Fogging your Google search history with Python and Reddit - <AUTHOR> http://howlroundmusic.org/wp/?p=23 <comment><USER3> Reminds me a bit of Marlinspike's Google Sharing: [http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/it- security/googlesharing-a...](http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/it- security/googlesharing-a-way-to-prevent-tracking-by-google/)

The concept of hurling garbage into the all-seeing-eye is a good one and I hope it gains sustained popularity.

<comment><USER4> Posit that the government wants to round up all the pressure cooker searchers. Now, instead of one searcher, they have a conspiracy of a dozen pressure cooker searchers. Are they going to just shrug their shoulders and say oh well?

The idea that it's possible to overflow the governments secret lists is founded on the idea that the government cares if a list gets too long. I'm not sure that's the case.

<comment><USER5> We also have to consider the (near future?) implications of machine learning on sifting through the "noise" that is generated with tools like this. In fact, by knowing that one is using such a tool, one could envision a scenario where this data adds _more_ information about the user and not less - <USER2> particular about everything that one is not _actually_ searching for or what OS the user is actually using. Consider that just clicking on a random search link with a browser automation engine probably doesn't look like a real user browsing without considerable effort on the developers part. Here we arrive at counter ML :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Well in fact if you check a section of your Google profile (Ads Settings) [0] you can turn off Ads based on your interests which will result it:

      You will still see ads and they may be based on your general location (such as city or state)
      Ads will not be based on data Google has associated with your Google Account, and so may be less relevant
      You will no longer be able to edit your interests
      All the advertising interests associated with your Google Account will be deleted

If you decide to believe them (as you are by using all their other services), that should be enough :)

[0] - [https://www.google.com/settings/u/0/ads/authenticated](https://www.google.com/settings/u/0/ads/authenticated)

<comment><USER7> Note that they never state they aren't still caching and selling your data. They just aren't showing you ads based on it.

<comment><USER8> Google isn't selling your data. They'd never do that. They make nearly all their money with advertising because they have so much good data to target ads. If they sold this data they'd lose their competitive advantage.

It doesn't matter if Google is good or evil, selling user data to other companies would be a very bad business decision in both cases.

<comment><USER7> Good point. But selling it or using it in-house, they're still mining it for ad research.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Obligatory Apple Doppelgänger patent link: [http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph- Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=H...](http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph- Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=8,205,265.PN.&OS=PN/8,205,265&RS=PN/8,205,265)

</comment><comment><USER10> I think it's pointless.

a) You'd have to keep this up and running forever.

b) You are essentially trying to game a machine learning algorithm, which weights and factors in so many signals, it's impossible to know. If you think you can game this system, SEO should be child's play for you.

c) Google probably has a profile of your personality already (such as the OCEAN model), because it can be derived from few signals such as a bunch of Facebook likes or whatever you type in the search slot. Because personality doesn't really change, your profile is set in stone for the future.

The only slight upside of this is: Google has to use this data about you, reach about to you or sell it to other people who reach out to you. To some extend, an ad blocker goes a long way, because then people can't target you specifically, despite having many information about you. But ultimately, you never know what kind of "content" is brought to you based on your personality and actions. Maybe it'd be even sane to assume that personal interaction with strangers could be motivated by means you don't understand.

<comment><USER11> a) The requirement of running it forever doesn't make it pointless. b) 1. Not knowing the outcome doesn't mean it's not worth trying. 2. It's not entirely true - SEO is about getting your phrase as close to the initial position as possible in an ecosystem with many contending players, whereas this is about introducing noise in your personal data. c) I beg to differ. When the signals change, why shouldn't the profile change?

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> Google can easily tell how much time you spend on a page, or when you click links, and if they wanted, even how your mouse moves. If the idea is to hide this information from Google itself, it seems pointless, just don't use Google.

<comment><USER3> Run a network monitor and visit just about any webpage; you'll see Google IPs and a lot of them. Not using Google is reasonable advice and one could start by at least not having an active account, but I'm not sure how effective that would be. Convolution still seems worth the effort, but perhaps ideally, through more sophisticated methods. Some of the metrics you mention could be randomized.

<comment><USER13> You can block those with an ad blocker, or at your router / firewall if you are really concerned with them. I know that is not something for a normal person, but neither is this search fogging, so seems like there might be better ways to do it.

Not having an account would likely not help at all. All those companies have profiles about you even without an account. You might get lucky and start out as a few separate profiles, but they will eventually link them together.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> A few years ago I devoted some time to screwing with Amazons recommendation engine. The results were interesting at first. They didn't seem to have much of an idea of the kinds of things I actually wanted to see. After a while I was just presented with dildos as recommendations, perhaps they saw through my schemes. I then stopped the campaign and things returned to "normal".

</comment><comment><USER15> IIRC Google suspended the accounts of people who did something similar(automated random searches). I think it's against their Terms of Service.

<comment><USER16> Someone's account was suspended after visiting ruinmysearchhistory, but it was more of an isolated case:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11880008](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11880008)

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> Obligatory [https://cs.nyu.edu/trackmenot/](https://cs.nyu.edu/trackmenot/)

</comment><comment><USER18> Google probably already knows our typing pattern and typing speed. They could probably detect whether you automated it or really typing. It wont be hard for them. "Google knows everything!"

<comment><USER19> Just because they have that information, doesn't mean they can determine what they need or do it in a scalable and computationally feasible manner.

<comment><USER18> I agree. I just gave them an idea just in case if people trying to fog their advertising data

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Whilst I don't disagree with increasing privacy, as a general solution for everybody into the future this method seems a bit brute force and possibly disruptive. If you only use Google search, and don't use other Google services, aren't you simply an IP address to Google? If so, I don't see the harm in the knowing of search trends by geolocation.

At the end of the day, we all have a price for convenience - I knowingly use Facebook even though I hate the loss of privacy.

<comment><USER5> One issue is just that unless you work for Google (and maybe even if you _do_ ) -- you can't know exactly _what_ kind of data structure(s) you are to Google (or any other service provider, large and small). You could be just an IP address, or an IP address and a User-agent or all of the above and then some other crazy stuff, like a browser canvas profile and operating system and age/race/income/sex... no one on the outside of a black box knows for sure exactly how it operates.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> Does this really make sense to do? Unless you form all your google searches as questions, it will be easy to separate real from ELI5. None of my history looks anything like that, so would be completely easy to tell the difference.

Although I would be interested to see what a clean account doing this would look like to google. What kind of ads do they get served?

</comment><comment><USER21> As a simple rule, whenever I want to search something and minimize polution to my web history, I open the other browser I never use and then go into incognito mode.

As a side note, this reminded me of the "Neo looks for Morpheus" scene (the one just before "Wake up Neo").

<comment><USER22> If I watch a Youtube video not logged in, in private browsing mode, in a different browser than where I am logged into Google, I end up seeing suggestions that are very much related to what I just watched when I use a logged in Youtube app on another device. And this is on a very shared Internet connection.

<comment><USER21> In my experience, YT suggests videos related to what I've been seeing with that "session", however I understand how this could be a YMMV situation.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> Or you could just use DuckDuckGo and an ad blocker.

<comment><USER24> You need to block Javascript too, and not enable exceptions for Google services like NoScript does. Besides that, Google is probably part of multiple data-sharing alliances that allow Google to track you even when it's not tracking you. Loading "normal" (non-ad) images from a site already leaves your IP footprint on a site, which could share that info with other sites. How much sharing goes on is a mystery. It's possible data collection companies don't know just how much info they really have, but that'd be a good thing for the rest of us, IMO.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> _> If a story broke, I'd got to Fox news, CBS, Aljazeera, Politico– even fake news sites like The Onion or CNN._

Zing!

 _> Tkinter- I knew I'd have to enter my gmail username and password, and I didn't want to hard code it knowing I was going to share my code._

For something like this that's intended to run forever or at an interval via cron or whatever, you're much better off pulling credentials from a config file or environment variables than requiring user interaction, especially via GUI.

</comment><comment><USER26> similar to [https://github.com/bengrosser/Personal-Depersonalization- Sys...](https://github.com/bengrosser/Personal-Depersonalization-System) [https://cs.nyu.edu/trackmenot/](https://cs.nyu.edu/trackmenot/)

</comment><comment><USER27> Or just use something like startpage.com.

</comment><comment><USER28> This is pretty much what I did to game Bing's search rewards with multiple users but I used Yahoo Answers instead. Worked well actually

</comment><comment><USER29> See the TrackMeNot Chrome extension which does the same thing (also supports multiple search engines). I don't know how it affects Google ads though.

[https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/trackmenot/cgllkjm...](https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/trackmenot/cgllkjmdafllcidaehjejjhpfkmanmka?hl=en)

<comment><USER30> There's a similar extension for ads - [https://adnauseam.io/](https://adnauseam.io/)

Works with uBlock Origin and sends a click to _everything_ blocked.

<comment><USER8> That sounds amazing. And great for website owners, they'll get paid! Any experience with it? Don't want to lose my google account because of that.</comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: How to actually apply for VC funding? - <AUTHOR> I am in the process building a Fintech startup, most of the technical aspects are sorted.
Now I want to upgrade to the next stage, but it is very  bureaucratic  and expensive.
My question is, how do I raise money?
Do I email a bunch of random VC sites with my business plan,  pitch deck?  Or Do I hunt down some known guy to  recommend my startup to a VC firm?
How did you do it & how do you advise me to go about it?
What things will increase my chances of getting funded?
I am based outside the US  but would love to partner with VC's abroad. <comment><USER2> Go and attend local events where VC people are expected to attend. Reach to your network and if you don't have one either hire a CEO/chairman who can help (literally somebody who had done it before and knows lots of people) or try to build your own network (more hard work required).

You need your investor deck polished into the finest details. Once you get your slot you won't be able to waste any time. Be sure to include all details about capitalisation and projected revenue. You need to have a strong backing to all those numbers. Most VC's will come back to you even if they don't invest and advice what went wrong - so this is an ongoing process and you'll get better in time.

We got our investment via our founder (he did not have any contacts, he made them and then he was very good at pitching his vision). He definitely had not emailed random people :-)

</comment><comment><USER3> Google is your friend. There are dozens and dozens of articles out there on this topic. First rule of being an entrepreneur is to be resourceful!</comment>


I failed to learn programming once, next time I won't - <AUTHOR> http://www.ebloggers.net/failed-learn-programming-next-time-wont/ <comment><USER2> I think the biggest mistake I see people do(especially early on) is to code to much before they run the program and see how reacts. if you have a piece of complicated code make it a function/method and put it in a test program.</comment>


Rumor: Intel to crank desktop chips up to Core i9 - <AUTHOR> https://liliputing.com/2017/05/rumor-intel-crank-desktop-chips-core-i9.html <comment><AUTHOR> Looks like server chips with less L3 cache.</comment>


LinkedIn rolls out Two-Factor-Verfication - <AUTHOR> http://blog.linkedin.com/2013/05/31/protecting-your-linkedin-account-with-two-step-verification/

<comment><AUTHOR> sadly, like Twitter, they only use SMS based pins, which might deter users (since it costs money). I would have preferred it, if they used something compatible to the Google Authenticator. Why can't companies not use something that is out there and compatible to other services?</comment>


Show HN: RikClicker - <AUTHOR> http://www.rikclicker.com/

<comment><AUTHOR> This was a spoof of the original CowClicker [1] used to promote a Radio 4 play called "The Last Hurrah" starring the last British comedy legend Rik Mayall. It is a fork of my original highlandcowclicker [2]. Tech is basic:

\- Github pages \- jQuery \- SoundManager2 \- A sprinkle of responsiveness

Despite spending most of my time nuts-deep in SPAs and the like, this was something I did quickly and found it to be loads of fun. It's completely pointless, very rude, and certainly not perfect. I hope someone likes it.

[1] [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cow_Clicker](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cow_Clicker) [2] [http://www.heresyerfuckingcowclicker.com](http://www.heresyerfuckingcowclicker.com)</comment>


Show HN: Imposter Syndrome Life- Stories from people battling imposter syndrome - <AUTHOR> http://impostersyndrome.life <comment><USER2> Imposter syndrome is mostly about making the valid observation that you are mediocre. Surviving this revelation without being crippled by feelings of inadequacy is an exercise in maintaining a realistic perspective about the world: understanding that the vast majority of people are also mediocre, that the vast majority of things that need to be accomplished do not require incredible genius, but rather pedestrian thoughtfulness and sustained brute- force, and so despite how small we all are measured against the best there ever was or could be, we each have a valuable purpose and role in the places we find ourselves.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Imposter syndrome is where even though qualified, people have a fear of being exposed as a "fraud".

This site is to help people overcome their anxieties by learning from others who battled imposter syndrome.

Here's the link if you missed it (I made an error submitting): [http://impostersyndrome.life](http://impostersyndrome.life)

</comment><comment><USER3> Thank you for this. I personally know many people in the tech industry going through this. (Including myself in the past.)

I "cured" myself by focusing on niche industries and learning almost everything about them. This really helps. Otherwise, a generalist always feels many things are missing.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yeah it's true, I would be a generalist and agree, I can't be an expert on much apart from being a generalist

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> The tall thin font is not easy to read (MacBook pro 2016)

<comment><AUTHOR> No it's not, I thought the same but nobody complained. I just made the font- weight heavier now, thanks.</comment></comment>


8 Things Tablets Still Can't Do - <AUTHOR> http://www.informationweek.com/news/galleries/personal-tech/tablets/232602971

<comment><USER2> Friends don't link friends to horrible multi-page websites. Where <50% of the first scroll position's space is dedicated to the article.</comment>


Extract prominent colors from an image – JavaScript port of Android's Palette - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/jariz/vibrant.js

<comment><USER2> I wonder how feasible it would be to run this kind of thing against frames of a running video to periodically adjust the colours of the page container playing the video, sort of like that Phillips Ambilight TV:

[http://www.philips.co.uk/c-m- so/televisions/p/ambilight](http://www.philips.co.uk/c-m- so/televisions/p/ambilight)

Also, writing the Gulpfile in Coffeescript and having "compile the Gulpfile to JS" in the installation instructions kind of made me frown a bit...

<comment><USER3> There are quite a few JS Ambilight demos out there. Here's one that works pretty well: [http://media.chikuyonok.ru/ambilight/](http://media.chikuyonok.ru/ambilight/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Sam Clay's excellent NewsBlur did this in Python in order to pick good colors to represent a blog source - he gave a short talk about it in an NYC LinkedList session (which later morphed into Hacker School which then became The Recurse Center).

<comment><USER5> The idea is not really new, it is just becoming more popular thanks to Android's implementation as a first party lib. There are several well known algorithms : Octree, MCQ & Neuquant and all libs tend to implement a variation of one of these.</comment></comment>


The Uncertain Fate of Amsterdam's Red-Light District - <AUTHOR> https://www.newyorker.com/news/letter-from-europe/the-uncertain-fate-of-amsterdams-red-light-district <comment><USER2> I have been living in Amsterdam for about half a year. Met lots of locals. The red light district is not liked. It's full of trashy people wanting to do drugs and have sex. Sure if you find those to be pleasures of life then be my guest, but the locals hate it: imagine having an entire neighborhood ruined by these kind of people, who let me tell you are not the most respectful kind.

But the real issue is that none of the girl prostitutes are locals. Not once I heard of a local Dutch girl doing this. And it's also mostly lots of people that need he money. If the brothels were full of dutch-rich women then I'd be fine with it... but reality is that it's not and it encourages poorer people to participate in the activity. And in a way it exploits these people even if it's their choice.

Also let's not forget the immortal rule: wherever there's money, there's corruption.

So unfortunately I don't favor the red light district. Maybe if it was far from the center and if it was done in a way where you would be 100% sure where nobody was exploited, then yes. But reality is that nobody can know for sure that exploitation doesn't happen.

But then there's also the other side of the coin that if you make it illegal it will anyway happen in a worst manner... on the streets and with more exploitation.

So maybe having something organized and outside cultural city center seems like a good win-win situation.

<comment><USER3> > Not once I heard of a local Dutch girl doing this.

How is this relevant? I mean in what manner would nationality change your opinion on this topic?

<comment><USER4> I read them to mean that the fact that no Dutch girl is doing it is indicative of exploitation. Dutch people generally have lots of opportunities that many other nationalities don't.

It's impossible to look at someone and tell with certainty that they are being exploited, but it's easy to look at a group of people and notice if any of them are from the local privileged peoples, and if most of them are from poorer regions.

<comment><USER3> > it is indicative of exploitation

In rich countries a lot of low paying jobs are performed by foreigners coming from poorer countries. I'm sure almost nobody _enjoys_ any of those jobs but they do them because they need the money and have little choice.

And by the nature of these low paying jobs they _only_ attract people with no other options, foreigners dreaming about a better life, completely unaware of the risks. This opens the door to abuse. I'm certain that plenty of locals (whatever country we're talking about) would do this job if it payed really well.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> The red-light district is for sure a tourist attraction, for people who are dumbfounded and awestruck to people going on drug fuelled benders.

I am the former, I've been through the red light district at night and there are a few bro's but generally it was decent.

The tourism culture seems to actively promote seedy/druggy stuff though.. Maybe if it wasn't being pushed it would be better?

</comment><comment><USER6> One of my favourite authors is Chris Hedges. I was surprised to discover he is against decriminalisation of sex work. His arguments actually won me over.

[https://www.truthdig.com/articles/the-real-face-of- prostitut...](https://www.truthdig.com/articles/the-real-face-of- prostitution/)

[https://www.truthdig.com/articles/prostitution-being- raped-f...](https://www.truthdig.com/articles/prostitution-being-raped-for-a- living/)

[https://www.truthdig.com/articles/the-underbelly-of-the- sex-...](https://www.truthdig.com/articles/the-underbelly-of-the-sex-trade- industry/)

<comment><USER7> I'm was unclear on something - is Chris Hedges saying that sex workers should be themselves charged with a criminal offense, or that only pimps should be?

Those blog posts make it out that sex work is a crime against the sex workers; i.e., it is prostitutes that are the victims. If that is indeed the case then prostitutes should be able to go freely to the police for protection, without fear of prosecution, since they are the victims. So that makes it unclear to me what it means that Hedges is against decriminalization.

<comment><USER8> > Those blog posts make it out that sex work is a crime against the sex > workers; i.e., it is prostitutes that are the victims. If that is indeed the > case then prostitutes should be able to go freely to the police for > protection, without fear of prosecution, since they are the victims. So that > makes it unclear to me what it means that Hedges is against > decriminalization.

He's of a school of thought that sex workers are victims, but since most sex workers do sex work voluntarily, it means that he views sex workers as victims of their own harmful actions. The implication (whether or not he states it directly) is that sex workers need to be saved from their own harmful actions (ie, the work they do voluntarily) because otherwise they will harm themselves.

While it's dressed in secular rhetoric, at its core, it's a very Puritanical, moralistic argument that ultimately is used to justify people taking steps to "save" sex workers from their "wrongful (harmful) actions".

Unsurprisingly, sex workers do not like him or his work.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I wish Seattle had a Red-Light district, so that I could avoid it. Instead, there are homeless and drug-addicted people everywhere, in need of help.

</comment><comment><USER10> When I went through the red light district in 2008, I didn't find it anywhere near as sketchy as half of San Francisco.

The only disappointment that I had is that Dutch weed isn't anywhere as good as Californian weed.

That being said: If I were Dutch, I wouldn't want to raise a family within biking distance of the red light district. It's practically across the street from a major train station. Dutch children have a lot of independence, and I wouldn't want an 8, 12, or 16 year old stumbling into the red light district by accident.

</comment><comment><USER11> Everyone is cool from afar with sexwork until a meth head is jerking it on their doorstep. "Like, wouldn't you rather have it be regulated and legal?"

Everyone is cool from afar with homeless until they're sleeping in their own doorway. "Like, why are you trying to get rid of all of these poor homeless people?"

"What's the big deal, maaaaan?" they ask, "Why do you have a problem with it?"

But the second the problem comes to their own doorstep they call the cops.

It's one of the most delicious hypocrisies of the internet. People get to bitch about people dealing with all of the negative aspects of any problem while self-righteously pretending to be open and accepting from thousands of miles away.

<comment><USER12> They could operate more like marijuana sales do here in California. You have to get a license and the number of licenses in an area is limited, so there isn't a "district". Advertising is restricted. Most dispensaries are just bland unmarked buildings in inexpensive office or warehouse areas.

It just seems possible to avoid both black markets and "vice districts".

<comment><USER13> That's how Switzerland does it. Prostitution is legal, regulated, and hookers charge value added tax like every other business.

Amsterdam's problem, from the article, seems to be tourism, not sex. The city is being overwhelmed by visitors.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> > Everyone is cool from afar with sexwork until a meth head is jerking it on > their doorstep

You are confusing or conflating sex work with drug use.

> Everyone is cool from afar with homeless until they're sleeping in their own > doorway

I would be ok with that; you don't speak for me.

> self-righteously

Yeah, sure. None of your post reflects on your self-centredness.

<comment><USER15> What if a homeless person takes a shit in your door step right in the broad daylight (actual thing that happened at my place of work several years ago). Cool with that as well?

<comment><USER16> Public restrooms are a problem in many areas. Take San Francisco. People piss and shit on the streets, you would think its because they have no couth, I almost ended up shitting on the street because no one lets you use their toilet without buying something and the friggin lines were too long.

I still dont understand why folks dont let tiny houses and allocate certain parking lots to let the homeless use for sleeping at night. Its not like you can pretend they arent there and make them disappear

<comment><USER15> Shitting _in the bushes_ or _behind a dumpster_ because you simply have to go and there's no restroom within reach is an act of necessity. Many of us have found ourselves so disposed. Shitting on someone's _doorstep_ is not something anyone needs to do, ever.

<comment><USER16> Find me a bush on market street in the finance district.

<comment><USER15> Although I am somewhat tempted to see exactly how far you will bend over backwards to justify people shitting in doorways in broad daylight, I will resist the temptation and move on. Take care.

<comment><USER16> :) i agree its not normal behavior but the homeless have been dehumanized enough they arent quite normal. Add a bit of mental issues and no public poopers... its simple to understand</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


US panel greenlights creation of male 'three-person' embryos - <AUTHOR> http://www.nature.com/news/us-panel-greenlights-creation-of-male-three-person-embryos-1.19290 <comment><USER2> Is "eugenics getting trendy again?

eugenics: noun, (used with a singular verb) 1.

the study of or belief in the possibility of improving the qualities of the human species or a human population, especially by such means as discouraging reproduction by persons having genetic defects or presumed to have inheritable undesirable traits (negative eugenics) or encouraging reproduction by persons presumed to have inheritable desirable traits (positive eugenics)

>>" The goal would be to prevent mothers from passing down disabling or fatal genetic disorders. <<"

This is possibly a slippery slope for what if parents, due to religious beliefs, or prejudice find specific traits "life threatening" or genetically defective?

i.e. Who watches the watchmen?</comment>


Wirecard files for insolvency after financial hole laid bare - <AUTHOR> https://www.dw.com/en/wirecard-files-for-insolvency-after-financial-hole-laid-bare/a-53936447 <comment><USER2> I wonder how many companies in the world are basially built on warm words without any real value behind. I made the experience that a lot of people don't really care if a company has positive revenue streams anymore, they don't even know what a balance sheet is. They simply invest because other people do. And those other people invested because people before them did. This new style "invest billions now in a lossy start up and hope for a positive cashflow in a few years" is absolutely insane, it transformed the economy into a pure gambling hall.

What makes it even worse, in case of wirecard, their auditor EY had audited and certified wirecard's balance sheet for years with no objection. They were satisfied with a clumsy fake audit certificate for 2 billion euros in a Philippine account! For how many companies EY did the same? How superficially do they check their customers?

<comment><USER3> The EY point is interesting. I'm not sure if it's still this way, but when I worked there, a lot of care was put on audit clients as the partner(s) signing off the work had effectively unlimited liability, and could lose pretty much all their money in a worst case scenario.

Unfortunately audit work, where the company decides on their auditor, has an in-built conflict of interests. If the auditor is too harsh/rigorous, then they risk losing the audit. If they're too lax and miss something material, then they risk lawsuits and regulator attention.

Then for large companies there's further complications liket doing the audit may preclude a company from doing other (more lucrative) consultancy work, or that large companies essentially only use one of 4 companies to do their audits, which leads to people rotating through that but little effective competition.

<comment><USER4> > If the auditor is too harsh/rigorous, then they risk losing the audit

How is this a thing ?

<comment><USER5> Because it is an absolute race to the bottom (on price) when it comes to Big 4 audit. There is really no distinction or difference in services provided between the firms. You can practically switch from EY to one of the other three (if they don't mind excluding themselves from consulting work) overnight.

Disclaimer: work for Big 4 but in tech consulting, not audit.

<comment><USER6> OTOH it was the Big 5 until Arthur Anderson gave up its license due to the Enron fraud.

So there's an incentive to audit correctly.

<comment><USER7> There's the same kind of incentive not to be the closest moth to the lightbulb, and yet....

The race-to-the-bottom/die-at-the-bottom reward structure only prevents disaster if the racers are invested for the long term. The agents in charge will have a high tolerance for that kind of risk if they hope to retire/sell before the money train jumps the tracks. I don't know if that's a hazard this industry is currently falling into, but it's a likely failure mode if nothing sufficiently enforces agents taking a long view.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Doesn't surprise me in the slightest.

Worked for a fintech company a few years back that used Wirecard as the processor for one of their products. Somehow they managed to lose the PK/FK relationship between accounts and transactions (or something like that). A whole lot of our customers suddenly started getting other people's transactions on their accounts. It was the final straw that shutdown the entire product line and we moved on to other providers for new projects.

So, not at all surprised they don't know where their money is.

<comment><USER9> So basically the cardinal sin of payment processing then? Not that I'm surprised.

<comment><USER4> I say cardinal sin would have been not storing amounts as integer.

<comment><USER10> Just curious, how would you manage bitcoin fractional shares.

<comment><USER11> Bitcoins are represented as integers. A whole Bitcoin is 100MM satoshis.

Typedef int64_t CAmount;

Static const CAmount COIN = 100000000;

Static const CAmount MAX_MONEY = 21000000 * COIN;

[https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/tree/master/src/amount.h](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/tree/master/src/amount.h)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> A total of around $2B has simply "disappeared" \-- as in, no one yet has been able to figure out what happened to it.

I keep imagining a Monty Python-esque skit:

 _" Was it stolen? We don't know."

"Was it spent? We don't know."

"Was it lent? We don't know."

"Was it transferred? We don't know."

"Was it burned? We don't know."_

Coincidentally, or maybe not, the company's last fictitious balance sheet, which was published in November of last year, right before the scandal was revealed, reports approximately $2B in long-term debt.[a]

So, as much as Wirecard was in the business of processing financial transactions ($124B last year!), it was also secretly performing a magic act of borrowing money and making it disappear into thin air. In a way, it's been an "impressive" performance.

On a more serious note, I hope Wirecard's failure is not seen in hindsight as a "Creditanstalt moment."[b]

\--

[a] [https://ir.wirecard.com/download/companies/wirecard/Presenta...](https://ir.wirecard.com/download/companies/wirecard/Presentations/WDI_Investor_Presentation_9M2019.pdf)

[b] The failure of Creditanstalt, an Austrian bank, in 1931, marks the beginning of the Great Depression in Europe: [https://www.bis.org/publ/work333.pdf](https://www.bis.org/publ/work333.pdf)

<comment><USER13> Hin Leong[0] is about to go the way of wirecard with a 'hole' of mere $3B USD.

I'll hazard that we're seeing only the firsts in a wave of [cooked up] companies imploding.

[0] [https://www.wsj.com/articles/massive-forgery-helped- hide-3-b...](https://www.wsj.com/articles/massive-forgery-helped- hide-3-billion-hole-in-energy-traders-books-11592993288)

<comment><USER9> COVID-19, and the accompanying economic down turn has a, hopefully positive, side effect. it exposes all the fault lines, all the cracks and quite a few high level crooks. In business, finance, society. Let's keep fingers crossed that longterm effects aren't too severe.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Here's the rest of the stack so far:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23611347](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23611347)

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23573386](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23573386)

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23598824](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23598824)

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23438323](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23438323)

This, from a year ago, reads interestingly now: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19737344](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19737344)

</comment><comment><USER15> Invisibilia just released a great podcast about trust, based on the experience of a trader who was harassed by Wirecard. The trader, who was shorting Wirecard, was subject to surveillance, and a constant stream of phishing attacks.

[https://www.npr.org/2020/06/02/868001948/trust- fall](https://www.npr.org/2020/06/02/868001948/trust-fall)

<comment><USER16> Well, the first half of it was a podcast about that trader. Then it abruptly shifts into ... I don't know what. A general talk about trust or something.

It left me confused and unsatisfied.

<comment><USER17> Invisibilia is a podcast about emotions. The second half is fairly typical episode.

<comment><USER18> Many episodes of Invisibilia deal with similar topics as Hidden Brain. I find Hisden Brain better and think Invisibilia should be merged. I don't like Invisibilia that much because it a lot about feelings and the talk is so much that I cannot grasp the main point of the discussion.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> This looks really bad for BaFin, they basically treated the Financial Times as criminals for blowing the whistle over the last few years.

<comment><USER20> > _This looks really bad for BaFin, they basically treated the Financial Times > as criminals for blowing the whistle over the last few years._

It's going on, with a variety of companies, every day. The entire system is beyond corrupt. Regulators are siding with frauds instead of investigating them.

A major red flag of corporate fraud is attacking journalists and blaming "short-sellers". Have these entities _ever_ caused the demise of a _legitimate_ company?

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> Now is clear what the company motto "Beyond payments" means.

</comment><comment><USER22> This is painful but it's a step in right direction. They have to serve ongoing processes for a couple of more weeks/months. All subsidiaries that can be sold will probably be sold to pay creditors. Hopefully all toxic parts will be removed and a few healthy ones will stay, in one way or another.

</comment><comment><USER23> This is the second ceo who started to dress like steve jobs and became a fraud.

<comment><USER7> Should we be worried about Xiaomi? [https://www.gizchina.com/2011/08/17/xiaomi-ceo-chinas- latest...](https://www.gizchina.com/2011/08/17/xiaomi-ceo-chinas-latest-fake- steve-jobs)

Based on more recent photos, it was just a phase. Maybe the company fixed its issues before it got caught?

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> Anyone know if Transferwise Global debit cards are impacted by this?

<comment><USER25> the Wirecard Bank is a subsidiary, that has not filed for insolvency. (disclaimer: they are checking if they need to file for the subsidiaries as well - though my guess is they are trying to minimize the impact on the operations and bank transactions, to save the future of the product).

<comment><USER25> scratch that.

Bafin (german bank watchdog) just froze the accounts, incl. cards of Boon, which is a wirecard subsidary.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> The entire story is shameful. I can just hope the Germans learn lessons from this.

<comment><USER27> I am really unsure if it's something "Germans" need to learn. It is probably something that could happen everywhere...

<comment><USER28> One weird thing I have noticed is that in the UK the phrase "The Germans" is often used instead of "Germany" (where it's grammatically valid, of course) for some reason. It's _really_ noticeable if you watch British TV coverage of the World Cup or European Championships.

Don't know if the OP is British or living there, but it's possible that this is what's happening and they don't mean "all Germans ..." and just mean "The appropriate body in Germany the country ...

<comment><USER29> Very common here in the US to do this with all countries. "Germany" is a country, whereas "Germans" are people. So in a sporting context saying something like "The Germans are better at passing the ball" makes more grammatical sense than "Germany is better at passing the ball". Same for the Italians, the French, etc.

<comment><USER28> It's not quite the same actually. You'll see the commentators occasionally reference Italy/The Italians or France/the French ... but the way they use "The Germans" is on a different level. I also feel like it's also said with a weird intonation, so not "The Germans" but "The _Germans_ " - with a little snarl :-D

I don't know how to explain it - you'd need to watch a World Cup with BBC and ITV coverage to see it in action. England have a special footballing history with Germany so it may be related to this.

Note: not implying this was what the original person meant, this is just a silly tangent :-)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> Will their cards still work?

</comment><comment><USER16>
        Trade on shares in the
        company was suspended

What does this mean? Is a certain stock exchange not executing trades anymore? Are all exchanges worldwide in sync not executing trades? If so, how is the sync achieved?

If it only was suspended at the Frankfurt stock exchange which is mentioned in the article, it would be interesting to see how it is doing at other exchanges.

Google is still showing realtime Frankfurt prices. Currently at a market cap of about €350M.

And what is the reason behind that? Is it guaranteed that shares of a company that files for insolvency are worth 0? And therefore the exchanges want to save uninformed investors from buying them?

<comment><USER31> > What does this mean?

That you can not trade the stock for now. Trading has been resumed. On many stock exchanges there are rules for this. Something very common.

> And what is the reason behind that? Is it guaranteed that shares of a > company that files for insolvency are worth 0?

No. The company could recover, could get bought etc. As a stock holder you are the last in line. Should the company get liquidated, bond holders will have a higher priority for any money recovered.

> And therefore the exchanges want to save uninformed investors from buying > them?

No. Please look up Hertz, the car rental company and what is happen recently the stock. They are bankrupt, people are buying the stock and Hertz was even allowed to issue more shares.

<comment><USER32> >They are bankrupt, people are buying the stock and Hertz was even allowed to issue more shares.

Eh, sort of. The bankruptcy judge said they could, but the SEC said they had some "questions" about the offering's prospectus and Hertz basically withdrew the offer after that. It's not clear whether the company actually sold any shares.</comment></comment></comment>


Google Calendar now syncs with Outlook - <AUTHOR> http://googleenterprise.blogspot.com/2008/03/introducing-google-calendar-sync.html

<comment><AUTHOR> This was the one thing holding a lot of folks back from using Google Calendar.

It'll be interesting to see what comes of it.

</comment><comment><USER2> Won't this be a problem in enterprise settings?

I can't imagine the IT department letting you install third party plugins.</comment>


Embedly (YC W10) releases new version of their API - <AUTHOR> http://blog.embed.ly/31814817

<comment><USER2> To someone who has never heard of your startup before, your front page doesn't do much to explain what you do.

Something to do with embedding content not just a link. What do I do from there? Your call to action button is a link to the api and the jquery plugin goes to a github page where I have to checkout the repository to try the demos.

<comment><USER3> In my case, their landing page was more than enough.

I was searching for exactly this service for my social network startup. Found Embedly, navigated to api docs, went live in just an hour or two. Great service, I almost forgot it's there until seeing this thread.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> FYI, homepage without Yanone Kaffeesatz (had to look that one up):

<http://i.imgur.com/E9lee.png>

</comment><comment><USER5> How does Embedly make money?

<comment><USER6> Coming soon....<http://pro.embed.ly/>

<comment><USER7> any clues? I bet it is going to be a freemium model.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Good. Embedly is one of the few startups that is actually doing something useful to everyone.</comment>


Perl 6 Cookbook kickstarter campaign - <AUTHOR> https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/596128605/perl-6-cookbook <comment><AUTHOR> What if there also was an effort to make Perl 6 faster than Perl 5 (and PHP 7 etc.), and to make it super easy to deploy (think golang binaries), best of breed tooling etc.

Possible result: Perl reputation rescued, community unites, once again rule the world.

</comment><comment><USER2> Honest question, I am wondering why would someone learn Perl today ?

<comment><AUTHOR> Perl 6: Like any other new fun language (elixir etc etc..), lots of innovation happening.

Perl 5: Still rules if you want a unixy language.</comment></comment>


Justice Department Investigating S.&P. Over Mortgage Securities - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/18/business/us-inquiry-said-to-focus-on-s-p-ratings.html?_r=1&emc=na <comment><USER2> Maybe this will discourage executives from using the revolving door during their career progression: bank -> SEC -> S&P -> bank etc.

</comment><comment><USER3> I often wondered why Moodys, Fitch and S&P got away with the MBS issues. In some ways their failure there made me less concerned about the downgrade of the US debt. I mean, how authoritative could they be?

</comment><comment><USER4> Doesn't this quote say it all?

 _"The investigation began before Standard & Poor's cut the United States' AAA credit rating this month"_

</comment><comment><USER5> I am pretty sure I predicted this on another post, and was downvoted (ahh...here we go: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2853293>).

I was wrong, not the US Treasury...but Justice department.

Here goes a roller coaster.

</comment><comment><USER6> Yes, that should teach them a lesson.</comment>


Using a physical bookstore to discover Kindle books - <AUTHOR> http://mortenjust.com/2011/05/23/using-a-physical-bookstore-to-discover-kindle-books/

<comment><USER2> If I walk into a brick-and-mortar bookstore, I'm doing it with the intention of compensating them for their service - being tangible. I _know_ the book will cost me more then if I bought it online. Anyone does. But I've decided the convenience of perusing the book in person is worth it.

But this just seems... well, wrong. Like you're violating a social contract. If this becomes more pervasive, you're basically telling the in-the-flesh bookstore to confiscate your (and everyone's) phones and electronics on entry, as it's the only way to discourage this behavior.

If you're going to treat the store as a your own personal library... at least go to the library. It's only fair.

</comment><comment><USER3> I think that's a neat idea. If I wrote it, I would probably have it find the ebook version on whatever sites I buy from... Baen.com, PragProg, Amazon...

The reviews would be especially useful, but I don't see the need for the picture of the reviewer. What they look like doesn't have anything to do with how good their review is unless they have crazy eyes or something. (And even then I wouldn't rule them out. Real crazy will show through in the review.)</comment>


DRM for chargers? Google Pixel 3 locks fast Qi charging to its own stand - <AUTHOR> https://arstechnica.com/?p=1398545 <comment><USER3> The explanation of "This is to protect batteries from sub par quality chargers" is not particularly convincing to me. As a user, wouldn't that be my call? Shouldn't providing a safe charging be a charger manufacturer's responsibility? Why is Pixel deciding to not accept charging at 10w from 'unknown' charging device? At best I can see the argument for not supporting charging from insecurely designed charger on the account of warranty, but even then I think it should be consumers call as to what device they are using to charge their phones and phone should at most warn me about unsafe chargers, rather than outright refusing to charge at full potential speed.

<comment><USER4> _Shouldn't providing a safe charging be a charger manufacturer's responsibility?_

Have you _seen_ the manufacturing quality of some of the chargers out there? I wouldn't be surprised if this wasn't an effort by Google to prevent a long series of "Google phones explode into flames!" clickbait headlines when ultra- cheap knock-off charging pads start showing up at flea markets.

<comment><USER5> This is pure FUD. I don't know how you think wireless charging works, but it doesn't send current directly into the battery. The charge is received by an antenna in the phone, and the same protections that protect it from overcharging when you plug it into an outlet apply to wireless charging too. You just replaced a cord with the antenna.

If you can damage the phone that way, then the phone is defective.

<comment><USER6> That's not how standards work. If a cable or charging block is out-of-spec it can easily pose HW damage risks or fire hazards. It's impossible to consider every possible way this stuff can be broken.

Take for example [https://gizmodo.com/a-google-engineer-is-publicly-shaming- cr...](https://gizmodo.com/a-google-engineer-is-publicly-shaming-crappy-usb-c- cabl-1742719818)

OnePlus USB-C cables work fine with OnePlus devices but can damage any other USB-C device.

Another example where a USB-C cable destroyed his USB PD analyzer & his chromebook ports: [https://www.amazon.com/review/R2XDBFUD9CTN2R](https://www.amazon.com/review/R2XDBFUD9CTN2R)

This was because the cable was completely miswired.

There's also numerous reports out there of how crappy charging blocks are fire hazards if driven at the full level they advertise.

[https://globalnews.ca/news/3365247/electronic-charging- devic...](https://globalnews.ca/news/3365247/electronic-charging-devices- cables-pose-fire-risk/)

It's not totally unreasonable for a responsible manufacturer to either outright ban charging from unknown blocks/cables or to fallback to a trickle charge that disabled the highest-speed charging.

Since there's so many the only way to do this is to maintain a whitelist of good chargers at the expense of fast charge not working with an arbitrary number of chargers. You could think "well, just warn the user & give them a choice." However, the majority of users would just learn that most of the time it's OK & just hit "OK" blindly even when connecting to new chargers they don't know about. Also the news reporting would still be the same & wouldn't capture the nuance of using a third-party charger since news cycles are more instant & don't allow the necessary amount of time for engineers to receive the unit & perform diagnostics to figure out what happened.

<comment><USER7> > Another example where a USB-C cable destroyed his USB PD analyzer & his > chromebook ports

That sounds to me more like a shitty design on both of those.

Short of sending hundreds of volts and causing arcing, this should be preventable, should it not?

<comment><USER8> That cable supplied voltage on the ground line. Quite some WTF factor on that, but also difficult to protect against.

<comment><USER9> You can protect against reverse voltage, ie, voltage from the ground line.

A simple diode is the easiest way, using various power MOSFETs can reduce the voltage drop induced and you can even build a circuit that allows charging the battery and supplying power on the same connectors while also protecting against reverse voltage.

It's neither hard nor expensive.

<comment><USER8> TIL.

Are you saying that it's possible to protect against all kinds of shenanigans on the ground line even if the device has no other ground, or only against negative voltage?

<comment><USER9> There is only reverse voltage and over voltage.

Ground is basically your reference, if your ground has potential above your voltage input, you're in reverse voltage, if your ground is too far below your voltage input, then you're in over voltage.

Both can be detected and prevented from causing damage via various means on both sides of the usb plug.

Overvoltage can usually be solved by having a Zener diode within acceptable overvoltage short the thing to ground and blow out a fuse, this will cut the circuit and prevent further damage.

I recommend this video from GreatScott: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Tk5ghH_U2s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Tk5ghH_U2s)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Given the update, isn't it pretty clear that this article is nothing but FUD?

The general standard, Qi, only supports charging at 5W. Pixels support this standard perfectly.

Google also made an adapted standard that charges at 10W. Chargers need to pass certain tests to prove they can implement this charging standard correctly. Once certified, then they can charge Pixels faster using this standard. There is plenty of evidence quoted by others of how shoddily implemented aftermarket chargers can damage phones.

I'm not an expert in wireless charging technologies so please correct me if I got something wrong.

<comment><USER11> > The general standard, Qi, only supports charging at 5W.

This is false. Only the low power Qi standard is 5W. Medium power is up to 120W and there is talk of a high power mode up to 1kW.

<comment><USER12> Given that medium power is designed for laptops and monitors and such, it would be safe to presume the size and weight of that spec wouldn't be applicable to phone applications. So, the Qi spec applicable to phones only supports 5W.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Is anyone else not impressed with modern phones? They all seem like the same as last year but with more arbitrary restrictions and a higher price tag.

<comment><USER14> I have a 6S that, while it's running fine, I would like to upgrade for a better camera. But, I want to keep the same size. So, my options are to get a year old 8 or a XS. The XR and XS Max are too large. I really don't want to spend $1000 on a phone. That's absurd to me. I'll probably end up waiting another year.

I've ruled out Android out of personal preference. Not an endorsement of iOS or a condemnation of Android. Just preference.

<comment><USER13> It would be very cool to have an OS option that isn't from one of these two brands. Neither seem to be very respectful of the customer, Google for its privacy practices, and Apple is just so heavy-handed it's hard to take them seriously when they say they care about the user.

<comment><USER15> Except of course iOS 12 has made my old 6 run like new

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> I have an iPhone X, and use an inexpensive Samsung Qi charger. It doesn't do the fast charge, but I also only ever charge my phone at night. It's sitting there for 8ish hours anyway, so the fact that it takes like, maybe two hours to charge is a non-issue.

I imagine many Pixel 3 owners will experience the same thing. A wireless charging pad is pretty naturally a "leave it sitting there overnight" spot. Doesn't really matter that it doesn't do the fast one.

<comment><USER17> I actually prefer a slower charge since it helps the battery last longer. I wish that the charging speed was software-configurable. I also have a samsung Qi charger on my desk, with another by my bed. They slow charge my iPhone, but if I need a quick boost because I'm going back out, I'll plug it in to an Anker charger. It'd be great if one could do it all: slow charging overnight, with faster charging in the off-hours - it could even be automatic based on what it thinks you want (and learn your habits over time), with a software override.

<comment><USER18> You're on an iPhone so I suppose this doesn't help you much, but on my (Samsung) Android phone it's possible to use a program like Tasker to programmatically toggle fast charging based on location, time of day, current battery level, etc.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> For a few shining years, you could basically charge any device with a micro- USB cord. I guess we're going back to having a culch drawer full of one-off proprietary connectors.

<comment><USER20> Which years were those? Mini-USB didn't die out quite quickly enough to make room for Micro-USB before USB-C came onto the scene, so I've had to have at least 2 of those 3 for most of the past decade. My entertainment center currently has to deal with all three, and I have to deal with Micro and C just about everywhere else (most things are Micro except my phone which is C). I think this is a bit of a rose colored look back on things.

<comment><USER21> 2011-2016ish. I had the following devices, all of which could be charged by micro-USB:

\- HP Touchpad

\- Samsung Galaxy SII

\- HTC One (M7)

\- Nexus 7 (2013)

\- HTC One M9

Some had quick charge, some didn't, some could be charged wirelessly via proprietary or Qi standards, but they all could fall back on Micro-USB when they needed to.

Now I'm on a GS8, which means I need a USB-C cable and a micro-USB to keep my phone and tablet charged, but luckily they both support Qi charging, so I can usually get away with just tossing the wireless charger pad into my bag and be good for the day.

<comment><USER22> I'm always amazed at how many devices people seem to have. I got a Samsung Galaxy Nexus in 2011 and just replaced it with a Moto G5 Plus in 2017. Both have micro-USB.

<comment><USER21> Not so much when you look at them as a progression:

GS II -> HTC One M7 -> HTC One M9 -> GS8

HP Touchpad -> Nexus 7

If I had been able to unlock the bootloader on either of my HTC devices, I'd probably still be using them with a custom ROM of some kind. But that's Verizon for you...

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> > _Google got back to us. The Pixel 3 does not support 10W Qi charging at all. > It supports 10W wireless charging, and it supports the Qi wireless charging > standard, but these are two different things. Qi is capped at 5W, and for > 10W wireless charging, you need a charger with what Belkin calls "Google's > 10W proprietary wireless charging technology."

Google says it is "certifying" chargers for the Pixel 3 via the "Made for Google" program..._

Isn't this almost a textbook example of "embrace, extend, extinguish"?

</comment><comment><USER24> Locking chargers doesn't seem like kind of a thing EU would approve. Considering their stand on unifying all chargers.

Let's see how this plays out.

<comment><USER25> It's not locking out other chargers, just the fast charging feature.

Poorly implemented fast charging can ruin your phone's battery quicker than most anything else, so really the issue here is would you rather have google try and help protect your hardware or are you ok with taking the risk that all of the cheap chinese chargers you come across aren't going to damage your phone.

<comment><USER26> > Poorly implemented fast charging can ruin your phone's battery quicker than > most anything else

But isn't the charger basically just a power supply for the phone ? i.e. the actual charging is done by the phone itself, not the charger.

<comment><USER27> In any cae, the charger definitely should only be a PSU. Current, voltage, and temperature during charging should be completely managed by the phone hardware. Otherwise a defective charger can easily destroy the battery, and potentially also your house.

If I'd hazard a guess - assuming it's not only greed - they are either offloading part of that work to the charger for a smaller bill of materials for the phone, or the charger is part of the thermal design.

The higher current for fast charging might generate more heat than the body of the phone can get rid of on its own, and the stand could be engineered to cool down the phone. Almost all cordless power tool chargers have some kind of fan that connects to battery pack cooling ducts to prevent it from overheating during changing.

<comment><USER28> I'd say the heat generation is the biggest factor in fast charging wearing out the battery - lithium batteries do not like heat, and base Qi generates quite a lot of it (have a Qi charger for my Galaxy S5). Can only imagine the fun you run into trying to pump more current through them without melting the phone.

Google may well be doing this because they can't guarantee cooling on the third-party stands, and would have to throttle the charge rate when the phone started to overheat. Guess they might be pre-empting it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> So if Google has some standard that has to be met, can't they just make it public and let the third party companies get certified? Or sign some kind of agreement that they promise to adhere to the standards.. something

<comment><USER6> The problem isn't a question of standardizing it. The problem is that there needs to be a process for independently validating that the products adhere to the standard. There's a huge problem with poor quality/counterfeit chargers & they pose fire risks. No amount of documents solve that problem. Just good old testing of the product itself which is time-consuming & more expensive.

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> I wonder if we'll see more of this from device OEMs, if only to protect against things like iffy USB-C and Qi chargers that don't conform to standards.

Standard Qi chargers don't put out enough power/heat to cause lasting issues, but a fast charger could. Similarly, Google's already seen major issues first- hand from an off-spec USB-C cable [0].

[0] [https://www.engadget.com/2016/02/03/benson-leung- chromebook-...](https://www.engadget.com/2016/02/03/benson-leung-chromebook- pixel-usb-type-c-test/)

<comment><USER31> If only there were an organization that could test and certify that these products adhere to the standards...

<comment><USER32> Too many counterfeits. The solution is basically what Apple did: put MFi chips in everything to ensure the valuable hardware isn't damaged, and lock down who can get the chips. Obviously this is very difficult for a standards body.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> It's also disappointing that while Pixel 3 supports USB-PD, which is forward looking, it has no support for older protocols, even conventional 2.4A USB charging. I tried charging one with my car USB port and it the charging rate was lower than the power consumption, so it died after a few hours of navigation.

There are tons of conventional chargers out in the world (card, hotels and airports, power banks, etc.) and it's stupid to deprecate them, especially given that the Snapdragon inside actually supports those.

<comment><USER34> As far as I can tell, there's no such thing as "conventional 2.4A USB charging". The USB 2 spec limits power output to 5v, 900 mA. USB 3 has the Battery Charging Specification that allows up to 1.5 A. I think you might be thinking of Qualcomm Quick Charge?

<comment><USER35> The USB Battery Charging spec is separate from USB3. The 1.5A is the minimum available current for charging port; the max is 5A. But the limit for legacy USB cables is 2.4A.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> Just imagine the shitstorm if it was s/Google Pixel 3/Apple iPhone/

The amount of angry tweets and 10+ minute long YouTube rants (for the monetization) would break the internet.

</comment><comment><USER37> Pretty sad to see where things are going. Computing started with everything being proprietary, then from the 80s on you saw wide open systems and standards developed. And I think standards are what enabled the rapid growth of the industry and the internet. And now the big players are trying to revert and make everything proprietary again. No standard protocols, hardware that barely can be opened or repaired.

<comment><USER38> Think of patents unrestrained (thanks to some really bad jurisprudence in the 90s and beyond) as the antithesis of open standards.

</comment></comment><comment><USER39> This adds to the list of reasons why I won't be getting a Pixel 3. Other reasons include the notch on the screen, the glass on the back, and the reduced efficacy of autocorrect.

I'm using a Pixel 2 currently, and the back is heavily cracked because I am clumsy and drop it often. Who puts glass on the _back_ of the phone and why?

<comment><USER40> I'm definitely with you about the whole glass-back issue. I know people like wireless charging, but glass isn't the only option.

Can we please go back to plastic? It was lighter and far more impact resistant.

Also, can I just have a rectangular screen? I don't need it to be curved or have rounded edges. I'm ok with a chin and/or forehead bezel. No notch, though.

Not to mention headphone jacks, removable batteries, and physical buttons.

</comment></comment><comment><USER41> Either google doesn't know how to implement the Qi standard[0], the wireless power consortium compatibility tests are complete garbage[also 0], and/or they have discovered a known defect and are trying to work around in order to prevent another airplane-fire recall kind of situation (highly unlikely, if true). I hope that Qi pulls their licence for this move, but I doubt it.

[0][https://www.wirelesspowerconsortium.com/products/details/482...](https://www.wirelesspowerconsortium.com/products/details/4826/pixel-3)

<comment><USER6> I believe 10w charging is a non-standard extension to Qi. QC & Apple have competing implementations & I'm not clear what version Pixel is using. Apple definitely also restricts 10w charging to MFI-certified 3P chargers. If Google doesn't enable validated 3P chargers that would be a shame.

<comment><USER42> You can actually read the specification here: [https://www.wirelesspowerconsortium.com/downloads/download-w...](https://www.wirelesspowerconsortium.com/downloads/download- wireless-power-specification.html)

As of at least 1.2.2 (April 2016) the Qi spec has supported 15 W through an Extended Power Profile

 _A Baseline Power Profile supporting transfer of up to about 5 W and an Extended Power Profile supporting transfer of up to about 15 W of power using an appropriate Secondary Coil (having a typical outer dimension of around 40 mm)._

</comment></comment></comment><comment> a-dub eh, they don't strike me as a company where some marketing doofus pushed this through to try and make an extra buck.

seems more likely that they wanted to see how far they could push the wattage and in doing so they found some pretty tight tolerances with respect to safety and reliability so they took care to ensure that it would only work in the tested configuration.

at the end of the day, it still supports the standard. would be nice to see them try to push the standard forward, which they still very well may do.

</comment><comment><USER43> 2 deflating thoughts;

\- Qi has always been a slow charge thing in my books. If that's changed, the specifications for the Qi charger required could very clearly be listed, and the Pixel could track the specs of the power coming in at some level I'd hope.

\- If sub-par quality QI chargers are a potential hazard, I would say sub-par AC chargers are a far larger hazard from installed footprint. That lock-in would have happened a long time ago if it would have been tolerated by Apple and Google.

Someone will likely find a workaround.

<comment><USER6> Apple does disable 3rd party chargers that haven't been certified, at least for high-power charging.

<comment><USER43> Fair point, I meant iPhone charging can happen from third party USB power sources, and should have been clear.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER44> > _but it 's hard to imagine a justification for this._

There are dubious chargers out there that are outright unsafe. It is in no way hard to imagine the argument that don't want to pull 10W through some no-name made-in-China piece of crap you got from Amazon that will burn your house down, because it wasn't even tested at 5W.

</comment><comment><USER45> This seems something apple like. I think Google is pretty evil now. The company needs to be replaced.

<comment><USER46> Are the Pixels actually that popular? I feel like another company (Samsung, LG) could corner the market on the "pure android" phone and have a better product. I'm surprised Google feels so confident with it's mediocre and overpriced phones.

<comment><USER47> on time patches, a superior camera, there are a few reasons to get a pixel.

9 month off product cycle from other android manufacturer means a cpu that will be a generation behind in 3 months when the next samsung, etc release though. As well as other drawbacks.

<comment><USER46> That's why I was saying that that they need to get onto Android base - <USER2> the only thing will be the camera, which to be fair, Google is really great at.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment> spacecase-25 Is there anything about the Pixel 3 that doesn't suck?

</comment><comment><USER48> This probably won't fly...

<comment><USER49> I can tell you that is at least literally true.

</comment></comment><comment><USER50> Shocking that Apple hasn't pulled this BS yet. I guess next model we'll see it.

</comment><comment><USER51> google playing by apple's book to extract revenues, one more nail in "don't be evil" coffin

</comment><comment><USER52> Qi is the most disgusting over-complicated protocol ever.

</comment><comment><USER53> Complain to Margrethe Vestager.

Google bosses tremble in their boots whenever they see blue stockings.

</comment><comment><USER54> No headphone jack? Can't use the fast charger that came in my vehicle? Nope and Nope.

Buy the LG v35 or v40. These phones have a headphone jack, has an OLED screen, is waterproof, has an SD card slot, works on Project Fi, and if you've ever dealt with LG customer support, they're great. The v35 has a 'normal' lens and a 'wide angle' camera, and the v40 has both of those plus a telephoto. The Pixel2's portrait mode was abysmal compared to the offerings from Apple, but LG's portrait mode absolutely stomps both the pixel and iphone. There's no reason to buy a pixel.

<comment><USER55> Also Moto G6 / Nokia 7 are pretty strong contenders in the $300-something no- bullshit phone segment with dual lens (I'm very happy about my G5+ camera's depth simulation - and my main shooter is a Fuji X100 with F2.0 lens on an APSC sensor, so care about that!).</comment></comment>


Google open-sources project for sandboxing C/C++ libraries on Linux - <AUTHOR> https://www.zdnet.com/article/google-open-sources-project-for-sandboxing-cc-libraries-on-linux/ <comment><USER2> I got more sense out of it on github: [https://github.com/google/sandboxed- api/blob/master/README.m...](https://github.com/google/sandboxed- api/blob/master/README.md)</comment>


A Love Letter to Employers - <AUTHOR> http://blog.jobsuitors.com/blog/2013/01/26/a-love-letter-to-employers/

<comment><USER2> Is this product a "more beautiful" ATS?</comment>


The People Who Run Wikipedia - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/matter/the-36-people-who-run-wikipedia-21ecca70bcca

<comment><USER2> inclusiveness is vitally important to wikipedia's continued success and i'm glad the author raised that concern, but we should celebrate the mutual aid and solidarity that countless contributors have shown to the world by improving access to knowledge.

i donate money and time editing to wikipedia and would (shamelessly) encourage you to do the same. if you have money to donate, i'm willing to bet that you've benefited from wikipedia's breadth and depth at some point, and you can help make the world a better place by enabling others to do the same. if you have expertise to share, people really do benefit from your freely sharing what you know with people. and if you can encourage people whose expertise or backgrounds are under-represented on wikipedia, that would also help to empower even more people to contribute to "the sum of all knowledge".

</comment><comment><USER3> The author really has no idea what stewards actually do. Mostly it is dealing with spam across multiple different language wikipedias and policing the smaller ones that do not have enough of a community themselves. Basically the only thing they would be doing on the English Wikipedia would be promoting people to bureaucrat and such. They explicitly do not use their powers on any of the projects that have actual communities.

</comment><comment><USER4> This is yet another article written by an author who has not done much editing on Wikipedia, or any serious research on the issues surrounding the project. The author buys into Wiki-utopianism -- the idea that Wikipedia could somehow become "the sum of all human knowledge". This false goal poisons the well, leading those who run the site, including the stewards mentioned, to believe that the site is perfect, and that it is the site's users that are a problem.

Wikipedia is actually in terminal decline. The number of administrators is dropping and soon there won't be enough administrators to maintain the pages. [1] There is no plan from the Wikimedia Foundation to deal with further loss of administrators. As more editors leave the site expect more vandalism, even less reliability, more bias, and more scandals.

More worrying is the author's glossing over of Wikipedia's gender gap. The article claims that "Everyone can participate and every voice is heard" but that's clearly not true. Wikipedia is written by 90% young white men, and the content reflects their interests and biases. Excluding women and minorities is hardly, as the article says, " a radically participatory model for this technologic age"

It's no secret that Wikipedia's content creation process is one of the most toxic out there. Apart from the arcane and outdated interface, new users, women and minorities are routinely bullied and harassed. Even if they do survive the initial stages editors have to put up with ambiguous rules that are arbitrarily applied by aggressive admins. Admins are all-powerful and groupthink and bias is endemic. Despite a lot of talking about "inclusion" and "diversity," nothing will ever be fixed, because the core feature of wiki software is "content through conflict".

As someone who runs a crowdsourced content site not that dissimilar to Wikipedia, but that has 80% female and minority participation, I have come to realize that the wiki software itself is the problem, attracting young men who are willing to fight for their knowledge to be displayed on the site. But the intensity of that fighting excludes many others. Much of the discussion about why women and minorities don't participate is like the lions at the watering hole wondering why the zebras aren't thirsty.

[1][http://wikipediocracy.com/wiki/index.php?title=Wikipedia%27s...](http://wikipediocracy.com/wiki/index.php?title=Wikipedia%27s_%27death_spiral%27)

</comment><comment><USER5> Deceptive headline. The stewards have virtually zero impact on English Wikipedia. They mainly help with administering the tiny foreign language projects that don't have a big enough community to run themselves, like Cornish Wikiquote.

</comment><comment><USER6> Perhaps Wikipedia exists due to its willingness to compromise on integrity, something that Western commercial entities were hesitant to do. An free online encyclopedia was a gap in the Internet you could drive a car through.

'I found it on Wikipedia' remains a euphemism for unreliable research, and participation in the project can be understood as an appeal to what Jean Baudrillard[1] understood as our primordial need to reproduce.

Indeed I edit Wikipedia, because I like the sound of my voice. Much the same reason I posted this comment.

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

</comment><comment><USER7> First read that was "The people who ruin wikipedia." Then realized the real headline. Then realized they're kinda the same people...</comment>


Free eBook – A comprehensive guide on how to find sponsors [pdf] - <AUTHOR> https://www.sponsormyevent.com/how-to-find-sponsors

<comment><AUTHOR> One of my friends created this eBook and is giving it free to help event organizers learn how to get sponsors, how to contact them and how to sell the event to sponsors. We will love to get some feedback on how to improve the book and we will try to incorporate as much as possible in the next one.

</comment><comment><USER2> Thanks!</comment>


How to contact successful and famous people? - <AUTHOR> https://www.linkedin.com/today/post/article/20140808065533-44477394-how-to-contact-successful-and-famous-people?trk=prof-post

<comment><USER2> Interesting, however I find that his approach requires too long of an email. I have found that shorter messages (only a few sentences) to be best. This works to establish a communication relationship and then you can do the major "ask"</comment>


Things to know before getting into cyber security (2018) - <AUTHOR> https://doublepulsar.com/8-things-to-know-before-getting-into-cyber-security-ab9010a4ff1c <comment><USER2> I'd add to this list: try to understand the commercial context of your organisation (or altruistic context, for non-profits). Other than security vendors, orgs don't exist for the purpose of security. So learn how infosec can add to the org's mission. That may be through controlling risk, differentiating your org from others ("Hey, we have ISO 27001!") or if necessary ripping out and eliminating expensive security snake oil.

Also, which applies to any job in any organisation - try to understand pain points higher up the organisation. E.g. does your board struggle to justify infosec spend, since they can't measure its value/ROI? Then develop some metrics and report on them! (Perhaps start by learning about ROSI, in that case.)</comment>


London's Laundry Business - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/08/opinion/londons-laundry-business.html <comment><USER2> "Any moralizing remnant of the British Empire is gone; it has turned back to the pirate England of Sir Walter Raleigh."

Come on - the British Empire was exactly the same under the hood as the Elizabethan Era, just wealthier and capable of far larger, lengthier, and more sophisticated acts of piracy. Fig leaves for the actions of the state change, but people are people in every age, and the goals of those with power ever remain the same.

</comment><comment><USER3> [http://www.theguardian.com/books/2013/jun/27/fragile- empire-...](http://www.theguardian.com/books/2013/jun/27/fragile-empire- russia-putin-review)

Ben Judah seems interesting. I shall read more of his work.

Now, how do we _change_ things? I'd like the Labour party back myself. You know, actual socialists with a vaguely radical agenda.

</comment><comment><USER4> "It boils down to this: Britain is ready to betray the United States to protect the City of London's hold on dirty Russian money."

And when exactly did we sign up to be your vassals?

<comment><USER5> American diplomacy assumes NATO lapdogs (or vassals, as it were) and so the idea is probably that you signed a vassal contract when you went policing Europe with us during the cold war.

As far as I'm concerned, any trust placed without consulting the other party is just an assumption. You defy assumptions, you don't betray them. Why is America's stance any more just than Russia's?

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> That article's way off. Our buses are really clean now.

But seriously, damned if i'll be lectured by an American institution on anything to do with morals or normative ethics.

</comment><comment><USER7> Money, like politics makes for strange bedfellows</comment>


Landau's Theoretical Minimum, ITEP in the Beginning of the 1950's (2002) - daniel-levin http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0204295 <comment><AUTHOR> contrast with "Lando's minimum" : he couldn't let Solo stay in Jabba's possession forever.

(edit: I couldn't resist, let the downvote beatings begin :( )</comment>


Ask HN: As a jobseeker – pay a small fee to fill out applications quicker? - <AUTHOR> <comment><USER2> This was the BlueSteps model, pay a fee to join an 'exclusive' database for lazy headhunters. Plenty of suckers still out there, as the recent Mega Millions Lotto demonstrates. PT Barnum would approve.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thoughts on this?

<comment><USER2> Linkedin jobs has an Apply button, one-click. BOOM!

And it's currently still free to job-seekers, the service is covered by fees paid for by job posters. It does little to actually improve the the speed or quality of matching people to jobs.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> no. not me.</comment>


Quora: Which are the best startup homepages? - <AUTHOR> http://www.quora.com/Which-are-the-best-startup-homepages

<comment><USER2> <http://squareup.com> does have a beautifully simple page, just compare it to the mess that is PayPal

However, you can tell it was made by designers in a high-end environment (large screens+ fast broadband) - for example, it shows a blank page when javascript is disabled and the image on the right is a whopping half megabyte, not even progressively rendered or split between above/below fold.</comment>


What are the best resources to learn Spring framework? - <AUTHOR> Hi, I've recently started working on a project built on Spring framework. I've worked on Java 8(mostly Android and only used lambdas) and Play framework(Scala) <comment><USER2> The spring reference docs are quite good. I'd take a scan through those first, maybe focusing more on the areas you will need so you have an idea what it can do and how.</comment>


Indian Jets Strike on Pakistani Side of Kashmir Line - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/25/world/asia/india-pakistan-kashmir-jets.html <comment><USER2> Note: This is not random attack by India. This was in response to an attack 2 weeks ago by Pakistani terrorists in India which had killed 40+ security personnel. Moreover this was an attack on terrorist camps in hilly/mountaineous terrain.

</comment><comment><USER3> NYT's anti-India bias is showing.

That said, this was expected. India's diplomacy and restraint has been tested time and time again. It has taken a page from Israel, US & Russia's book. India is only cleaning up the mess that Pakistan should've cleared on its side of the border.

<comment><USER4> It's against international law to randomly bomb another country. Duh

India didn't get authorization from the UN Security Council nor was this in self defense.

I think _your_ bias may be showing.

<comment><USER5> FWIW, that part of Kashmir isn't technically another country. Kashmir's unelected ruler chose to remain independent when he had to choose back in August 1947, Pakistan invaded in September and Kashmir then joined India in October.

The border is labelled "line of control" on the maps. What India bombed is in the part of Kashmir-then-India that Pakistan effectively controls but that other countries don't recognise.

<comment><USER6> BTW, it wasn't PoK that was attacked. It was Pakistan.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I read elsewhere that this might very well be with tacit agreement from Pak

* India bombs terror camps and can show it's retaliation for the suicide attack.

* Pak has always denied existence of the camps - so of course they 'missed' and bombed empty ground. Helps them save face internally.

</comment><comment><USER8> I wonder why this news is worthy of being discussed on HN?

<comment><USER9> Because 2 nuclear powers are going at each other

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Hey dang, there's some problematic comments[1][2] in here from godelmachine. As far as I'm aware (and at the very least in the UK), calling someone a "paki" is a slur.

[1]: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19254972](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19254972)

[2]: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19255009](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19255009)

</comment><comment><USER11> Countries with nuclear weapons should not go to war with each other.

<comment><USER2> Countries should also not harbor and train and support terrorists that attack neighbors.

<comment><USER12> You're right, but avoiding nuclear war is the higher priority. If India and Pakistan want to kick the ahit out of each other they should disarm their nuclear weapons. Imagine for a moment that Russia had been sending terrorist to the US border with Canada. Now imagine that the US started bombing Russian border towns. You would quite rightly, be crappping your pants and focusing on the threat of global annihilation.

Nuclear powers are burdened with a far greater need for restraint _out of necessity_ than non-nuclear powers, even in the face of provocation.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> This would be a very stupid reason to jumpstart an apocalypse. You'd really hope nuclear armed neighbors would have more restraint.

<comment><USER13> Ha ha. Restraint is not an option when 50+ soldiers of said country get suicide bombed by a terrorist group known to be residing with impunity and immunity in the other said country. At this point, it's a wonder it's not all out war.

<comment><USER12> Of course it's an option, when the alternative is a potential nuclear holocaust. I'm not denying that Pakistan makes for a miserable neighbor, just that limited engagements with limited casualties are preferable to risking nuclear war.

<comment><USER2> There has been limited engagement for last 70+ years with no result.

As Einstein said, lunacy is doing the same thing again and again and expect a different result.

<comment><USER14> Was Mr Einstein qualified to comment in international affairs?

Anyway, that expression is misattributed:

[https://quoteinvestigator.com/2017/03/23/same/](https://quoteinvestigator.com/2017/03/23/same/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Thanks god there are no casualties.

<comment><USER16> I don't understand why to thank god for that. Pakisthan have denied the existence of such terrorist organisation even though the last surgical strick from India killed over 50 jihadis who were trained to attack India. The attack was done by 12 mirage aircraft carrying bombs weighing over 1000kgs. This have a destructive radius over 15 kms. The Indian intel and the state is claming that there is anywhere beteen 300-400 Jihadis killed in this attack. Major strike on terror from Indian side.

<comment><USER15> It's a figure of speech. I am an atheist.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> A fool's election winning strategy is putting more than a few billion people at risk of nuclear apocalypse!

Note that the Pakistani analysts predicted this a long time ago (Indian opposition parties also understand this) that the Indian PM Modi would create a war like situation with Pakistan before their upcoming elections.

<comment><USER17> Example: [https://twitter.com/AsharJawad/status/1072387135485943808](https://twitter.com/AsharJawad/status/1072387135485943808) "After BJP defeat in state elections & Pakistan's masterstroke in Kartarpur, Indian estab. is on backfoot. Don't rule out false flags in Kashmir & India (esp. INC ruled Punjab) followed by border skirmishes with Pak to revive Hindutva nationalism ahead of 2019 G.E. Ram Mandir too."

<comment><USER9> Oh dear the ISI machine is out :D

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> After a history of the Pakistani government letting terrorists operate/organize within its borders, one can't be surprised that India has grown tired of the nuclear deterrent preventing them from making progress in curbing attacks in India from Pakistani terror groups.

I agree the situation should be handled delicately, and hopefully diplomatically, to a mutually-agreeable outcome. At the same time, continuing to rely on the Pakistani government to make progress here would be foolish given their poor track record in dealing with domestic terror groups. After all, America acted unilaterally in the hunt for Osama bin Laden because the Pakistani government was unreliable. To this day many sources allege the direct involvement of many Pakistani officials in harboring OBL ([https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2015/10/14...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2015/10/14/pakistani- leaders-knew-osama-bin-laden-was-in-pakistan-says-former-defense-minister/)).

</comment><comment><USER19> I'd advise everyone to wait until it's confirmed. The fake news problem in India is at another level.

<comment><USER2> It was reported by Pakistan that this had happened, before Indian media had reported.

<comment><USER19> What happened exactly? Nobody's arguing that Indian planes crossed the LoC. But did they really bomb all the terrorist camps? Were the terrorists really killed? Were there really no civilian casualties? How do we know? In fact, how do they know? No source outside Indian media hasn't confirmed these details. Not just that, the Indian media itself hasn't provided evidence to back these claims

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> This is highly irresponsible with the possibility of escalation of hostilities between the nuclear armed neighbors. As some one rightly pointed out nuclear powers carry the additional burden of restraint.

<comment><USER21> Yeah well, next time travel to Pakistan and try explaining "responsibilities" and "world peace" to them. I would love to observe that conversation.

<comment><USER20> And this potential for escalation does not bother you?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> Honestly, with intense warmongering and politics being broadcast 24/7 in my country, I come to HN to discuss better than what one zealot wants to do to another. I already woke up to the news that India had crossed the border, felt sad, decided to browse HN for intellectually stimulating debate and found this instead.

Let's please stick to hacker-friendly content? This stuff will just invites a flamewar, and we've got enough war talk happening in the real world.

<comment><USER23> Did you feel sad when Pakistan harbored terrorists blow up innocents in India? Did you feel sad on 14th Feb when JeM attacked the military convoy trucks?

<comment><USER22> I've had no concrete evidence of Pakistan harboring fugitives yet so I have no feeling either way. I'd condemn it if it were true.

I did feel sad even JeM attacked the military convey along with every Pakistani in my immediate surrounding. A loss of life is a terrible thing, and we've been victims of terrorism for years. I'm sorry, were you expecting a different response?

<comment><USER24> Everyone know about hijacked Indian Aeroplane in Afghanistan in 1999 to free Masood Azhar He can be seen now in news in Pakistan channels. I don't know why Pakistan is scared of handing him over to India if they don't support terrorism. He is not a government official or army man or any other person of importance as per Pakistan narrative.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Foreign government allegedly behind cyberattack on IMF - <AUTHOR> http://arstechnica.com/#!/security/news/2011/06/foreign-government-allegedly-behind-cyberattack-on-imf.ars <comment><USER2> Another high profile cyber attack. If I am not mistaken, Russia used cyber warfare to subdue Estomia. [http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/may/17/topstories3.russ...](http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/may/17/topstories3.russia)

This is the direction of modern warfare.</comment>


Programming Is Not a Craft - <AUTHOR> http://dannorth.net/2011/01/11/programming-is-not-a-craft/

<comment><USER2> This was discussed in: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6914669](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6914669)</comment>