New Logo and Identity for Library of Congress - <AUTHOR> https://www.underconsideration.com/brandnew/archives/new_logo_and_identity_for_library_of_congress_by_pentagram.php <comment><USER2> I definitely prefer the old logo. The new one feels like it was made in paint using system default fonts. It's not necessarily bad, just feels generic.

<comment><USER3> I get that Pentagram feels they have enough of a handle on good design that they know the right way to break some of the rules of design. But this feels like breaking the rules of design so much that it's _actually_ breaking the rules, in a way that produces something unpleasant and ugly.

I mean... a close cousin of Impact? Black and orange? A second, unnecessary copy of the word 'library' that's so large it's hard to make out the name of the institution by comparison? This smacks of designers being so in love with their own process that they abandon the basic principles of good design -- i.e., it has to be immediately recognizable and look aesthetically pleasing -- entirely in favor of some weird brutalist experiment.

Which might be a good idea for an avant garde institution in Manhattan, but is entirely inappropriate for the Library of freaking Congress.

<comment><USER4> It's seriously surprising that a premiere design company produced this.

<comment><USER3> Contrast this with their excellent identity refresh for American Express: [https://www.pentagram.com/work/american- express-1](https://www.pentagram.com/work/american-express-1)

The difference is night and day. Imagine how fantastic that kind of modernizing light touch could have looked for this client, too.

<comment><USER5> I think this is pretty horrible, too, though.

<comment><USER6> I disagree, but I accept that there's a lot of subjectivity to it; the Amex refresh is just that--a refresh of an existing brand identity with _very_ strong recognition, and consistently high brand loyalty. Pentagram managed to refrain from abandoning everything, while fixing problems that were...annoying (see the alternate blue square logo for small-space digital use, for example). I'm not a fan of the more aggressively cropped 'C' but that's more a nuisance feeling than anything objectionable. Overall, I'd say Pentagram's AMEX work is interesting more for their restraint and ability to recognize when it's not appropriate to just abandon everything.

The surreal thing is that, as important as continuity and timelessness can be for financial services firms, it's even _more_ fundamental to the LOC's roles. If you've ever been to the Thomas Jefferson Building, to walk its halls the first time is to almost be overwhelmed by a sense of connection to millennia of human thought and achievement. There are libraries out there with modern- looking identities (as an example, Carnegie Library of Pittsburgh--though I really hate the combined i/l mark).[0] I don't know of any that are as in- your-face as the LOC redesign. A lot of these kinds of "make it modern" updates are because companies are trying to better connect with consumers. The really crazy part about this is just how irrelevant that is to the Library of Congress' mission. The LOC isn't trying to reinvent itself before the internet kills it, as with so many other libraries across the country.

It's really hard to imagine someone actually visiting, well, any of the LOC buildings and coming away with the impression that Druk Condensed feels right. Pentagram has an impressive body of work, but their work for the Library of Congress comes across as the sort of pitch an intern might make prior to being fired before they might accidentally stumble in front of a client.

0\. [http://www.landesbergdesign.com/projects/carnegielibrary.sht...](http://www.landesbergdesign.com/projects/carnegielibrary.shtml)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> My gut reaction is that this new logo is strictly worse than the old one. This is my first time seeing either of the logos.

Can someone with a graphic arts background explain why the LoC is so attracted to this new design (after only 8 years with the previous one)?

<comment><USER8> They traded what was "just a logo" for an entire design system. This is the branding equivalent of Google's "Material Design." Also for what it's worth Pentagram — and Paula Scher — are very prestigious, considered top-of-their- field.

But I agree they phoned this in. Unnecessary and uninspired.

<comment><USER9> I wonder why they couldn't make a design system that integrated or utilized the previous logo, or an updated version of it.

The new one is hideous and redundant, as are all of the alternatives (which look more like positioning/alignment errors in Microsoft Word).

1\. "LIBRARY Library" \-- really?

2\. The colors don't evoke a library OR Congress, but a construction site.

3\. There's no "logo" here, strictly speaking: just a bunch of words.

The article even explicitly says "Our view here at the Library of Congress is the image of a treasure chest, filled with limitless information and services, ready to explore and amaze if you open it up."

There's absolutely nothing in this new logo that communicates "the image of a treasure chest" filled with anything at all.

Similarly, the "bookshelf" examples look less like a bookshelf and more like someone having issues putting clip art into text in Word.

I really hope feedback about this logo influences all involved parties to reconsider this design.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I don't think the library of congress should have an aggressive, in-your-face logo. It's a library. It's mission statement is about maintaining history. There's no reason to try to appeal to hip coffee shop urbanites. The old logo was both more clever (resembling the American flag and a book at the same time), and still pretty darned modern. Designing a new, tone-deaf logo is a waste of everyone's time and resources.

<comment><USER11> Libraries are quiet. An all-caps logo is the branding equivalent of yelling.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> Gah, that's awful. It looks more like the branding for a protein bar: "New EXTREME library to the maaaaax! Get some!!"

<comment><USER13> It is kind of amazing how inappropriate a slab typeface feels for a library.

<comment><USER14> Libraries are serving their communities all sorts of media beyond just books.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> The old logo has an authoritative look without feeling dated. It looks great on a website, in print or on a sign. The new logo is meaningless and bland and has massive scaling issues. Interesting direction, I'll admit.

</comment><comment><USER16> This must be a joke, right? Using the word "library" twice in the new logo looks ridiculous. As do the variations where "library" is split in two.

<comment><USER17> For some reason it wanted me to think "LIBERAL ARMY".

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> interesting tidbit from the comments there; this design firm, Pentagram, also did the recent redesign for EFF: [https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2018/07/effs- new-logo-member-s...](https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2018/07/effs-new-logo- member-shirt)

Looks very similar, and while I strongly dislike the Library of Congress redesign, it almost works for EFF.

<comment><USER19> It is the same logo. Big heavy sans-serif font with the full name of the org stuck in the middle. The only difference is EFF's big EFF letters are stretched and the full title is condensed, while LIBRARY LIBRARY's big LIBRARY is condensed and the full title is normal-width.

<comment><USER20> It makes more sense for the EFF, though, since both "EFF" and "Electronic Frontier Foundation" are valid names for the organization. The LoC's version creates the impression that the brand name is just "Library".

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> I don't like the logo, but let's take into account that this is supposed to be a identity system and they are designing a logo that is extremely flexible in service of such system.

The identity in this case will not come just from the logo or the colors or a rigid manual that says what pantone codes to use and how many `x` should be around the logo (where x is the dot of the i or whatever) which everybody will ignore anyway. This identity seems to be designed to be misuse-proof.

We're used to the logo being the centerpiece of an identity system but this "flexible identity" trend has the order of priorities backwards.

<comment><USER22> I think that it's leading with its weakest aspect, which is the logo with nothing but LIBRARY. It's much more interesting when there is an actual goal, like identifying an event or department and then putting a little Library of Congress logo next to it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> Standalone comparison of Old Logo vs New Logo, i think most agree that Old Logo wins hands down. Old Brand Identity vs New Brand Identity is where the new one makes a lot more sense.

</comment><comment><USER24> I actually like the concept of inserting the images in between the "LIBRARY" bookends. I agree that the narrow slab san-serif typeface is mildly inappropriate for a library, but it's passable assuming the intent is for the brand to feel bolder and more modern. My biggest complaint is the omission of a logomark. The old logomark was boring and uninspired, and I think Pentagram not doing a logomark was a huge missed opportunity. They had the chance to create a truly iconic logomark for an iconic institution, and instead said "Eh, logotype is enough." It is definitely not enough.

</comment><comment><USER25> My initial reaction to the logos was, wow that really doesn't look good, but the video helped sell it.

</comment><comment><USER26> I found the change.... disappointing.

I'll gladly concede that there could be a better logo than what previously existed, _but this isn 't it._

When I look at the old logo, I think "professional and clever". When I look at the new, I think "WE'RE SHOUTING IN A LIBRARY! A _LIBRARY_ LIBRARY!"

If this places me in among the unwashed masses that "just don't get it", so be it. I see regression, not improvement here.

</comment><comment><USER27> The redesign looks fine. Most people, seeing the log, will never have visited a Library as they fade into obscurity beyond obsolescence. It's good to get ahead and set up the idea that it is THE Library.

<comment><USER28> Libraries are far from fading into obscurity.

[http://www.pewresearch.org/fact- tank/2017/06/21/millennials-...](http://www.pewresearch.org/fact- tank/2017/06/21/millennials-are-the-most-likely-generation-of-americans-to- use-public-libraries/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> A lot of branding I hated when I first saw it has grown on me over time, this one though - I know it sounds like a joke but I find it hard to read.

</comment><comment><USER30> I love this redesign.

</comment><comment><USER19> LIBRARY is set to become my new favourite candy bar.

</comment><comment><USER31> Why are they screaming at me? Can we keep the signage and ditch the new logo? Was this solving an actual issue?

</comment><comment><USER32> Why do they want to change it? What purpose does the change serve? Or indeed, who is it who wants to change it?

</comment><comment><USER33> I'm not a designer, but the new logo looks meh.

</comment><comment><USER34> Best of luck to the LIBRARY LIBRARY OF CONGRESS on their new logo.

<comment><USER13> It's even worse in the examples where they jam an image in the middle of the word LIBRARY. Welcome to the LIBR <jpg> ARY LIBRARY OF CONGRESS! Dear God.

</comment></comment><comment><USER35> Paula Scher, you can't win them all.

<comment><USER36> Literally her own words (over 7 years ago): [https://vimeo.com/hillmancurtis/artist-series- paulascher#t=1...](https://vimeo.com/hillmancurtis/artist-series- paulascher#t=188s)

"If I don't get it in the first crack, I get it in the second. And if I don't get it in the second I almost never get it."

"I've never been a refiner"

This is not identity design—this is ego.

</comment></comment><comment><USER37> My initial reaction was shock and disgust.

My reaction after mulling it over for awhile and reviewing some of the material is.... contempt and disgust.

So there's that.

<comment><USER38> I definitely prefer the old logo. The new one is extremely generic and does not convey any feeling via the logo.

<comment><USER37> My biggest problem with the new logo is that they're effectively un-branding the Library of Congress by trying to brand it as LIBRARY.

That's like trying to rebrand the White House as HOUSE.

<comment><USER39> Their concern is that too many people read "...of Congress" and assume it's not for them. They're very much pushing the idea that it's a library first.

Not sure I like how they did that, but I get the idea.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER40> In yet another bold move for America, President Trump mandates that all gov webdesign will be done via Fiverr Gigs...

<comment><USER40> My bad. I meant _graphic_ design.</comment></comment>


Tesla's autopilot probed by government after crash kills driver - <AUTHOR> http://money.cnn.com/2016/06/30/technology/tesla-autopilot-death/index.html <comment><USER2> Death happened back on May 7th, I don't remember seeing that in the news at all. This is the first legitimate "bad" accident I've seen actually related to Tesla's autopilot. This is the second time I've seen the Tesla struggled with the height of semi trailers. I wonder if this was an oversight or if it's just really difficult to compensate for.

</comment><comment><USER3> [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12011419](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12011419)</comment>


Show HN: Axeptio, consent collection made GDPR compliant - <AUTHOR> https://www.axeptio.eu <comment><AUTHOR> Hello everyone,

A month after our french roll out, I come here to present you our last product. It's called Axeptio and it's basically reCAPTCHA for user consent.

Backstory:

In november we were attending a conference about GDPR and we learned that opt- in and personal data collection was about to change, a lot. It was pretty obvious that no one except the GAFAs were to be ready on time and we saw it as an opportunity to create a new niche. We came up with the idea of a "consent- as-a-service" platform.

Technically, it's a iframe served upon HTTPS, displaying a form that follows the guidelines of the regulation. When a user checks to give its consent, we store the event and take it as the "proof". We don't know anything about the user and just store the information of acceptation.

If you have any question please leave a message here!</comment>


Local messaging - what do you use? - <AUTHOR>

What tools do you use to communicate with people around you (friends or not) in near real-time?<p>Has anybody had any success with Highlight's "Post nearby" feature? <comment><AUTHOR> Full disclosure: I'm the founder of Howler, <http://bit.ly/PsuFDX>, candidate for this YC batch</comment>


ML and Big Data = AI - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/@Lager/ml-big-data-ai-4e5e1e8dff32 <comment><USER2> > We need them machines that so far follow along, grasping

> this article just as good as you, to guide us.

That moment when you feel pity for the algorithm that one day will try to grasp a blog post. I'm sure there's a point somewhere in that text but most HN threads on the topic seem far more coherent. tl;dr seems to be "AGI is not the next useful step in the world of AI".</comment>


What properties must an enterprise smart contract language have? - <AUTHOR> https://blockchain.works-hub.com/learn/what-properties-must-an-enterprise-smart-contract-language-have-28f40 <comment><USER2> 2 that come to mind 1) contract-oriented primitives 2) proper encryption between 'public' chain and private data stores</comment>


How Does One Create A Gtk+ Application? - <AUTHOR> http://blogs.gnome.org/mortenw/2014/06/23/how-does-one-create-a-gtk-application/ <comment><USER2> This state of Gtk sad, but I'm really glad we (VLC) moved to Qt, a few years ago (2006), before many applications did the switch, and when it was an unpopular move.

Before that time, we were using WxWidgets and had many issues, notably with Unicode and Windows support. WxWidget APIs and behaviors were changing too much between releases (even minor ones).

When we moved, we were in the early Qt 4.1/4.2 days, and most VLC developers were using Gnome and pushed a lot for Gtk. But one developer started the new UI in Qt, and I picked up the work. We had an important backlash from users, notably with some people in the community recoding an interface in Gtk...

Afterwards, QGtkStyle was introduced, and people could have a native look, even with Gtk environments.

Finally, Qt moved to a community project, to LGPL and Gtk went down the road with Gtk 3.x, breaking themes, Windows, OSX, and API/behaviors at every release (and removing features).

Those days, every cross-platform application are moving to Qt (subsurface, LXDE, wireshark, audacity). It's funny that we made this decision, at that time, without knowing all that. I think we just got very lucky... :D

<comment><USER3> Around that time I worked for Trolltech and got a good view of how that project was run. The trolls took compatibility very seriously. From devs that were running KDE 3 using the current nightly build of Qt 3 to swapping out the Qt library of various Qt applications with the next Qt release to find any regressions ourselves, keeping things working was important. Dogfooding with KDE, internal tools etc was expected by developers. It is not to say we didn't make mistakes, but we did try to prevent as much as we could. A good API really goes hand in hand with compatibility. Because almost any API change in C++ is incompatible and because any public API we would be stuck with for years there was a huge incentive to get it right. When designing any new API there was always multiple rounds of API design sessions often with many different developers providing feedback and always feedback from the documentation team. Is this API extensible? Does it use the same terminology as the rest of Qt? Could any of the function names be named better? Is there any api missing or that could be removed, etc. New classes had examples and demos not just for documentation purposes, but often enough written first to help find the best API (before actually implementing it) and second to be used to regression test compatibility. Before a release all new API was reviewed one last time to catch any errors that might have slipped through. Many of the lessons learned can be found in "The Little Manual of API design" that was written by one of the Tolls Jasmin Blanchette [http://www4.in.tum.de/~blanchet/api- design.pdf](http://www4.in.tum.de/~blanchet/api-design.pdf) It is because of all of this effort that when you are using classes in Qt you often can intuitively know what how the api would work. Again we did make mistakes, but we tried to learn from them and we were not shy about holding back on an API that wasn't ready for a release rather than commit to an API that we were not sure about. I recall more than one API being delayed for the better 6 months or so before being included in the next release (4.3 v.s. 4.2 for example). The result was always a better API and a more bug free class, a win all around.

<comment><USER4> Nice, but they didn't follow their advice in the case of creating parent-less widgets up to Qt4.

I.e. in Qt3 and previous versions, creating a parent-less widget resulted in a window frame being created. Why was that? If I am creating a button I do not want a window frame around it. I am going to insert the button to another widget later.

Thank God they fixed that in Qt4 and later versions.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> This post was written by Morten Welinder, the author of Gnumeric and a popular GNOME blogger.

I feel really bad for GTK developers. The GNOME guys have clearly taken the toolkit from a "general purpose" direction to a much more gnome-centric one.

At the same time though, I can't help but be hopeful for the future. Qt is a wonderful project, with a bunch of wonderful licenses, developed in a wonderfully-open environment (It's not like before!) and with wonderful improvements already available in Qt 5. With more and more applications switching to it, I see Qt as a central part of the Linux desktop ecosystem in the future - finally, not only will we have a beautiful desktop with common themes for all apps, but also the power of a truly cross-platform toolkit in most Linux apps. It will be nice.

<comment><USER6> I feel really conflicted about Qt. On one hand, as a graphical toolkit/environment, it's great. It's well-structured and easy to use, and QML is basically everything web applications should have been.

On the other hand, as a C++ library it really couldn't be worse, with its flagrant reinvention of the standard library, pervasive UTF16, complex object hierarchies, raw pointers, extensive use of macros, etc., etc.

Maybe I'm just too choosy, but it'd be _really_ nice to have a graphical toolkit that didn't have such an air of sausage factory to it.

<comment><USER7> > On the other hand, as a C++ library it really couldn't be worse, with its > flagrant reinvention of the standard library, pervasive UTF16, complex > object hierarchies, raw pointers, extensive use of macros, etc., etc.

Have you given Qt a serious try? Most of the above arguments don't hold good at all. * c++ std lib is total crap. Anyone arguing for it has no idea what a good API is. Have you used Qt container? It's as intuitive as it gets. The C++ std lib is performance optimized and most desktop apps don't need it. It comes at a cost of developers having to learn complex APIs.

* Complex object hierarchies - huh? Qt's value based types need no memory management. The pointer types has a simple parent-child relationship. Delete the parent and all children are deleted as well. How hard is this?

* Raw pointers - Commented truly like someone who hasn't understood Qt.

* Why do you care about UTF16? It's an internal representation. BTW, Do you write any web apps? Do you know or care what internal representation is used by strings? If you some ultra-special case of a performance critical app, no string library out there will be good for you. You will have to roll out your own.

Let me guess. It really looks like you are one on the few guys who likes writing libraries (as opposed to apps). People who write apps love Qt. People who like writing libraries don't like any other library other than their own because their way is the true way.

There are many valid criticism of Qt but these are none of them.

<comment><USER8> Calling the C++ standard library crap is acknowledging the Wheel was Not Invented Here.

Glazing over the fact that Qt has an incredibly complicated object hierarchy by saying "they're good for you" is not acknowledging the fact that it's complicated and difficult to learn or work with. You didn't even mention, e.g., MOC - Qt's incredibly complicated Meta-Object Compiler. And people call GObject complicated...

Ignoring the fact that basically every other platform than Windows (and the platforms it has managed to infect) uses UTF-8 as its One True Encoding, and that you and Qt are proliferating the claim that every sufficiently complicated C++ project has its own string class with its own specific peculiarities is not a good thing.

Most importantly, you can't dismiss his concerns by _agreeing that all of them exist_ and that he shouldn't care.

<comment><USER7> I honestly don't get these arguments.

Not sure how you concluded this is about NIH. Qt's container are very developer friendly and as an application author that's the first and most important thing that matters.

Saying moc is complicated is like saying dalvik or ART is complicated. These are just tools that work in the background. Just like you don't need to know ART internals, you don't need to know moc or the code it generates for you.

Arguing about string encoding is so 1990's, I won't comment.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> There is a lot about GTK I like; it's a C library making compatibility easier[1], it always seemed way faster (less memory bloat?) than QT, and while the widget-packing/nesting style was somewhat ugly, I found it surprisingly easy to write.

I was even enjoying Vala. While it was obviously a young language, it had a lot of interesting ideas.

Then we got the new 3.x version of GTK with its "lets rewrite everything for no other reason than to break compatibility"[2] project goal that seems to have corrupted far too many projects recently. In addition to the problems already mentioned in this thread, it seemed so.. _unfinished_. Various components or features were gone or rewritten into something else. I guess they spent all their development time trying to tie Gnome and in as tightly as possible instead of finishing features.

The last straw was when they decided to join Pottering's "lets forget Unix and make Linux into Windows" crusade. A terrible design decision on top of years of other questionable choices and bad attitude about actually listening to user needs.

I supported GTK and Gnome waaaaay back when they first started, when the fight was between a Free (GPL) library and the increasingly popular proprietary- license-only[3] Qt. Now, I'm not sure what to support in the GUI toolkit area.

While I figure that out, my current project's GUI is being written in ruby-tk. The widgets in Tk have a terrible look and strange layout/interaction quirks, but at least it isn't a moving target and work more or less everywhere.

[1] e.g.: writing Ruby bindings C++ libraries can be problematic. While problems such as the name-mangled symbols are not as bad as they once were, it is still much easier to link a C library into a random environment.

[2] As Linus said, "...thou shalt not break working code."

[3] Trolltech changed the license about a year (?) afterwords.

<comment><USER10> _> The last straw was when they decided to join Pottering's "lets forget Unix and make Linux into Windows" crusade._

Could you give a little more background about this? (True curiosity, I don't doubt that what you say is true!)

<comment><USER11> I think it's just largely perception amongst the anti-systemd crowd. Systemd is a virtually unmitigated boon to Linux, but some people fear its relatively tight coupling and lack of adherence to some platonic ideal of the "Unix Philosophy". Indeed, systemd's design is inherently epicurean; the aim is to create a unified base system for Linux that reduces friction and makes people's lives easier.

"Turning Linux into Windows" is hyperbole, though; the most used and developed-on non-mobile Unix -- Mac OS X -- is similarly epicurean, and blithely makes use of tightly coupled components designed to work together, to deliver a smooth easy-to-manage experience. And it's eating Linux's lunch.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I just watched this [1] video from Dirk Hohndel describing the migration motives and process from Gtk+ to Qt for subsurface (started by Linus).

TLDR:

* Qt has a community of people developing applications, has good documentation (precise, good coverage) and people who care

* Gtk+ has a bunch of Gnome developers, if you want to develop an application, you're out of luck

[1]: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ON0A1dsQOV0](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ON0A1dsQOV0)

<comment><USER13> I just finished watching this, it was pretty interesting. Thanks.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> It's unfortunate that Linux and/or Linux distributions have not yet solved the problem of supporting parallel versions of dependencies. Even Node's package manager supports that. The end result is that rolling release distros break stuff often, as applications can't be tested and executed in isolation of each other. The "solution" to this is releasing everything every 6 months, when you can actually test everything together, then stop providing new versions for months.

If Linux/Linux distributions did support it, rolling release would be a lot more common. One limitation that would remain is that if you have an application that requires a single instance (e.g. a Network Manager), you couldn't have multiple instances of it running at the same time.

<comment><USER15> Well (I think) part of the whole point of a package manager is to reduce space by sharing dependencies. Npm seems to actually store a copy of the dependency _individually for each package that requires it_. I really think that is inefficient and a step backwards.

<comment><USER16> A good package manager should allow to: -share dependencies -provide a way to install multiple versions of the same package

These requirements are not mutually exclusive. With a proper file system hierarchy both of them could be accomplished.

Most of the popular distribution's package managers (apt, pacman, etc) support the sharing dependencies but almost none of them support installing multiple versions of the package.

Given that storage space is very cheap nowadays I think a package manager like NPM which stores copies of the dependencies is not that bad actually.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> I really think this is exaggerated a lot. Maybe we don't use a lot of complex features, but at sugarlabs we have written a whole desktop environment and app ecosystem based of gtk3. We use the python gtk3 wrapper and I think there was only 1 instance this year where gtk3 broke our ui (icon_size got removed or something like that). We also use a lot of other gnome things (eg: gsettings) and those don't seem to be an issue.

</comment><comment><USER17>
        Parts of the gui that used to render correctly now stops updating at all.

I suffer this problem with an image viewer (geeqie) on debian. I have to restore/maximize the window to force a redraw and it has been like that for months.

</comment><comment><USER18> It would be nice, if the author would back his claims by specific references. Comparing the upstream tracker reports for GTK+ and Qt shed a different light on ABI compatibility between versions:

[http://www.upstream-tracker.org/versions/gtk+.html](http://www.upstream- tracker.org/versions/gtk+.html) [http://www.upstream- tracker.org/versions/qt.html](http://www.upstream- tracker.org/versions/qt.html)

(Yes, yes, Qt does more than just GUI, I know …)

</comment><comment><USER19> We loved GTK. It let us do great things for so many years... it was a necesary step while there were no other LGPL libraries.

But we got rid of it, changed all our code to Qt, which run circles around GTK Never looked back, best decision we could ever make. It works beautifully in all platforms, it integrates OpenGL, pdf output, printers support.

The only problem about Qt is that not all open source programs use it, so you use Inkscape(GTK) in Mac and works so badly, you can't even copy vectors(it copies pixel images instead!!).

GTK should die.

</comment><comment><USER20> If you need GTK for something, really, don't bother. It's a bag of hurt.

Qt, WxWidgets, or even something else.

I'm so glad the Web and Modern Browsers reinvented "desktop applications".

<comment><USER21> I actually like writing GTK way more then Qt. I like the fact it is C and easily integrates with any language I wish to use.

Though I use Qt, the Mac support on GTK is terrible at best. Windows support is even worse (or non-existent) which makes me question their "cross platform gui" title.

If I was to suggest a method, I would suggest using each platforms GUI language and make a backend in something cross platform.

<comment><USER22> GTK runs on Linux with X11, Wayland, and probably even some BSDs. Technically that qualifies as cross-platform.

<comment><USER21> And Mac with X11 emulator/vm/what ever XQuartz is. And Windows if you use the 2 year old version that has a ton of issues (UI bugs, glitches, old GTK bugs, etc).

Running on multiple Linux DE's/OS's is not cross platform as far as I am concerned, even though technically it is lol.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> There is a lot of truth in this but it does take a very lazy attitude to testing.

The simple truth is that if you need your application to support certain distributions, you need to be there on the development releases testing them and either submitting bug reports or improving _your_ application.

And you can automate much of this with a pile of bootable ISOs and a scriptable virtual machine. Testing isn't new.

<comment><USER8> Testing is not enough.

I release an application "today" (and "today" for example is when Gtk 3.4 is released), and six months down the line the Gtk team decides to release Gtk 3.6 which breaks just about every application that has a GtkTable. As an application developer, I believe I have a right to be pissed.

How do I file a grievance? I go to the GNOME bug tracker to find my bug. CLOSED: WONTFIX - we don't care, our solution is you port to GtkGrid. Doesn't matter to us that you now have to bifurcate your codebase to work with people still running Gtk 3.0 or 3.2, or choose to ship your own built version of Gtk 3.4 with your application. Fuck you, application developer.

What do I do to mitigate the impact? Well, I have to spin an emergency release of my application, despite the fact that no other code might have changed, just because the Gtk team decided that breaking ABI was no longer a concern for them.

Now multiply this for basically every Gtk cycle from 3.4 to 3.1(3/4) and you realize the problem.

<comment><USER23> I think you're conflating "what's released and out there" with "what's being used or distributed".

I'm saying you can test on the versions distributions are actually shipping (and the ones they're about to be using). In a lot of distributions you can rely on that staying stable for a period of time.

If your application depends on an older GTK library the solution is simple: depend on that version or ship it with your application. This is pretty unusual in the Linux world but old hat for Windows developers where you can only really depend on Win32; and for anything else your installer makes sure it's present.

And finally, for the third time, I'll state that I'm not saying there aren't legitimate issues with how GTK+ is developed. There clearly are... I'm just saying that some of the things Morten wrote show issues in their own development process as much as anything else.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> FYI, for those who want to write cross-platform GUI apps but prefer to avoid C++ (even the mildly nicer Qt flavor...), there are alpha-quality go bindings for QML.

[https://github.com/go-qml/qml](https://github.com/go-qml/qml)

</comment><comment><USER25> Folk who want to develop cross platform software GUI software should use Lazarus. It works on Linux, Windows and OS/X. Getting started can be dicey, what once you are up and running it simply works. The LCL doesn't use the latest Qt5 or Gtk3, but it just works.

Linux guys should stuff faffing about with endless compile times in C++, buffer overruns and pointer exceptions. They should use FreePascal and Lazarus and retain their sanity.

</comment><comment><USER11> I'm actually teaching myself Xt Intrinsics and Xaw, because "lateral thinking with withered technology". It's crazy, I know it's crazy, but when I read about what a moving target the new hotness is, I wonder if there isn't some kernel of wisdom in looking to the battle-tested technology of the past for inspiration.

</comment><comment><USER26> I've been using Gtk+ with Vala for almost 3 years now and i love it.

I tried Qt and liked the fact that it had good libraries built in (using the provided networking library v/s using libsoup with Gtk+)

In my opinion Gtk+ with C is a big pain but Vala feels natural and should've been pushed instead of JavaScript by the gnome guys.

</comment><comment><USER27> >How does one shield oneself from this, i.e., how does one ensure that the binary compiled (say) three years (or months) ago continues to work reasonably?

Static linking should save you from from this hell. I don't know if gtk even supports it, I know glibc does not, whitch is a shame.

</comment><comment><USER28> ABI compatibility should not be a huge problem for distributions. They can just recompile all the packages linking against GTK+ when they update it.

The crazy stuff is having your window decorations disappear when running a GTK application under openbox because somebody thought it would be funny to screw with gtk+-3.12 [1].

[1]: [http://redmine.audacious-media- player.org/boards/1/topics/11...](http://redmine.audacious-media- player.org/boards/1/topics/1135)

<comment><USER8> > ABI compatibility should not be a huge problem for distributions.

That's just fine, until you want to release a binary application that targets more than one distribution...

<comment><USER28> If you really want to do that you should statically link it.

<comment><USER8> A wonderful idea. Let me just statically link an LGPL library into my Commercial application...

<comment><USER29> Sure, just relicense your application under the GPL. You're getting these libraries for free. If you're not at all willing to contribute back, then you're obviously not the target audience.

<comment><USER8> If you check Gtk+'s history, I have contributed back on numerous occasions.

Unfortunately, convincing the people who write my paychecks, VMware, to contribute Workstation and Player to the Open Source community seems to be a pretty big stretch.

<comment><USER28> "(1) If you statically link against an LGPL'd library, you must also provide your application in an object (not necessarily source) format, so that a user has the opportunity to modify the library and relink the application." \- [http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl- faq.html#LGPLStaticVsDynamic](http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl- faq.html#LGPLStaticVsDynamic)

So there you have it. Link statically against the LGPL library and package the object files of your commercial application.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> [http://www.open- std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2014/n402...](http://www.open- std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2014/n4028.pdf)

<comment><AUTHOR> Well, C++ ABI is a similar issue but not related to the Gtk+ ABI because Gtk+ is written in C.

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> even though Qt might and wxwidgets might be better(wxwidgets is really more a wrapper to different gui backends), IMHO linux lacks a proper gui toolkit.

creating gui applications is much better in both windows in osx. Cocoa was a fairly well designed base api that gradually got improved. (yeah, there is a lot of valid criticism here too, but we're comparing it to gtk in this case)

We should build something that can gradually phase out GTK as was done with Carbon. If linux had a nice gui toolkit people would write more linux desktop applications.

Just my opinion. So feel free to completely disagree with it.

<comment><USER32> How is Qt not a proper GUI toolkit exactly?</comment></comment>


Corey Quinn on why Lyft is right to pay $300M over 3 years to AWS - <AUTHOR> https://twitter.com/QuinnyPig/status/1101616132681752576 <comment><USER2> $100M/year for infrastructure is insane when it's all dockerized containers.

Build out some bare metal and you could be down to something like $10M/year.

I'll happily take just $1M/year for this advice. :)

<comment><USER3> There's nowhere near enough info provided to make that kind of sweeping pronouncement.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Anyone know a good support API with Logging? - <AUTHOR> Has anyone come across a support API compatible with iOS that has logs of user activity to help diagnose issues? <comment><USER2> [https://raygun.com/raygun-providers/ios](https://raygun.com/raygun- providers/ios)</comment>


Ask HN: Anyone excited about SC2 Galaxy Map Editor? - <AUTHOR>

I am pumped about StarCraft 2.
But I'm actually most excited by its Galaxy Map Editor because it enables me to make the game I've always wanted to play: a fast-paced, team-oriented tactical RTS.  The scripting language will impose limitations, but I'm happy to compromise for access to the physics, matchmaking, and general polish.
Will anyone else be hacking on the Galaxy Editor?  Leave a comment or get in touch @jayruy twitter, we can form a mailing list if there is demand.
Also happy to share/discuss my design document: the quick pitch is a cross between StarCraft 3v3, WoW EoTS, and Team Fortress Capture/Hold.  It is nothing like DoTA. <comment><AUTHOR> Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?</comment>


A Visual Guide to Version Control - <AUTHOR> http://betterexplained.com/articles/a-visual-guide-to-version-control/

<comment><USER2> Just out of curiosity, do many people here use version control for one-person projects? Is it worth it?

<comment><USER3> Yes, it's worth it. Especially if you tend to code late at night and do not really know what you are doing.

I used to lave darcs. But bazaar is simple and reliable.</comment></comment>


Co-Opted: The Ultimate Berkeley Housing Ad–From a "Sustainably-Karmic" Community - <AUTHOR> https://alumni.berkeley.edu/california-magazine/just-in/2015-08-15/co-opted-ultimate-berkeley-housing-ad-sustainably-karmic

<comment><AUTHOR> Hours ago, craigslist posted an online ad seeking potential housemates for a Berkeley space that does not promote "ableism, consumerism, negativism, positivism, homophonia, slut shaming or sham slutting." Applicants need only forego TV, microwaves, doors, and all scented products (yes, foods included, people!)—and they must be non-speciesist in their welcoming of fellow tenant Gaia, the 8-foot-long monitor lizard.

As the ad for "Wysdym Yrth" notes, "We often host spontaneous get-togethers, art parties, fire dances, political rallies, knife fights, and other spirited challenges to outdated social mores like 'decency,' 'restraint,' or 'public safety.' " Meet the bike messenger who posted the ad after reaching the end of his organic-hemp rope.</comment>


Ask HN: Posture – what do you do during work to avoid back pain? - <AUTHOR> Do you use any apps, products that help you stay healthy? Do you work out during work or take a lot of breaks? <comment><USER2> Doing these two things has worked extremely well for me:

1) Doing deadlifts. This is a strength-training exercise: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4AObAU- EcYE](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4AObAU-EcYE)

2) Seeing a _good_ chiropractor about twice a month. (You might need to shop around - I can elaborate on how to select a quality one if people want)

You asked about an app. I actually corrected my earlier posture and lower-back problems using the above and not any kind of app to remind myself to get up and move around; the above helped even though I routinely sat 1-2 hours at a time, in a deep coding trance, without moving around. Recently, though, I started using BreakTime (a macOS app) to remind me to look away from the screen, mainly because I believe it's healthier for my eyes. This is a $5 app I've been quite happy with.

All the above is in the anecdotal "works for me" category. Good luck in your effort to find what works best for you!

Edit: The video link above gives a rough sense of the exercise, but the fine details matter greatly, so if you decide to do it I highly recommend studying the relevant chapter of this book: [https://www.amazon.com/dp/0982522738/](https://www.amazon.com/dp/0982522738/)

Edit 2: More about chiropractors: Few are MDs; the ones I've worked with all went through a 4-year, post-bachelors program. In my experience, chiropractors fit on a spectrum, going from ambulance-chasing quacks to gifted, remarkably effective healers. You want the latter. Only way to find out is to pay for about 3 visits; if you and your body are consistently feeling better physically and emotionally by then, you've found a good one. If not, stop, and go find another. So far, the best I've found lean towards alternative medicine (which was really surprising at first... I'm trained as a physicist, and was REALLY skeptical.) Can't say that's a general rule though. Again, all this is my experience; better to get your own experience and evaluate based on that, instead of blindly deciding based on something you read online.

<comment><USER3> Is your chiropractor an MD? I've been skeptical about chiropractors after reading the Wikipedia entry on the practice [1]. As someone with back problems, I've taken chiropractor recommendations from colleagues, and looking into them, they were too alternative medicine for my taste.

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

<comment><USER4> At the very least, never let them touch your neck. A friend of mine had a stroke and died after having a neck manipulation. [http://chiropracticstroke.com/victims.johnhoffman.php](http://chiropracticstroke.com/victims.johnhoffman.php)

<comment><USER3> Thanks for sharing this. I was surprised as well to learn that many chiropractors aren't medical doctors.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> What helped me most was to get an ergonomic chair and an external monitor/keyboard/mouse. To avoid wrist pain, I recommend a split keyboard [1], a vertical mouse [2] and an alternative keyboard layout [3].

[1]: [https://www.microsoft.com/accessories/en- us/products/keyboar...](https://www.microsoft.com/accessories/en- us/products/keyboards/natural-ergonomic-keyboard-4000/b2m-00012)

[2]: [https://evoluent.com/](https://evoluent.com/)

[3]: [http://mkweb.bcgsc.ca/carpalx/?full_optimization](http://mkweb.bcgsc.ca/carpalx/?full_optimization)

<comment><USER6> stretching your wrists and forearms (their inner sides) can also be a good help in fighting this kind of pain (speaking from experience)

<comment><USER5> Yes. And Thera-Band exercises.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I go lift heavy barbells in the gym. A strong back is a healthy back.

<comment><USER8> As long as what you life is not _too_ heavy. Than it becomes very unhealthy.

<comment> yoz-y If you can lift it with proper form, then it is not too heavy. But you definitely need to watch out for that.

<comment><USER8> Yes, proper form will be absolutely fine. But as the weight gets heavy for you, keeping a great form will be very difficult. You see many weight lifting olympians getting serious injuries.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> As someone who has made huge progress on posture over a long period of time, my first recommended steps for you would be:

1\. Watch the "Deskbound" Google Talk by Kelly Starett [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kfg_e6YG37U](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kfg_e6YG37U)

2\. Read and do the exercises in _Awareness Through Movement_ by Moshe Feldenkrais.

3\. Get into the habit of wiggling and shifting your body throughout the day. And get into the habit of devoting regular time to being more conscious of where your muscles are and how you are using them.

4\. Trigger Point Therapy is amazing for self-treating body pain, if you are willing to experience short bursts of pain during the treatment.

<comment><USER10> Ditto on the Feldenkrais method. Worked with a practitioner to resolve an RSI.

Rewrites how your body perceives itself and addresses the movement / freezing habits which cause injuries.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> I've had few/any complaints since strapping one of these to my cheapo office chair (at the recommendation of a spine/back specialist):

[https://www.amazon.com/Original-McKenzie-Lumbar-Roll- OPTP/dp...](https://www.amazon.com/Original-McKenzie-Lumbar-Roll- OPTP/dp/B000H48WYA/ref=sr_1_3_a_it?ie=UTF8&qid=1475764233&sr=8-3&keywords=lumbar+back+roll)

The extra lumbar support is really comfortable, and it sort of subtly nudges you to stay in a healthy position. Even when I'm completely unmindful of my posture, it keeps a healthy arch in my back.

I also take a 20 - 30 minute walk at lunch several days a week.

<comment><USER12> I agree. Get a good chair.

Years ago, I had to sit in one of those leather OfficeMax chairs. I developed all sorts of back pain. I realized it was the chair when I changed jobs (and chairs) and the back pain went away.

People have a lot of opinions about chairs, but I really like the Aeron chair.

<comment><USER13> They're worth the price, even new. But if you poke around a little and don't mind being less able to customize than the Herman Miller site makes possible, you can probably find gently used castoffs for half retail price or less.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> everyday stretching + yoga for 15-20 min in the end of the day has eliminated my backpain pretty much completely

I do not do anything special DURING the day except occasional (1-2 times a week) yoga sessions for 30-40 min at lunch

I was surprised to see that so little exercise had such a big impact on my well-being.

<comment><USER14> Yes on the YOGA. I thought it was for girls. BUT THEN i took a yoga class, AND "WOW". 1-2 times a week at the very least. Yoga works for real.

<comment><USER6> the other good part is that after a while, your body gets used to it and you kinda get addicted. If I skip my yoga sessions, I start craving for them.

<comment><USER14> Yeah. So if i miss a week, my body craves it. I try to go every sat morning and another night during the week. Your WHOLE body feels liberated! after a yoga sessions.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> I added a function to my bash that forces me to do pushups every 30 minutes (by turning off my monitor and keyboard). [https://gist.github.com/jerel/1fc7686263c9427522f945f755e0a7...](https://gist.github.com/jerel/1fc7686263c9427522f945f755e0a724) An hour after I start work in the morning a cron job reminds me to start a terminal and run `work 8` (or however many pushups I want to do that day). I do the pushups on my knuckles to avoid aggravating my wrists.

I also have a Kinesis Advantage keyboard, go to a good chiropractor, and do cycling. All of which seems to contribute to a (nearly) pain free existence.

</comment><comment><USER16> Exercise, and if you had to limit to just one thing. Pushups. They work your whole body, especially core, and back. You can do them anywhere. I like to take random breaks throughout the day, and just get down and do ten pushups. Secondly, a good chair. Currently using the Herman Miller Embody, and love it. Third, a good mattress. Just picked up a Saatva, and for $1000 delivered, it's by FAR the best mattress I've ever had.

Pushups, and don't skimp on the two things you spend the majority of your day in. Chairs and Beds.

</comment><comment><USER17> This book is the best one on the subject

[https://www.amazon.com/Treat-Your-Back-Robin- McKenzie/dp/095...](https://www.amazon.com/Treat-Your-Back-Robin- McKenzie/dp/0959774661)

The core idea is that most back pain is caused by the shortening of the muscles in your back. "Posture" is not a productive way to think about it because you don't have the flexibility to be in the correct posture. If you try to improve your posture without addressing flexibility you will feel more pain.

The exercises in that book will help, also try the "Cobra" position from yoga, and also this exercise

[http://reichandlowentherapy.org/Content/Practices/Grounding/...](http://reichandlowentherapy.org/Content/Practices/Grounding/bow.html)

If you stand up and do the "bow" whenever you have back pain you will probably feel better pretty quickly (1 to 2 weeks)

If you are popping NSAIDs or tylenol, also consider the antidepressant Venlafaxine. It is often highly effective on chronic pain, particularly things like back pain that definitely have a stress-related component.

</comment><comment><USER18> I started getting chronic back pain last year after being in a desk position for quite some time. I even considered switching jobs as I was that uncomfortable sitting. Some things that have helped:

Movement. Try to get up and move around at least once every hour or so. Going for a couple of 15 minute walks on breaks helps as well. It is the lack of movement and tightening of muscles that causes most of the pain.

Decent Office Chair. The one I have can lean back quite far, and I find this more comfortable. Try to change positions in your chair to keep your body posture and muscles moving.

Chiropractor. When my back starts acting up more than usual I'll see a chiropractor. This can help loosen up really tight joints and crack your spine or ribs back into proper position.

I've heard both swimming and yoga can both work wonders as well, but have yet to try these. Goodluck!

<comment><USER3> Since you mention a chiropractor, can I ask you the same question as I did in this comment [1]? Is your chiropractor an MD?

[1] [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12653040](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12653040)

<comment><USER18> I'm not sure if they use the same terminology in Canada, but the four chiropractors at the place I go to all use Dr. and DC as their title, so I'm guessing so.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> My posture improved and my occasional back pain went away entirely after I added "roman chair"[1] to my exercise routine. This is a machine at the gym where you lie on a pad a few feet off the floor and your legs are held in place, and you raise your upper body by contracting your lower back. Reading online now that it can be dangerous if you're too gung ho about it, so do it without weights at first. There are also a lot of other lower back exercises like deadlifts, etc, but this one works best for me.

I like dealing with this stuff through exercise because it avoids the annoyance of having to remind myself to sit a certain way or buying special chairs or desks.

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

<comment><USER20> To add to this, the hyperextension you are describing can be done in reverse too. There is a proper machine for it, called, unsurprisingly, the 'reverse hyper' but they are rare.

Here are a couple of videos showing different ways to do it without the machine

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ef4noCz83A4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ef4noCz83A4)

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3d9_W-- eUcI](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3d9_W--eUcI)

As with the standard hyper. Start slow, good form without any weight.

Give it a try!

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> Stretch hamstrings, piriformis, possibly quad lumborum for lower back. Get up every 15mins and give those poor hamstrings a break. Strengthen core, and not no, not just abs! Shoulder and scapula work is needed for upper. Good posture, no internal rotation. Shoulders back, pecs to the sky.

Myofascial release ball and or foam roll glutes, rhomboids and rotator cuffs a lot.

Lifting regularly has really fixed my posture. Bar the odd injury due to bad form and tight hamstrings. Work on core and mobility before starting to lift heavy.

Seeing a physio every so often is worth its weight in gold. There are lots of prehab things that can be done but its still worth seeing an expert. You only get one body and it is not meant to sit all day.

<comment><USER21> Don't have the relevant links handy on my phone, but stretching hamstrings and foam rolling glutes are frowned upon when you spend all day sitting. Strengthening the glutes+abs and gently stretching the lower back+hip flexors is a better idea. If you spend all day in a chair, your hamstrings might be a bit tight, but they'll also be weak as hell.

Foam rolling is a bit controversial, because the direction matters and the proper direction (to me) is non-intuitive.

A good physio is definitely a good idea. So is moving around as often as possible.

<comment><USER20> Is that frowned upon possibly in people who have pelvic tilt from bad posture sitting down? I know it can exacerbate some existing conditions. And yes, very good point, un-trained hamstrings are going to be very weak.

Foam rollers and myofascial balls definitely have controversy around them! But, anecdotal as it is, they work wonders for me and have been recommended by every physio i have seen.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> I have been working at a standup desk for about the last 10 years. To combat fatigue, I add a walk around the room every 20 minutes. This system has mostly eliminated all aches and pains for me.

</comment><comment><USER14> 10 min PLANK. First thing in the AM. Then before Bed. On Elbows.

<comment><USER23> Ten minute static front plank? Video or it didn't happen. I've heard if you can do 3min front and 3 min each side (on elbows) without rest or movement, you'll never have back problems. I believe it, but I've never met or seen anybody capable.

<comment><USER21> The world record is eight HOURS. Ten minutes is well within the realm of the easily achievable.

Link: [http://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/world-records/longest- ti...](http://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/world-records/longest-time-in-an- abdominal-plank-position)

<comment><USER14> Yeah! that chinese dude is straight gansta! LOL the marine before him is very tough too.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> I recently made a lil app that tracks how long you've been sitting at a computer using facial recognition. It's actually encouraged me to get up and off my computer when I've been sitting for too long; I can see I've been sitting in front the computer for like five hours. The time stops when you walk away. Super helpful.

[http://overworked.io](http://overworked.io)

</comment><comment><USER25> There is no "proper" sitting. The best thing you can do is to change your sitting position like every 30 minutes or so. Of course, standing up and doing some basic stretching would help too.

I am not recommending exercising for this specific reason, we should all be exercising regardless :)

</comment><comment><USER26> I am using MacBreakz [1] to remind me to take breaks and do some stretching throughout the day. I have not any back pains, but had severe RSI several years ago. A break program was the most important component to get better, along with an ergonomic mouse and keyboard.

[1] [http://www.publicspace.net/MacBreakZ/](http://www.publicspace.net/MacBreakZ/)

<comment><AUTHOR> What do you think of [http://www.curie.me/](http://www.curie.me/)?

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> Work out in the morning every day (strength stuff with dumbbells as the gym in the office doesnt have barbells).

I get up and walk around every couple of hours at least.

Slouch in the chair the rest of the time. Any time I've tried to sit according to "recommendations" (i.e. more straight up), my back hurts. Slouching at a 135 degree angle means no back pain for me.

</comment><comment><USER28> This may not work for everyone but I got one of those large rubber inflatable balls like you see in gyms and put it in my office. I lay on it and stretch my back. Also side note, check your shoes and chair. All of my back pain could be traced to either my shoes, or my chair. Consider buying your own chair if you have to.

</comment><comment><USER29> My team takes a scheduled break (its completely optional tho) at 3pm and we get a conference room open up a google hangout for remotes and go around the circle. Each person present picks a stretch and everyone tries it out. You get about 5-10 good stretches over about 10-15 min and its a nice break from the day.

</comment><comment><USER30> My lower back pain all but vanished after we tried one of those foam mattress startups (we chose Leesa). We bought one for my father a few months later, and it worked for him as well.

It takes courage to throw away a 4 year old $3k mattress that required special-order extra-deep fitted sheets. ;)

</comment><comment><USER10> Standing + adjustable standing desk do I can sit or stand.

Moving my feet - "fidgeting" to avoid frozen body patterns. Taking frequent breaks and rigorous walks at the advise of my father who is a cardiovascular surgeon.

</comment><comment><USER31> I use a Humanscale Freedom chair w/ headrest.

[http://www.humanscale.com/products/product.cfm?group=Freedom...](http://www.humanscale.com/products/product.cfm?group=FreedomTaskChairWithHeadrest)

</comment><comment><USER32> Try this exercise: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LT_dFRnmdGs](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LT_dFRnmdGs)

I've been doing it for a few days now and it is quick, easy and seems to help.

</comment><comment><USER33> I elevated my laptop with a 2ish inch folder holder. It's saved my neck from bending as much. The trade off is that my hands have to be elevated to type which might not work if you are typing extensively during the day.

</comment><comment><USER34> At least 10 min daily exercise for the back. Push ups, rolling on the back, back and forth while keeping your knees close to your chest, etc. The essential bit here is _daily_ . Use alarm or sth to remember, never skip it.

</comment><comment><USER35> I've read somewhere that Donald Knuth had suffered back pain. His doctor adviced him to swim three or four times a week and he eventually confirmed that swimming is an effective excercise to cure and avoid backpain.

<comment><USER36> Makes sense. When I had bad back pain I only really felt comfortable standing while in a pool, thanks to its buoyancy effect. I'd get out and almost immediately have back pain again. Thankfully I don't have that problem anymore.

</comment></comment><comment><USER37> Standing at work and losing weight have eliminated my back pain.

<comment><USER38> +1 for standing, it is hard work but does make you feel better. on the occasions I am in an office without a standing desk I find I have all sorts of aches and pains

<comment><USER39> I'm considering a treadmill desk. Any thoughts?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER40> Sit/stand desk, stretching.

<comment><USER21> Got any tips on convincing my employer to OK a sit/stand desk? Not allowed to bring in my own desk, sadly:-(

<comment><USER40> Get a better employer? :)

More seriously, having a note from your doctor might help. When I was having back pain I saw a physiatrist, who recommended a sit/stand desk and physical therapy (both effective), and I asked for a note for the desk which she happily supplied.</comment></comment></comment>


"Productivity" Tricks for the Neurotic, Manic-Depressive, and Crazy (Like Me) - <AUTHOR> http://www.fourhourworkweek.com/blog/2013/11/03/productivity-hacks/

<comment> ryan-allen So in this post, Tim mentions that he has seen a therapist "for the first time ever" because he was possibly doomed to life long pessimism, yet he implies that he is manic depressive, which may well be true, but then he wraps up his post with some 'tips' on how to manage, and if they work for him, great... or maybe not.

I don't feel so good about him throwing about this manic depressive stuff, especially in the coffee table self help circle-jerk industry. Bipolar disorder is a serious goddamn illness and it ruins peoples lives.

The average age people are diagnosed with bipolar is around 30, and that's a lot of life to live flipping from left to right listening to whimsy advise like this. This is really dangerous.

You can't give a list of '10 things to do' to someone with bipolar and expect them to sort themselves out. If Tim is truly suffering from biploar, that 'list of things that work' changes from week to week, possibly even day to day and hour to hour. The drive he feels is from his hypomania (that leads to a post like this and incredulous books like the 4 hour body) that inevitably leads to an exhausted crash and period of debilitating depression. Hell, he might even have a mixed episode and in a manic 'clarity' moment of the depression he decided to hang himself. This isn't simple conjecture, these are the kinds of things that happen.

For what it's worth, if you want to see what the many sides of bipolar are like you should watch "The life of a Manic Depressive" with Steven Fry. He interviews many famous people and regular civilians regarding their illness, and you'll find that the sample there are mostly not living 'inspired lives' like Tim, and his advise isn't going to help them in the long run I fear, if anything I fear it'll cause more people suffering to delay that first visit to a psychiatrist to seek help.

EDIT: I'd like to point out that if Tim's writings are a product of his hypomania/mania you can't blame him for it. But whatever.

</comment><comment><USER2> Here this guy claims to have put on 20 pounds of muscle in 8 weeks, and in another article he claims 34 pounds in 4 weeks. Hmm... I wouldn't invest in anything he was associated with, he is clearly full of shit.

<comment><USER3> So what? The previous 34lb gain happened about _8 years_ ago and that was probably his main focus at the time. Then, he was in his late 20s. Now, he's in his late 30s and obviously spread thin.

I love HN, but damn the negativity and dismissal. The guy is opening up on some pretty personal stuff and I for one appreciate it.

[edit: I've explained why I think the original 34lb gain is possibly legitimate in this comment: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6669680](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6669680) (though you should note that wasn't the point of _this_ comment.)]

<comment><USER4> Gaining 34 lbs of muscle in 4 weeks is impossible, even for a young man.

Even gaining 34 pounds of weight in 4 weeks (not just muscle, but fat as well) would be a serious challenge: 34 pounds of weight equates to about 119,000 kilocalories[1], meaning you would have to eat 119k/28=4,250 kcal a day in addition to your "maintenance" calorie level (i.e. the caloric energy that you burn with everyday activity -- usually 1500-2500 kcal). So he would have to eat about 7,000 kcal a day in order to gain weight at that rate.

Furthermore, gaining weight and gaining muscle are very different beasts. Muscle is only "built" when muscle fibers are broken down through strenuous activity and then rebuilt. This is not a rapid process. It's widely accepted in the weight training community that without steroids, muscle can be built at a rate of a pound or two a week at most.

So either the author is lying about his muscle gain, which throws his other statements into doubt, or more likely he's simply confused about how to actually measure weight vs. muscle gain, and reporting erroneous conclusions. There are many fitness-related misconceptions out there.

[1] [http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/calories/WT00011](http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/calories/WT00011)

<comment><USER3> Original article for reference: [http://www.fourhourworkweek.com/blog/2007/04/29/from-geek- to...](http://www.fourhourworkweek.com/blog/2007/04/29/from-geek-to-freak-how- i-gained-34-lbs-of-muscle-in-4-weeks/)

>Gaining 34 lbs of muscle in 4 weeks is impossible

I'm not so sure it's impossible. Claiming such seems like black swan fallacy. Lots of people were skeptical about it of course and I don't blame you for being skeptical. My original comment above was mainly in response to the divergent 2 numbers being clearly bullshit... they're not. I'll try to tackle what you said below:

The calorie part isn't much of an argument. With enough exertion and access to calorically dense, highly palatable foods, it's not that hard to eat several thousands calories in excess daily. A large pizza can easily be 2500 calories; a cheesecake can easily be 3000 calories.

But... your calculation is actually a straw man, since fat requires more calories than muscle. I can't find an exact number, but taking just knowing that caloric density of dietary protein is less than half that of dietary fat and that muscle mass is mostly water, I'm guessing at least half as much as fat, so closer to 1500 calories than 3500. Add a small detail to that in that he lost 3lb of fat during the same time period and the calculation is more like ((34 X 1500 kcal)-(3 X 3500 kcal))/28 = 1446 kcal a day in excess. So he'd be eating about 3500 calories per day. That's actually a fairly typical number for an American.

I really don't think he was confused about how to measure... he went to a human performance lab and used hydrostatic weighing, one of the most accurate methods.

Finally, call me naive, but I don't think he's lying either. I've read a lot of Ferriss's stuff and one theme that has come out is he's really good at finding loopholes that allow him to win by just barely staying within the rules. I'm no expert, but I've noticed that improvements in body composition are rapidly achievable for people who had a similar composition in the past and only temporarily deviated. I'm pretty sure Ferriss was jacked when younger (he used to wrestle).

Ferriss also references the Colorado experiment and the same point is brought up on the wikipedia page (the claim here by the way is a _63lb_ gain in one month... so you must really think that is BS):

>These claims are considered controversial because it was only performed with two subjects who were not "average," but regaining pre-existing muscle mass.

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

He may very well not have "built" the muscle, but simply regained the existing mass.

<comment><USER4> Good point about the caloric density of fat vs. muscle. It's kind of embarrassing to have forgotten about that point.

However, that still doesn't address the question of how someone could seriously put on 34 lb of muscle in one month... I think even if you're regaining "lost muscle," this still strikes me as implausible or at the very least unreproducible. I am not convinced that having some historical muscle suddenly entitles you to a ten-times-normal rate of muscle growth.

Also, I can tell you right away that the Colorado Experiment was BS. It would take a remarkably naive reader to think that the reported results of the "experiment" are legitimate.

I think you might be right about the "finding a loophole" type of thinking. In my mind, if someone uses a loophole to achieve a metric like "pounds of muscle gained," the accomplishment is nullified in the sense that it becomes useless as a learning tool, and as an anecdote it is downright dangerous... even if he actually gained 63 pounds of muscle by abusing "the rules," that's not useful (although it may still be rather impressive).

Well, I haven't read anything else Ferriss has written, so I don't have any background. But the claim itself is pretty outrageous.

<comment><USER3> Just because I find it interesting, let me just point out a couple examples Ferriss gives (and is up front about) to elaborate on "loopholes":

-Winning a kickboxing championship by 1) pretty drastic water loss to fit into a lower division and 2) TKO by repeatedly knocking his opponent out of the ring.

-Winning a world record in tango by getting the most consecutive spins in a minute.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> If he really is bipolar (manic-depressive is an outdated term that most of us don't use) this sounds like a very manic period after coming out of depression. The truth is somewhere in the middle. If he sustains this for more than 6 months it might be sustainable, otherwise his mania will run out and the depression will set back in.

</comment><comment><USER6> Are these really tips that are applicable to others or is blogging like this just another form of humble-bragging?

<comment><USER7> It's Tim Ferriss, man. (In my RSS feed this post is just above 'Startup snake oil').

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Humble bragging meets survivor bias.</comment>


Best syntax for a regex literal - <AUTHOR> I am working on a programming language.<p>What is the best syntax for regular expression literal?<p>`(...)<p>re (...)<p>$(...)<p>@(...)<p><...><p>/.../<p>(re:...)<p>`...` <comment><USER2> "^[AEIOU]{1}.+[aeiou]{1}$" or `(^[AEIOU]{1}.+[aeiou]{1}$) or re (^[AEIOU]{1}.+[aeiou]{1}$) or @(^[AEIOU]{1}.+[aeiou]{1}$) or <^[AEIOU]{1}.+[aeiou]{1}$> or /^[AEIOU]{1}.+[aeiou]{1}$/ or (re:^[AEIOU]{1}.+[aeiou]{1}$) or `^[AEIOU]{1}.+[aeiou]{1}$`

all look ugly. I would either use a triple distinct character set like python with """^[AEIOU]{1}.+[aeiou]{1}$""" or <comment>^[AEIOU]{1}.+[aeiou]{1}$<comment> but for simplicity you should use the re(...) one because you can intuitively know where the wrapper starts and ends.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks

<comment><AUTHOR> I also use an alternative regex syntax to improve readability. For example:

re ("abc" | ["0"-"9"]+)

means this:

/abc|[0-9]+/

(You can put whitespaceses into the literal)

<comment><USER3> PCRE have the /x modifier to allow whitespace _and_ comments.

When reinventing the wheel, it's hard to top what other do already pretty well. Also, be warned people have to learn your syntax and this will probably stop them using it.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Developers, developers, developers ignoring, ignoring, ignoring Vista, Vista Vista - <AUTHOR> http://venturebeat.com/2008/06/16/developers-developers-developers-ignoring-ignoring-ignoring-vista-vista-vista/ <comment><USER2> Sooooo... I develop for windows. And though I'm not writing for vista (who would?), I am using the toolchain. Most of which can easily target XP. It's a very nice improvement over what came before. Should I ever have to run my software on vista, it'll probably work pretty well. I suspect that most windows devs nowadays are in the same boat.

</comment><comment><USER3> <obligatory_apple_fanboy_comment>It's because they're all too busy porting their apps to the iPhone.</obligatory_apple_fanboy_comment></comment>


Launch HN: Balto (YC W19) – Fantasy Sports People Bet On - <AUTHOR> Hi everyone! We're Spencer, Nick, and Joel, co-founders of Balto (https://www.playbalto.com). We develop tools for users to organize fantasy sports games that people bet on. Yes, we said it, betting! March Madness brackets, NFL survivor pools, PGA pickems and more.
With laws changing, sports gambling is becoming a reality in all states. Last year, 60M brackets were filled out with over $10B dollars wagered for March Madness. This is just one subset of the market we're going after. Despite these figures, games such as brackets, survivor pools and pickems continue to be overlooked while cumulative wagers climb to an estimated $20B+.
Sports run in our DNA. We're former athletes that come from sports families—Nick's the son of Hall of Fame Quarterback, Joe Montana. With sports deeply embedded in our lives, we always wondered what happens beyond the playing field the three of us met on.
For years, we ran sports betting pools and leagues for our friends, co-workers and others as a hobby. Things began to take off dramatically, but posed a major problem. The software that we used was outdated and not conducive for managers (ourselves) or the bettors (users). We saw this as a major opportunity to go after due to the gambling laws and space evolving.
Within a few short months we'd built an enhanced platform for managers and bettors to play on: Balto. Not only did we notice high retention amongst our users from game-to-game, but the increased social interaction and engagement amongst peers made our platform more sticky.
Aside from Balto, the current options for users are third-party websites or large antiquated media companies, which aren't betting or gaming companies. These platforms prioritize content and ads over a great UX, and completely miss on delivering the social interactions inherent to what makes playing these games (with your friends and family) so much fun.
We aim to become the go-to platform that aggregates all betting pool games for casual fans and gamblers. We're putting the user experience at the forefront of the product by enhancing the social experience for users, the management tools for league organizers, and placing all of your favorite games onto one, mobile-first platform. It's a tall task, especially when factoring in the laws, but it's a space we're beyond passionate about.
To test the product, feel free to visit www.playbalto.com. We're currently running a free to play March Madness Challenge!
Feedback is more than welcome, don't hesitate to share in the comments. We're eager to hear your thoughts, ideas and experiences in this space. Thanks! <comment><USER2> I would've expected yc's mission statement to shed some light on how they justified funding a bookie. Turns out yc has no ethical/moral/etc grounds in their mission or about us. Spend your money how you see fit, but I would've hoped you'd build some ethics into your business.

[https://www.ycombinator.com/principles/](https://www.ycombinator.com/principles/)

[https://www.ycombinator.com/about/](https://www.ycombinator.com/about/)

(For context - I've worked closely with a number of large betting websites like mybookie.ag. 100% of my contact with them has been toxic. My employer explicitly does not fire clients but an exception was made after I recorded a call with them. Similar situations occurred freelancing.)

<comment><USER3> What exactly is your qualm with them investing in this company?

If you have a problem with gambling, take that up with your legislators. But I wouldn't expect you to have an issue with gambling, since you, ya know... literally earned a living working with the incumbents.

<comment><USER4> > If you have a problem with gambling, take that up with your legislators

Legal != Ethical

It's perfectly reasonable for people to be upset about things that are legal. In fact, almost every new law originates under those conditions.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> I guess it isn't clear to me what this actually does.

Every year I do a March Madness pool, a survivor pool, a couple fantasy football leagues, a college pickem, a superbowl grid, and a half dozen NFL game bets.

The idea here is that I should do some of or maybe all of these on this platform, rather then the various other ones I use?

I think the major platforms of these are pretty good, we use a smaller one for a college pick em that is pretty bad but we tolerate.

Is the value add here just the the UI is nicer and doesn't have ads? Or is there something else I'm missing?

I'm doing a vegas march madness with friends and I'll see if we can use Balto for our pools.

Congrats on the launch!

<comment><USER5> I think the point is to integrate the money with the bracket, and have it update live and accurately. I assume none of the existing platforms you use take money, hold the pot, and disburse to the winner?

<comment><USER6> > I assume none of the existing platforms you use take money, hold the pot, > and disburse to the winner?

To be fair, there's a good reason for that! [0]

But its not clear that's what's happening. Usually with grey area startups there's a section that at least attempts to describe why they are not running afoul of the law. This site under legal information is just a privacy policy, so, yeah I guess they should spend a bit more time explaining how they will make money. Ads?

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

<comment><USER7> We'll make money through affiliate marketing and premium features. We're strictly a technology company and don't touch or handle any money.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Posting anon due to industry reasons.

How in the world was this invested in?

1\. It's unclear how, at least in the context of March Madness, this is preferable to any number of alternatives. Given that they don't touch money, it's functionally equivalent to either running an offline pool, or using an existing site with years upon years of consumer behavior and content integration like CBS, ESPN, or Yahoo!. Better UX? Yeah, maybe, but there are dozens of companies that have tried and failed on that premise in the fantasy space: FleaFlicker, Sleeperbot, and on and on. Some guy from the Apprentice had a company doing exactly this and spectacularly failed. People go where they already go as a habit, not to some new destination.

2\. On the other formats, I'm skeptical that you'd have enough people willing to join pools around The Bachelor or what have you, or else you'd see it already. Even if I'm wrong, you run into the problem of (#3) plus generally a scale problem; that maxes around at a very low total unique visitor count.

3\. Under the thesis that this might eventually turn into a platform that accepts and handles money, that seems extremely unlikely if you've seen how skin regulation has gone now that NJ is up and legalized. I can't see a world where an existing license holder would take a flyer on this when you've got the FanDuels and the DraftKings (not to mention the inevitable strong European entry in the market) with vastly larger budgets and user databases to leverage. Further to that, in the event these guys take off, there's absolutely no reason why those companies wouldn't just replicate this functionality. Anyone who follows Europe knows that over time, features diverge to parity.

It's going to be a dickish statement, but I don't see how it's not 100% true: there's no way this gets invested in if this kid's dad wasn't Joe Montana. Literally the only logic I could theoretically buy is that the name recognition of Joe Montana + YC would give them a shot at a license in a multi-skin state where a lower-end holder would be willing to give them a shot. Free to play either as a service (Chalkline, Sportcaller) or as the end game unto itself (#1, #2) is dead on arrival.

<comment><USER9> Joe Montana having a VC firm probably helped

<comment><USER8> Plenty of current athletes with lots of money to burn as well. I can count on one hand how many cases I've seen an athlete actually be value-add; in most cases they're the dumbest of dumb money who vastly overrate the influencer value of their social network.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> >Sports run in our DNA. We're former athletes that come from sports families—Nick's the son of Hall of Fame Quarterback, Joe Montana.

I'd be more impressed if you had the sons of Johnnie Cochran and Jackie Chiles. This idea, "Let's make money on internet gambling" isn't novel, it's just been a legal nightmare in the USA. And while it's no longer clearly illegal on a federal scope every state will have their own ideas.

Washington state, for example, made online poker a felony long before the federal government got around to closing all the sites. Even now the Native Americans have introduced a bill making sports books illegal in Washington, except on tribal lands, of course.

<comment><AUTHOR> It's definitely a challenging space with the law. However, we're confident with the direction things are moving state by state --but it'll certainly take time and run its course through complexities.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> The name is REALLY interesting to me as a Greek: in greeklish (using latin/english characters to transcribe greek ones -- pretty common before unicode caught on everywhere), "Balto" reads like "Valto". Now, "Valto" loosely translates to "score it!", and it's a famous snippet of a sports commentator, where he was talking to a football (ok, _soccer_ ) player about to score a very important goal.

Good luck guys!

<comment><USER12> "Balto" was also the name of Elizabeth Holmes' (of Theranos fame) dog:

 _For Holmes, the dog represented the journey that lay ahead for Theranos. As she explained to colleagues at the company's headquarters, in Palo Alto, he was named after the world-famous sled dog who, in 1925, led a team of huskies on a dangerous, 600-mile trek from Nenana, Alaska, to remote Nome, Alaska, bearing an antitoxin that was used to fight a diphtheria outbreak. There is even a statue of Balto in New York's Central Park, Holmes told one former employee. The metaphorical connection was obvious. In Holmes's telling, Balto's perseverance mirrored her own. His voyage with the life-changing drug was not so different from her ambition._

[https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/02/inside-elizabeth- hol...](https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/02/inside-elizabeth-holmess- final-months-at-theranos)

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> I know paypal won't process transactions where users mention that the payment is for fantasy sports or brackets. I'm assuming it's for some kind of legal reason. Why is Balto allowed to process transactions for sports betting?

<comment><USER14> I've been thinking about this as a startup idea for a few years now, every time I gave up because of legal concerns and regulations. Stripe also does not allow betting. I am guessing Balto had to use a payment provider that works with adult and gambling companies... Most likely international (yikes).

<comment><USER7> We're strictly a technology company and don't touch or handle any money. Our emphasis is on the user experience and driving engagement through social interactions on our platform.

<comment><USER13> So, it's software to organize bracket/survivor/whatever pools and whomever is using it would have to make sure money is collected and payment is made? The void it fills is that existing fantasy services don't do brackets and survivor pools?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> > With laws changing, sports gambling is becoming a reality in all states.

What is the current status in the US? Isnt it federally prohibit, in addition to state level regulation ?

And i any case, dont u have to be specifically registered (and i guess taxed and fee-ed) for various betting activities ?

<comment><AUTHOR> +1 to the comment below. Last May, the United States Supreme Court ruled 7-2 that a 25-year-old federal law that prohibited sports betting outside Nevada is unconstitutional - allowing states to pass their own laws either allowing or prohibiting betting on professional and college sports. Here's a link discussing this as well as new states that have opened up to sports betting: [https://www.cincinnati.com/story/sports/2019/02/21/state- sta...](https://www.cincinnati.com/story/sports/2019/02/21/state-state- sportsbooks-legalized-sports-gambling-tracker/2938122002/)

<comment><USER8> Great, but how does that impact you? How are you going to edge companies who are much larger than you, for the finite number of skins allowed in each state? What's your plan for working with the regulators, including the necessary amount of lobbying and retail adjacency you need?

Just saying "Well, we can eventually become a paid host of these games" isn't enough and you haven't done that; just because it's now legal in a singular state doesn't mean that just anyone will be able to get licensed and regulated.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Interesting. I have been playing NFL with crypto at [https://cryptocup.io](https://cryptocup.io) and now are doing soccer. Idea similar, but using crypto and smart contracts. Great UX as well

</comment><comment><USER17> Not only does it blow my mind that betting is legal, states run their own goddamn lotteries and made more than $70 billion of revenue doing that in 2014. [0]

I'm pretty sure lotteries have destroyed more lives than all of the drugs combined.

0: [https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/05/lotteri...](https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/05/lotteries- americas-70-billion-shame/392870/)

<comment><USER18> That's quite a claim, what makes you think state lotteries ruin any lives at all? Per capita lottery spend was at just $225 a year in 2016 [0], so no one is going broke playing the lottery, and the revenues typically go to state programs around education.

[0] [https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2018/10/23/per- capit...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2018/10/23/per-capita- lottery-spending-has-doubled-since)

<comment><USER19> Per capita may be $225 but gambling isn't distributed evenly through the population. I live in a country with very relaxed laws and I've seen the social problems that unrestricted gambling leads to.

<comment><USER20> And those problems exist whether you ban gambling or not. Do you think that no-one is addicted to heroin because it is illegal? It is kind of farcical.

If you regulate gambling properly, you actually have tools to control harm. If you don't, then you are increasing harm.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> I suggest email signup, I refuse to do social media login, but I know HN users are not the norm with that...

<comment><USER22> This was a huge request on our app as well, we did it, and about 10% of our users are email sign-up.

On the flip side, when/if you do decide to go with email sign-up, be prepared that users who once signed-in with their social media account will start signing in with their email address and expecting it to work, even though they never showed a password.

It seems to me users use the same social media service to sign into most services, so they don't get confused between facebook or google login buttons, but give them an email field, and they get confused as to how they have been signing in in the past.

Anyone else seen similar behavior? Or is it just us?

<comment><USER23> We're venturing a bit off topic here, but yes I can understand a user with many logins on many sites may not remember which they used on yours. You can't really remind them on failed login without subjecting yourself to leaking that a user is a member of your service (or full blown user enumeration attacks).

In these cases where social logins are the primary approach most users use, I suggest making the email login look like a social login button, but make it clear it's email (i.e. more than just an icon) and trust only the few I-never- use-social-login users will leverage it while not confusing the others.

<comment><USER7> This is great advice, thank you!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> a</comment>


Ask HN: Anyone know of a real-time message board or one in development? - <AUTHOR>

It'd be nice to just leave a message board thread open and watch as the replies are posted. Or similarly watch as comments are posted on HN and elsewhere.
The refresh is slowly being eliminated.
Thoughts? <comment><USER2> What technologies would be needed to make this happen? There was a Websockets demo yesterday, which I guess is one way..that hardly seems to be supported by any browsers in use. What else.. is Ajax polling the only other method used now?

<comment><AUTHOR> Facebook and Twitter and others are doing it, so the technology must be out there.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> There were plenty of implementations, at least on the demo level using Websockets & similar.

Here's one example: <http://chat.nodejs.org/></comment>


JavaOne 2013 Roundup: Java 8 is Revolutionary, Java is back - <AUTHOR> http://www.infoq.com/articles/javaone2013-roundup

<comment><USER2> Since Oracle started shipping malware/spyware on every damn Java update, we where forced to abandon it and we can't recommend it to any customer. Considering the vast amount of warnings each time a client start a remote- control applet, it's just not usable any longer.

</comment><comment><USER3> So it appears that they are de-siloing their different stacks. I'm curious how well this will go. But I'm amazed how much they have open sourced!

Frankly, the amount of technologies in Java are remarkable. How does one know where to even start?!?</comment>


The past and future of laundry - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/@tashian/the-past-and-future-of-laundry-6628d85828b3#.57mjwfo66 <comment><USER2> Wonder what the author thinks of Cleanly, a YC startup: [https://angel.co/cleanly](https://angel.co/cleanly)

<comment><USER3> Don't forget the excellent [http://nymag.com/news/features/laundry- apps-2014-5/#print](http://nymag.com/news/features/laundry-apps-2014-5/#print) too.

Plus, [https://angel.co/laundry-1](https://angel.co/laundry-1)</comment></comment>


Romanian hacker Guccifer: I breached Clinton server, 'it was easy' - <AUTHOR> http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/05/04/romanian-hacker-guccifer-breached-clinton-server-it-was-easy.html <comment><USER2> They should basically release all of it. If a single Romanian hacker has it, China and Russia have all of it also. The only people kept in the dark will be US citizens.

<comment><USER3> I mean, he used Russian VPNs.

<comment><USER2> I figured that the Russians knew about her private email address almost immediately, and probed the server directly.

I mean, she was going to be SecState - any Russian spy tasked with watching her who didn't try it, should be fired :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> The most interesting part of the article:

 _> In the process of mining data from the Blumenthal account, Lazar said he came across evidence that others were on the Clinton server.

> "As far as I remember, yes, there were … up to 10, like, IPs from other > parts of the world," he said._

<comment><USER5> It's not even remotely interesting that a mail server used (unofficially) by the State Department would be accessed from around the world... many of their officials travel constantly.

<comment><USER6> I don't think he's talking about accessing email on the server, but rather that others had root access on the box.

<comment><USER5> That's quite a jump to make... how does 12 IPs authenticating successfully translate to root access? We already know who root was, and it was a State Department admin.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Microsoft to Unveil Multiple iPad Challengers - <AUTHOR> http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/microsoft_to_unveil_multiple_ipad_challengers_with.php

<comment><USER2> This seems to be part of Microsofts general decline lately. I don't believe consumers want to have to choose from 6 or 8 different tablets. They just want someone to tell them what is the one ideal tablet. There will always be a subset of users who like all the options and configurations, but I think a larger group of people fear buyers remorse over choosing the wrong option. Not to mention get overwhelmed by having to research all the different choices in the first place.</comment>


A visual explanation for regularization of linear models - <AUTHOR> https://explained.ai/regularization/index.html <comment><USER2> > The simple reason is that that illustration shows how we regularize models > conceptually, with hard constraints, not how we actually implement > regularization, with soft constraints!

Note that these are equivalent. In particular, assuming the two problems are (for some loss "l" and regularizer "r")

        minimize  l(θ) + λr(θ),

and

        minimize    l(θ)
        subject to  r(θ) ≤ M,

for every λ there exists an M and for every M there exists a λ such that the resulting problems are equivalent, in the sense that a solution for one is a solution for the other. (Of course, under some fairly general regularity conditions, but these hold for all given examples). I agree that this is not often stated in many introductory texts, but the intuitive image is the same.

<comment><USER3> > for every λ there exists an M and for every M there exists a λ such that the > resulting problems are equivalent

Sorry, this might be a tad off-topic. I have over the last month being thinking extensively on the topic.

As far as I can see, the above is actually not true. If the trade-off between l(θ) and r(θ) is concave (which might occur frequently for a lot of problems), you will not find all the solutions with the first approach you would find with the second approach. With the first approach you cannot find points on the concave parts of the pareto-curve, while with the second approach you can walk the whole pareto curve. When minimizing a linear combination of losses, you can only find the points on the ends of the concave part of a pareto curve.

Is there a reason the above is not correct? I.e. do you have some more explanation or a source on the "fairly general regularity conditions" you mentioned? It would help me out a lot.

<comment><USER2> Well, I'm not sure what you mean by "concave part of a Pareto curve." (Perhaps you meant convex?) Usually, the Pareto curve is the epigraph of the individual function evaluations at the optimal points, so, unless your problem is highly nonconvex, the Pareto curve is likely to be convex.

More specifically, the tradeoff curve is defined as the following: letting θ(λ) be the optimal solution of the first optimization problem at fixed λ, the Pareto optimal curve/frontier is the _epigraph_ of the set of of all (l(θ(λ)), r(θ(λ))). I.e.,

        {(x, y) | x ≥ l(θ(λ)), y ≥ r(θ(λ)), λ ∈ ℝ}

If l and r are convex functions, then this curve is guaranteed to be convex. A similar curve can be defined for the second problem (over M instead of λ), and both curves are equal (in the sense that they both include the same points).

Note that this equivalency between both problems doesn't require convexity; for example, lower semi-continuity of l and r with r bounded from below [0], are sufficient conditions that would include essentially all functions used in ML.

\-----

[0] Boundedness is needed in this case since, otherwise, we could just have r(θ) = -∞ for a bunch of points, in which case we would always choose this θ, no matter how large or small λ is (except at λ = 0) in problem (1), whereas it would have a different effect in problem (2).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> The world certainly doesn't need yet another article on the mechanics of regularized linear models. What's lacking is a simple and intuitive explanation for what exactly is going on during regularization. The goal of this article is to explain how regularization behaves visually, dispelling some myths and answering important questions along the way.

<comment><USER4> Totally. Often, I see a copy paste of that canonical regularization figure in TL,DR 1. which I've never seen adequately explained.

Until this post.

Edit: Ok and now I see what you did there ;)

<comment><AUTHOR> haha. :) Yeah, I got stuck for SOOooo long trying to reconcile the standard picture from ESL book with the math. Turns out they don't match! The picture is for a hard constraint whereas the math penalty term just makes bigger coefficients more expensive. Man, that really threw me.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I wrote a small post to explain the bias-variance trade-off in OLS visually, leaving it here in case it helps anyone: [https://towardsdatascience.com/bias- and-variance-in-linear-m...](https://towardsdatascience.com/bias-and-variance- in-linear-models-e772546e0c30)</comment>