

<comment><USER3> > No, they aren't.

You seem to be confusing "creative" with "artistic". Creativity can mean a customer service employee coming up with an imaginative, memorable and successful way of satisfying an upset customer. It can mean a driver finding ways to shave five or ten minutes off a delivery route. It can mean a coffee shop owner turning a "cash only" sign into a "we accept these currencies" sign (as per a recent HN post). It can mean reorganizing a paper route to reduce "dead-walking". It can mean finding a way to cut 50 pounds of onions without getting teary-eyed. It can mean reorganizing a desk to make it more effective. It can mean taking the time to codify a word-of-mouth business process in a clear process document. It can mean a manager setting up a venue for staff meetings that encourages meaningful participation. It can mean tweaks to an assembly procedure that reduce errors.

I'm firmly of the opinion that there is no job so menial and mechanical that it can't benefit from creative input by the people doing it. Companies that cherish and empower their employees unleash these kinds of creative improvements and enjoy the productivity gains they produce.

<comment><USER2> Since I very clearly wrote that I'm 'creative' when it comes to programmer, I'm sure I'm not confusing those things.

<comment><USER3> Maybe I misunderstood you, but it seemed to me that you were circumscribing creativity to 'traditionally' creative activities, like music, painting, programming, and so on. My point is that you can be creative in _any_ field of human activity, even fields we don't normally associate with creativity.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Is Nordic humour too dark for the rest of the world? - <AUTHOR> http://www.bbc.com/culture/story/20151012-is-nordic-humour-too-dark-for-the-rest-of-the-world <comment><USER2> If you've seen the kind of stuff in most comedies now (especially quite a few animated ones), then the answer is probably no. Some of the 'shock' humour programs on Adult Swim and other networks make just about any live action comedy seem tame by comparison.

And let's not even get into some of the comedies and stuff you can find online... There are some audiences out there who would find your average gallows humour tame and boring by comparison.

As for whether any of that stuff would be as popular with mainstream critics or audiences... that's a bit more debatable. But this sort of stuff (like anything else) can find a niche.

</comment><comment><USER3> Try living somewhere you don't see the sun for three months and see what happens to YOUR sense of humor.

</comment><comment><USER4> The Scandinavians I've met and worked with have a very good sense of humour. Utterly dry, you have to be tuned in to realise they are being funny.

Great film making nations though. Bergman, Dreyer, Sjöström etc.

So they don't make comedies as well or in enough numbers as other types. BFD.

</comment><comment><USER5> Any Nordics here who can comment on this? I can't say I notice any difference between the Nordic/UK/American sense of humor. Of course "Americans don't understand irony" so I'm probably missing a lot of nuances.

<comment><USER6> Americans are too strung up on the "be ashamed for someone" comedy that really doesn't go over well with Scandinavian audiences.

It's hard to find an American comedy (since Wag the Dog, perhaps) that doesn't fall on the gag of fremdschämen.

A typical example of the bleak humour from here would be the Danish movie [Flickering Lights]([https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XE4ZBcK01HU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XE4ZBcK01HU))</comment></comment>


Never Lose Your Wallet Again - <AUTHOR> http://www.wallettrackr.com/ <comment><USER2> The product seems interesting but the video is wayyyyyyy too long(4:48 ! ) and doesnt get to the point soon enough.

I think a short video (less than a minute) would be more effective.

<comment><USER3> Agreed. You need to get this down to 30 seconds or a minute. It is way too long. I watched for like 20 seconds and had no idea what the hell was going on... didn't find out for a good 2 minutes. Nobody is going to watch it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> TL;DR: 3.8mm bluetooth device inside an optional custom wallet that allows you to track where your wallet is using an IPhone 4S, 5 or new IPad.

Personally I haven't misplaced my wallet since I was a teenager but I guess this might be useful to some. It's not clear why they're limiting the IPhone/IPad hardware requirements to just the newest ones.

<comment><USER5> Hardware: Are the older models supporting the low energy mode of bluetooth 4? If not .. that'd be the reason, I guess.

<comment><USER6> The 4S was the first iPhone to support low-energy bluetooth.

Note that this use-case is handled specifically in the spec:

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bluetooth_low_energy#Electronic...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bluetooth_low_energy#Electronic_leash)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Tasteless advertising video = close window, forget about the product.

<comment><USER8> The video was very tongue-in-cheek, I would not characterise it as tasteless. I found it pretty funny.

<comment><USER9> The Wealthy Silver Fox + Gold Digging Blonde archetypes are, if not outright tasteless, so hopelessly played out that it's cringe-inducing.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Cool idea. However, after reading the website, I realized I don't get why this is limited to wallets. Think about other things people lose on a regular basis. For example, why not make this thing key-chain friendly? Should be pretty easy to do by adding a hole on the device.

Also, I would recommend removing the "TrackR" text from the device. Otherwise, it will be the first thing a thief gets rid of once they have your wallet. On the other hand, if you try to make it look as inconspicuous as possible, it is less likely to attract unwanted attention.

Another crazy idea: offer an option to have it _sewn into_ the wallet so that it A) is hidden and B) cannot slide off by accident.

<comment><USER11> _> Cool idea. However, after reading the website, I realized I don't get why this is limited to wallets. Think about other things people lose on a regular basis. For example, why not make this thing key-chain friendly? Should be pretty easy to do by adding a hole on the device._

I think this is more of a branding/marketing issue. In the video they make note that you could use it for more than just wallets. And there's a hole on there for keys...

<comment><USER10> Hmm, didn't even realize that was a hole. And there's a diagram that specifically points it out. _facepalm_

<comment><USER11> heh. well not totally you fault. IMO, there should be a huge pic of the product closer to that (great, albeit long) video of theirs. as well, calling it "wallet tracker" pigeonholes its potential uses.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I'm not sure I want to be adding more to stuff to my wallet. In fact, I don't think I'll even be carrying a wallet in the near future with mobile payments quickly growing (Square Wallet, Google Wallet (NFC), Level Up, etc.)

Google is also apparently launching a virtual physical card. It's great since you don't need to carry multiple cards. If it gets lost you can probably just disable Google's virtual card rather than having to call your bank and having your card killed/changed.

<comment><USER13> While payment via smartphone is certainly compelling, I carry many other things in my wallet: \- Driver's license \- Insurance (car/medical/dental) cards \- Auto club membership card

I'm not sure I want to have separate apps for these. Things like gift cards to restaurants (which I also carry around) could easily be replaced w/ an app, but there's something mildly compelling about a non-smart identifier for things like insurance / ID.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> I forget where my smartphone is (once a week or so) way more than I forget where my wallet is (pretty much never), so I guess this isn't a good product for me.

Edit: I guess the product works both ways (wallet will beep your phone if the app is running), so that's more useful than I thought, but when I do misplace my cellphone I can always find it by calling it via my google voice on a laptop or whatever, so I'm still going to skip this.

<comment><USER15> "The technology works both ways, which means your wallet can beep to alert you that you're leaving your phone behind."

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> If it works with Bluetooth doesn't that mean it has a limited range?

What happens if you leave your wallet in the bus, etc...?

<comment><USER17> I suggest rereading the page. The app alerts you when your phone has separated from the tracking device. The device is not a GPS device. From the site's copy:

 _"When the Wallet TrackR gets separated from your iPhone or iPad, the Wallet TrackR app gently alerts you that you may be leaving your wallet behind.

The app also takes a GPS snapshot of where your wallet was at the moment of separation in case you didn't hear the alert."_

In answer to your question about the bus, I assume the idea is that your phone will alert you before you get too far (i.e., before you leave the bus). If you managed to leave the bus without catching the alert, the app could tell you where you left the wallet, but not where it's been since then. At least you will know to contact the bus company to see if anything was turned into their lost-and-found.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> I am pretty paranoid about my wallet, which means that I usually have a pretty good sense of awareness about where it is. (I am so used to it being in my pocket that when I have my wallet in my hand I sometimes have a mild panic about my wallet missing. Doh!) That said, I would not put a large device like this in my wallet, because I don't perceive the benefit as worth the cost of a larger wallet and missing card slot.

Still, the idea and implementation seem to be excellent. I would be much more likely to attach a tracker to my luggage while traveling or in my laptop bag. With a smaller device I might even put it on my keyring. If I had one in my car I wouldn't have to think about remembering my parking spot. The GPS tag will mark it for me as soon as I leave my car.

<comment><USER18> I am pretty paranoid about my wallet, which is why it's often attached to my trousers by a chain. Appropriate technology: [http://www.amazon.co.uk/CANVAS- WALLET-WITH-CHAIN-BLACK/dp/B0...](http://www.amazon.co.uk/CANVAS-WALLET-WITH- CHAIN-BLACK/dp/B002EP9KL4/ref=sr_1_1?s=shoes&ie=UTF8&qid=1352757988&sr=1-1) It's cheap and the batteries don't run out.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> Hmm, I got one of these: <http://www.loc8tor.com/> about 8 years ago? Granted it doesn't have the iPhone app but at the time I thought they had patented the 'find your stuff with RFID' concept. The 'tags' last about 4 years and then you need to replace the batteries in them.

The most useful thing was that you could go through the house and eliminate rooms where the thing you were looking for wasn't. As my kitchen is centrally located I could stand in it hold up the loc8tor unit like a tri-corder, and ascertain both which direction and which floor (we've got two) that the item is.

</comment><comment><USER20> I appreciated that the video had Santa Barbara references (as a native), but I don't see this as being a big seller. People who misplace their wallets probably have the same issue with their phones.

<comment><USER21> Indeed. So perhaps such people need a permanent bodily insert that beeps when it's too far from the phone or wallet?

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> I don't misplace my wallet enough to warrant an extra 3.8mm. In fact, I classify losing your wallet as a minor annoyance for most people than anything else (I've certainly never been as upset as the man in the video).

If people were really concerned about misplacing wallets, designs like these (<http://i.imgur.com/FnOtD.jpg>) would have taken off.

</comment><comment><USER23> Being fairly absent minded, I've been intrigued by this and similar concepts. I tried Bikn for a while, and I liked the general idea, but the phone case was bulky, prevented use of the standard iPhone adapter, and stopped working after a few months. Eventually someone will get this right, though, and I'll be first in line. (If I can remember where the line is... ;))

</comment><comment><USER24> The clever bit is how it's constantly duplicating geolocation results from the phone to the wallet fob and then using that last-known successful transfer to determine if and when the phone and the wallet have become separated. Thus, no cellular requirement on the fob's part, thus a much simpler design. I like it, and the video. It's silly in all the right ways.

</comment><comment><USER25> I have a bigger problem with leaving jackets/coats at bars & restaurants. I also have had occasions where somebody took my coat by accident. Just last week, somebody also mistakenly grabbed my suitcase from the overhead compartment of an airplane.

Assuming this would work just as well for non-wallets, I think this is pretty cool.

</comment><comment><USER26> WRT the thickness, I wonder how many mWh 2 button cells hold compared to these 0.5-1.2 mm lithium-polymers <http://www.powerstream.com/thin-lithium-ion.htm> and if the self discharge rate is low enough for year+ use

</comment><comment><USER27> Everyone else is making apps to make the wallet obsolete, and I think I speak on behalf of all men when I say kudos to them for doing so.

So it's a an odd time to be making a product that makes it bigger. This seems like making something to rewind your VHS tape the year before everyone bought a DVD player.

<comment><USER28> Not really, I imagine the wallet will still be alive and well for at least another 10 years.

Until every little shop and flea market is accepting square for _everything_ (I've yet to see anyone using square in the UK yet).

Not to mention having somewhere to put credit cards, business cards, discount cards, receipts and all that other stuff.

Plus a wallet is still a fashion item.

I agree that this does look kinda big though.

It might also be better to have this somehow sown into the wallet itself, if your wallet is stolen the first thing the thief would do is throw this away.

<comment><USER27> Wallets definitely will exist for awhile, unfortunately, because businesses are slow to adopt new terminals that use NFC or the like. I think their collapse will come very quickly though. You'll go from not needing your wallet half the time to not needing it ever in under a year. I'm not sure when that will happen, but I'd take the under on 10 years.

Once I can pay for things with my phone at most places, I'll simply not go anywhere where I can't, or if I do, I'll plan in advance and toss some coinage in my pocket.

<comment><USER29> To play devils advocate - I'm not convinced =)

Wallets are used for more than just cash ...

NZ law for example requires you to carry your drivers licence at all times. Most (but not all!) people keep it it their wallet - sure you can attach it to your key chain or put it in the glovebox, but then if you're driving a work/friends car, you need to make sure you also have your keys with you (or remembered to grab your licence)

I keep receipts in there - normally for up to a few weeks until I sort them and keep the important ones. Without a wallet, these will just go in a random pocket and probably be lost (though maybe you could have electronic receipts...)

I keep business cards in there (both mine and others). Sure, some of the time you may be able to send a contact to the other persons phone, but if you're meeting a client etc for the first time, fumbling around trying to get phones to sync is probably not a good look. (Assuming the person has a phone that's compatible with yours). This ignores all the other advantages of business cards such as being able to scrawl a message on the back before leaving it with a receptionist, or tucked into a door.

I keep one time keys on a bit of paper tucked in there - both gmail and for financial accounts. These are bits of data I specifically never want to ever be found anywhere on my phone or online =)

And if you are young, where else are you going to keep that emergency condom? =)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> Interesting idea but the rather large tracker requiring a custom wallet is a bit of a deal killer. It's not credit card sized, it's much thicker.

I suppose if you have a problem losing your wallet you may be willing to use this but since I've never lost mine or had it stolen it's not worth it to me.

</comment><comment><USER31> Buy a wallet with a chain. Problem solved. (I haven't lost or forgotten my wallet or keys in years)

</comment><comment><USER32> So does this track your wallet or not? Or does it just beep/take a snap shot of when the separation happens?

If someone takes my wallet or I left my wallet in a moving vehicle (ie: taxi) - there's zero chance to track it since it's on the move?

</comment><comment><USER33> I wonder how much it costed for the developers to make this video? It's pretty well done. Looks more like a startup marketing video rather than a Kickstarter project.

</comment><comment><USER34> My wallet is too thick already. Another 3.8mm is way too much. That kind of thickness needs to be integrated into the wallet rather than inserted into it.

</comment><comment><USER35> I think they would have done better to design a dongle for keys instead. People are already used to keyfobs.

</comment><comment><USER36> When will Android get a working Bluetooth 4.0 stack? It is a shame they don't even mention Android

</comment><comment><USER37> "Can I put it in my brain, just in case I lose it while watching the video?"

</comment><comment><USER18> > "If you don't have an iPhone ... too bad"

Is this for real or is it a parody of the douchey vacuity iPhone apps for people with too much money?

Also, how much do you think they paid for the rights to use "Tarzan boy" by Baltimora? It was released on EMI. They're now part of Universal.

</comment><comment><USER38> This thing will be a _hit_ in hotels and mall parking lots...

</comment><comment><USER39> $250K! What?!</comment>


How Slack Stays Secure During Hyper Growth - <AUTHOR> https://www.heavybit.com/library/podcasts/the-secure-developer/ep-14-how-slack-stays-secure-during-hyper-growth/ <comment><USER3> Slack is an excellent product with a seemingly top-notch engineering team. But Slack has had multiple published security events the last couple of years. Including a DATABASE BREACH. E.g. someone either left a db open to the public, or didn't have ssh password auth disabled, or any number of no-brainer security practices.

Again, no hate for Slack -- growing as fast as they have is an incredible feat. But heavybit is, um, pushing the definition of "secure" with that title. LOL.

* [https://slackhq.com/march-2015-security-incident-and-the-lau...](https://slackhq.com/march-2015-security-incident-and-the-launch-of-two-factor-authentication-3cdcc8efba29) * [https://www.wired.com/2017/03/hack-brief-slack-bug-everyones...](https://www.wired.com/2017/03/hack-brief-slack-bug-everyones-worst-office-nightmare/)

<comment><USER4> Slack is not an excellent product. When I'm using 3g tethered connection Slack experience is unbearable. It constantly loses connection. Why is simple text chat is so bandwidth hungry. I'm surw it's due to bad engineering. IRC was much more reliable on much worse connections.

<comment><USER5> People often confuse engineering and design. Slack has a very good design team, the UX is far above IRC or competing solutions and everything flows and works in a way that most users expect. The engineering itself is not the strong point, that's for sure. Slow, bandwidth hungry, memory intensive, strange syncing problems, security issues, etc.

<comment><USER6> It's certainly pretty. It reminds me of that quote by Joel Spolsky - "people ridiculously overvalue aesthetics and beauty when evaluating products. It's one of the reasons iPods, and, for that matter, Keanu Reeves, are so successful."

I don't think usability-wise it's all that great though. If you have multiple chatrooms in multiple slack organizations, it's a PITA checking on them all, for instance.

<comment><USER3> On Spolsky's quote, wouldn't that mean people _undervalue_ aesthetics and beauty?

<comment><USER7> Engineers undervalue it, users overvalue it compared to other criteria. Mostly because users are not engineers and so have no way to look at why a product is engineeringly superior; they can only look at how easy/simple it is to use.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> The idea that anyone could think of Slack as a "secure" communications platform is laughable. There's security and then there's security theatre.

Reasonably secure against crimes of opportunity, perhaps. Secure? Highly doubtful.

<comment><USER9> Are there any known security vulnerabilities or incidents you can elaborate?

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> We tried out Slack recently. I was reticent to replace our existing XMPP server with an external service for security reasons. When I started the Electron-based desktop app, it tried to connect to lots of third-party services. That was enough to scare me away: [https://twitter.com/mcculley/status/941728005617078272](https://twitter.com/mcculley/status/941728005617078272)

<comment><USER11> I recently had a _quick_ look at mattermost, zulip, matrix and rocket.chat. Of them, rocket.chat was the only one I could get up in 5 minutes, just from a docker-compose file. I assume they're all similar for a full production set-up - but for a dev test, rocket-chat came out far ahead.

Mattermost actually have a dockerized setup - but it didn't work without more fiddling than I cared to do for a test run.

I'm not all that happy about rocket being a meteor/mongodb app - but if you for some reason want to move away from a working xmpp setup (why?) to something slack-like, you might want to take rocket for a spin.

I've seen people complaining that the clients for rocket are bloated - <USER2> afaik they're not as bad as slack (I've just used the Web front-end and Android client).

A curious fact: from the wording on the doc page, you might think this needs a lot of twiddling ("Create docker-compose.yml based on our example..."). But it's clearly commented, and someone apparently verified that it _actually works_ :)

[https://rocket.chat/docs/installation/docker- containers/dock...](https://rocket.chat/docs/installation/docker- containers/docker-compose/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> Slack gets hacked in 3... 2... 1...

In all seriousness, and as much as I'm willing to assume that they've a good team, the title is cringeworthy.

</comment><comment><USER13> Slack has been hacked before. Previous discussion on HN:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9277370](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9277370) (March 2015)

</comment><comment><USER14> More like "How Slack _Thinks_ It Stays Secure..."

A sophisticated attack against Slack would be for the purpose of maintaining long-term access to chat data. There's no reason to believe Slack would ever be able to detect someone exfiltrating chat logs. They might catch some attacks but customers can not rightly expect that that their privacy is being maintained. Data being stolen is _more_ likely than not.

Slack chat should be treated like semi-public communication, with the expectation that it will all end up in a torrent file at some point.

The idea that you can "secure" unencrypted text chats using a Security Team with Executive Leadership is pure theater. If Slack took security seriously it would utilize end-to-end encryption.

<comment><USER15> Taking your criticism to its logical conclusion, are you asking for end-to-end encryption on every online mode of communication in order to consider it secure?

When security engineers and cryptographers analyze an application, they frame their analysis in the context of security goals, threat models and categories of risk. They don't begin from the perspective that application security is a boolean property - i.e. that the software is either secure under the most strenuous of requirements or simply insecure. That's not how any of this works. All security analysis exists on a continuum between safety and usability.

Not all messaging software _needs_ to be secure enough that it could be used as an anti-censorship platform or to facilitate secure communication from journalists in totalitarian regimes. For most companies it's enough that their data is protected through strong application security mechanisms, and Slack devotes significant resources to that task.

In addition, customers choose to use Slack for its features. As others have pointed out, some of these features (like message search, or an audit log for direct messages between team members) cannot exist under an end-to-end encrypted model. If you want to use _Slack_ , that means you want to use Slack's _features_. It's pointless to demand Slack to become something it's fundamentally incompatible with. If you want confidentiality assurance at the highest echelons of computational security, just use something else.

<comment><USER16> There is a qualitative difference between having your staff communicate with each over Slack, and having your staff communicate with each other over email or local chat within the firewall.

For one thing, if you run applications on servers you own, you and only you will get the subpoena for that information. You and only you will know if that information is breached or exfiltrated. Under 3rd party doctrine, Slack does not need your permission to provide your data to law enforcement, nor are they under any obligation to tell you that they did.

And while I haven't read the Slack legal agreement for a while, I would be surprised if there is an ironclad SLA around their duty to notify you if they are breached, or to provide all details about who got what when.

The alternative to Slack is not always Gmail and Gchat, in every institution. Running licensed applications on owned hardware is still a thing that many organizations do for the reasons I list above, and others including document retention policies.

And yes, employees with mobile devices can certainly be encouraged to chat over WhatsApp, iMessage, or even Signal instead of Slack. Or at least they can be empowered with an understanding of why they might want to put certain sensitive information there instead of in Slack.

<comment><USER17> I think the key is to make sure that developers and other employees understand the tradeoffs. This applies not just to Slack, but also to email, Github, cloud storage tools, and even browser extensions.

Apart from easy setup and good ux, these tools provide ideal integration points for third party plugins that can do all kinds of amazing things for productivity, sales, business processes, code intelligence, etc. etc.

In my view, this is all well and good, and we shouldn't be looking to axe these benefits by demanding self-hosting or end-to-end encryption for everything.

Instead, people need to understand what they are and aren't appropriate for. If your browser has 20 extensions installed with access to every page's data... that's cool--I'm sure they all do useful things, but would you sign in to your bank's website with 20 strangers looking over your shoulder?

Same deal with Gmail, Slack, and Github. They all have their place, but they were not designed to store e.g. application secrets securely-- _especially_ if you're also using third party integrations (which, why wouldn't you?--it's a big part of the value they offer). None of this is a problem if you just draw the line in the right place.

Quick plug: this issue is exactly why I started EnvKey[1], a 1Password-like service that keeps application secrets securely in sync across development and server environments so that developers aren't tempted to share them over third party channels in plain text. If your secrets management strategy involves exposure to _any_ third party, you should probably re-evaluate what you're doing. EnvKey offers a very quick, hosted, end-to-end encrypted approach to getting you on the right track.

1 - [https://www.envkey.com](https://www.envkey.com)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> The day Slack is compromised will be a fun one...

It's such a high-value target that it's almost inevitable.

<comment><USER19> I thought it has been: [https://www.wired.com/2017/03/hack-brief-slack-bug- everyones...](https://www.wired.com/2017/03/hack-brief-slack-bug-everyones- worst-office-nightmare/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> The Windows client is buggy as hell. It makes me wonder how many security flaws there are in there...

</comment><comment><USER21> Don't poke the bear

</comment><comment><USER22> If you use slack:

1) create a slack channel name not related to you or your company. EG. channel name 'foobarindustryyys'

2) require all users to use anonymous emails

3) delete the channel once a month

EG. If you run on eagames.slack.com you will get owned. Horribly.</comment>


Why Manhattan's Skyscrapers Are Empty - <AUTHOR> https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/01/american-housing-has-gone-insane/605005/ <comment><USER2> What a surprise, yet another case where letting companies do whatever they want leads to them serving themselves to the detriment of everyone else!

Simple solution: if a unit is vacant for 12 months, the city gets to use the space for housing the homeless.

I suspect this wouldn't house the homeless, because property owners would do everything in their power to not let this happen. Instead, we'd quickly see rents drop so that supply actually connects with demand. Either way it's better than what we're seeing.

But I'm sure the HN crowd will demand that we pay the rich to do the right thing, since incentives are the only way we are allowed to do things and have been working so well so far.

<comment><USER3> _Simple solution: if a unit is vacant for 12 months, the city gets to use the space for housing the homeless._

That's an egregious suggestion.

OK, I had an empty apartment for years. It was too expensive to renovate it, and I didn't want to get sued or scammed by tenants who would use small violations to avoid paying rent, so it was empty. It's a small house with a couple of apartments in it. What you're suggesting is straight up expropriation. And you trust NYC government workers to do the right thing, constitutional violations aside?

Is this the new norm of thinking? Turning our government into some dictatorship who decides winners and losers? You'd have me personally go bankrupt and your personal thinking process is, oh I bet those landlords will fight tooth and nail?

Your stance is as miguided as it is deeply immoral.

<comment><USER2> The government already decides winners and losers, and right now they're deciding that the loers sleep outside in the middle of a winter storm system. Deciding winners and losers is inherent to living under the rule of law. Your only complaint here is that I'm saying government should decide that _you_ lose. Except _not really_ , because you still own a home you can rent out and make money off of, while the so-called "winners" have to live in your crappy unrenovated apartments. So really, your complaint is that you don't get to win by as enormous a margin. Maybe if you play that tiny violin on a street corner in the freezing cold you'll gain a sense of empathy for the homeless.

Let's not pretend this is some sort of moral argument when you're forcing people to sleep on the street so you don't have to risk being scammed by tenants.

<comment><USER3> _So really, your complaint is that you don 't get to win by as enormous a margin. Maybe if you play that tiny violin on a street corner in the freezing cold you'll gain a sense of empathy for the homeless.

Let's not pretend this is some sort of moral argument when you're forcing people to sleep on the street so you don't have to risk being scammed by tenants._

You're demonstrating a limited knowledge of both housing code and its implications, and also the homeless problem.

Homeless break down into sheltered and unsheltered homeless. People on the street, the unsheltered, are primarily people with mental and substance issues not receiving help, and don't want to be in shelters. It's completely irrelevant to a two family house being partly empty? Why not then requisition a one family house forcibly and cut it in 10? Do you think that would solve the issue? The City provides shelters, section 8, public housing and now affordable housing.

Secondly no the government doesn't pick winners and losers as you put it. What if the government decided to confiscate your car because some people can't afford them to get to work? If you spend your life savings on a two family house, you think the government can force you to lodge anyone they please?

Is there a single democratic country where people do this?

More importantly, you'd have a house owner go bankrupt out of spite, which is what you demonstrate here? Violins, the violins aren't coming from me, if you read our exchange.

People like yourself, who see no difference between a small landlord or business owner and a huge landlord with 100 buildings or a corporation, are what give even reasonable-minded social democrats the shivers.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Unfortunately what has happened is we've reached such a tipping point of inequality (and red tape) that it is no longer worth the investment of catering to the middle class. The windfall from selling just one luxury apartment is greater than the profits from selling ten middle class houses, and there are enough plutocrats buying their daughters' tenth condos to make selling the luxury apartments feasible on the market. Welcome to endgame capitalism.

<comment><USER5> This is sad, but makes sense to me.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_value_tax](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_value_tax)

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Everybody_works_but_the_v...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Everybody_works_but_the_vacant_lot_\(cropped\).jpg)</comment>


Nexus 4 available for purchase again today at 12pm PST - <AUTHOR> https://play.google.com/store/devices/details?id=nexus_4_16gb&utm_source=nexus&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=N4_1121_%20Notify%20Me&pcampaignid=112112EMN41 <comment><USER2> This is one of the worst shopping experiences I have ever had. I have seen it come in stock several times now, but when I add it to my cart and try to proceed to checkout, I get "Due to high demand, your order could not be processed. Please try again later." This happens every time until eventually I get the dreaded "Oops, we had trouble processing your request. We're working on fixing the issue. Please try again later.", which means that they gave up and dumped it from your cart. (Edit: Actually, no they didn't, keep trying! If it comes back in stock, then spamming "Proceed" may work.)

Now I'm also getting it failing to add it to the cart to begin with, with the message "Oops, we had a problem with your request. Please try again.". At least this is better than two weeks ago where I would get very unprofessional- looking cookie errors. Edit: The icing on the cake (Add To Cart click): <http://imgur.com/dHmOL>

Google really needs to step up here. Forget missed sales opportunities; this is just reflecting very badly on them, period.

UPDATE:

Possibly the first real feedback from Google on all this: A message displayed at the top of the Play store reading "Google Play is currently experiencing very high traffic. Nexus 4 is not sold out and will still be available for purchase. Please try again shortly. Thank you for your patience." It was up for about five minutes and has since been removed. The Nexus 4 is now consistently in stock, but attempting to purchase it always results in "Due to high demand, your order could not be processed. Please try again later."

<comment><USER3> What I did last time was click to "Proceed" from the cart, even if you get a "Oops, we had trouble processing your request" error and the button is no longer blue. Eventually I was able to order the phone that way, instead of refreshing the page which removes the item from your cart. This might not work this time around, but it's worth a shot.

<comment><USER4> I wish I had read that 15 min ago.

UPDATE: Nah, I tried that, Now I'm getting a popup "Due to high demand, your order could not be processed. Please try again later." UPDATE 2 : "Oops, we had trouble processing your request. We're working on fixing the issue. Please try again later."

<comment><USER3> I guess now you know for next time, since it doesn't look like Google is fixing the process.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> After today, all Google interviews should start with: "So, how would you implement a shopping cart system?" Amazing that this can be this bad.

<comment><USER6> Google ought to pause its work on driver-less cars and magic glasses while it learns how to run a 1990's-style online retail store. The Google Play Store experience is shockingly poor.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> This is absolutely pathetic. How is _Google,_ of all companies, not able to handle load? And how did they manage to fail so fantastically not once, but twice, on the _same product_?

<comment><USER8> This has happened repeatedly with Google in the past- I think it was a Nexus phone back then, too. I've come to the very simple conclusion that they just don't care all that much about how the store performs under huge load. The phones will get sold one way or the other, and the real goal isn't to make money as a phone seller but to drive forward the state of mobile phones.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> Dear Google,

You really need to fix your shit when it comes to selling hardware.

Despite being a huge Android/ChromeOS/etc fan, every interaction I've ever had that involved buying hardware (or in some cases, trying to buy hardware and failing) from the Play store was some level of painful ranging from minor annoyance to full-blown disaster.

I get that the Nexus 4 is supply constrained, I really do. In no way do I feel entitled to purchase one at any specific time. Being out of stock is no big deal and I'm normally a very patient person, but your inability to address the issue with any sort of useful public information and your lack of useful human customer support is inexcusable. Apple, Amazon... hell, even Microsoft... all make you look like a bunch of bumbling idiots when it comes to this stuff.

I'm basically done trying until you address the huge problems you have in this area.

</comment><comment><USER10> I finally got mine. When you have successfully added the phone to your cart, use this

        var j = 0;var i = setInterval(function(){document.forms[1][1].click();j++;j>600 && clearInterval(i)}, 1000);

<comment><USER11> Thank you for bringing several hours of frustration to an end

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> It's an awesome phone, but not without it's problems. I bought mine on launch day and I'm already getting a replacement. I love the phone, but along with others I'm experiencing interference in the earpiece. We'll see if a new unit fixes it.

<http://code.google.com/p/android/issues/detail?id=39936>

</comment><comment><USER13> Well, they haven't fixed the Play Store. Page currently alternating between "SOLD OUT" and "Add to cart" with subsequent refreshes; clicking the latter just goes to <https://play.google.com/store/cart?costatus=INVALID_REQUEST> (with an error message).

<comment><USER13> Alternative failure modes observed:

* page saying "Server Error".

* clicking "Add to cart" brings up the cart page without an error, but saying "Your cart is empty".

<comment><USER14> I was able to add it to my cart, but clicking "Proceed" did nothing. Refreshed the page and my cart is now empty :(

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> _finally_ secured my 16GB Nexus 4. Tips / steps I picked up from various posts in this story:

\- If you see "Sold out", just refresh. I had to refresh _many_ times at certain points just to see "Add to cart"

\- Sometimes the "Add to cart" just fails, go back to the product page and try adding it again.

\- Once you have the item in your cart, don't click on "cart" again, because your can (and probably will) lose it.

\- Even though "Proceed" is grayed out, you can (and should!) click it again freely.

\- Make sure to use firefox developer web console, firebug, or something similar for your browser, so you can hit "proceed" as soon as the series of 3 http requests has returned. they looked like this for me (I had to enable "Log" under "Network" for firefox web console):

      [16:03:00.085] POST https://play.google.com/xhr/ce [HTTP/1.1 200 OK 70ms]
      [16:03:00.085] POST https://play.google.com/store/checkoutcart [HTTP/1.1 200 OK 450ms]
      [16:03:00.538] POST https://play.google.com/xhr/ce [HTTP/1.1 200 OK 59ms]

\- You will see "Due to high traffic.." and "Oops! .." errors constantly. Don't give up :)

<comment><USER16> This worked for me on Chrome! It works!

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> Has anyone been able to buy this? I've added it cart like 20 times now. Half the times I get an error and it's not added, the other half I get an error when I click "proceed" and then it's automagically removed from my cart.

I was there at 12:00 and wasn't able to get it. So I wonder, has anyone actually been able to buy this?

Edit: 1hr later, still trying and still failing. I'm gonna give it an hour and then check again.

Edit 2: They just posted this: _Google Play is currently experiencing very high traffic. Nexus 4 is not sold out and will still be available for purchase. Please try again shortly. Thank you for your patience._ There is hope yet

<comment><USER18> Just bought 2 phones after 2 hours of trying (12:00-14:05) with two browser windows open (chrome and firefox). I was hitting the page about 20 times a minute, and finally got through. This phone had better be the best thing ever...

Good luck.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> I got an "Add to Cart" button (with 4-5 weeks to ship notice) once. When I clicked it, I got a cart error. This sucks.

<comment><USER5> Now it's in cart, but I can't checkout "Due to high volume". This has got to be the most botched product release of all time.

<comment><USER5> Cart Updated: The following items have been removed from your cart because they are currently unavailable.

        Nexus 4 (16GB)

AMAZING!

<comment><USER19> Look on the bright side, at least they told you. Mine just vanished with no explanation. :)

<comment><USER20> Mine too!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> As of 3:15 EST, the 16GB version switches from "Sold out" to "Add to cart" about once every two refreshes. Even when it's "in stock", adding it to your cart triggers an error.

The 8GB seems to be consistently in stock, advertising a 4-5 week shipping period. It is possible to add this one to your cart consistently.

EDIT: Now getting a generic Google server error page: "We're sorry, there was an error. Please try again later."

</comment><comment><USER22> This script got me an 8GB phone just now (took 10 minutes). Simply paste into your console window (hit F12 and then ESC)

setInterval( function() { var buttons = document.getElementsByClassName( 'buy- button-price' ); for ( var i = 0; i < buttons.length; i++ ) { if ( buttons[i].value === 'Proceed' ) { buttons[i].click(); console.log("click") } } }, 2000);

<comment><USER23> This worked for me twice. I had two windows open in chrome (one incognito) with two different google accounts, one for the 16 GB, one for the 8 GB. The 8 GB went after about 7 minutes, the 16 GB took until about 15 minutes.

Now to cancel the 8 GB.

Thanks for the tip!

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> Either it sold out in a record 2 minutes which means that they never had enough to begin with, or it hasn't become available yet.

<comment><USER25> My clocks were still showing 2:59 when it went from 'sold out' to 'add to cart' and back to 'sold out', all within 60 seconds.

Now, almost every time I hit refresh, it flips between the two. I'm giving up for now.

EDIT: The trick from this comment <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4838782> worked for me after about 5 minutes of clicking.

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> An hour and fifteen minutes, I've been tying to purchase one item. This is time I'll never get back in my life. This is the first time I have tried to be an early adopter. I only found out about the Nexus4 several weeks back when I was ready to purchase the Galaxy Nexus, only to find out those were no longer available.

Google is their own worst enemy here with such a crappy check out process, I would not need to have several computers and browsers hitting their servers to get one Item. Why not let us pre order and send the darn thing when it comes in? Why open the ordering for a small window of time while we all eat bandwidth and time?

This is ridiculous. Now I've been at it for two and a half hours. If I did not see the device disappear from my cart a few dozen times, I may have just let it sit in my cart for a few hours before hitting "submit" a couple dozen times per minute over the past couple hours!

Who comes up with this sales model?

</comment><comment><USER13> A banner at the top of the store now reads: "Google Play is currently experiencing very high traffic. Nexus 4 is not sold out and will still be available for purchase. Please try again shortly. Thank you for your patience."

Not sure whether "will still be available" means "today" or "one of these days"...

 _Update 14:05 PST_ now the banner is gone.

</comment><comment><USER27> Nexus 4 sold out again today at 12:02pm PST

<comment><USER28> Unfortunately, you are probably going to be right! Anyone know which regions they are supposed to be available again? Sources?

<comment><USER29> i think this this was more of a fact than a prediction. It seems the nexus is sold out again.

<comment><USER27> I made that post before noon PST. So...Powerball time?

<comment><USER28> Exactly :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> Has anyone actually been able to get an order through? I haven't heard of any success stories yet.

<comment><USER31> I was able to get one like 5 or so minutes ago. Took me a while and lots of phantom items in the shopping cart. But I already got the confirmation email.

<comment><USER32> Did you keep clicking the "Proceed" button when you're in the cart page?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> This is a bad time of the year to have 4-5 week lead times before shipping. I can't be the only one hesitating to place an order for an expensive piece of electronics that might sit on my doorstep for a week while I'm elsewhere visiting family.

</comment><comment><USER3> Notice the huge banner at the top of the Play Store now?

"Google Play is currently experiencing very high traffic. Nexus 4 is not sold out and will still be available for purchase. Please try again shortly. Thank you for your patience."

</comment><comment><USER34> Notice in big red letters on the top of the page:

"Google Play is currently experiencing very high traffic. Nexus 4 is not sold out and will still be available for purchase. Please try again shortly. Thank you for your patience."

</comment><comment><USER35> Curious question: They are not releasing this in Canada at the moment, but I can go through one of my US-based servers to add it to my cart. Assuming I ever get past the high-demand errors, does anyone know if I'll be allowed to ship it to Canada?

Keep in mind, both Canadian and US customers access the site via play.google.com. They are only determining your country based on IP (or something similar) and presenting a different experience.

<comment><USER36> I'm also curious about this. I had the same idea and spent probably 20 minutes going through a proxy of mine clicking the PROCEED button every few seconds, but eventually gave up.

</comment></comment><comment><USER37> If you're still looking to buy one and don't want to use the JS hacks, just tab over to the Proceed button and hold down the enter key (I'm guessing this starts making continuous ajax requests) - took me about 30-45 seconds of holding it down but the checkout/payment screen popped up.

HT: <https://twitter.com/TomDanTheRock/status/273546858289303554>

</comment><comment><USER38> After over 2 and a half hours of trying to get my order through, I was finally able to place my order. Confirmation e-mail just came in. I wish that the process would have been a lot nicer.

No automation, like others did. Just did a lot of clicking the "Process" button with a few breaks every so often. I would click on the "Cart" link every now and then, just to verify that my cart didn't get cleared out like it was earlier today.

</comment><comment><USER39> Looks like the system is available now, but I've noticed that the shipping lead time has increased from the 5-6 weeks (1pm) to 7-8 weeks (5pm)

</comment><comment><USER40> Well, let's face it, the N4 is probably subsidized at Googles prices, so no wonder everyone wants one.

But Google, if you want to play this game, take a page from Amazons book. In comparison to my recent black friday experience there, the Play store handling of the demand is a piss poor disaster and wasting people's time. Certainly creating a lot of ill will and an organic DDOS at the moment.

</comment><comment><USER41> I'm looking to upgrade from my Galaxy Nexus (the USB port is broken and it's annoying to charge the battery by pulling it out).

How big of a concern for people that its only HSPA+? I've only ever used HSPA+ so I'm not sure how much faster really is LTE. I know you can get 20mbs download speeds but realistically for page loads and browsing is it that much smoother of an experience?

</comment><comment><USER42> I've had a checkout script running for 10 minutes with no luck despite the site says they are in stock. Just running into errors. I'll probably let it run for another 20 minutes before giving up.

This is unfortunate though as I was trying to use the Nexus as an opportunity to migrate off iOS.

EDIT: Finally got it after 1 hour of running the script.

</comment><comment><USER43> It only leaves your cart if you refresh the page while the other page turns to 'out of stock'

So my advice is to not refresh the page. Keep 2 tabs open. If you get the 'there was a problem' message...go to the other tab and refresh THAT page until its back.

Then head back to the cart and continue pressing, "proceed"

<comment><USER43> it also takes the ajax roughly 3 seconds to run. So click every 3 seconds to ensure youre not cutting off a form submit that was going to take you to the ordering page.

</comment></comment><comment><USER44> This worked for me:

Once the phone is in your basket, hit tab until the focus is on the proceed button. Then hold enter until finally it succeeds (took about 30s for me).

Now just a "6-7 week" wait for delivery. In other words, the phone can no longer be given as a Christmas present. Disastrous launch all round.

</comment><comment><USER16> Was anyone able to buy it? I have being trying to since before 3pm. It just seems totally broken...

<comment><USER43> i got an 8gb. was around 3:03pmEST.

Went to cart, clicked "Proceed" .. got "too busy" error. Waited a few seconds, clicked again...same error. Waited a few seconds, clicked again, and it worked.

</comment></comment><comment><USER43> I got a 8gb. Must have lucked out. Im guessing they won't go back to 'sold out' for a while based on the shipping times.

I'm trying to get a 16gb one though so I can cancel my 8gb...and no luck. this is really awful.

</comment><comment><USER45> For anyone who's still trying, I did a window.setInterval to click the "Proceed" button. Mine hasn't gone through yet, but better than constantly clicking :)

</comment><comment><USER46> This is ridiculous. I can put one in my cart but can't check out? If this supply constraint is artificial, it's doing a great job of pissing me off.

</comment><comment><USER47> Not sold out..Its available.. At least the 16 GB

</comment><comment><USER48> It's in my cart, but clicking proceed gives an error...

edit: 5 times I've been to the last screen only to press 'Buy' and see another error.

<comment><USER6> Same here. I can get it in my cart, but can't checkout. It gives me an error, then it empties my cart. Apple must be having a good laugh at this

</comment></comment><comment><USER49> I got through the shopping cart and ordered an 8GB model about 5 minutes ago.

</comment><comment><USER50> oh my God! i am sure I can make a better cart! :S 41 minutes, one second i get go to cart, other i get "please try again" i think i should give up! i have better things to do than buy the stupid phone!

</comment><comment><USER20> Just out of curiosity, what language/platform is Google Play running on?

</comment><comment><USER51> i just bought one nexus 4, 8 gb (without any hassels at all). that is almost 8 hrs after sales began.

so folks, its not yet sold out. you might wanna try to grab it again if you had failed to some while ago.

</comment><comment><USER52> Has there been any word on how many have been available each time?

</comment><comment><USER53> This worked for me after about 6 minutes of clicking. reply.

</comment><comment><USER54> Time to order that LG Optimus G :)

</comment><comment><USER24> What a joke Google!

</comment><comment><USER55> Aaaaand it's gone.

<comment><USER56> Finally got through. Although I'm not keeping my hopes up as far as when they'll ship it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER57> Sold out...</comment>


Alleged Bitcoin creator pursued in L.A. car chase - <AUTHOR> http://money.cnn.com/2014/03/06/technology/bitcoin-car-chase/index.html?iid=HP_LN&hpt=hp_t2

<comment><USER2> Insanity. I still have no idea why this behaviour (extreme harrassment by reporters) is legal (well actually I do, detente between law enforcement and media agencies). Whatever, these people should be arrested and put on trial.</comment>


Ask HN: Anyone tried a food-related startup? - <AUTHOR>

We have a good story and product to sell. Unfortunately, we have zero experience selling food over the internet. Any advice? <comment><USER2> I cannot remember ever purchasing food over the internet.

However, I have driven 30 or 40 miles to go to a speciality ethnic grocery store or farmer's market to get a specialty food I learned about over the internet.

Perhaps you should look into finding non-internet ways to sell your item, and then simply advertise on the internet.

</comment><comment><USER3> I've started, grown, and sold a food startup - contact me privately if you'd like to know more about what I learned...

<comment><USER4> I'd love to hear about this. I'm fascinated by food and food business.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> No, but I'm curious about it. What's your product? My guess is that the biggest hurdle is actually producing and certifying as safe whatever it is you're cooking up.

<comment><AUTHOR> Organic snacks would be the general category.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Foodoro (a YC company) and Foodzie both do this.</comment>


Computer vision model to identify the Australian Aboriginal Flag [follow up] - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/australia/aboriginal-flag-cv-model <comment><USER2> Would it find this I wonder. [https://i.redd.it/s31e8hi5wmk51.jpg](https://i.redd.it/s31e8hi5wmk51.jpg) (Event Horizon, Sam Neill, replaced Union Jack on an Australian flag)

<comment><AUTHOR> It did indeed! -> [https://i.imgur.com/j46YmON.png](https://i.imgur.com/j46YmON.png)

I might watch that movie this week, thanks!</comment></comment>


The reality of AR/VR business models - <AUTHOR> http://techcrunch.com/2016/04/05/the-reality-of-arvr-business-models/?ncid=rss&cps=gravity_1462_8745034790021005438 <comment><USER2> Just in case you think the article wasn't expansive enough in the possibilities for AR/VR business models, I'll just leave this here: [http://www.varcrypt.com/info/](http://www.varcrypt.com/info/)

> VARcrypt is the world's first blockchain content distribution platform > designed specifically for VR (Virtual Reality) and AR (Augmented Reality) > content. VARcrypt derives its name from a combination of both VR (Virtual > Reality) and AR (Augmented Reality) resulting in the combination of VAR > which when mixed with a cryptographic blockchain content distribution and > payment processing protocol combines to create VARcrypt. VARcrypt's > blockchain will be powered by its own proprietary cryptocurrency, VARcoin. > VARcoin will become its own medium of exchange for goods and services within > the VARcrypt blockchain universe and beyond.

> The future of media will not be either VR or AR, it will be both, it will be > VAR and that future will be brought to you by VARcrypt. VARcrypt is a place > for artists, a place for content, a place for the future, because at > VARcrypt we are breaking everything.

Sometimes I just love the startup world.

<comment><USER3> This is parody, right?

<comment><USER4> > VARcrypt is a place for artists, a place for content, a place for the > future, because at VARcrypt we are breaking everything.

It has to be.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I think the enterprise chunk is too small in the info graphic. I envision a pretty huge market, especially for AR. There are very few AR applications that seem viable from a business model POV right now. The ones that are pretty easy to spot tend to be in the enterprise world. It seems like a very valuable technology along the entire supply chain from R&D (for building machines, automobiles etc.) to distribution (try on this dress in AR = less returns = higher margins; we can offer this kitchen sink service online now with AR instructions). AR is in fact already used and generating value in some enterprisy field, specifically marketing (mostly just "ZOMG cool" branding) and in logistics (dedicated AR glasses for warehousing)

<comment><USER6> AR glasses that understand mirrors and with a good physics engine could do wonders for the fashion industry.

You could try out clothes and accessories and anything else in front of any mirror and get incredibly realistic renders of how you'd look. You could even experiment with different colors trivially. It could even render multiple alternatives next to each other. And you could be assisted just like normally by a sales person who can give you personal advice and suggestions.

Just about anything involving design could benefit beyond fashion as well, like being able to try different colors or other customizations on a car, or with furniture, etc.

In fact you could even get live remote assistance with this like home decoration and layouts, getting suggestions with live renders for what to place where. Or that same service but for gardening.

Then there's IRL MMORPG, LARP:s would never be the same again. Imagine Ingress with AR.

<comment><USER7> It's a lot easier to replace the mirror with a screen. You can cram a lot more CPU power into something the size of a mirror that doesn't have to run on tiny batteries. The fact that such "mirrors" are not widespread yet indicates that the tech either isn't there yet or that it's just simpler to try on the dress.

<comment><USER6> You have a screen already, given that we're talking AR glasses. The mirror is for reducing latency, not screwing up your skin tone, etc.

You only render the particular things to substitute, nothing else is needed. And it won't get your view angle screwed up, and trivially allows for multiple people.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> _" AR/VR is the fourth major platform shift (after PC, web and mobile)."_

Or maybe VR is just the next 3D TV. Remember 3D TV? 3D TV viewership peaked in 2013. Samsung killed off their entire 3D line in 2016.[1] Some other manufacturers still make them, but they're not selling.

We've already had AR. It was called "Google Glass".

[1] [http://www.whathifi.com/news/samsung-announces-15-new-tv- ran...](http://www.whathifi.com/news/samsung-announces-15-new-tv- ranges-2016-kills-3d)

<comment><USER9> Yes, 3D TV was a failure, but I still hold out a little hope that someone will get VR/AR right. Saying that AR has failed in 2016 because Google Glass could be like saying MP3 players failed because Creative Nomad in early 2001.

Not that it has to be Apple, but someone has to come up with an angle that is innovative if these technologies are going to make an impact.

That all said and hindsight being 20/20, the thing that 3D TV, AR, and VR have in common is that it is the collective willpower of the bleeding edge evangelists alone that is powering discussion. Real tech innovations are immediately recognized as game changers by the general public.

<comment><USER10> Yep, there is a ton of useful stuff you could do with ar/vr.

My wishes:

AR:

Keeping an eye on something while doing something else. Anything from udemy to a simple timer or a webcam on the delivery dock.

VR:

A wearable replacement for a multiscreen setup. Possibly with a cam in front so you can adjust translucency to get back at office pranksters the first few months.

Edit:

Bonus of a easy-to-use VR solution that goes mainstream: work on widescreen on the train, plane or whatever without nobody nosing into your business (eh, as long as you stay away from Oculus Facebook:-P )

Already done on AR:

\- temperature and other sensoe overlays

\- escape routes

What I don't need:

\- everything google glass turned out to be it seems.

<comment><USER6> AR can be turned into VR with a plastic cap. Any approach using VR plus cameras to imitate AR is flawed due to unnecessary latency.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Quick caveat, this is written by the same firm (Digi-Capital) that came out with a totally preposterous estimate (on the high side) for the market potential and uptake speed of VR.

So, you know, grain of salt; the Digi-Capital numbers were followed by much more sane (and significantly smaller) numbers from Piper Jaffray and others. Digi-Capital then revised their numbers so they didn't look like quite such an outlier.

<comment><USER12> They can't have been as far off as Intel (and HP) were with Itanium. Any year now...

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> Every time AR is discussed, I link to the CC-BY-NC comic _Vision Machine_.[1] As all good SF, it describes current trends with a veneer of future technology; I find that it offers insight on a lot of use cases for AR and VR.

[1] [http://visionmachine.net/](http://visionmachine.net/)

</comment><comment><USER14> While not specifically about the business model, where I really think that both will shine is in encouraging a separation of user from chair, getting them active and possible even turning AR/VR into a fitness movement. I've been working on the side on a UE4 based game, and as I realize the potential for it's use in fitness, especially with Vive style roomspace-play, the more I think it will be a huge industry of VR fitness. Maybe I can ride that wave, maybe not, but I hope to see it regardless.

<comment><USER6> Competitive puzzle games that require you to do exercises well? "Zombies, run!" or other zombie games where you have to escape by actually running?

<comment><USER14> More along the lines of virtual bootcamp for a semi-realistic sci-fi sword and gun play sandbox world.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> I can still think of a few challenges.

First, like the Apple Watch, I do not think that consumers are keen to wear more objects every day. So this is a first challenge to AR being something we carry all the day like a mobile. The fact that it looks cool to a few techies doesn't warrant wide adoption.

Two, as it is, they require a lot of computing power. Computers aren't really getting any faster. Engraving may get a little thinner but I understand the physical limits are in sight. Will these things really become so power efficient that they become portable?

Then you have motion sickness which has more to do with the fact that we do not move while our eyes are telling us we are moving. This is something structural to VR. Though this should only apply to non static scenarios. But if you are sitting and using VR to work on a peripheral screen, if done well that shouldn't induce motion sickness. I would be tempted to consider the experience of 3D TVs as a warning.

It's not obvious to me VR will be such a big thing, outside of video games for a limited time per day.

<comment><USER16> > So this is a first challenge to AR being something we carry all the day like > a mobile. The fact that it looks cool to a few techies doesn't warrant wide > adoption.

This fits with the article hinting at smartphone capabilities being integrated in AR/VR headsets.

I would like a device that looks like normal glasses but can display images on the inside of the glasses to create an AR or VR experience when the user wishes to do so. Like Google Glass, but not as obnoxious. If that thing can replace my smartphone, sign me up.

(The most important feature would be an easily triggered silent mode where it does not pop notifications into my eyesight while I'm socializing or focussing.)

<comment><USER15> I don't know. I stopped wearing glasses a few years ago and I don't miss them. It's not just a technological decision.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> The forecast is also leaving out this important application: playing Chevette Washington looking down upon San Francisco to see the city as it will be rebuilt by the tech titans mentioned. Honestly, I would pay for that.

<comment><USER18> Incredible that Virtual Light was written more than 20 years ago. How prescient it was ...

Funny thing with its rising real estate prices and large number of bums (I hear), San Fran is turning into exactly what Gibson envisioned.</comment></comment>


Open source game-theoretic poker player - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/adamsmith/game-theory-poker <comment><USER2> There is actually a business behind bot-poker-player.

I have played about 20k tables Texas Hold'em Double or Nothing and stopped playing after 6 months with a profit of 1000$.

I have met quite a few bots and an experienced player will most likely recognize such bots. However it took a while to realize it and I had to look up the stats in order to see it.

The algorithm the bot used was really simple. In poker terms you'd call the bot-player a rock. He bets when he has good cards and will always go all-in whatever happens after the flop.

You'd think that this algorithm is too simple to be succesful but that's wrong. There are two factors that make this strategy profitable:

1\. If you play on low limits the players usually play incredibly aggressive and will nearly always lose a lot of money whenever your bot bets.

2\. Even if you have a winrate of only 55% (which is necessary to not make a minus, because you never play for free, there is a fee for each table) you will make profit because of the cashback your online poker provider will give you after each month. This is also why you have to play a lot of tables. The bot played about 800 tables each day, which is insane. However it does increase the cashback and the more you play, the more money will get each month.

<comment><USER3> Seems like a rather easily detectable bot, playing 800 tables a day and playing predictably.

I thought all poker sites banned such bots. Is that just a lie?

<comment><USER4> Since there were bots the poker sites have started detecting bots. If a player played every day exactly 800 tables (or exactly e.g. 8 hours), it would be instantly banned for being a bot.

Bots have a lot of randomization now to make it appear human: sleep randomly to emulate "thinking", click on different parts of the button, randomly move the cursor around but still humanly, click next to the button, move the cursor on one button before moving it to another button to actually click, and so on...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> OK now that Chess and Jeopardy have been conquered.

I wonder if no-limit texas hold'em poker is something that massive computing power can consistently conquer as well. Imagine if you had 10,000's of instances of EC2 churning at playing one hand of poker against the world's best opponents...

Is it possible?

<comment><USER6> There's a group at the University of Alberta that does research in poker strategy. They have a program that plays heads-up poker (2 players) as well as the best in the world. Adding more players into the mix significantly complicates things though, so it will be a little while yet.

There are people that run bots on online poker sites, to varying degrees of success.

<comment><USER7> Those bots have gotten significantly better the last few years. I would say the best bots today are beating nearly all of the recreational players and even the lower rungs of professional players - but the very best players can still beat them, should they be paying attention to their tendencies. The bots have a big advantage over them though in that they are robots: they don't get tired or hungry and their judgment never gets clouded on runs of bad luck.

PokerStars and FullTilt have worked hard to rid their sites of bots but many other networks have turned a blind eye to them, some even explicitly allowing them - since the bots pay rake like any other player. Every so often the players will revolt and the sites will crack down but the bots always find their way back again.

<comment><USER8> I agree with everything you have said, but it is worth pointing out that the best online players are assisted by bots. The top players use software that can immediately show your last 10 bets and the outcomes as soon as you raise.

My point is that if you play low stakes, you get crushed by patient bots. If you play high stakes, you get crushed by cyborgs.

<comment><USER9> Im not positive that the current HUDs do that , and even if they did, i dont think its a huge advantage. Players use statistical tools which could be seen as unfair , except they are so common now that a significant percent of players from the lowest stakes to the highest use these tools. Just having this data is not enough to make soemebody a winning player as it does not suggest a specific move, the player still needs to figure that out. High stakes players are just much, much better than lower stakes players, with or without the HUD.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> > But we can compute the optimal strategy for an abstract version of poker > that, for example, during pre-flop betting treats pairs of aces the same way > as pairs of kings.

Not a big deal, but the wording of this seems off. It doesn't sound like you're computing the optimal strategy for poker-prime, where poker-prime has the property that in pre-flop betting (but nowhere else?) pocket aces are no more valuable than pocket kings.

Rather it sounds like you're computing a sub-optimal strategy for poker, by taking an optimal strategy and making it computationally simpler at the expense of some correctness.

<comment><USER11> It's still optimal because your preflop play with KK is going to be exactly the same as with AA. Similarly, you are going to play 9s8c exactly the same as 9h8d.

<comment><USER9> this is not true. suit simplifications can be made without any loss to the value of the solution, but saying AA=KK is not a lossless simplification

<comment><USER11> EV is different, but optimal course of action at each branching point is identical

<comment><USER9> You have no way of knowing this. If the EV is different, how can you say with any certainty that the action at each branching point is identical? What if there is an ace or a king on the board? These hands are very similar and likely have similar strategies, but they are absolutely not the same and any strategy that treats them that way is not optimal.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Will be interesting to see how/if it can scale on cheap cloud based cpu oriented machines, such as Amazon High-CPU instances.

<comment><USER5> From what I have read today, the current poker bot programs do a lot of work in advance, and just follow decision trees when to raise, call and fold along that tree. They already know how they will bet with J10 suited before the flop when they are the first to act before the game starts.

The real challenge is the number of permutations of that, which raise memory requirements into the petabytes range. Not to mention multi-player games, and the no-limit version where betting gets more complex.

Not sure if having high-cpu instances at your disposal helps during game play.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> I wrote a pokerbot for my university third year project: <https://github.com/IsaacLewis/FYP>. I haven't been able to spend any more time on that project since finishing it (though I wanted to), but I still find the space fascinating.

Unlike the linked bot, which is an "equilibrium" (or "game-theoretic") player, mine followed an "exploitative" strategy. What's the difference? Equilibrium strategies find (or attempt to find) a Nash equilibrium, and follow that. As the OP said, this minimises their losses, but also prevents them exploiting weaknesses in an opponent's playing style. Wheras an exploitative player adapts its strategy to take advantage of its opponent, but that leaves it open to being exploited itself.

The OP used RPS as an example - it's clear that the Nash equilibrium is picking each move with 1/3 probability. No matter what your opponent does, your expected value is 0. But what if your opponent decides that they will always pick rock? The EV of the equilibrium strategy is still 0, but you could switch to an exploitative strategy of always picking paper, in which case your EV is 1. For this reason, exploitative strategies will almost always win multiplayer RPS tournaments, because they can consistently beat the weaker players, whereas the equilibrium players will stay in the middle of the pack. It might seem like a surprising result that playing an exploitative strategy _always_ leaves you open to exploitation yourself, but the maths works out.

If you an intuitive grasp of this idea, consider that to exploit your opponent's strategy, your play must be adapted based on observations of their play. But this means they can play with style X, leading you to play style X' which is dominant, before they catch you out by switching to style X'', which dominates X'. If you have experience playing poker with competent humans, they do the same thing.

In computer poker, AFAIK equilibrium players generally perform better. I think this is because poker is a more complicated game than RPS, so both humans and bots consistently make mistakes, so just playing solidly gives equilibrium bots the edge. But writing an exploitative bot is still pretty interesting, because it seems closer to human poker, which is more about bluffing and outthinking your opponents than mathematically optimising your play.

My bot wasn't especially interesting - it was based on an existing algorithm called Miximix, and I used Weka to try and machine learn a model of the opponent's strategy. Still, it could do interesting stuff - eg, if it played against an opponent that could be intimidated out of hands by large bets, it would realise that it could bet large without having good hands - ie, it successfully taught itself to bluff. What I thought would be really interesting was a bot with multiple-level opponent modelling - "what does my opponent think I have?" or "what does my opponent think I think he has?". Good human players think this way, and "recursively modelling other minds" seems integral to conscious thought, so it'd be cool to look into in more depth.

The other thing that would be cool to look into is "explanation-based learning". Normal machine learning approaches require large amounts of data to draw inferences, but human poker players seem capable of forming conclusions about their opponent based on very limited information. Explanation-based learning uses a domain model to help this.

Hmm, writing this comment has reignited my interest in this space - I really should dig out my old code and work on this again some time.

<comment><AUTHOR> With the advent of Deep Belief Nets, which can learn from lots of unlabeled data, it seems reasonable to believe you could duplicate or exceed the human ability to quickly understand a player's behavior based on past humans played.

If only we had access to the backend histories of an online poker site!

<comment><USER13> Oh, but you can... <http://www.pokertableratings.com/buy-hand-histories>

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Interesting, how much did you try to optimize this code? Some of it is a bit fishy.

</comment><comment><USER15> It's Limit Texas Hold'em. (of course)

Limit Texas Hold'em and No-Limit Texas Hold'em, are two entirely different game. They happen to share a few things in common but from a game theory they're two wholly different beast.

They're as different that, basically, limit Texas Hold'em is a solved problem: good bots can rival with the best professional players (playing Limit Hold'em for money online is risky: you can be playing vs a bot or vs someone entering the moves of a bot).

But No-Limit Texas Hold'em? There are players who've won several major tournaments. The psychological element is very, very important.

And unless we make amazing AI discoveries, it's going to be very difficult to write bots able to beat good players at No-Limit Texas Hold'em.

But you can find bots online, even for NLHE, able to beat beginners and the rake at very low limits (called the nanostakes and the micro-stakes, but not above).

Another thing: there's so much money to be made (as in millions of $) by writing a bot able to beat mid-stakes and high-stakes online no-limit Texas Hold'em that the last thing someone who'd write such would do would be to publish it online.

Major sites like PokerStars do pro-actively look out for bots: the EULA states that they have the right to scan the entire memory of your computer and your entire hard disk. And you can't install such a software without giving the root/admin password of your system. And you cannot legally use a VPN: if they detect one you're out (you still technically can if you manage to fly 100% below the radar). And you can't use remote desktops. It's overall very restrictive.

They're regularly busting bot-rings and chinese-colluders rings and confiscating their money (and redistributing it to other players).

And if they suspect an account of multi-accounting, they'll do tricky things like moving and resizing all the poker tables at once, while simultaneously showing a captcha.

If you fail to enter it, you'll have a hard time convincing the site to not confiscate your money...

But back in the wild wild west days, it was amazing: some people had "war rooms" made of tens of PCs, all playing online poker and making very very big money. It was a big business.

But games got tougher, poker "black friday" hit the US hard, bot detection has vastly improved, etc.

So the "gold rush" is over for most botters.

<comment><USER16> As someone who worked for one of the online poker sites doing bot detection and collusion investigation, I find your optimism amusing. It is certainly not over.</comment></comment>