What killed Sun Microsystems? - <AUTHOR> http://hxxbit.vinci.cloud/2016/06/08/whatkilledsun/ <comment><USER2> Please note that this was before my link switch. Please go to [http://hxxbit.vinci.cloud/2016/07/08/whatkilledsun/](http://hxxbit.vinci.cloud/2016/07/08/whatkilledsun/)

</comment><comment><USER3> Pretty perceptive for a 13 yr old.

I was at Sun from the day they went public until the launch of Java, I saw things a bit more clearly. When Sun started they were building workstations using Motorola's 68010 series of chips. They had taken an open source OS (4.xBSD) and a commodity microprocessor (68K) and put together some really nice hardware and made sure all the drivers worked and all of the software interfaces were consistent. Their two fiercest competitors at the time were DEC with its VAXStation line (custom CPU (VAX), custom OS (VMS)), and Apollo with its Domain line (commodity CPU (68k), custom OS (Domain)). It gave you almost the perfect Petri dish for evaluating the strategy.

It worked well, Sun out engineered all other workstation companies and by 1990 was at the top of its game.

The first thing that started eating at it was Silicon Graphics, the focus on serious graphics hardware got them into places where Sun was weak. The second thing was the slow ponderous rise of the x86 architecture. It wasn't until the 386 that there was realistically a competitor to the old 68K dominance in 32 bit machines. And the Pentium was the first architecture that could go head to head with SPARC on the low end.

At the top of its game Sun made three bad decisions, that ultimately sealed its fate. First it decided to make its OS more "enterprise" and got into a huge deal with AT&T to "merge" all the UNIXes into one happy System V. Second it decided that it could build a better CPU than semiconductor companies and embarked on building SPARC. And finally, when x86 machines started developing the same capabilities as workstations (and brought Windows NT along with them), it chose to retreat into the "datacenter" rather than continue to work and learn in deskop space.

All of the advantages of its early days had been reversed, it had a proprietary OS (Solaris), a proprietary CPU (SPARC), and it charged premium margins (even though they were not sustainable). I emailed Scott McNealy and suggested he sell off SPARC to Fujitsu, sunset Solaris in favor of a new version of SunOS based on the FreeBSD kernel, and engineer machines out of commodity chips (x86 and Opteron). They did much of that (except the SunOS part) but it was much too late and the rest of the organization was hemorrhaging money.

Even today I think that could be a credible business plan although I note that folks like System76 haven't been nearly as successful as the early Sun. I'm not sure if that is that they don't engineer _enough_ of the systems or if they don't have the staff to really do the drivers they need. Or it could just be that crappy driver support and flakey window systems are the new normal and not enough people remember not rebooting for 6 months.

</comment><comment><USER4> Sun not adapting to market changes. Who wants a Solaris SPARC box if a X86 PC with Linux is cheaper?

Remember the network computer Sun made with Java OS that was supposed to take on Microsoft? Nobody wanted one.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> I think that this is pretty interesting. It seems like Sun couldn't keep up with Linux. but still screw java adware</comment>


U.S. arming insurgent groups in Syria - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/13/world/middleeast/syria-russia-airstrikes.html?_r=0 <comment><USER2> Please use the original title unless it is misleading or linkbait. Please don't use the title to editorialize.

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

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> "They appear to be using techniques honed in Afghanistan, where the occupying Soviet Army fought insurgents who were eventually supplied with antiaircraft missiles by the United States. Some of those insurgents later began Al Qaeda."</comment>


Ask HN: When Do You Relax? - <AUTHOR> I've tried googling the answer to this, and what surprises me is that there's no tips to relaxation. If I followed the tips written out there, I would wake up at 4 AM, meditate, go for a run and a swim, get your best work done, prepare for day job, do work, have lunch without looking at your phone, do more work, go home, hit the gym, play with kids, go to bed early to wake at 4 AM.
Where does that leave relaxation, besides sleep? It makes it very tempting to sneak time off other schedules, like work, family time, or late nights to relax. In reality, that's an unhealthy habit, and you just end up with not getting work done and/or not enough sleep and exercise.
If you could intentionally block off a few hours of your day or week to entertainment, when would it be and what would you enjoy most? <comment><USER2> 0400? No thanks. I usually naturally wake up sometime between 0800 and 0830. I have a 0900 alarm just in case I'm sleeping heavy. I throw on pants, take my dog out into the backyard, and scroll through what came in on Slack overnight while she runs around. I'll mark a few threads that might require my input, do about 10 or 15 minutes of mobility work on the grass and then head in and feed the dog.

I get online around 0930 or 1000. So that 2 hours wandering around the backyard and casually browsing Slack is my slow, relaxing way to start the day. I put zero pressure on myself to do anything before 0930

I take lunch around 1300. I watch TV while I eat. Usually something recorded the night before (I love The Titan Games and Ultimate Tag. easy to just "watch" w/o too much thought).

Work from 1400 till around 1830 or 1900. Now during this time, I'll take the dog out for a few quick potty breaks and do some more stretching mobility each time I'm out.

Do my weight lifting, take the dog for a long walk, eat dinner, and then read some articles I've been meaning to read, read a technical book, read fiction, or just plop down on the couch and watch TV.

Long story long - I don't try to schedule relaxing time. I fit it in throughout the day. Somedays I have more than others. It all balances out. I think if you go about your day trying to schedule every second, you're just putting undue stress on yourself. And even in your scheduled relaxation time, you're not really. That's just my 2 cents...

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks, this is a good answer. The problem is that it's easy to start on, say, a game, movie, or the internet at 0930 and then stop at 1930. Or do hundreds of little microbreaks and get little done. 4-5 hours of real work is actually quite productive.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> what's a "relax"? :(</comment>


Justices Suggest They May Let States Legalize Sports Gambling - <AUTHOR> https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-12-04/justices-suggest-they-may-let-states-legalize-sports-gambling <comment><USER2> U.S. Supreme Court justices suggested they may uphold New Jersey's legalization of sports gambling, in a move that could ripple quickly across the country and let other states grab some of the billions of dollars now bet illegally.

Should the high court strike down the federal law, other states could move quickly to take part of the $150 billion the casino-backed American Gaming Association says is wagered illegally every year. By some estimates, more than a dozen states could have legal sports gambling by the end of next year.

New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, who sat in the front row for the argument, told reporters afterward that his state is ready to begin sports betting within two weeks if it prevails. The court will rule by June.

Wait, what, why June? It takes that long? I wonder how draft Kings will do after this decision.</comment>


Announcing Scala.js 0.6.12 - <AUTHOR> http://www.scala-js.org/news/2016/09/01/announcing-scalajs-0.6.12/ <comment><USER2> Is there any leading sponsor for Scala?

<comment><USER3> The Scala Center [1] is the leading not-for-profit sponsor for Scala. Lightbend [2] is the company maintaining the main compiler.

[1] [https://scala.epfl.ch/](https://scala.epfl.ch/) [2] [https://www.lightbend.com/](https://www.lightbend.com/)</comment></comment>


Unintended Consequences: The Printing Press and European Witch-Hunts (2009) - <AUTHOR> https://blogs.ubc.ca/etec540sept09/2009/10/31/unintended-consequences/ <comment><USER2> Scary. What if social media leads to that sort of mob behavior?

<comment><USER3> /s? Because this is already very much in progress around the world. Everywhere from the Rohingya massacre to the alt-right.

The last few paragraphs of the article hint pretty strongly at this:

> The witch-hunts do not directly affect literacy or education today, but > there is a lesson to be learned. Dewar (1998) warns us that many > developments have unintended consequences which often dominate the intended > ones. Although the Catholic Church may have seen the benefits of the > printing of intentions and the bible, it surely didn't see the unintended > consequence; that being the protestant reformation. The witch-hunts are > another example of unintended consequences. " If the future is to be > dominated by unintended consequences, it would be a good idea to get to > those consequences as quickly as possible….. or you will be overrun." (p. > 25) He goes on to say that if large institutions such as schools and > governments choose to deal with inappropriate use through bans and > firewalls, they may well find they have a reformation (or witch-hunt)on > their hands. One that may have results of which they have no control. It is > critical that we stay on top of these things and deal with them quickly in a > creative way- not by pretending they don't exist.

<comment><USER4> This is explicitly a call to reject creating and using technology as a filter to prevent the spread of bad information.

I thought that the liberal ideology had finally figured out the necessity of filters after the last election. Fact checking sites, auto-hiding of conspiracy theory videos, etc are all precisely the opposite of what the author calls for.

<comment><USER5> The thing is all of them can and have backfires. Fact-checkers often encounter the backfire effect from those who don't want to know the truth but validation. Filters have the Streissand Effect where the cover up validates that there is something to it because they fear it.

The last election has frankly lead to short sighted hysteria being exploited ruthlessly by vested interests Big Lying their nonsense.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Ah, 2009... where it was understood that bans and canceling were infeasible. The good old times and yes, it seems I am afraid of change now.</comment>


40 Vintage Computer Ads - <AUTHOR> http://www.hongkiat.com/blog/vintage-tech-ads/ <comment><USER2> Yikes.

That fourth photo, featuring the Seagate ST-4096 80MB full-height 5.25" drive?

 _I bought one of that exact model._

I could afford it only because my sister worked at Seagate at the time, and she had no use for her one-drive-per-year-at-cost employee perk.

God, I'm old.</comment>


The Sustainability Solution to the Fermi Paradox (2009) - <AUTHOR> http://arxiv.org/abs/0906.0568 <comment><USER2> TLDR

The Fermi Paradox (a.k.a. "Why hasn't some alien civilisation already visited us?") contains a hidden assumption that a space-faring civilisation will expand rapidly to fill the galaxy. But such expansionist civilisations are likely to collapse when they reach their limits and exhaust their resources.

So we should be looking for either small civilisations that have managed their growth, or the "graveyards" of civilisations that didn't manage their growth, reached their limits, and collapsed.

And the implications for humanity, with its own expansion and resource problems, are clear.

</comment><comment><USER3> Like near all potential solutions this fails on the "it only takes one" point.

The Fermi Paradox is better thought of as the Wilderness Paradox. Why is everything that we see natural, explained solely by the laws of physics?

It only takes one small faction within one advanced civilization to launch the self-replicating probes that will convert all matter in a galaxy into someone's paradise, be that computronium or habitats or whatever. Most likely computronium, given the economics that drive expansion. Even the stars will be dismantled once it is economically viable to use their matter in another way.

The point here is that this engineering won't look natural, even in its early stages, and it won't look natural from a very, very long way away. Yet everything we see looks natural, out to the nearest 100,000 galaxies, a simply preposterous span of stars and planets to argue that no small factions capable of doing this have arisen. Yet do we see the evidence of their existence? We do not.

[https://www.exratione.com/2015/05/the-cosmological- noocene/](https://www.exratione.com/2015/05/the-cosmological-noocene/)

Here is a sketch of the future, without any specific dates assigned to its milestones. The human mind is reverse engineered. It is run in software. A million variants and improvements are constructed. Molecular nanotechnology is established and becomes a mature industry, available to everyone. Anything and everything can be built efficiently given the raw materials and a spec. From an economic perspective those who thrive are those who make the most efficient use of the matter that they own, and those who gain control over the most matter: quality versus quantity shift back and forth in the degree of advantage as the ability to accurately and rapidly manipulate large masses of matter at the atomic level and lower grows. Matter is most economically efficient when incorporated as the workings of an intelligent entity. The end state here is a continuum of thinking matter, and there are countless arrangements by which matter might be made aware. Our evolved biology is among the least intricate and least capable of these possibilities. At the most efficient we might envisage space- and matter-efficient computational processors plus the necessary workings for support: communication, energy, repair, and so forth. The higher the fraction of that mix that can be devoted to data processing and transfer, the more economically effective the entities who use that system as a substrate.

Evolved intelligences are not rational actors in search of growth above all other goals. We have parks and entertainment industries, for example. There is no reason why constructed intelligences should be any different, but equally they have one important quality: they can change themselves and their progeny in defined ways to achieve defined outcomes in mental state. The alterations and experiments that provide economic advantages will prosper. Entities who choose to incorporate an urge to growth will become the majority. At some point the value of an asteroid, a moon, a planetary crust, or a star in its natural state falls below the value of the same matter dismantled and used as raw materials for computational processing. After that it is just a matter of time before this solar system, a wilderness at present, and a collection of parks in ages ahead, is transitioned into a more efficient arrangement of matter in which near every portion of the whole is intelligent. This change will propagate outward to other stellar systems, without end, driven by simple economic considerations. A sea of cultures of a complexity and scope beyond our imaginings, and our world today the tiniest mote of a seed, that could be emulated by the smallest discrete material unit of computational processing in that future substrate.

So it is less a matter of manifest destiny that we will convert our entire future light cone into intelligence, and more a matter of economic inevitability, the destination at the end of the random walk of choice simply because some classes of choice will be made more frequently than others. The outcome of human action writ large. All of this, however, indicates that there is something very important that we at present do not understand about the nature of reality. Nothing in our present situation as a species appears to be exceptional: stars are everywhere in vast numbers, planets also, and complex organic molecules are seen wherever we have the ability to observe them. Thus intelligence should arise elsewhere. The age of the universe is very long in comparison to the time taken for our spontaneous generation, yet we see no evidence that any other intelligence has come before us. This is often expressed as the Fermi Paradox, but is perhaps best thought of as the Wilderness Paradox, which is to ask why everything we observe, out to the very limits of the visible universe, is apparently natural and unaltered. Where are the signs of what we know is possible and inevitable for an intelligent evolved species, the conversion of matter to more efficient forms on a vast scale?

The only solid solution to the Fermi Paradox that does not require some new and presently missing piece of scientific understanding is the Simulation Argument: that we are in a box and walled off from the real world, whatever that might be, created by some demiurge for purposes guessable but ultimately unknowable through any action on our part. Prosaically that demiurge might be a descendant of a past humanity similar to ours, an entity that is running one of countless ancestor simulations for scientific reasons. Far less prosaic options are also possible, in which the demiurge is simulating from first principles a radically different cosmology from its own and thus its nature and motivations are inscrutable. These possibilities of the Simulation Argument are dissatisfying to explore, however, for all the same reasons as the brain in a jar thought experiment is a dead end. Best to assume it is not true, as it if is there is nothing useful you can do about it, individually or collectively. Pascal's wager turned inside-out.

It is more interesting to speculate on what it is that we don't understand at present about the nature of reality. There are numerous candidates, and most present thinking is directed towards those related to enforcing our rarity, often expressed as the Great Filter, one or more enormously unlikely steps that lie between the origin of a barren world scattered with a few organic compounds and the destination of an intelligent species engaged in repurposing of raw materials on a vast scale. All proposed Great Filters are very speculative; there is a great deal of room to argue about odds when you only have one example to work with, or events of the distant past must be reconstructed from theory, or future development of the species considered in detail rather than at a very high level, all which makes coming to any sort of rigorous conclusion next to impossible. All that is practical to achieve is to build the shape of the argument that would be sufficient if the actual numbers and proposed events in fact exist in reality. Given this uncertainty, any proposed Great Filter becomes an ever less satisfying answer the further we look outward and the more galaxies we see without any sign of massive engineering. It only serves to argue for our uniqueness, which is implausible given what we presently know and the isotropic nature of all other observed aspects of the natural universe across vast spans of distance and time.

Per our present understanding of physics and intelligent economic activity, we will turn every part of that great span into our descendants if not diverted or stopped by some outside influence, stars and all. The cosmological noocene, an ocean of intelligence. That the natural universe remains present to be used by us indicates that something is awry, however, that some vital and important understanding is missing, and as a species we are still just making the first fumbling explorations of the bounds of the possible with regards to what it is that we don't know.

<comment><USER4> > The only solid solution to the Fermi Paradox that does not require some new > and presently missing piece of scientific understanding

There's at least one more: somebody's gotta be first (in our light cone).</comment></comment>


Can someone explain to me patio11's Taco example? - <AUTHOR>

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5603403<p>"I don't think that was the takeaway I was going for. An accountant, told "Tell me where the money goes in a taco truck", would be able to do do a napkin sketch of that in under a minute. "Describe at least one business problem amenable to a software solution that a taco truck has" does not strike me as being terribly difficult. (Actually selling it to them in a scalable fashion? Much more difficult, but that's largely because they're a taco truck.)"<p>What did Patrick mean in this paragraph? If you were to ask me "come up with a software solution for at least one business problem that a taco truck might have", I couldn't give you an answer. How could someone look at a business, and just dream up some software solutions? <comment><USER2> Can I ask you which part of that you're having a problem with?

Can you identify a business problem a taco truck has? (I'm assuming taco trucks are something within your experience. If not, assume I said "the last restaurant you ate at") Even if you know nothing in particular about taco trucks, you can go the the reliable old standby that absolutely every business in the world feels its revenues could be higher and its costs could be lower.

Let's focus on revenue. Do you understand how a taco truck generates revenue? They sell tacos (and some other stuff), at a particular price. If they sell more tacos, holding price equal, their revenue goes up. (Take on faith that tacos are incredibly high margin and that selling more of them is a win, OK? I strongly believe this to be true for the typical taco truck. If you don't know what high margin even means, that's fine, because it doesn't change this analysis.)

So our problem is now "Sell more tacos, with software." Can you do that? If not, ignore the software bit -- can you dream up ways to sell more tacos? Can you just brainstorm twenty of them?

\+ Get more people to hear about our taco truck. \+ Always ask people "Would you like a second taco for the road?" \+ Sell tacos at a better location. \+ Sell tacos to companies in big batches, then anchor your retail business at the company's location for a day. \+ ...

Now look very hard at your list. Is one or more of those amenable to being implemented, in whole or in part, in software? I suspect the answer would be yes.

You don't have to be bitten by a radioactive spider to make businesses money, and it equally doesn't require superpowers to do that with software. If you absolutely, positively feel you can't do it, I strongly suggest working in industry for a year or three. Any industry will do. Applying technology to discrete problems is a learnable skill.

<comment><AUTHOR> Wow, now that I see you breaking it down like this, I can start to see how I can find business problems that I can potentially solve.

This is making me think why stop at software solutions? Why not just solve business problems in general, but use Ruby on Rails as a tool to solve them? Maybe some problems won't even need Ruby on Rails!

Another questions comes to mind: how would I sell a service with such unpredictable outcomes? If I sell software, then I can almost guarantee certain features. But if I were to promise "more customers" or "more sales", I wouldn't even be 100% sure myself if my methods will work. How would I market a service with an unpredictable success rate?

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> The Taco Truck gets one thinking about a concrete example and looking at its processes. Unlike a bank, any software solution for a Taco Truck is likely to be generalizable across a large range of businesses [whereas a bank might get one thinking about something as narrow as international wire transfers].

Look at the examples given in other comments - inventory, vehicle maintenance, planning - if a Taco Truck could use it, a lot of other businesses can too.

The danger is coming up with a Taco Truck specific payment handling solution rather than a generalized one. The Taco Truck Solution leads to an email feature implemented in a subset of Common Lisp. The generalized solution leads to Stripe and competing with PayPal.

</comment><comment><USER4> The company has several taco trucks they operate in the greater metro area. Each is run as a franchise, with the parent company as the main vendor of ingredients. They want a software program to track sales, inventory, locations of each truck at which time, providing a accounting and inventory management to each franchisee, without them seeing any other truck's information. The parent owner wants to see all of them, of course.

Managing the maintenance schedule on each truck would be a nice feature, also.

</comment><comment><USER5> The idea is that by observing people (and their businesses), you'll see choke points that software would solve. For a taco truck, maybe the owner is writing down quantities of ingredients (shells, salsa, meat, etc.) on a physical piece of paper. Once he's low, he calls up the supplier to order more.

A software solution might keep let him keep track of this on an iPad, and perhaps even integrate order forms (so he can order stuff immediately from the iPad).

</comment><comment><USER6> Actually talking to a taco truck owner >>>> Random Guessing about a domain you have little knowledge of.

But, what I think his point was, make a list of things that taco truck owners spend time/money on.

Marketing, food ingredients, labor, gas, deciding where to post up for the lunch rush, food prep time, etc.

Pick something out of the list that you have braninstormed, and drill down into how can software solve this problem for less money or in a positive ROI money for time tradeoff, than the current solution (I think in a lot of areas of industries, it will turn out, that you just can't).

</comment><comment><USER4> Taco truck has limited time, and many potential venues. They come to you and want to know how to best allocate their time. They have a dozen different venues they operate at regularly, which will change from time to time. They want a program into which they can enter the sales results of each venue along with the weather, date and time, and get back a schedule of venues to maximize their revenue.</comment>


Grouper Co-Founder Accused of Breaking Ethics Policies at Newsweek - <AUTHOR> http://www.betabeat.com/2011/09/27/jerry-guo-newsweek-grouper-fareed-zakaria/?show=all

<comment><USER2> Actually, the point of the piece is he didn't violate policy, Fareed Zakaria changed the rules.

But he did lie to the guy from Ignighter. Later, he apologized.

<comment><AUTHOR> Correction noted, my bad.

The relevant section:

 __Like many news organizations, Newsweek had a longstanding ethics policy that expressly forbid reporters from accepting flights, hotel accommodations and merchandise in exchange for coverage. But current and former Newsweek staffers who worked alongside Mr. Guo said that during his tenure at Newsweek International, Fareed Zakaria changed that policy, specifically for reporters working on The Good Life section.

"It just begs the question, why did Fareed implement these new rules?" said a current Newsweek employee who worked alongside Mr. Guo. "Nobody objected, because Jerry filed good copy. It seems crazy now, but he basically just played within the absurd rules of the time.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> I like how he states that he was a YC funded company...since they got an interview with YC and took the travel money $400 to invest in building up the company.</comment>


Show HN: CuriositY - <AUTHOR> https://shark.fish/curiosity/ <comment><USER2> Excellent, forces you to really think by yourself sometimes!

Some of the logic (starting at level 2) was similar to Ouverture Facile ([http://www.ouverture-facile.com/start/index.html](http://www.ouverture- facile.com/start/index.html) for the english version) which I encourage anyone to try if you like these riddles!

Looking for more!

</comment><comment><USER3> Made it all the way through! Really fun, please make more levels!

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks! I'm glad you liked it. Already working on new puzzles...

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> That was fun! Look forward to more...

PS: I went down a rabbit hole on @. Then I felt silly.

</comment><comment><USER5> I cheated on 11. What is the thing I was supposed to figure out?

<comment><AUTHOR> Here's a hint (SPOILER, obviously): [https://gist.github.com/sharkdp/47f62f3fe6870c51b510cc912960...](https://gist.github.com/sharkdp/47f62f3fe6870c51b510cc9129605b85)

<comment><USER5> Man, I'm just really bad at git.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I get to level 005, but was to lazy to do a script :P

<comment><USER7> What would be the logic of the script ? I didn't get it .. :/

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> I'm noob, what's level 2??

<comment><USER4> ++ is the increment operator from C-style languages.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> level007. I'm absolutely clueless.

<comment><USER9> Cheated. Tried to solve this for about 4 hours. Now I feel like a complete idiot... Still fun though! Waiting for new stuff!</comment></comment>


Ask HN: What are some unsolved problems in everyday computing? - <AUTHOR> <comment><AUTHOR> As an example, I think that 'securely send files from A to B' is mostly unsolved at this point for most people. (GPG is not an option)</comment>


$25 x86 Computer: Is It Worth It? - <AUTHOR> https://hackaday.com/2019/06/06/the-atomic-pi-is-it-worth-it/ <comment><USER2> This review seems oddly combative.

It's $35, it boots off the shelf Ubuntu, it has a real graphics chip, it does what it says it does. It doesn't have RF shields, and was probably designed cheaply, but it's $35.

Aside from the RasbperryPI (which obviously isn't x86) the review compares it to items which are 3x in price.

Admittedly, I assume that 3x price is probably closer to what the actual retail would be for this without the surplus angle. I think it being surplus is cool in a hacker kinda way, but I do see an issue there if you're concerned about longterm support.

<comment><USER3> The "review" is based on the author's skewed view of the world.

The AtomPi is basically a cheap SBC with standard hardware (off the shelf Debian etc. can run on it, or Win 10 with some limits). Cost is cheap.

The author seems to be complaining that the hardware doesn't match his expected profile of a Rpi killer type SBC...maybe he's upset about the deception around the kickstarter, dunno.

There's nothing wrong with the product for hardware hackers... sure, it's not something you can use if you want to maintain the ability to mass produce whatever you're designing... like about 0.01% of all Rpi users do.

Repurposing of computer hardware that was manufactured for another purpose and purchased surplus is not only environmentally sound, but it's a win for all parties.

There are repeated events in the last 30 years that show products like this gaining a cult following and selling out on Ebay just because they're a good value... like any of the set-top boxes that were loss leaders for subscription services, but got turned in to Linux boxes, robots, etc.

<comment><USER4> Manufacturing doesnt really use rpis i think? They'd want guarantees that the sbc remains in production and warranties and support and stuff. And emmc not sd card.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Ah, a very choice quote:

> I could very easily say this is the Silicon Valley ideal of repackaging > literal garbage and selling it as a groundbreaking disruption, but I don't > write for Slate or The Atlantic. No, the Atomic Pi is what you get when you > try to fill an existential void by buying stuff. The Atomic Pi fills a > market need for guys who think the ability to install Kali Linux constitutes > a personality.

</comment><comment><USER6> Given the popularity of single-board computers among hobbyist folk, I'm going to bet there will be more "repurposed industrial waste" SBC fiascos in the future.</comment>


Apple unveils iMessage, its BBM competitor, at WWDC - <AUTHOR> http://www.engadget.com/2011/06/06/apple-unveils-imessage-its-bbm-competitor-at-wwdc/ <comment><USER2> A smart move for Apple would be to make this available to BlackBerry too. With BB in the pipeline for other OS, I'm curious to see how RIM will respond. May it's time for a business model change...</comment>


Another flaw in Signal desktop app leaks chats in plaintext - <AUTHOR> https://thehackernews.com/2018/05/signal-desktop-hacking.html <comment><USER2> From the researcher who found it:

 _we were able to compile a list of strategic defense-in-depth recommendations for Signal Desktop which we've sent to the Signal security team per their request. At the end of the day there will always be new "hot" vulnerabilities, but the "vendor" response is generally what separates the wheat from the chaff. The Signal team's quick patch time along with a strong interest in mitigating vulnerabilities of this type in the future was encouraging to see. I'll remain a Signal user for the foreseeable future :)_

[https://thehackerblog.com/i-too-like-to-live-dangerously- acc...](https://thehackerblog.com/i-too-like-to-live-dangerously-accidentally- finding-rce-in-signal-desktop-via-html-injection-in-quoted-replies/)

</comment><comment><USER3> >Researchers—Iván Ariel Barrera Oro, Alfredo Ortega, Juliano Rizzo, and Matt Bryant—responsibly reported the vulnerability to Signal, and its developers have patched the vulnerability with the release of Signal desktop version 1.11.0 for Windows, macOS, and Linux users.

>However, The Hacker News has learned that Signal developers had already identified this issue as part of a comprehensive fix to the first vulnerability before the researchers found it and reported them.

>Signal app has an auto-update mechanism, so most users must have the update already installed. You can read this guide to ensure if you are running updated version of Signal.

Seems everything is patched, and was already going to be patched before the vuln was reported.

</comment><comment><USER4> Maybe secure chat clients shouldn't be written in JavaScript or other languages that have excessive dynamicness? Signal seems to be written mostly in languages that are bad for security (significantly worse than the best alternatives). Maybe I'm just a language nerd without any clue about the trade-offs, but I trust the Wire software more. Note that this just applies to mobile clients and server - Wire, like Signal, chose to build their desktop+webapp in JavaScript :(

<comment><USER5> As much as I'm not a fan of JavaScript, the problem is not so much the language but rather the choice of Electron and all that comes with it. Heck, even a web version or Chrome app would've successfully mitigated these attacks. Electron means you're one XSS away from remote code execution, and even worse, it makes it way harder to mitigate XSS through CSP (which Signal did utilize, but script-src 'self' can easily be bypassed in Electron).

FWIW, Signal's native mobile apps are written in Java and Objective-C respectively, so there's not really much of a difference compared to Wire (which is a good choice as well). Still, even a hypothetical React Native app written in JavaScript wouldn't be much worse; after all, React Native isn't just a Web View made to look like a native app, but uses actual native components.

<comment><USER6> While I agree that Electon offers a massive amount of footguns, neither Javascript nor Electon was the issue in this case. The issue was using innerHTML (or rather $.html()) with strings concatenated together from user input. Something you should never do. Could as well just call eval() directly on it, or pass the input to gcc, compile it and run the resulting binary.

The Signal devs thought $.html() does some kind of escaping: [https://github.com/signalapp/Signal- Desktop/commit/9d41b8616...](https://github.com/signalapp/Signal- Desktop/commit/9d41b8616296f1b328aa864e0114b99d7f11ca06) (this commit made something that was easy to exploit into something that was even easier to exploit).

To be honest, I'd lay more blame on the authors of the DOM spec making innerHTML a setter than on Electron, and jQuery exposing this misfeature even more with $.html(), teaching an army of web developers to do the wrong thing. We've all seen numerous (XSS) vulnerabilities in all kinds of websites, browser extensions, Electron apps, etc resulting from this API, tho in Electron apps it gets particularly devastating as often you'd get code execution not just in a sandboxed website but full code execution under the current user credentials in the system.

<comment><USER7> > The Signal devs thought $.html() does some kind of escaping: > [https://github.com/signalapp/Signal- > Desktop/commit/9d41b8616...](https://github.com/signalapp/Signal- > Desktop/commit/9d41b8616..). (this commit made something that was easy to > exploit into something that was even easier to exploit).

This is an absolutely egregious rookie error. I wouldn't touch the Signal desktop app with a 10 foot pole after seeing that commit.

<comment><USER8> Why is this a 404 now?

<comment><USER9> Looks like grrowl copied and repasted the truncated display text of the link. The full link is 2 comments up: [https://github.com/signalapp/Signal- Desktop/commit/9d41b8616...](https://github.com/signalapp/Signal- Desktop/commit/9d41b8616296f1b328aa864e0114b99d7f11ca06)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> In security less is more.

The more we try to make encryption mainstream, the more difficult it gets because the mainstream interacts with computers predominately via browsers. The mainstream won't adopt something that isn't highly similar to what a browser has to offer in terms of media richness (photos, videos, html), so you see Signal choosing technologies like Electron, a browser, to develop their native applications. The heart of what signal is and does well (encrypt, decrypt, authenticate) is dwarfed by a pile of code that was added to make signal usable by the mainstream. Desktop Signal, in terms of code and complexity, is no longer a security product -- it's an application with a web- like media experience that happens to tack on a very good library to do encryption and authentication.

As we all know, sometimes vulns are in broken crypto, but most of the time they're in a gotcha beneath a mountain of code.

<comment><USER11> In general less is more, with proper abstraction, not just in security.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> I don't know if this is exploitable, but they are using many different methods to escape HTML content:

[https://github.com/signalapp/Signal- Desktop/blob/d1f7f5ee8c1...](https://github.com/signalapp/Signal- Desktop/blob/d1f7f5ee8c1111c2b12a2870c64a830ca0f4fd04/components/mocha/mocha.js#L89)

Then here it's a different function:

[https://github.com/signalapp/Signal- Desktop/blob/d1f7f5ee8c1...](https://github.com/signalapp/Signal- Desktop/blob/d1f7f5ee8c1111c2b12a2870c64a830ca0f4fd04/components/mustache/mustache.js#L56)

Then sometimes they use the underscore library to do it:

[https://github.com/signalapp/Signal- Desktop/blob/d1f7f5ee8c1...](https://github.com/signalapp/Signal- Desktop/blob/d1f7f5ee8c1111c2b12a2870c64a830ca0f4fd04/components/backbone/backbone.js#L295)

Which their implementation seems to be using regular expressions as well.

<comment><USER13> The first one doesn't escape single quotes or slash, but I have no idea how to get any HTML parser to treat just those as anything but text. Underscore's implementation will be correct, I'm sure.

<comment><USER14> Slash doesn't need to be encoded. Only 5 characters that have special meaning have to be encoded (&, <, >, " and ').

<comment><USER13> Which raises the best question: how would you exploit someone not escaping single quotes? I do not know. Perhaps it isn't possible.

<comment><USER15> I think escaping quotes only matters for attributes (which can use ' or "). Example:

        <img src="$url">

Exploit:

        foo.jpg" onload="alert('pwned')

<comment><USER16> Heh, found the exact bug on a live bbcode parser some 5 years ago.

<comment><USER14> It was probably written using regexps? One should make full syntax analysis instead of writing regexp hacks.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Honestly, and none of you are going to like hearing this, and the Signal people aren't going to appreciate me saying it: if you're serious about messaging securely, don't use Signal Desktop; don't use desktop secure messengers at all. Desktop applications are incredibly risky, far more so than iOS mobile apps are.

<comment><USER18> > don't use desktop secure messengers at all. Desktop applications are > incredibly risky, far more so than iOS mobile apps are.

It's risky to use an open source OS. If you are serious about security, use Android or iOS. Instead of direct ssl connection to XMPP server, it's much safer to send all your data with Google Cloud Messaging. /s

Desktop computers are currently the most open sourced, least opaque, least spyware, non gps tracking, non "microphone always listening for 'ok google'" computer average person has. Why do you suggest that iphone is much more private device?

<comment><USER19> You have my upvote, but I imagine that tptacek means that iOS is very very well sandboxed, and has an extremely tight and well authenticated download and update system which is extremely difficult for a third party to monkey with.

This is security via centralization and trusting a benevolent capitalist dictator. As long as your personal interests are aligned with interests of the benevolent capitalist's shareholders, you should be fine.

It is my _least favorite security model_. But, in the case of iOS it seems to be working well (for now). My long-term hope is for a decentralized FOSS model, but for the time being, in the USA, on a multipurpose machine, the benevolent capitalist dictator beats it, especially on sandboxing and package/app authentication.

<comment><USER17> I like open source software as much as most people on HN, and have worked with it for most of my career. But help me understand how a decentralized FOSS model gets ordinary lawyers, reporters, and congressional campaign staffers the level of security that iOS does? What are the mechanisms that assure safety for users?

The closest I can come to seeing something like this work is a Chromebook, and Chromebooks are locked-down and get their security model from a central authority.

<comment><USER20> > What are the mechanisms that assure safety for users?

What are the mechanisms that assure safety for users of iOS? I understand that it's had a good track record so far, but the proprietary closed nature doesn't inherently inspire trust. Surely a decentralised FOSS model done right could be secure for lawyers &c.

<comment><USER21> As the old saying goes, "if you could have invented a secure open source desktop chat app, you would have developed a secure open source desktop chat app."

In practice, empirict results win over theoretically optimal designs.

<comment><USER20> And as the old saying continues, "...so instead you invented a proprietary one, with hidden code, and told everyone it's secure."

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> Wasn't this domain imitating the actual Hacker News banned years ago?

Plus, I think they violate rules because this is just blog spam.

The actual source of the story is: [https://ivan.barreraoro.com.ar/signal- desktop-html-tag-injec...](https://ivan.barreraoro.com.ar/signal-desktop-html- tag-injection-variant-2/)

<comment><USER23> I don't see anything imitating this website.. other than a technology based news feed and a similarly used name.

I used to browse a website called "hacker news" back in the late 90s / early 2000s, but I wouldn't go as far as to call News YC a copy of that.

<comment><USER22> I was referring to the fact of imitating the HN brand by capitalizing on the domain name so they could scoop up all the traffic and SEO love. That's why the domain was banned to begin with a few years back. There was a whole discussion about it.

<comment><USER23> The site that I was referring to was literally hackernews.com, and was very popular among the tech crowd from the late 90s onward. (long before YC was conceived)

ALmost 20 years ago, I used to rotate between hacker news, fark, and slashdot to get my daily dose of internet.

[https://web.archive.org/web/*/hackernews.com](https://web.archive.org/web/*/hackernews.com)

One would be perfectly justified in also trying to claim that the name here was stolen from the original.

.. but sometimes, just because things share a common name, does not necessarily mean they are related.

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

<comment><USER22> Not that one. That's owned by Space Rogue. I'm talking about the one linked now, owned by some Indians who keep copying articles off other sites. There was a reason this got banned years ago. At one point you could trace articles from The Register and Motherboard paragraph by paragraph to their stories, but with bad grammar and bad sentence structure.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> On their Android app, first thing it makes you do is give them permission to read your SMSs. It wont let you vefiry by entering a code. I immediately uninstalled - doesn't seem like a privacy focussed organisation to me.

<comment><USER25> That sounds absolutely horrendous. Even Whatsapp allows you to verify using a fixed line and claim that number on the mobile for privacy.

Coupled with the recent LocationSmart revelations, it would make Signal unusable for those who wish to keep their location private. You absolutely need to provide the mobile number of the actual terminal being used.

<comment><USER26> Not true. I have Signal running in an iPod Touch.

I needed to give them a phone number I could read SMS from to set it up, but there's no need for that to be "the mobile number of the actual terminal being used".

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> What is this website?

"The Hacker News"? And no actual relation to HN? This website doesn't even have an about page...

<comment><USER28> This is BLASPHEMY!!

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> From TFA:

"...the new vulnerability (CVE-2018-11101) exists in a different function that handles the validation of quoted messages, i.e., quoting a previous message in a reply.

"In other words, to exploit the newly patched bug on vulnerable versions of Signal desktop app, all an attacker needs to do is send a malicious HTML/javascript code as a message to the victim, and then quote/reply to that same message with any random text.

"If the victim receives this quoted message containing the malicious payload on its vulnerable Signal desktop app, it will automatically execute the payload, without requiring any user interaction."

Is it the case that you don't even need to have the attacker's number in your contacts list?

<comment><USER30> No, that's incorrect. You have to have someone's number to send a message to them.

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> This news saddens me. I've been the last user of the Signal desktop app around me and it looks like I have been too optimistic about Electron. I've now deleted any Electron app and recommend everyone to do the same.

</comment><comment><USER32> It's mind boggling why messaging app has 181 MB.

<comment><USER33> I'm really starting to get tired of all these bloated JavaScript desktop apps. I get that it's more convenient for developing cross-platform apps with modern looking UIs, but I really wish there would be an increased focus on reducing the overall bloat and resource use, both among app and framework devs.

Speaking as a Windows user, I would vastly prefer a well-designed native application (WinForms/WPF) over a JS monstrosity any day.

</comment></comment><comment><USER34> Is there a native Signal client that isn't an Electron abomination?

It is clear at the point the Signal desktop people has no idea what they are doing and cannot be trusted to write a secure desktop application.

<comment><USER35> Nope. But you can try Threema or Wire. They're both pretty good.

</comment></comment><comment><USER36> Pretty mindblowing that Signal allows things like `dangerouslySetInnerHTML` in any of their apps. A simple linter would have caught this.

<comment><USER37> With such an obviously "DON'T USE THIS" method name as dangerouslySetInnerHtml, I'd expect that we'd see something like // eslint- disable-next-line above it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER38> Interesting, more or less, nothing is 100% secure. Looks like DEA had cracked the whatever crypto Blacberry was using and quite a few drug dealers were caught that way (one example: [https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-deas-dirty- cop-who-tipped-...](https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-deas-dirty-cop-who- tipped-off-a-cartel) ). They must have been using because of the reputation BB had. I wonder what will we find out in time about the narcos, terrorists etc using Signal.

</comment><comment><USER39> Someone invited me to use signal. I thought "It's a trap!"

<comment><USER39> It's a pun on inter-process communication signals and traps in UNIX.

[https://www.tutorialspoint.com/unix/unix-signals- traps.htm](https://www.tutorialspoint.com/unix/unix-signals-traps.htm)

</comment></comment><comment><USER40> Is the chrome extension also vulnerable to this?

<comment><USER41> No, it is not.

</comment></comment><comment><USER42> Anyone else have an aesthetic feeling for this? Signal desktop _felt_ clunky to such a degree that takes away from trust that Telegram feels equally secure - even though it is not.

</comment><comment><USER43> Why is this flagged?

<comment><USER44> Same question.

Also, is there somewhere where we can see why a thread is flagged ?

<comment><USER43> Unfortunately there's no way to know why users flag something, but that brings up an interesting idea: in order to flag something require the user types out a reason, and if an article is flagged it could show why people flagged it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER45> When will people start using plain old PGP — a tool that does one thing only, and does it right? Sure, it's a little harder than using just one tool that handles contacts, communication, formatting, and encryption, while making popcorn and walking the dog, but it works, and it's secure if you use it right.

Our efforts to make encryption easy are going to get someone killed.

<comment><USER46> literally this week

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17064129](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17064129)

<comment><USER47> The PGP vulnerability is actually in e-mail clients, and it affects almost nobody. And how often do PGP vulnerabilities happen?

Signal got two vulnerabilities that affect everyone _JUST THIS WEEK_.

<comment><USER17> By "almost nobody", you mean everyone who used Apple Mail/GPGTools and Thunderbird/Enigma, meaning, the vast majority of everybody who used PGP?

<comment><USER47> Thunderbird does not download remote content by default.

I don't know anybody who is using Apple Mail with GPG, but if there are such people, they have been doing it very wrong regardless of this vulnerability. It's an unsafe combination.

I have no statistics on what people use PGP with, but asserting that most people use it with Apple Mail and Thunderbird is baseless and without proof.

<comment><USER5> > Thunderbird does not download remote content by default.

The researchers behind EFAIL found a number of ways to bypass the remote content setting. Not only that, but Hanno Böck found another one today[1] that hasn't been fixed yet.

[1]: [https://twitter.com/hanno/status/997138771194859521](https://twitter.com/hanno/status/997138771194859521)</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Ask PG: Leader board ranked my comment karma - <AUTHOR>

I think comment karma is a much more accurate way of representing the quality of contributions a particular user makes. And I don't think factoring in submission karma really adds any significant value to assessing that quality. A lot more thought is put into sparking interesting conversation than submitting an interesting article, but often times, the karma doesn't quite reflect that, as submissions can get voted up to relatively high amounts, making any comment karma gain seem insignificant, and recognizing/rewarding users inaccurately.<p>So, an alternate leader board would be appreciated. <comment><USER2> I recently wrote something that displays a list of the users with the top average comment scores. I could make that visible.

<comment><USER3> <http://top.searchyc.com/points_per_comment>

Your list may be better if it is bigger or if it lists only the users who have made more than a certain number of comments.

<comment><USER4> Great site: <http://top.searchyc.com/>

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> i tend to agree, but i'm probably biased. i submit maybe one thing every two months -- all my karma is from comments. i'd love to see what a leaderboard looks like without submission karma. and a leaderboard of just submission karma.

</comment><comment><USER6> To the extent that karma is an incentive at all, I'd rather have it encourage more high-quality submissions than more high-quality comments. (I'm reasonably happy with the level of discussion in the comments, but there aren't as many interesting submissions as I want.)

<comment><USER7> I would guess that the supply of high-quality submissions is fairly inelastic compared to the supply of high-quality comments; i.e., there are enough people submitting articles that the good ones will likely get submitted either way, while the same may not be true for comments.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> I agree that the karma points derived from article posting is essentially a lot of nonsense. I remember once finding an article on slashdot in the middle of the night about java being rumored to be open sourced before it actually happened. I quickly posted it to reddit since I had not already seen the article there, and within the next day I obtained about 80 karma points from posting that one article. The news article would have ended up on reddit regardless of if I posted it, but because I was lucky enough to see the article first among reddit readers, I got a lot of karma points.

I doubt that anyone has ever gotten 80 karma points from writing a single comment, but it is difficult to use comments alone as a ranking system since there are a lot of people who just read articles and will ignore any additional commentary.

</comment><comment><USER9> I am not sure why anyone thinks this is important. You can't turn karma points into investments in your start-up - it's just stuff.

</comment><comment><USER10> I agree in theory, but in reality it would probably be divisive and not worth it. I think it's better just to accept having a lower place on the leader board than you would have otherwise.

(And also, users who self-submit their own blog posts do deserve the karma.)

<comment><AUTHOR> Oh, this isn't about my place on the leader board. Admittedly, most of my points have come from submissions, so I'd have a pretty low spot on the list.</comment></comment>


Will mobile developers survive 2012 or will the web finally take over? - <AUTHOR> http://text.krona.tm/

<comment><USER2> Great article!

I personally think web apps will soon take over (this may be bias as I'm a web developer), but as mentioned above it easier to develop in HTML5...yes there stuff we can't do that native apps can but only a matter of time till we can I suspect.

As for Apple I could see them push a web app store where they still check the code before they get placed in the store.

The Only thing I'm not sure about is how will Paid apps work? I guess this model would need to change!</comment>


DataHand - <AUTHOR> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DataHand <comment><USER2> I currently own a pair of DataHands I found on eBay. They are pretty unique items, and start quite a few conversations, but I don't find them very practical -- probably because I don't experience extreme RSI pain that necessitates their use.

They are quite large. For instance, I could not bring them to a coffee shop (for more reasons than this) because the smallish tables wouldn't be able to accommodate my 15" mbp + the DataHands.

The build quality feel a bit lacking. These guys don't have the build quality of, say, an iPhone -- and for a $1,500 keyboard (retail), I would have expected a bit more.

Its a bit strange to move some of the lesser used fingers in certain directions without hitting other keys. I'm sure this could be fixed with a little practice, but moving my ring finger without moving my pinky and hitting another key was/is tough.

Overall, they are unique and interesting to have on a desk and pretend I use them. But if unless you have serious RSI and these are your last resort, I would probably recommend another ergonomic keyboard.

<comment><USER3> I have a pair in mint condition in a box somewhere. I found the holes for the fingers to be way too big and after trying it a bit never got used to it.

I wonder what it would be worth these days if I bothered to put it up on eBay, I bought it used for $280 at the time.

<comment><USER4> I sold a pair in good condition for ~$1500 (~$1300 in pocket) on eBay a couple weeks ago.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> You may be interested in knowing that someone is working on rebuilding the DataHand, you can follow his progress here:

[http://geekhack.org/index.php?topic=41422.0](http://geekhack.org/index.php?topic=41422.0)

Another interesting project to follow is the Nexus keyboard : [http://geekhack.org/index.php?topic=44940.0](http://geekhack.org/index.php?topic=44940.0)

<comment><USER6> Most of these keyboards based on the ErgoDox (and the ErgoDox itself) make the mistake of considering that the thumb is a finger positioned like the others. And the keys you're supposed to hit with your thumbs are just placed in a crazy way (totally non-ergonomic IMHO).

To me one of the rare person who really "got it" is "Jesse" (he's both here, on GeekHack and on Deskthority) with its "butterfly" keyboard.

That's one of the only split (and ergonomic) keyboard that takes into account the fact that the thumb's opposition-apposition makes it unlike any other finger.

Look at his "butterfy" keyboard here and how smartly the keys you're to hit with the thumbs are positionned:

[http://blog.fsck.com/2013/12/better-and-better- keyboards.htm...](http://blog.fsck.com/2013/12/better-and-better- keyboards.html)

<comment><USER7> As an owner of the ergodox, I appreciate the efforts and iteration here. Sadly, the ergonomics of most non-split keyboards are hardcoded to a magic number. With the ergodox, I currently have the halves about a foot apart and really enjoy typing that way. (I have also "tented" the halves in the past).

I agree that the ergodox is not perfect and the thumb clusters could be improved, I'm just not sold that the butterfly does that.

Here's an old post with my initial impressions of the ergodox [0]. I need to add an update, but I have since purchased a second unit for home and have been typing with the "Norman" layout since day 2.

(BTW, massdrop currently has the keyboard up for sale, but you need to act fast as there is only a day or so left)

0 - [http://hairysun.com/blog/2013/04/02/oh-ergonomic- keyboard/](http://hairysun.com/blog/2013/04/02/oh-ergonomic-keyboard/)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Years ago (early 80's) one of my Dad's buddies was a dealer for the Writehander.

[http://research.microsoft.com/en- us/um/people/bibuxton/buxto...](http://research.microsoft.com/en- us/um/people/bibuxton/buxtoncollection/detail.aspx?id=6)

It never really took off, but at the time, it was super cool.

Edit: some more links on chord keyboards:

[http://www.billbuxton.com/input06.ChordKeyboards.pdf](http://www.billbuxton.com/input06.ChordKeyboards.pdf)

[http://www.dougengelbart.org/pubs/augment-14851.html](http://www.dougengelbart.org/pubs/augment-14851.html)

<comment><USER9> I've been looking for this link for weeks: [http://research.microsoft.com/en- us/um/people/bibuxton/buxto...](http://research.microsoft.com/en- us/um/people/bibuxton/buxtoncollection/default.aspx)! Thank you!

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> My experiences with RSI leave me sceptical on these types of approaches which focus solely on minimizing hand and arm movement. E.g. hunt and peck typists are less prone to small tissue RSI because they make large movements using their stronger forearm muscles.

The injuries I experienced were due to holding tension in the shoulders and back (due to working while tired, altered posture while caffeinated and the self-directed stress of trying to get some work done).

Technical fixes like this might provide relief for a while but I think they miss the core problem, which imo boils down to your body not being relaxed while you work.

<comment><USER11> I went through a period where I spent thousands of dollars on ergonomic keyboards and chairs.

I bought the Datahand and used it for a good two weeks. The mouse cursor can only be controlled up/down , left/right with it. With too much graphical work, that cut my use of it short.

Several years later I started a strength training program, and within a few weeks my RSI vanished. At its worst, my arms would be numb when I woke up, I had sustained numbness in one hand for weeks, at one point I couldn't physically hold a mouse more than 15 minutes. It took a quick Google Image search to know I would never do a carpel tunnel release surgery.

After adding up the workout time spent, it was about 4 hours of strength training (no weights or gripping) that ended 5 years of debilitating wrist pain. From what I've been able to tell many years later, it was all from doing pushups -- which likely has everything to do with shoulder and back muscles. That ironic thing was, because the pain was in my wrists and arms, I thought doing pushups would cause too much pain so I had stopped doing them.

Now instead of ergonomics I think of how to be more active while and between working.

<comment><USER12> For two more anecdotes, my coworker and I have had similar experiences. My RSI isn't entirely gone, but I had to take a long break from pushups because of an injury. I'm able to start doing them again so I should get to it, because I had a significant reduction in symptoms after only a week or so of pushups.

This site might seem a little spammy, but its methodology for figuring out how many to start with and at what rate to increase the # of pushups was a big help for me. I started at about 3 pushups and even after a long break due to the injury I can do 15, which is saying a lot since I am completely out of shape!

<comment><USER13> Think you forgot to include the URL?

<comment><USER12> Wow, sorry! [http://hundredpushups.com](http://hundredpushups.com)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> There is an open source stenography project called "Plover". The idea of stenotype is instead of typing individual letters one combines keys to form sillables (or commands), what makes typing blazingly fast (240 WPM in the video below) and is overall a less cramped movement, because after each sillable you can relax instead of keeping muscles tensed for each letter.

[http://plover.stenoknight.com/](http://plover.stenoknight.com/)

Talk: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wpv-Qb- dB6g](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wpv-Qb-dB6g)

Demo: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bAyIMnTqGB8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bAyIMnTqGB8)

<comment><USER15> Has anyone had any experience trying to use this for programming? My feeling when I looked into it a while back was that it's heavily optimized for typing English, and that it might not be suitable for programming without some heavy modifications.

Even if it's not good for coding then I might be tempted to learn it anyway, but now speech-to-text is starting to get good enough that I'm questioning whether it'd be worth the time investment (at least for me personally).

<comment><USER16> I hope to use it for programming in forth sometime soon. Forth is ideal for steno because it is word based and unstructured.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> IIRC, DataHands are super expensive and have a high learning curve. Anyone looking to upgrade should consider a Kenesis, wait for Mark 13: [http://launch.keyboard.io/](http://launch.keyboard.io/)

That said, I toggle between chiclets and a kenesis.

<comment><USER18> There is also the Ergodox... but I think its expensive and you have to do it yourself. But boy it is beautiful.

<comment><USER19> I thought about an Ergodox; I don't mind soldering, but I decided against it anyway, because to me it looks like it's a bit short on the "ergo" \-- it will help with the need to rotate the wrists outward, but they still have to rotate out of the neutral position in order to address keys on a flat keyboard, which makes the Ergodox look to me rather like a Kinesis Advantage without the Advantage.

<comment><USER20> It's not too difficult to add tenting to the Ergodox; just replace some of the screws with a longer variety so they act as legs. Also some of the Kinesis Freestyle tenting accessories have been adapted to the Ergodox to address these issues. It's a really hackable design, which is the main draw.

<comment><USER21> I would add that the flatness is only a problem with the kits sold through Massdrop, which use the laser-cut acrylic case. The original source files for the Ergodox include a model for a case which can be made on a 3D printer. That model does include some minor tenting.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> Definitely a fascinating piece of data entry history. A friend of mine got one in the late 90s; to avert an onset of repetitive stress injury. He was blazing fast with it; I never saw him do a wpm test, but he could put a line of text on the screen in a couple of seconds.

</comment><comment><USER23> Did you guys see the movie Ender's Game? He was typing on a touch screen by doing little swipes with his fingers. I would imagine that it functioned like this DataHand one, but virtually.

Found something on GitHub: [https://github.com/henrahmagix/enders- keyboard](https://github.com/henrahmagix/enders-keyboard)

</comment><comment><USER24> I had one of these, it wasn't very hard to learn - the movements were very similar to querty. I started getting RSI and this helped a lot.

Now I learnt a bit about typing skills and ergonomics I am fine on a regular keyboard, but I would have kept on with the datahands if not for its massive lack of practicality.

Basic typing was great, but using it on a mac for programming was not so great - all the modifier keys were wrong, and the PS2-USB connection was flaky. Not to mention carrying it around with a laptop was basically impossible without a dedicated case...

</comment><comment><USER25> I feel like there's been little adoption of innovative changes to HCI in terms of software development. Most engineers I know still use the same old keyboard/mouse/monitor. I am curious if there will ever be a time when software development resembles something like football.

<comment><USER19> How do you imagine software development resembling something like football? I'm honestly curious; that statement gives the impression of considerable thought having gone into it, but I can't for the life of me imagine what sort.

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> See also [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chorded_keyboard](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chorded_keyboard)

<comment><USER27> Speaking of which, there's finally going to be a Bluetooth-enabled version of the Twiddler, the Twiddler3: [https://plus.google.com/105804767481830727070/posts/j4M9fmRr...](https://plus.google.com/105804767481830727070/posts/j4M9fmRr8dY) . The best smartphone/tablet keyboard yet?

<comment><USER28> Oh wow. You've just made my week. Thanks!

<comment><USER27> Spread the word! :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> I can see how it might be useful... but the learning curve has to be immense. There's video of it here: [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_rzFqEqzhmA](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_rzFqEqzhmA)

</comment><comment><USER30> DataHand was customer of mine way back in the day here in Phoenix. They actually gave someone on my staff an early version of the product and after a VERY steep learning curve he was able to increase his wpm from 90 -> 110.

</comment><comment><USER31> I kind of wish for something opposite, not a tool to minimize my physical movements, but to actually make me move more. I'm not talking about a computer on a treadmill. But, for example, if, say I'm moving something from one virtual place to another (copying files, etc), I would like to be moving something physically as well, I feel like that would get me more connected to what I am doing. The same reason it is much more pleasant and less distracting(to me anyway) to read a physical book that I'm holding, rather than something on the screen.

I have no concrete suggestions though.

<comment><USER22> Something like the leapmotion? [https://www.leapmotion.com/](https://www.leapmotion.com/)

<comment><USER32> From the reviews that I've read, it isn't quite ready. Has anyone integrated one into their development process?

<comment><USER20> The Leapmotion is designed for analog input. Typical software development is nearly all digital input: hitting keys and such, which is something that you have to sacrifice in a system like the Leapmotion or a multitouch surface. I could see it being a lot more useful for games or graphic design.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> It looks like to use this input device you would have to do quite some wiggling of individual fingers sideways, without moving the other fingers on your hand, and that motion just feels terribly awkward to me - e.g. on a normal keyboard, if I move my right index finger to the left to press H, the other 3 move left as well; I can't just move one finger left/right.

</comment><comment><USER34> Unfortunately, I think slower then I type.</comment>


San Francisco's independent retailers disrupt themselves to survive - <AUTHOR> http://pando.com/2015/05/22/san-franciscos-independent-retailers-disrupt-themselves-to-survive/

<comment><AUTHOR> An ironic bummer for sure. Seems like a lot of opportunity there though.</comment>


Ask HN: PHP or Ruby on Rails - <AUTHOR>

Hello,
I want to know, with which language is easy to develop a web project ?
Best Regards, <comment><USER3> [http://www.tiobe.com/index.php/content/paperinfo/tpci/index....](http://www.tiobe.com/index.php/content/paperinfo/tpci/index.html) i would mostly agree with this chart. ruby is on the roll, but i do not think it will catch up with php any time soon. php has many great frameworks like:

<http://kohanaframework.org/>

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

<http://symfony-reloaded.org/>

<http://fatfree.sourceforge.net/>

and language is evolving in decent steps, has A LOT components, extensions, libraries. its easy to find solutions for your problems in search engines, or community. i like ruby too, but sorry, i will be going probably for python/golang/(maybe even java) soon (i dont like front end stuff). ruby is just too young to become something more serious in web development, and other languages are catching good ideas from ruby fast... you should define your goals more precisely and choose where you will go next

<comment><USER4> Wow, I just spent an hour reading the fatfree documentation, after skimming the docs and rejecting the first three you mentioned. I really want to try fatfree now. Thanks for posting those links.

Damn debian! Time to compile PHP from source, so I can get the rev 5.3 that fatfree needs.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> The common story is that PHP is easier for a very basic app but that rails is easier for anything beyond that.

My opinion: Why choose? Try both, write a simple app in both and follow a tutorial or two. Decide which one you like best. Which was easiest to find documentation? Which community was more helpful to you?

I'd also recommend checking out Sinatra, since it's sort of in between the two other frameworks you mention. It does more than PHP and less than Rails, but is (I think) far simpler than either one.

<comment><USER6> I agree. I think you have to try both in order to know whether you made the right decision. I started off learning PHP in the beginning, then switched to Ruby on Rails. Of the languages I've learnt so far, Ruby is by far the most fluid. It's a beautiful language. Rails allows you to do many things really quickly as well, and at the time that I switched, PHP was still lagging behind in frameworks. I haven't hopped back into PHP, so I'm not sure where they are now, but I haven't looked back since going onto Rails.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> PHP hosting is easier to find. Competent and secure PHP hosting is hard to find. Most PHP hosts run with all the compatibility options on to support their existing customers who were too cheap to get their sites done right. PHP is easier to start with, but more complex to grow in the right direction. PHP is ridiculously inconsistent and frustrating ([1]). If you get stuck, PHP coding help is easier to find... but it's useless 95% of the time as people give the same old wrong answers. Lower barrier to entry - more clueless "coders" on the forums sharing their (lack of) knowledge. Following from last point, "coders" like that mean you can get more consulting gigs fixing their crap.

Personally, I stick to PHP for new projects because it's what I know - <USER2> RoR out would have to be a spare-time endeavor, and I already have tons of stuff I like to do in my spare time. If I had no prior experience, I'd probably pick RoR though.

[1] ignoring the old tired rant about function naming: object->badproperty just causes a notice and carries on, object->badfunction() crashes with a fatal error, null->property, null[property] and 1 + undefined are also just notices... basically you want an error handler that turns _anything_ into a fatal error, but then you can't co-op with any older code as even older "frameworks" such as Joomla are full of that crap.

</comment><comment><USER8> Try both (Ruby,PHP). Find out about frameworks in php (cakephp, codeigniter) and in ruby (sinatra, rails, etc) And not just read the docs and say "i dont want this thing". Try this: develop a user login and signup system in both. see which one is easier.

Quick facts: 1.) It's easier to find php hosting for cheap. low cost to get started.

2.) It's easier to develop a prototype in Rails quickly, especially if your app has some CRUD stuff, you can get it up and running in no time, but this interface would just be for testing. Its called scaffolding.

3.) You can do the same scaffolding in php frameworks like cakephp.

4.) With ruby you get a lot of well-built libraries which are called "gems". they are handy and are centralized, so you can update to a new version easily.

5.) With php you can get a lot of cheap man power to work on you app if it requires some complex plugins.

6.) If you are going to use ruby, I suggest getting familiar with linux commands. That way you can find cheap vps to host the app (but not as cheap as the php hosts you'll find). Or develop it on heroku's free plan.

7.) Now that you know these, go develop the app on whichever language you find easy.

P.S: If you are seriously out of money, and can spend only in single digits ($x), you should seriously consider doing the app in php. The same applies if the app is too simple

</comment><comment><USER9> I would suggest Ruby. I found php easier to learn, but it was so easy to write bad code in it. Ruby on the other hand forces you to follow solid design patterns.

Also on a side note, ROR is a framework for Ruby, so you cant compare it with PHP. There are some really good PHP frameworks out there too (Symfony, CakePHP, Codeigniter) but they essentially try to imitate ROR and bring those design paradigms to php.

</comment><comment><USER10> This is an interesting question. Are there any credible web resources that compare and contrast the web development framework? I think there are main variables involved are :

1\. Accessibility to good developers

2\. Hosting options

3\. Scalability

4\. Tools Support for Building and Testing

5\. Documentation and Developer Community

6\. Security

7\. (something i missed?)

Could some one help the guy by comparing the two according to these factors or point to some credible study?

</comment><comment><USER11> Keep in mind it will be easier to hire PHP dev's than ruby developers. If you find a good ruby dev you will have to pay $$$$.

<comment><USER12> Why do you think that is? I would suspect it's not because people are locked into huge legacy Ruby codebases.

If Ruby devs are paid more, it's probably because they're more productive. Now, I'm not a Ruby fanboy, and people can be very productive in many other languages. I think in general paying someone far less to write a codebase in PHP may be penny-wise but pound-foolish.

PHP is, in my opinion and that of many others, a very poor language that encourages poor coding practices. It's possible to write good code in PHP and poor code using Django/Rails but I think there's a strong correlation between the tools used and results produced.

<comment><USER11> PHP vs ruby is not like going from java to ruby. You may see productivity gains. However, PHP is so well established you may even save time by taking advantage of all the open source code written. PHP has done wonders for the devs at facebook and digg. I feel the need for "nerd cred" is too high these days. Using older tech that has a proven track record is still a good idea. Your start-up may not be the cool kid on the block but once you're making money nobody cares. I do use python and django myself and LOVE IT! Can add that to your list?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> If you're only starting out, I would be less concerned about the technical pros/cons and figure out which ever is easier for YOU to pick up.

Check into whatever your nicest techy friends are using.

After all, if you run into any problems, they'll be ones you'll reach out to for help.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Thank you for all you comments / suggestion . Thanks again</comment>


Software Engineering vs Computer Science - <AUTHOR>

I am an aspiring Software Engineering(MS) student. I want to know the difference between a software engineering graduate and Computer Science graduate ? What is the role of an SE and what is the role of CS? which among the both have better job opportunities ? or do they both weight the same? what are the jobs that both of the above are likely to get? as SE will I be able to enter the realm that a CS student does? And can a SE apply for a job where it says "B.S., M.S., or Ph.D. in Computer Science or equivalent,"? Thanks <comment><USER2> [http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_difference_between_com...](http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_difference_between_computer_science_and_software_engineering)

[http://www.cse.concordia.ca/prospectivestudents/softwareengi...](http://www.cse.concordia.ca/prospectivestudents/softwareengineeringvscomputerscience/)

Please realize that it depends what university you go to and how the courses are taught.</comment>


LG Display Reveals News-Worthy, Flexible E-Paper - <AUTHOR> http://www.digitaltrends.com/international/lg-display-reveals-news-worthy-flexible-e-paper/ <comment><USER2> Is a large, bendy sheet really the _best_ way to read news? Or is it just an relic of choices made by printed newspapers to minimize costs?

</comment><comment><USER3> I love that whoever wrote this used the word 'bendiness' in a serious article. 'Flexibility' anyone?

</comment><comment><USER4> So you can bend it, but can you crease it?

</comment><comment><USER5> Who ever doubted we would get better and better displays over time? The exciting thing would be to get to know some of those damn user-ready products...</comment>


Ubuntu Linux and Wayland Display Server: Status Update - <AUTHOR> http://www.thevarguy.com/2011/09/20/canonical-supports-wayland-display-server-but-where-is-it/ <comment><USER2> _So far, though, Wayland currently can't do much more than this: (video)_

What the hell was that? We've been seeing much more impressive videos than that since last year...

e.g. <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9R3n7W_wfzM> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rD9T03qsFuo> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b7RxuxlXFQQ>

</comment><comment><USER3> Does it support X forwarding? That's a deal-breaker for me.

<comment><USER4> There are projects for running an X server on top of wayland either as a client (like Xnest) or as a rootless server (more like X on Quartz on OSX). Both of those should allow for X forwarding, there's also been a number of projects for doing something more native to wayland but i'm not sure if they've gained any traction.</comment></comment>


Introducing the p0f BPF compiler - <AUTHOR> https://blog.cloudflare.com/introducing-the-p0f-bpf-compiler/ <comment><USER2> This is kind of scary [http://lcamtuf.coredump.cx/p0f3/](http://lcamtuf.coredump.cx/p0f3/)

</comment><comment><USER3> I hope people are cautious when using p0f. When accessing it on my iPhone 6 from my cell network (not Wi-Fi) in Chrome, it reports the following:

        Detected OS = Linux 3.x [generic]
        HTTP client = unknown
        Network link = Ethernet or modem
        Distance = 11
        Language = English
        Uptime = 36 days 18 hrs 26 min (modulo 198 days)
        WARNING: Inconsistent fingerprints, probably indicative of
        IP sharing or proxyingNote: looks like you're hitting this
        page through a proxy (your Via header is set). This
        affects the apparent identity of your system on TCP/IP
        level.

Perhaps my cell network is acting via proxy (wouldn't surprise me), but your average user won't know this. If you're going to filter or identify traffic based on p0f, be careful to not negatively impact honest users who might be misidentified (either because p0f got the fingerprint wrong or because there's some proxy in the middle).

</comment><comment><USER4> My first thought reading this was "lcamtuf works at cloudflare now?" Nope, cloudflare just took an awesome tool of his and made the kernel able to filter packets based on its signatures using bpf. Pretty cool.

</comment><comment><USER5> It'd be nice to know what if any false indications this triggers. "we want to ratelimit" \-- so is there any pathological behavior wrt the legit traffic (especially with ever-more-cleverly-reducing-round-trip protocols like QUIC)?

<comment><USER6> The pessimistic case is when the attack signature matches exactly the signature of real operating system. For example, if the attack resembles Linux, with the p0f-to-BPF you can generate a BPF that matches Linux SYN packets. This allows you to block these packets, and this of course can affect traffic from Linux machines.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> So it's a much more complicated and brittle version of the OS detection built into OpenBSD's pf (via p0f signatures) a decade ago?

        block in proto tcp from any os Windows

[http://man.openbsd.org/OpenBSD- current/man5/pf.conf.5#OPERAT...](http://man.openbsd.org/OpenBSD- current/man5/pf.conf.5#OPERATING_SYSTEM_FINGERPRINTING)

[http://man.openbsd.org/OpenBSD- current/man5/pf.os.5](http://man.openbsd.org/OpenBSD-current/man5/pf.os.5)

<comment><USER6> Absolutely! (almost) everything in computer science can be summed up as: I've seen the same 10 years ago but a bit different.

The differences are:

\- my understanding is that pf module is written in C and runs in kernel mode.

\- my understanding is that pf os detection uses old p0f (2.x series) (not sure if it matters though)

\- here, you have code in readable python that produces sandboxed bpf \- which makes it actually useful.

Is it more complex? Well, you decide. Is kernel mode C "more complex" than p0f-to-bpf compiler in python?

<comment><USER7> _Is it more complex? Well, you decide. Is kernel mode C "more complex" than p0f-to-bpf compiler in python? _

Obviously C code running in a kernel is "more complex" than a Python script.

I was talking about how users would actually use this p0f BPF tool. Compare this:

        ./bpfgen p0f -- 4:64:0:*:mss*10,6:mss,sok,ts,nop,ws:df,id+:0
        sudo iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 80 -m bpf --bytecode "39,0 0 0 0,48 0 0 8,37 [...]"

with how you would actually use the "complex" C code in pf:

        block in proto tcp from any os Windows

<comment><AUTHOR> That's not what we are doing with this. We are dealing with DDoS SYN floods, not "block Windows".

<comment><USER8> You mean like:

      pass in proto tcp from any to any port www synproxy state

I'm being a little tongue-in-cheek, though. It seems your solution is either a superset of the above, or perhaps just an alternative. And compiling p0f to BPF is definitely an interesting topic and quite noteworthy.

Though, I would dispute the notion that compiling to BPF is either simpler or more secure. The BPF JIT has been responsible for several kernel exploits recently. The original BPF was much simpler but irrelevant at this point. While I believe the design of the contemporary incarnation in Linux is still provably correct, the implementation manifestly still has bugs. And from a user perspective it's really difficult to beat the syntax of PF's pf.conf. pf.conf can't be emulated by using a front-end configuration generator for iptables + company as the semantics of many tasks require implementation logic in the kernel, whether as extensions to BPF or to the networking subsystem.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> This is old and very good tool for passive identification. I wrote my engineer thesis based on p0f 10 years ago. It mostly uses differences in implementation of TCP/IP stacks between OS and couple of other things to recognize the OS. You can add new fingerprints yourself.

</comment><comment><USER10> I use p0f and iptables but never thought to use bpf module to hook both together, what a wise way for battling DDOS.

</comment><comment><USER11> The uptime info is a bit creepy.</comment>


What's a Verb That Rhymes with 'Wow'? Searching for Words with Words API - <AUTHOR> http://blog.wordsapi.com/2015/01/whats-verb-that-rhymes-with-wow.html

<comment><USER2> I can't access the home page www.wordsapi.com; there seems to be an infinite redirect loop between http and https protocols; does anyone else have this problem?

<comment><USER3> I get this in Firefox (I'm at work):

An error occurred during a connection to www.wordsapi.com.

The server rejected the handshake because the client downgraded to a lower TLS version than the server supports.

(Error code: ssl_error_inappropriate_fallback_alert)

<comment><AUTHOR> That's strange, I'm not seeing it. What version of FF are you using? I'm using cloudflare to force a redirection from http to https.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Interesting sidenote: People seem to disagree whether it's Adrenocortico- tropic or -trophic, with -tropic being the more common (200k vs 500k results).

</comment><comment><USER5> This is really awesome. Programmatically find word pronunciations, definitions, synonyms. Very, very cool. Bookmarked.

</comment><comment><USER6> That longest words list should've included pneumonoultramicroscopicsilicovolcanoconiosis.

<comment><AUTHOR> No one can actually pronounce that word.

<comment><USER6> njuːˌmɒnoʊˌʌltrəmaɪkrɵˌskɒpɪkˌsɪlɪkoʊvɒlˌkeɪnɵkɒnaɪˈoʊsɪs

Easy peasy.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Vow.

</comment><comment><USER8> Bow

<comment><USER9> plough

Also, any noun can be verbed in English. Note that "cow" is a noun. Hence I give you, "cow", the verb. (Some interpretation required, semantics not included.)

<comment><USER10> Good thing that pronouns aren't nouns. I can't figure out if it would be "I Ied" or "I ied" when I use "I" as a verb in the past tense.

Though "God" is a noun, so is it "God Godded" or "God godded"? Oddly, I see those as having two different meanings, so it must be "God Godded".

And is "Bull Run" conjugated in the past as "Bull Runned" or "Bull Ran"?

This language, she is not so easy.

<comment><USER11> English doesn't have an explicitly defined grammar or vocabulary. If you want conjugations, you have to look at the word's introduction to the language and subsequent usage.

If you _are_ the word's introduction, then it's really up to you. ...to pick something that other people will naturally agree with. Good luck with that.

<comment><USER10> Other than a few synthetic languages, that true of every other language, so I don't understand why you are singling out English.

Well, I guess there are a few language academies which try to define a language, but those are post hoc. If you accept that, then I can declare myself the explicit definer of English language, no?

I can say that the past tense of "to God" is "to Gods", but English has a general rule that the "d"/"ed" form usually forms the past, while "s" is used for third person singular present tense. (There are exceptions, of course.)

I could say that in Swedish "att Gud" is conjugated in the present as "att Gudo", but Swedish has a pretty strong rule that present tense verbs ends with an -r. The exception being the modals and archaic forms like "äro" in the song "Vi äro, musikanter".

Tossing the 'explicitly defined grammar' aside, which is the realm of the prescriptivists, we're still left with the meaning of rule used by the descriptivists. What are _those_ rules? In terms you use, what are the rules which describe what "other people will naturally agree with."

In case you couldn't tell, I'm a descriptivist, in the Language-Log-fanboi sort of way. Quoting from [http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=3985](http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=3985) :

> Bloom finishes with some more invective against "these do-as-you-please > linguists" who pretend that "utopia is at hand, that everyone is a > revolutionary, that linguistic anarchy will set you free." I would love to > meet one of these anarcho-linguists, since they sound like a lot of fun, but > I'm afraid that they only live in the imagination of folks like Bloom and > Acocella, following the path of their distinguished forebear in > descriptivist strawmanism, David Foster Wallace.

> Actual linguists and lexicographers who answer to the "descriptivist" label > tend to be quite concerned with precisely those matters Bloom claims that > they neglect. Is a particular linguistic form considered to be erroneous? If > so, what motivates the ascription of error? Would the person who produced > the form in question recognize it as an error and chalk it up to a slip of > the tongue or pen? Or is a linguistic variant disparaged because it is > associated with a stigmatized dialect, and if so, how does the relationship > between the "standard" and "non-standard" forms reflect broader social > dynamics over time? And finally, which registers of a language are > appropriate for which social situations, and how do speakers and writers > navigate changes of register in their daily lives?

See also [http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/001843.h...](http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/001843.html) .</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: How to get max out of an accelerator program? - <AUTHOR>

Hi All,
I have got into one of the prestigious accelerator, resident program.
I have a B2B, SaaS product, with one paying customer, and a buggy MVP. The product is sort of CRM for a niche, with inbound marketing via social promotional features etc.
I am pre-product/market fit stage.
The folks over here are very resourceful, and well connected.
What all should I do, to maximize the returns from the program.
What should be my targets for the next 3 months?
What actionable items should I define to be achieved?
Thanks for your advice. <comment><USER2> This is a question everyone going into an accelerator program should ask themselves before, throughout and after the program. From running a startup accelerator off the beaten path (in Hong Kong), I can tell you that the startups that got the most out of it were those that were coachable, social (but not too social), kept in contact by asking for help when needed, and maintained momentum. I wrote about this here: [http://startupsunplugged.com/startup-programs/four-simple- th...](http://startupsunplugged.com/startup-programs/four-simple-things-that- make-a-better-accelerator-experience/)

There is a lot of hype out there about startup accelerators. And overall, it's really early to know how things will go with the many different programs that exist. Some of the data that's out there is just inaccurate. Here's another post on when an accelerator succeeds: [http://startupsunplugged.com/startup- data/when-does-a-startu...](http://startupsunplugged.com/startup-data/when- does-a-startup-accelerator-succeed/)

For me in a program that was pretty new, I judged success as all the startups finishing feeling that they had achieved multiples of what they would have done if they had not joined the accelerator. That and being noticeably stronger companies.

In any program, at some point you'll probably get feedback that you don't want to hear. You could either reject it outright and keep doing whatever you were doing before, or you could consider why you were given the feedback (whether or not you agree with it), or you could be open-minded and willing to accept that you don't know everything yet. Use the mentor network but don't fall victim to mentor whiplash (where you get pulled in 100 different directions by mentors providing opinion-based advice). You should know your business and customers better than anyone else, so take all advice with the understanding that you will have a different perspective than other people.

It's hard for me to give you really specific actionable items that you request, because everyone's situation is different. For all I know, in 3 months, you'll have changed to a B2C product in a totally different market...</comment>


Who Owns the Internet? - <AUTHOR> http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/08/28/who-owns-the-internet <comment><USER2> Blaming the result of the election on piracy seems like... a stretch.

<comment><USER3> Yeah, that's a bit farfetched. Still an interesting article though.</comment></comment>