Open-sourcing CraftAssist for studying collaborative bots in Minecraft - <AUTHOR> https://ai.facebook.com/blog/craftassist-platform-for-collaborative-minecraft-bots/ <comment><USER2> Could it be made to work into minetest, the OSS minecraft?

<comment><USER3> Hi, I'm one of the authors. CraftAssist communicates with the Minecraft server via an implementation of the Minecraft protocol available at [1]. This is compiled into a pybind module which is imported by (python) agent code. You should be able to write a network client for Minetest that provides the same python interface (e.g. functions to move, place blocks, and fetch cuboids of blocks from the environment) and import this instead, while still making use of the pure python modules built on top (e.g. the semantic parser, the Tasks, and the memory system).

[1] [https://github.com/facebookresearch/craftassist/tree/master/...](https://github.com/facebookresearch/craftassist/tree/master/client)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Wow, this is some amazing stuff! Congratulations!</comment>


Recovering stolen bitcoin: a digital wild goose chase - <AUTHOR> http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/dec/09/recovering-stolen-bitcoin-sheep-marketplace-trading-digital-currency-money <comment><USER2> starting from a single compromised wallet, how difficult it is to follow all the ramifications until you end up with branches with that sum?

even if you end up with one coin per wallet, you just found all the wallets the thief created or people/exchange that he used to off load it...</comment>


73% of developers who don't use AI plan to learn how in 2018 - <AUTHOR> https://www.techrepublic.com/article/73-of-developers-who-dont-use-ai-plan-to-learn-how-in-2018/ <comment><USER2> "17% of developers worked with AI or machine learning in 2017."

Really? That seems very high to me. Although maybe developers are a smaller pool than I thought (is making a website still development these days)? Also, same for the number of people who think PHP is #1 language (27%) (next, python 24%).

<comment><USER3> genuinely curious, why would making website not be development? you mean using wix/squarespace ? or something else?

<comment><USER4> It would be but if 90% of you are coding is website frontends or CRUD like back ends then your skill set is fairly limited and you wouldn't be thinking about learning AI.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> It is the fashion industry....</comment>


Recession Already Grips Corners of U.S., Menacing Trump's 2020 Bid - <AUTHOR> https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2019-09-09/a-manufacturing-recession-could-cost-trump-a-second-term <comment><USER2> "job" measurement isn't an adequate metric as some jobs are high earners and some jobs pay so little that you need more than one just to keep your head above water. So people may be happier or unhappier than suggested by this metric.

In other words I don't think the article really addresses its own thesis.

<comment><USER3> Yup. Also doesn't measure the fact that some people have multiple jobs, when wages go up they often ditch one. Not to mention things like labour participation rate, underemployment, etc...

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Economists have correctly predicted 5 out of the last 3 recessions.

</comment><comment><USER5> My contacts in various parts of the manufacturing sector tell me they're already pulling back but keeping it quiet. Nobody wants to be the first to proclaim gloom and doom.

<comment><USER6> Similar situation over here in Germany. New orders have dropped greatly in some branches of the industry that I know about.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> I want nothing more than for Trump to get unseated, but it amazes me how people pin the entirety of the economy's ebbs and flows on whoever was most recently president.

Edit: the sitting president of course has influence on the big picture, but there are many other factors at play, some of which are inevitable

<comment><USER8> Anecdote: I have seen my shares of stock dip by up to 5% because of his tweets.

<comment><USER9> [https://www.vox.com/policy-and- politics/2019/9/9/20857451/tr...](https://www.vox.com/policy-and- politics/2019/9/9/20857451/trump-stock-market-tweet-volfefe-jpmorgan-twitter)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> The infographic shows 4 of Trump's swing states with job gains vs. 3 with job losses. My US geography isn't perfect, but it looks like losses vs. gains across states are pretty equal.

I read the whole article, they don't do a great job backing up their thesis, instead using anecdotes.

> His advisers argue that the blame for any slowdown rests with a Federal > Reserve that last year hiked interest rates too quickly and a strong dollar > that makes U.S. exports less competitive.

They're not wrong. Interest rate hikes reduce the amount of debt companies (or farmers) can take on to pay for equipment and rates that are too high are a drag on the economy. Low rates encourage growth.

<comment><USER10> > They're not wrong.

They're not right, either. What's far more important for farmers and loan officers is a market for selling the product.

Normally it's sort of silly to point a finger at the president for larger market trends, but if ever culpability for market trends could be laid at a president's feet, it'd be for something exactly like a poorly executed trade war. On the other hand, the market has been on a nearly 10 year run. Some sort of slowdown was inevitable.

The real story is that the tax cuts did squat to help the economy, and instead resulted in extraordinary deficits, precisely as predicated by everybody whose professional credibility was on the line.

<comment><USER11> > The real story is that the tax cuts did squat to help the economy, and > instead resulted in extraordinary deficits, precisely as predicated by > everybody whose professional credibility was on the line.

This is a very partisan opinion. Objectively assessing how much the tax cuts helped or didn't help the economy is impossible, but seeing what professionals predicted and then observed is not. For example the Congress has the Joint Committee on Taxation [1], whose job is to estimate the impact of various tax cuts (among other things). Their assessment was an impact on GDP of about 0.8% on average for the first decade [2]. Despite this, they also predicted a one trillion reduction in revenues overall (for the first decade). Separately, the Congressional Budget Office (which in this case has overlapping duties with the JCT), predicted a reduction in revenues of about 1.4 trillion for one decade [3] and an average impact on real GDP of 0.7% over the same period [4].

>and instead resulted in extraordinary deficits

The tax cuts did increased the deficits, but the main reason for the deficit increase is the military spending. To be more precise, the deficit increased by $194 BN between 2016 and 2018 ([5],[6]), and the military spending has increased by $123 BN over the same period, [7].

[1] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Congress_Joint_C...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Congress_Joint_Committee_on_Taxation) [2] [https://www.jct.gov/publications.html?func=startdown&id=5045](https://www.jct.gov/publications.html?func=startdown&id=5045)

[3] [https://www.cbo.gov/publication/53312](https://www.cbo.gov/publication/53312)

[4] [https://www.cbo.gov/publication/53787](https://www.cbo.gov/publication/53787)

[5] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_United_States_federal_bud...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_United_States_federal_budget)

[6] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_United_States_federal_bud...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_United_States_federal_budget)

[7] [https://www.thebalance.com/u-s-military-budget-components- ch...](https://www.thebalance.com/u-s-military-budget-components-challenges- growth-3306320)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Trump has basically nuked the farmers... so watch them all vote him out.

<comment><USER13> The farmers actually have doubled down on Trump and believe conspiracies that the USDA is just out to get him. [1]

Never thought I'd actually witness the emperor has no clothes.

[1] [https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/10/reuters-america-many-u-s- far...](https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/10/reuters-america-many-u-s-farmers-fume- at-washington-not-trump-over-biofuel-trade-policies.html)

<comment><USER12> He is down 10% in farm support and that number will continue to drop as the new reality continues to set in over the next year.</comment></comment></comment>


Politweets - When Twitter gets political - <AUTHOR> http://politweets.com/ <comment><USER2> This is a very confusing site for something that seems like it should be simple.

The center column names look like they should be clickable, but they're not. The republican candidates look like they're disabled because their background has a different color not used anywhere on the site, whereas the democrats' names' background is about the same color and brightness as the tweets' background.

The "candidate popularity" banner presumably refers to the center column, but really I don't know. For a second I thought the whole site was about "candidate popularity", but again, I don't really know.

I don't know what the purpose of this site is. I don't have a clear idea of how it works, so I don't know what to expect. Does it just display all tweets which mention a candidate's name?

I do like the aesthetics though.

</comment><comment><USER3> Thanks for your feedback, we are working to eliminate a lot of what you have pointed out. The real key here is making the public twitter stream of information legible, separate the signal(s) from the noise.</comment>


Microsoft's president has called on the US to end Huawei ban - <AUTHOR> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-49753460 <comment><USER2> Huawei is security risk because their buggy software and slow of response to security issues, not malicious backdoor. They are just like everyone else, just more so.

Huawei has been under microscope for decade or more. Not just governments, but big telco's in US, EU and Asia have been looking into it. Nothing intentional has been found. At the same time their firmware is buggy as hell and they do the absolute minimum to fix them when something is found.

It's not unreasonable to ban Huawei in some areas because their systems are insecure but blanket ban is too much.</comment>


Building a Black Hole for Interstellar Led to an Amazing Scientific Discovery - <AUTHOR> http://www.wired.com/2014/10/astrophysics-interstellar-black-hole/

<comment><USER2> Not sure if this is advertising for the film or an actual discovery.

<comment><USER3> The idea that the far side of the accretion disk would form a halo appears to be kind of new, at least in terms of visualization.</comment></comment>


How bad is the California drought? - <AUTHOR> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/11192081/How-bad-is-the-California-drought.html

<comment><USER2> It's bad. I recently drove to LA through the central valley, and in 18 years of doing that drive, I've _never_ seen it so dry. Whole farms are just gone, everything is brown.

There are a couple of problems preventing us from saving more water though.

#1, we had a drought in the 80s. A lot of people learned to conserve then and never changed their habits (like me). There is no way I could use 20% less water -- I already use the minimum. I have buckets all over the house for reuse, for example. My next step is a gray water system, which is expensive.

Which leads to #2, water is way to cheap in this state. I would have expected my water bill to go up during the drought. It's gone down. It's insane. Sure, let's keep tier one usage cheap so we don't destroy the poor, but tier two and up? It should be 10x what it is. _That_ would make people conserve.

<comment><USER3> The number 1 way to conserve water is to eat less meat. I don't think that people have learned this yet and most people have not changed their habits to consume less meat.

Serious question: why is it acceptable to change all kinds of behaviors, take shorter showers, fix leaks, turn off taps, and even install gray water systems, yet not change our behavior to eat less meat?

If you didn't eat beef for one day (1/2 lb beef = 1,250 gallons of fresh water) it could be the same as not showering for a month.

Sources: [http://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/farm-practices- management/irr...](http://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/farm-practices- management/irrigation-water-use/background.aspx)

[http://www.ewg.org/meateatersguide/interactive- graphic/water...](http://www.ewg.org/meateatersguide/interactive- graphic/water/)

<comment><USER4> The latest issue of National Geographic has a map showing meat calories consumed per-capita for various countries and regions around the world. The US is high, but more-or-less right on par (or a little under) with many other places: Brazil, western Europe, northern Europe, Australia, and China[1]. Some countries are considerably higher, including Argentina and Finland.

This is, indeed, a global phenomenon, not a US one.

[1] China is interesting in that the meat _calories_ consumed is high, but the _amount_ (in weight?) of meat consumed is less. This due to the consumed meat being largely high-fat-content pork.

<comment><USER3> Even if it is a global phenomenon, and even if the US is not the worst in terms of meat calories consumer per-capita, that doesn't negate the fact that we could still improve our environmental impact by eating less meat.

It's not a competition, we can still make an impact locally and globally by eating less meat.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I think the issue isn't only the lack of rain, it's the immense use of water. I read at some point recently farmers have moved to crops such as pistachio nuts which have high margins, but take something like 1 gallon of water per nut.

And water usage in rich areas actually increased year-over-year, which is infuriating. We had rain throughout the winter, and even a couple of summer showers recently which is rare, and if you look at Crystal Springs reservoir, the water levels don't look as bad as some of the pictures you see on the news.

So I think this is more a case of demand vs supply. What hasn't increased however, is our water rates. Places in Hillsborough, a rich area of SV, use in excess of 300 gallons per day to water their lawns, vs other areas. I personally have stopped watering my lawn down to zero, and my property is a big patch of dirt now. I think there should be a tax on people who want to water their lawn during these times, because it's so unimportant. For a household of 2 adults and 2 kids, we use less than 85 gallons per day, and my water bill is $15/month.

<comment><USER6> And yet, instead of raising prices, polls show we are looking to pass Prop 1, a terrible omnibus pork-barrel bill as our "solution" instead of just raising prices on water as should be happening. [http://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_1,_Water_Bond_...](http://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_1,_Water_Bond_\(2014\))

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> It is very frustrating to me that we are dealing with such significant drought, while most of us Californians live within 100 miles of the ocean. Using that water seems like the answer. The problem with desalination is that it's an expensive solution to a sometimes problem.

[http://www.wateronline.com/doc/santa-barbara-to-reboot- desal...](http://www.wateronline.com/doc/santa-barbara-to-reboot-desalination- plant-0001)

Santa Barbara built and then shut down an expensive desalination plant in the early 1990's. Desalination is expensive, and when water is abundant, it is more cost effective to use natural water sources than run an expensive plant. A desalination solution must be designed to be inexpensive and easily hibernated/restarted. That way, the state could effortlessly switch between whichever water supply was most abundant.

<comment><USER8> As with nearly all of our problems, California's water shortage is really an energy shortage. If we had cheap, abundant energy, desalinization isn't expensive anymore.

Figure out fusion and our water problems are solved.

Of course, in the meantime you think we'd at least consider pricing water as a resource and let supply and demand control the price. Instead, we implement this ludicrous system of encouraging neighbors to tattle on each other.

<comment><USER9> Fusion is cool, but fission is easy and if used on Thorium in LFTRs[1], would provide us with virtually unlimited, passively safe energy that leaves extremely little waste.

Unfortunately it falls under the 'nuclear' umbrella and thus carries with it all of the baggage associated with that.

5 minute elevator pitch for the LFTR: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uK367T7h6ZY](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uK367T7h6ZY)

Failing that, I don't understand why we can't just connect a pipe (like we do with oil) from one of our water rich states to CA.

But for whatever reason the state doesn't seem to be even considering any engineering solutions to the problem.

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

<comment><USER10> You know that California already drains water from the entire Colorado river basin, the Owen Valley, and numerous other sources. No way a state is going to just let California's appetite for clean water drain yet more rivers.

<comment><USER9> Alaska might be up for it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Was recently at the Lost Coast for a hike and on the way there several of the smaller lakes and rivers were mere rock beds. From what i've heard from friends in LA, shops still 'water the side-walk' as they call it.

<comment><USER12> I'm a bit north of LA, but the country club golf course has never been greener ;-)

Joking aside, it does feel like people are trying to make a difference and conserve.

<comment><USER13> In the last month, 3 of my neighbors have removed their lawns in favor of rockscape or mulch. LADWP is offering $3 per square foot if you remove your lawn, so that is encouraging people.

<comment><USER2> They're doing that here in the bay area too. My question is, do I have to have _grass_ to count as a lawn? I stopped watering my lawn the day I bought the house, so at this point it is just dirt. Can I still the the $3/sqft to put in turf?

<comment><USER14> "I stopped watering my lawn the day I bought the house"

In some cities, not watering your lawn may get you a fine too: [http://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-brown- lawns-...](http://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-brown-lawns-fines- california-drought-20140718-story.html)

<comment><USER2> Yep it sure can. They sent me a nastygram once so I watered for a week till they inspected and then stopped again. It's such a waste to water things that aren't edible. I was just ahead of the curve -- green is the new brown.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Need: [(Solar || Nuclear Power) + Desalination]

There's plenty of water available (Ocean), but California needs to spend it's money on the right things. Too many frivolous laws and programs.

</comment><comment><USER16> So, uh, why would anyone bulldoze dead almond trees if they're not going to replace them with another crop yet? Seems like it would just increase soil erosion problems.

<comment><USER17> At a guess, scrub fire hazard?

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> According to the article, LA received about 4 inches of water a year over the past 3 years, which is 2 inches per year less than average. Wouldn't that mean LA is in perpetual drought?

When I last visited (4 years ago), I was struck by how much everything was watered there. I'd never keep plants that need that much tending. Water must be way too cheap there.

<comment><USER10> Before William Mulholland and the draining of the Owen Valley basin, LA was a desert. Without millions of gallons of water piped it from hundreds of miles away at great expense and energy use, LA would still be a largely uninhabitable, and would certainly not be a city of millions with lawns and golf courses.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> It reminds me of some years ago when the last major drought hit Australia [1]. We had dams down to ridiculously low capacities (about 15% total supply for certain urban areas, with individual dams getting to single digits if I recall correctly) at times. An entire generation got used to fast showers as the government actually circulated little 4 minute egg-timers to encourage everyone to take no more than that in having a shower.

I think many of the laws enacted then around use of water (e.g.: for car washes, lawns, etc.) are still tighter than they were prior to the drought, but everyone's sort of used to being more water wise now so it doesn't really bother us.

[1]: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000s_Australian_drought](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000s_Australian_drought)

</comment><comment><USER20> I went camping at Snow Mountain in Mendocino Forest a few weeks ago. Not a drop of water anywhere, only dry stream beds. Extremely high risk of fire. No sign of mammals larger than chipmunks.

Meanwhile, I'm sure this hasn't changed: [http://www.economist.com/news/united- states/21596955-drought...](http://www.economist.com/news/united- states/21596955-drought-forcing-westerners-consider-wasting-less-water-drying- west) — choice quote: "Last week Barack Obama visited Fresno, in California's fecund Central Valley, to announce $183m of federal aid before spending three days golfing on well-watered courses in the desert."

<comment><USER21> This president is one of the biggest hypocrites! I can never forget him being caught saying: "I'm very good at killing people." And he's a Nobel Prize Laureate!

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> Obligatory and insightful XKCD: [https://xkcd.com/1410/](https://xkcd.com/1410/)

<comment><USER23> There appears to be a five year periodicity to the lifting of the drought, I wonder if that will happen in 2015, I assume that is because of a reoccurring El Nino? If not, can someone enlighten me :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> Are we not able to desalinate water? No doubt some special interests are preventing us from solving this problem. Access to plentiful, cheap water has not been a first world problem in a very long time. Just authorize the building permits and a contract to buy water sufficient to make it profitable, and this problem will be solved quickly.

<comment><USER25> Not refuting your point, but it's not quite that simple. Current desalination techniques are very energy costly, and the state has actually decreased its energy capacity in the past few years. For example, the San Onofre nuclear station went offline permanently in 2012 because of a botched repair job by, a little ironically, the Japanese (Mitsubishi). Neither ConEd or the state have announced any plans to replace the lost capacity (~10% of the state's total energy capacity) = higher energy costs.

San Diego county is currently building a billion dollar desal facility off the coast of Carlsbad, but it hasn't been easy or cheap. And even with the state in dire conditions, this project has faced opposition for various reasons - e.g. environmental concerns about desal runoff (apparently the salt water byproduct is very bad for marine life and has to be treated before being released back into the ocean).

Even when it's completed and producing at full capacity of 50 million gallons per day, this will be a literal drop in the bucket compared to the 38 billion galls of water per day that are used by the state overall (2010 USGS estimate). With population projections having the state grow 40% by 2060, things are not looking good and nobody seems to be addressing the longer-term impacts.

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> Obviously NOT BAD ENOUGH if California keeps using more and more water every year.

</comment><comment><USER27> If you want to understand the drought conditions better, I implore you to watch this Ted talk by environment scientist David Keith:

[http://www.ted.com/talks/david_keith_s_surprising_ideas_on_c...](http://www.ted.com/talks/david_keith_s_surprising_ideas_on_climate_change)

To sum it up, governments are engaged in cloud seeding to fight climate change, and they're staying silent on the issue because informing the public is a moral hazard.

As a side effect of cloud seeding, certain areas are bound to develop less rain clouds. This causes drought conditions.

Spraying chemical compounds over populated areas also has environmental impacts.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O4WhYKP83zo](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O4WhYKP83zo)

"On July 15th, 2014, citizens from Northern California rallied to create the largest attendance ever at the Shasta County Supervisors chambers (400+, chairman Les Baugh confirmed this attendance record at the start of the meeting). The primary purpose of this meeting was to present information that proves there is a very dire heavy metal contamination and UV radiation issue across the Shasta County region (and the world). A list of 10 experts presented data to the board to confirm the legitimacy of the concerns being addressed. At the end of the presentation, the board voted unanimously to investigate the heavy metal contamination and passed resolutions accordingly."

<comment><USER28> Evidence please - surely you have something better than a 7 year old talk about a proposal and a conspiracy-mongering chemtrails website. I looked at the Documents section there and it's a joke - one white paper from 1966, one guy's investigation of his single diseased rhododendron plant, one unpassed bill introduced by Dennis Kucinich and written by a couple of UFO researchers, and a slide deck on possible geoengineering methods.

[http://contrailscience.com/kucinich-chemtrails-and- hr-2977/](http://contrailscience.com/kucinich-chemtrails-and-hr-2977/)

Sorry, this is kooksville. A reasonable argument would start with a review of meteorological classification and then assert novel observations before introducing theories about possible causes. Instead we have some guy who drones into his camcorder about how sheeple can't remember what real clouds look like.

<comment><USER27> Ted.com, and a youtube recording of the Shasta County Board of Supervisors.

That's what I linked you to.

Your criticism would be better directed at the various websites you have apparently frequented.

> Evidence please - surely you have something better than a 7 year old talk > about a proposal and a conspiracy-mongering chemtrails website. I looked at > the Documents section there and it's a joke - one white paper from 1966, one > guy's investigation of his single diseased rhododendron plant, one unpassed > bill introduced by Dennis Kucinich and written by a couple of UFO > researchers, and a slide deck on possible geoengineering methods.

> [http://contrailscience.com/kucinich-chemtrails-and- > hr-2977/](http://contrailscience.com/kucinich-chemtrails-and-hr-2977/)

> Sorry, this is kooksville. A reasonable argument would start with a review > of meteorological classification and then assert novel observations before > introducing theories about possible causes. Instead we have some guy who > drones into his camcorder about how sheeple can't remember what real clouds > look like.

What made this poster go to the lengths he did? Dennis Kucinich? UFOs? Did he even read what I posted?

<comment><USER28> The guy leading the presentation to the Shasta County board of supervisors is the same guy who runs [http://GeoengineeringWatch.org](http://GeoengineeringWatch.org) which is the first link in the description of the video. Not wanting to sit through an hour-long video of people making speeches - rarely a good way to get informed on a topic - I went to his website in search of a written summary of his argument. Unfortunately it sent my BS meter straight into the red.

If the US and/or other countries are actually seeding clouds on a massive scale, and if there is any evidence of this being linked to the drought in California as you asserted, then I would love to read it.

<comment><USER27> The event lasted 3 hours, and the video was shortened. Sorry but I don't have a transcript.

David Lim, a doctoral researcher at the University of Reading, has a much more comprehensive presentation for the curious:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v-zRREd8DZQ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v-zRREd8DZQ)

"This public presentation has been created to introduce the topic of geoengineering to those with limited or no knowledge of the subject. It therefore provides an overview of this lesser known area of science. The talk entitled 'Increases in extreme weather, food prices and illness: the unspoken connection' was held in Trent, Sherborne, Dorset (UK) on 27th March 2013 in front of an 80 strong audience. The 'questions and answers' session lasted 90 minutes and has been excluded from the clip for manageability. The audience consisted of members of the public; it appeared that very few people were aware of geoengineering let alone the science and political issues underpinning this vast topic. A multitude of periphery subjects were also discussed during the Q&A session, leaving many with much to consider...

I was a doctoral researcher at the University of Reading (UK) looking at domestic electrical loads, when I stumbled across the science of 'environmental manipulation', encompassing Geoengineering, Weather Modification and Military Operations - all of which pose a significant risk to natural systems. Period.

Having investigated the climate change debate and become acquainted with 'the bigger picture' \- delineated by topics such as politics, geopolitics, history, meteorology, sociology, economics, physics, metaphysics, quantum mechanics, medicine, law, military and many others - I concluded that something was wrong. In fact many 'things' are wrong with the version of reality that is presented to us by the mainstream media and government. It has taken over 1,500 research hours to comprehensively put together the pieces of the geoengineering puzzle, which pulls in all of the other subjects mentioned afore, it just does. The vast majority of people simply don't have the energy or time to investigate such overarching topics as geoengineering, thus many are left in the dark. Herein, I simply aim to shed some light on this murky area, for those at stage one of 'the journey'..."

<comment><USER28> Look, I'm sorry if this seems rude, but do you not recognize that 90% of what you've pasted here is emotional manipulation? I'm willing to entertain your proposition but I would like to read something with specific assertions about chemicals, numbers, methods - stuff I can conduct searches on, not handwavey presentations by an expert who's dumbing it down for laypeople and so leaves me without any detail that I can check for myself.

I took some time to watch this guy's video, but his argument is incoherent and it's absolutely full of logical fallacies. I'm well aware that there have been multiple proposals for geoengineering, but it's a long way from that to claims that the clouds look wrong, geoengineering is being conducted on a mass scale, and there's a giant coverup. Having grown up near an airport, I've always had trouble with chemtrail advocates claims that 'these don't look like normal contrails' because my experience is that contrails have always exhibited a great deal of variety and do not have a single consistent appearance as contrail theorists are wont to claim.

I urge you to consider some of the debunking arguments that you can find at [https://www.metabunk.org/forums/contrails-and- chemtrails.9/](https://www.metabunk.org/forums/contrails-and-chemtrails.9/) and search for specific written arguments that are based on empirical and repeatable observations.

<comment><USER27> So you would agree the site you linked to is more scientific and empirical? The owner of metabunk.org, Mick, is thoroughly defeated in a public debate by Dane Wingington, who you apparently detest, here: [https://www.metabunk.org/threads/wigington-west- geoengineeri...](https://www.metabunk.org/threads/wigington-west- geoengineering-debate.2211/)

Mark my words, this issue is going to become more mainstream over the next thirty years. Your position is simply anti-science.

> Dane: You know, that's a great suggestion! I appreciate that suggestion, > we'll do that, not just here, because we're already arranging meters for > Norway, Maine, New Mexico, and Florida. So we'll do that in each location. > And you know one that makes it quite clear that the numbers are that bad > Mick, and again, your suggestion is a good one and we will follow that up. > The bark in the pacific Northwest is literally being fried off the trees. > Completely fried off to the core wood. Trees are dying everywhere up here. > It takes a tremendous amount of UV to do that. Nothing grows here, which is > a known consequence of excessive UV. I mean the UV seems so staggeringly > high that leaves are literally falling off the trees right now. They started > falling off in July. So, we see every single sign of excessive UV. Massive > insect decline. We just had a US forest service biologist re-survey the > terrestrial insects - 90% decline. Bark being burned off the trees. You > can't stand in the sun here. So we believe those numbers. We are actually > trying to use conservative math, because if you take the UVA and if you > calculate 5% of the UVA measured in milliwatts per centimeter squared, you > would come out with 3.5, and if you divide that into ten, which is UVB you'd > get a number that's close to 3000%.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


The Man Who Brought Down Lance Armstrong - <AUTHOR> https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/05/lance-armstrong-floyd-landis/556868/?single_page=true <comment><USER3> Let's not forget that Armstrong enbarked on a spirited campaign to _destroy_ Greg LeMond (and his cycle business licensing his name to Trek), after LeMond brought up all of the issues that were later proven true by Tyler Hamilton.

[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greg_LeMond_anti- doping_stan...](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greg_LeMond_anti- doping_stance_and_controversies)

</comment><comment><USER4> Everybody was doping. The speed of the tour climbed until 2005 [1] and the related scandals and then dropped and is now hovering around 40kph.

Talking to competitive cyclists in the US at the time, everybody knew everyone was doping because it had become physically impossible to do that speed without doping. The top 10 racers were within 0.3% of Armstrong's time in the 2005 race. They were all doping and several have had their results stricken.

Armstrong was the fall guy and object lesson for a general cleanup of the sport because nobody liked him. The rest was hypocrisy.

1\. [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tour_de_France_records_and_s...](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tour_de_France_records_and_statistics)

<comment><USER5> >Armstrong was the fall guy

He was far worse than just cyclist who doped. Most others just doped, cycled and kept heir head down.

Armstrong was toxic bully and leader of the doping world who attempted to destroy other peoples life's. He crossed lines others did not cross. His gangsterism and strong-arm tactics against his accusers over the years deserve no sympathy.

<comment><USER4> Right, he was a terrible person and nobody liked him.

It's why he was the perfect fall guy; everybody was cheering that, finally, he got his.

<comment><USER5> Fall guy is a colloquial phrase that refers to a person to whom blame is deliberately and falsely attributed in order to deflect blame from another party.

The way you word you response it looks like you are implying that it was his personality.

Me and others are telling is telling you that it was his __actions__. His shady character was probably why he became such a gangster, but that's beside the point. We are cheering his demise not because he was the right guy and the blame is correctly attributed to the central figure. There was no other party who deserves the blame more than Armstrong.

His actions when hiding his doping usage were far worse than his cheating and doping.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> People say everyone was doping. Lance, Floyd, Tyler, Levi, Big George, etc. A crime without victim - everyone did it.

I never saw anyone claiming Chris Horner was doping. He was not competitive internationally until his last years on the circuit when doping use somewhat subsided.

Chris Horner is the victim. In a better world it's Chris Horner who won Tour de France.

<comment><USER7> Chris Horner was competitive in races when he was 41. That was unheard of in modern bicycle racing until Valverde, a convicted doper now racing after his suspension, continued to race. This is all after the invention of EPO so that could be a coincidence or not.

In the redacted documents from the USADA investigation of Lance Armstrong, several people are not identified still, rider 15 is never identified but his name is redacted out. Because they used a font that is not uniform width per character, there has been a lot of speculation over the years that rider 15 is Chris Horner because a.) his name fits the redacted space, and the parts of the characters USADA did not redact match the letters in Chris Horner, b.) the background described for rider 15 match Chris Horner.

Many people came to this conclusion separately. Someone who actually didn't dope and raced against Horner in his first prime wrote a lot about it - <USER2> sample [http://stevetilford.com/2013/10/24/unbelievable-chris- horner...](http://stevetilford.com/2013/10/24/unbelievable-chris-horner/)

<comment><USER8> It's outrageous that anyone could think Chris Horner is a victim. See my other reply as well, but this is just completely off the charts.

There were lots of victims to various degree of the Armstrong era. Even on USPS people like Frankie Andreu were to some degree victims.

Chris Horner wasn't one of them.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Over this side of the Atlantic (Europe) there was a book by David Walsh called "Seven Deadly Sins: My Pursuit of Lance Armstrong" where he describes his 12 years pursuing Armstrong and being subject to his Type A bullying character some of it on video.

<comment><USER10> David Millar's, Racing Through the Dark[0] also provides some eye-opening background and is a terrific read for anyone remotely interested in cycling.

Doping is not a forgiveable offence in professional sport, imo – I advocate for lifetime bans in all sports – but as a reformer Millar has convinced me he is genuine; unlike Armstrong, who is utterly unrepentant. I loath Armstrong for what he has done to the sport of cycling. I'd have a beer with Millar. Two even.

[0] [https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/6797630-racing- through-t...](https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/6797630-racing-through-the- dark)

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> So Floyd also ended up being part of the opioid crisis and found salvation through cannabis. Quite a change in career and interesting how he has no interest in that first career.

It is a curious law that he used and fortunate that the sponsor happened to be the government, had they had another sponsor, e.g. AmGen, then they would not have had this legal route.

</comment><comment><USER12> #ISavedYouAClick: Floyd Landis.

</comment><comment><USER13> Everyone just acted like this was a huge scandal. One guy on roids beat all the other guys on roids. Plain and simple.

He just had to be made an example of, by people he had pissed off. And he was brought down by his own disgruntled teammates. Not by a + test.

It's widely known that athletes at the highest level have encountered people who use roids. If you just don't inject yourself to the gills with it and cycle out, you stand a good chance of passing the test.

You can use it and compete with the rest, or you can choose to not use it and watch the others run past you in a pace you thought was supernatural.

Bikers used to drink alcohol and climb the hills in the Tour all the time. Is alcohol not performance enhancing when it dulls the throbbing pain in your legs?

Bring those cyclists down too. Then you'll have everyone's support.

Make a league for people who want to use roids, and for the ones who don't. It'll multiply your revenue 2x, organisers.

<comment><USER14> For starters, although Armstrong took testosterone supplements he is mostly accused of using blood doping and EPO.

We don't need to "bring down" those who drink alcohol. Drinking alcohol makes you slower not faster.

The reason that we don't just let cyclists like Armstrong just use any "supplements" they want in a special league is because they then pressurise their domestiques to do the same. This is what Armstrong tried to do with Frankie Andreu.

There are serious long and short term health implications to that, see Tyler Hamilton's description of taking a "bad" blood transfusion in The Secret Race. Many professional cyclists died from "mysterious" night time heart attacks. Some just young neo-pros. Can you really say that they understood the risks of over thickened blood?

I think we'd all be happier if Armstrong and the other cheats found a country where it's legal to dope and set up a dirty league there and left the UCI sanctioned events clean.

Of course the dopers would then have to contend with a new generation of cheats trying to sneak eBikes into the drugs only league.

<comment><USER15> _"We don 't need to "bring down" those who drink alcohol."_

For a small set of sports, alcohol _was_ on the banned substance list until last year ([https://www.wada- ama.org/sites/default/files/resources/files...](https://www.wada- ama.org/sites/default/files/resources/files/2016-09-29_-_wada_prohibited_list_2017_eng_final.pdf))

I think the fact that it makes you more relaxed is (thought to be) performance-enhancing in sports such as archery and shooting.

It also was on the list in airplane, motorboat, and car racing. I think that was because of safety concerns.

It still may be forbidden in archery in some competitions ([https://worldarchery.org/news/153442/statement-wadas- withdra...](https://worldarchery.org/news/153442/statement-wadas-withdrawal- alcohol-banned-substances-list))

<comment><USER3> _Chess_ has an anti doping policy: [https://www.fide.com/fide/fide-anti- doping-regulations.html](https://www.fide.com/fide/fide-anti-doping- regulations.html)

though I'm curious what sorts of nootropics or mental alertness drugs a grandmaster level player might be tempted to use. Adderal?

<comment><USER15> modafinil and methylphenidate, possibly ([https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28119083](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28119083))

I add "possibly" because the abstract mentions two effects: losing more time due to running out of time and playing better, and doesn't discuss when one of them might be better.

<comment><USER16> Modafinil was used competitivly in poker..... But I'd guess in part it would have been great at killing tells more than increasing math skills.

I wonder if beta blockers have a use in chess for some players.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> I wonder how much of this is about money and how much is about prestige. When you look a the figures at WADA, men are caught doping more often than females and women earn much less in sports. In Sweden, the women's national hockey team has to balance a day job with their sport.

Now, even the figures by WADA are not perfect (since women require lower levels of the agent to raise performance and might just not get caught) but I feel we should discuss the incentives for doping. I sure as hell don't want teenagers making stupid decisions about their health for the prospect of becoming a millionaire celebrity before they're 30.

<comment> cup-of-tea Men have an advantage because they are already men. If women take the same kind of drugs men take they start to become men. Testosterone is the best performance enhancing drug there is.</comment></comment>


The new Windows subsystem for Linux architecture: a deep dive - <AUTHOR> https://mybuild.techcommunity.microsoft.com/sessions/77003/# <comment><USER2> This appears to be a dupe of [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19868282](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19868282)

</comment><comment><USER3> Beware, this site hijacks your back button rendering it inoperable.

<comment><USER4> Thanks for this, domain blocked!

<comment><USER2> I had no problem with the site.</comment></comment></comment>


A Rare Disagreement - <AUTHOR> http://www.marco.org/3627726252

<comment><USER3> I've already commented on this subject:

<https://raganwald.posterous.com/the-freedom-to-eat-pizza>

The tl;dr is where I say "Cry me a fucking river." When will people learn? A closed, proprietary system is a closed, proprietary system.

Marco is arguing that the Massah is being too rough on the sharecroppers, he's beating them inconsistently and in ways they couldn't reasonably predict. Let me see if I understand: These poor indentured servants built a business around what they perceived as a loophole in Apple's iOS terms. Their plan was to make millions of dollars off their "free" iOS apps while Apple got nothing. Then Apple shook them down for 30%.

Well I couldn't have predicted exactly _how_ Apple would react, but I don't imagine anyone ought to be surprised that they did _something_. They're the landlord. That's what landlords do: They extract rents from the sharecroppers, and if rents aren't enough they kick the sharecroppers out and take over the land for themselves.

You can bitch and whine, you can figure out how to make money while Apple tolerates your presence, or you can stop building on proprietary platforms. Arguing that Apple is illogical or ought to be smarter or is shooting itself in the foot... A waste of electrons. Does Apple look like the kind of company that takes our advice on how to run a business? If it listened to people like us, it would be selling Windows PCs right now.

iOS and Kindles and Java and everything else controlled by a profit-seeking corporation are all the same things to developers. Of course Apple markets your work to end users and pretends you're happy with your cut of the two billion dollars in app store revenue. That's like a dating site marketing you to other users.

The bottom line is this: If you are developing for a proprietary system, you aren't in the business, _you are the business_. Trying to argue that Apple's proprietary system ought to be less closed or more free or have more pixie dust than Amazon's is wishful thinking. If you develop for _any_ of these proprietary platforms, you are a sharecropper. You work at the landlord's pleasure to improve the land he owns.

Period.

<comment><USER4> _Arguing that Apple is illogical or ought to be smarter or is shooting itself in the foot... A waste of electrons._

In my experience, employees at Apple care very much what users and developers are saying. Many of them read Marco and Gruber. Quite a few even read the Apple support forums. Although they can't publicly respond to them, it helps inform their thinking about future decisions.

Remember when Apple reversed its decision on 3rd-party developer tools and languages? Rational feedback and criticism can work.

<comment><USER5> This isn't really a refutation of what he said. If enough of the proverbial sharecroppers complain, it MAY be worth it for Apple to improve conditions. You are still at their mercy, however.

Also, it's ridiculous that people are voting raganwald's comment down. What's next, covering your ears and yelling "la la la la"?

<comment><USER6> "What he said" might vary by reader, since reganwald's comment rambled somewhat. But, the gp did refute this line in reganwald's "bottom line" summary:

 _Trying to argue that Apple's proprietary system ought to be less closed or more free or have more pixie dust than Amazon's is wishful thinking._

It's not wishful thinking, it's a tactic that has proven effective in the past. I voted reganwald down because his line of argument seems to have been refuted.

<comment><USER5> Arguing with the faceless Apple executives via the internet is wishful thinking, whether you succeed or not.

Also, you don't downvote comments because you consider them wrong or refuted, you downvote because a comment was not beneficial to the discussion. It's people like you that slowly chip away at what HN is intended to be.

<comment><USER7> The argument isn't with faceless executives, or Apple at all---its with people like you and I, the developers at large.

If we are convinced that what is Apple is doing is wrong, we might be turned away from their ecosystem--thus denying them of profit---or better still we may stand in solidarity if the current complainers try to take more drastic measures such as shifting to another platform all together.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> > So why aren't those who are criticizing Apple for taking a 30 percent cut of > subscription revenue criticizing Amazon? My theory: everyone understands, > intuitively, that the Kindle is a closed proprietary platform; but many > people view iOS (incorrectly) as a platform like the Mac or Windows, where > third parties are free to do what they want.

This seems like laziness or intentional dishonesty on Gruber's part. There are huge differences between the two. The biggest being Amazon doesn't have a Kindle app ecosystem so there isn't the [huge] problem of requiring a subscription option (which is the real issue--charge 90% if you want, it just becomes unfair when you require me to use it). Amazon also funds the delivery of the content to the subscriber, which considering it's often over 3G can be considerable.

In the current state of things if you are a publisher with an iOS app, Apple changed the rules to either require you to cough up 30% of your business or stop being a publisher. Also, you get the joy of delivering all content, that's not included in your 30% vig.

<comment><USER9> > This seems like laziness or intentional dishonesty on Gruber's part.

What do you expect from the freelance Apple PR department?

<comment><USER8> He's too consistent to still be freelance.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I have zero sympathy for developers in all of this. Apple has made it clear _from day 1_ that you are only permitted on iOS at their pleasure and that they can change the rules at any time. For those of you who were slow, the way Apple banned Adobe Flash CS5 apps right before CS5 was going to be released should have been a wake up call. Maybe you bet that your corner of the world wouldn't be interesting to Apple or maybe you didn't realize you could get caught in the crossfire of an unrelated Apple objective. Tough. This is what you signed up for. If you don't like it maybe you shouldn't have been developing iOS apps in the first place.

The people I do have sympathy for are users. They are not going to understand why some of their favorite applications and services on iOS stop being updated / eventually disappear altogether. Among other things, Apple sold devices using the availability of apps. I didn't see any fine print saying "your favorite apps might get rejected in the future" in those ads. And I can't think of a similar platform that might have given users those expectations. So users have a genuine beef. Developers are just not being honest with themselves about the consequences of their own choices.

<comment><USER11> People (users and developers) have a right not to be adversely affected by unfair competition.

Apple has a monopoly on selling iOS devices because of Copyright law - <USER2> that is how Copyright law is supposed to work. Apple develops iOS, and so aren't breaking any laws by making their App Store the default. Apple operates their App Store; selling access to the App Store under reasonable terms is also perfectly legitimate.

However, a particular sequence of actions can be illegal even though each of the individual actions that makes it up are legal. It is legal to ask someone nicely to stand in front of you (obviously they don't have to), and it is legal to move a knife and twist it in front of you; that doesn't mean it is legal to do the first then the second!

IANAL, but Apple's conduct around the 30% charge, while made up of individually legal actions, appears to be a straightforward breach of US anti- trust law. 15USCs14 (part of the Clayton Act) says that it is illegal to sell something on an agreement that someone won't purchase something else. So making developers agree that they can buy App Store services unless they don't buy payment processing for use within their app from anyone except Apple is not allowed in the United States, if the effect "may be to substantially lessen competition or tend to create a monopoly in any line of commerce".

Even if it wasn't illegal, it would still be wrong to try to lessen competition for their advantage, and it would be entirely appropriate for developers to criticise Apple heavily for it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> There's an other point in this Apple/Amazon comparison that's not being raised: If you own a book, and you don't want to stick with Kindle's format, it's trivial to offer that same core product on other platforms like the Nook or Apple's store.

Whereas if you've developed an iOS app, transitioning that to another platform is often going to be a large amount of work where you're basically starting over from the spec and not bringing over any code.

Which means you're going to generally hear a lot more squawking from iOS software vendors than book vendors, because their migration costs are prohibitive relative to those of book publishers.

<comment><USER13> _Whereas if you've developed an iOS app, transitioning that to another platform is often going to be a large amount of work where you're basically starting over from the spec and not bringing over any code._

It's much harder to find a substitute for the App Store ecosystem than it is to replace the code. The proverbial rock and hard place.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> > So why aren't those who are criticizing Apple for taking a 30 percent cut of > subscription revenue criticizing Amazon?

Who says people aren't criticizing Amazon? Their DRM-infested marketplace is very customer-hostile. The difference is that you can use the hardware without using their marketplace.

<comment><USER14> Isn't that equally true for iOS devices?

What can you do with a Kindle except buying books from Amazon? As far as I know, you can read books without DRM and you can surf the web. That's equally true for all iOS devices. What else does a Kindle allow you to do that you cannot do on an iOS device sans apps?

<comment><USER15> It seems to me that the difference is what you purchased the device for. Based on advertisements, I'd say the usual goal of an iOS purchase is to run apps and the usual goal of a Kindle purchase is to read books. You can read books on the kindle that amazon doesn't approve of, but you can't (reasonably) run apps on an iOS device that Apple doesn't approve of.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> I think part of the reason why there is such a "user revolt" (opposed to a tech or developer only revolt) is the prospect of functionality of _current apps_ such as Amazon Kindle or Netflix or Hulu will go away, and that Apple hasn't provided any assurance that they'll stay.

Right now I'm in "wait and see" mode where I don't want to invest in the iPad 2 unless I know for sure that Hulu will still be able to function.

<comment><USER17> Where is this "user revolt" you speak of?

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> Building a business on iOS similar to building a business on a single client. It's an issue, but it is done.

</comment><comment><USER19> I feel as though Marco is remiss in not disclosing that he has ties to a company that has a real dog in this hunt (Readability):

<http://www.marco.org/3044068415>

Context:

<http://daringfireball.net/linked/2011/02/21/readability>

It doesn't invalidate his points at all but as an advisor to a company deeply affected by this policy, the honest thing to do would be to make that agenda clear. If he wants the trust of his readers, it's worth letting them decide "Is he saying this because he believes it or because it benefits his associates to convince people this is true? Both?"

<comment><USER20> _First they came for the fart apps ..._

The problem with Apple's recent fumblings is that it leaves the iOS platform wide open to slippery slope scenarios. While Readability was flat-out denied upon app submission, others were yanked post-approval, which creates a Damoclean sword in the minds of every current and prospective app developer.

You don't need to play the degrees of separation game; Marco's Instapaper subscriptions can be rendered null and void at the whims of Apple's incongruous and incomprehensible "policy".

\---

As a user, it's also unsettling, because I honestly don't know where this leaves current and future apps. I recently read that Apple allowed a tabloid's app that contains a daily photo of a nude woman. What happened to Apple's no- pornography policy? Remember Steve's e-mail that replied that people looking for such filth could try out Android?

This is the App Store brouhaha all over again, except it now affects approved apps as well, meaning that we as users and developers will live in perpetual fear of a trap door opening beneath the most cherished apps. Not for sake of consistency or "policy", but the behest of whatever incomprehensible whims the guys at Infinite Loop have.

<comment><USER19> That's a little fuzzier, though. Steve said he's not trying to get a chunk of SaaS. So is Instapaper a content subscription or SaaS? Seems closer to the latter to me, but definitely concede the point that this uncertainty is bad for the platform.

At the same time: Paying out $2 billion to devs and having 200 million credit card accounts means never having to say you're sorry.

<comment><USER8> > Steve said he's not trying to get a chunk of SaaS.

Yet. He can change his mind at any time. If SaaS looks as promising as publishing does, who's to say he won't?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> Can't you buy ebooks through some other service and then display them on your kindle?

<comment><USER8> Displaying books on your Kindle has nothing to do with Apple's iOS terms. Apple could disappear entirely and you'd be able to continue buying ebooks and reading them on your Kindle. The discussion is over iOS and under the latest statements from Apple it appears the iPad's Kindle app cannot exist in its current state.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> I have to say I side with marco on this one. I really think that apple needs to focus on the ecosystem and let the content creators create their own markets.

</comment><comment><USER23> Well, that's the down side to relying on an app store rather then helping shape the mobile web.

While I understand the appeal for wanting in on the app store for a variety of reasons, this is going to keep happening over and over again.

For content distributors, app stores are a short sighted vision.

</comment><comment><USER24> So, which apps were banned and business ruined because of the new rules? Or is this just some wild guessing?

<comment><USER25> He is one of these guys <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2245692>

<comment><USER17> Which was submitted _after_ the rule change.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> Personally, I don't feel it's the freedom, or anything of that nature. A 30% cut of anything is just too much. 5%, 10%, ok, maybe even 15%, but 30% to be listed in an app directory, come on. The payment processing is at most 2-3%. Demanding 30% of your revenue is outrageous and borders on mafia-like. Terrible.

Unfortunately, all the above applies to Android, and others. Apple gets the blame IMO because they set the precedent. There's no reason they couldn't have made their initial cut 10%. 10% is still high, but reasonable.

Furthermore, it wouldn't be so outrageous if they provided some value or tangible services for it, but they don't. They don't give advice, or contribute in any tangible way, it's essentially an outrageous tax without any real services in return.

<comment><USER27> You mean aside from bandwidth, a marketplace of literally hundreds of millions of ready buyers for your chosen platform, all with credit cards conveniently stored for ease of purchasing your product?

Sounds like Python's Life of Brian.

<comment><USER26> We're talking 30% here. You think 30% is a just price for that service? Lets not forget that you still have to pay taxes on the remaining income. If there was a startup here on HN whose business model was 30% of your revenues for hosting of your app + credit card information storage (usually done via 3rd party PCI compliant service) it wouldn't be taken very seriously.

Maybe I'm old fashioned, but 30% of your revenue for that service is absurd.

<comment><USER27> Man, I still remember (and everyone who was even cursorily interested in mobile development should) when carriers not only controlled the conduit but the device and the marketplace. You had to either apply for the privilege of being in their "market" or had some form of marketing agreement with them (iow, you had to have a big stick to play that game). Even then, carriers pocketed up to 75% of sales. It was disgusting.

30% is like a godsend in comparison. And, with competition heating up with Android and Amazon, app stores will either compete on payouts or cartelize and price-fix.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> Amazon has pulled books, and for not good reasons IIRC.

<comment><USER8> They have deleted books, but I only remember for good reasons. The famous 1984 deletion was because the publisher didn't actually have copyright, which seems like as good as of a reason as a company can have.

<comment><USER29> In my opinion, there cannot be a good reason for pulling books that you bought, ever.

Imagine that happening to dead-tree books, someone shows up on your doorstep to reclaim the book 'because it violates copyright'. You'd tell them to bugger off, and it's no different in this case.

Once you bought a book, digital or analog, it should stay in your possession for as long as you want.

<comment><USER30> Um, the police do this all the time with stolen property.

<comment><USER29> Yes. But never with books that you buy in a respectable bookstore, and pay for. Which was my point.

Also, Amazon is not the police. If they take something you rightfully bought, they are the thieves.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> "Developers are being shown that their apps — and their months or years of hard work, and in many cases, their entire businesses — can be yanked by Apple's whim at any time for reasons that they couldn't have anticipated or avoided."

Exactly, it's the classic bait and switch. Now after spending the time, money, and effort involved in developing the apps developers are forced to either cut their losses and abandon ship, or continue giving into Apple's demands.

<comment><USER32> Not just developers, but users as well. 90% of my ipad usage is with 2 apps - Netflix and Kindle, and now Apple is threatening to mess with them. I am not amused.

<comment><USER33> Apple won't mess with Netflix. No way. Any phone/tablet without Netflix is a non-starter. Apple knows this. Netflix gets an exemption.

Kindle is a tougher call. I think Apple may try to pull them and see if they can do it or not.

<comment><USER8> I don't disagree, but that's also how you get sued/investigated for anti- competitive behavior.

<comment><USER34> Seriously? Did I miss the part where iOS obtained 95% mobile OS market share?

<comment><USER35> > Did I miss the part where iOS obtained 95% mobile OS market share?

That depends on whether or not you believe what Steve said in the keynote about having over 90% of the tablet market.

<comment><USER36> Did I miss the part where first-mover advantage became anti-competitive behaviour?

<comment><USER35> I'm not making any claims about who is and isn't an illegal monopoly, that's a legal matter and IANAL.

I was addressing the claim about market share and only that.

<comment><USER36> Neither was I really. I was making a point about the speed with which people are jumping to claims of anti-competitive behaviour before the competition have really got out of the starting blocks, and in some cases before they've even got their running spikes on. I think it would be a very bad move to regulate a market that's only really existed for 3 years and hasn't yet reached a point where anyone can be said to have an established monopoly. Must remember not to try being pithy on HN in future.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Augmenting Human Intellect (1962) - <AUTHOR> http://www.dougengelbart.org/pubs/augment-3906.html

<comment><USER2> For those of you that don't know Doug Engelbart was one of the pioneers behind modern day computing. He invented, among other things, most of the technologies behind the web and collaborative software among other things. If you go to youtube and search for the mother of all demos you can see a demonstration of some of the technologies he invented, it is amazing considering it was done in 1968. Even more impressive than his technological inventions was his vision and the problem he set out to solve.

Engelbart realized early on that the technology related to computing would increase in an exponential fashion and would bring about with it massive changes to society as we know it at every level. The problem is that human beings are not naturally adapted to live in an exponential world where everything is constantly changing, so how to we as a society adapt fast enough to keep up with these changes? Engelbart set out to attempt to solve this problem through his research.

"Augmenting Human Intellect" describes in detail the strategy Engelbart developed that people would need to follow in order to keep up with these changes. Engelbart used this strategy himself in his research. Before reading this paper, I would suggest starting with this paper here[1] which provides a refined summary of these ideas and a few additional ideas and then go back and read this paper. The more I learn about Engelbart's vision, the more I am amazed about how accurate his predictions of the future were.

For those who are interested in trying out a system with a similar interface to the NLS, I have built an experimental system similar to Doug Engelbart's NLS system here[2]. Scroll down to the getting started section.

[1] [http://www.dougengelbart.org/pubs/augment-132811.html](http://www.dougengelbart.org/pubs/augment-132811.html)

[2] [https://github.com/smarks159/hyperdocument-system- wiki](https://github.com/smarks159/hyperdocument-system-wiki)

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for the comment. Bret Victor referenced this paper in his essay [1] describing his vision. He loathed the idea of people simply calling him "The Inventor of the Computer Mouse"

[1] [http://worrydream.com/#!/Engelbart](http://worrydream.com/#!/Engelbart)</comment></comment>


Box Brings on Wagon Team to Advance Insights Around Enterprise Content - <AUTHOR> https://blog.box.com/blog/wagon-box/ <comment><USER2> Comments moved to [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12401726](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12401726).</comment>


Declassified: CIA Explains Consciousness, Meditation, Holograms, Telepathy - sahin-boydas https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/document/cia-rdp96-00788r001700210016-5 <comment><AUTHOR> Woo woo! Nothing new here. People have been fleeced in the name of "expanding conciousness" for millenia. Apparently the CIA is just as naive as anybody else.</comment>


Slashdot for Software Architecture - <AUTHOR> http://archspot.com/ A friend of mine recently launched this. It's still in the early stages, but if you're into reading about software architecture, it's worth reading/contributing. <comment><USER2> Well, maybe:

" _This will be a website in the style of Lambda the Ultimate devoted to software architecture._ "</comment>


The Truth About Hack Schools - <AUTHOR> http://www.fastcompany.com/3023456/become-an-ios-developer-in-8-weeks-the-truth-about-hack-schools <comment><USER2> I'm all for anyone who wants to learn programming to get that opportunity, and I support non-traditional education as long as it's not a scam. But these hack schools and boot camps just can't be graduating significant numbers of developers ready to do real work, unless I'm missing something.

I learned how to program in the mid-1970s. I was in high school so I had no bills, no kids, and lots of spare time. My grandparents bought a terminal and dial-up modem for me so I had access to timesharing systems from my room. I had two mentors available who both worked as programmers. I read every book I could find, read and wrote code every day for three years, learned every language I could find a compiler or interpreter for. When I eventually got a job as a programmer I was a junior making decent but not great money. I still had a lot to learn at that time.

Programming was much simpler back then. The languages and tools were an order of magnitude (at least) less complicated than today. Getting a terminal and text-based application to work is a lot easier than developing a web application or mobile app today. I've been able to gradually add skills over the years as new technology comes out; I can't imagine how long it would take to get productive with software development today.

Maybe the bootcampers and hackers are a lot smarter than I was, but I doubt they are that much smarter, or more motivated, or have more free time and energy. I can't see how anyone who doesn't already have years of programming experience is going to spend a few weeks or months in even intense courses and come out ready to develop something more serious than a Rails tutorial-level to-do list app.

If anyone has personal experience with these hack schools and boot camps and can explain how they can cram so much information and experience into such a short time I'm interested in how that works.</comment>


Practical Python Programming - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/dabeaz-course/practical-python/blob/master/Notes/Contents.md <comment><USER2> This looks really good, from a quick skim. I would definitely consider using it if I had to teach an intro to Python. It reads like material that's been taught before.</comment>


Raspberry Pi computer review - <AUTHOR> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-17857189

<comment><USER2> I didn't know the Pi ships with the Blender Foundation's awesome animated cartoon _Big Buck Bunny_ (<http://www.bigbuckbunny.org/>) on the SD card. Cool! It makes me wonder how well it would actually _run_ Blender though, and if there are ARM binaries available?

The latest builds listing at <http://builder.blender.org/download/> doesn't include any.

<comment><USER3> There are blender packages in the ARM debian repository, so you should be able to get it to build on Fedora, too. Another issue is whether it'll run: I think Blender uses OpenGL/GLX for rendering, and I don't know if that works on the RPi. OpenGL ES 2.0 is supposedly supported by the hardware, but I don't know if and how that is supported in Linux userspace, particularly as OpenGL ES is mostly a subset of OpenGL. Software rendering might suffice though.

<comment><USER4> > _"Software rendering might suffice though."_

If I understand correctly, if it's using Mesa it should software render what it has to and hardware render the rest, without needing to change the program itself?

<comment><USER3> Yes, unless it makes specific demands on the OpenGL implementation which Mesa's software renderer can't meet. By "suffice" I was mainly thinking of performance. I don't know if Mesa is optimised for ARMv6 at all, and how demanding Blender is in this regard.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> > The website where it was offered for sale crashed

Still can't order in certain countries

And is it me or why didn't they put the links to buy?

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

<http://uk.rs-online.com/web/>

<comment><USER6> It's the BBC, they're explicitly not allowed to by their charter.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> This would make an interesting little server if has the processing power for that. Maybe with a big SD card, it could be a little portable Git server?

<comment><USER8> It has more than enough power for home server level tasks.

I was fast, lucky, and able to wake up at 0-dark-30 in the morning to order and I currently have it running ArchLinux and using 4 USB webcams to detect motion and lock in to take facial-area screenshots using both Motion and OpenCV+Python. This weekend, I plan on testing out the Kinect libraries.

I have a 7000maH battery on order from Amazon to be able to make it portable and easily chargeable which I hope to get 8 hours of off the grid battery life out of.

If you don't need the video, audio, GPIO, or the long wait time for the batches to fill current orders, a comparable product at low cost would be the PogoPlug. <http://archlinuxarm.org/platforms/armv6/pogoplug-provideov3>

<comment><USER9> This is pretty amazing stuff! Do you have a blog where you post the details?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Only 2 programming languages installed? I doubt it!

<comment><USER11> They're the two that make the most sense to expose the most, given their mission. I'd be surprised if it didn't also have gcc at a minimum.

<comment><USER10> I'd also be very surprised if gcc wasn't there. I'd like to think people are taught what pointers are and how they can be used to make data structures. Educate people about the dangers, but don't be scared!</comment></comment></comment>


Microsoft makes fun of Google with Gmail Man video, again - <AUTHOR> http://www.winbeta.org/news/microsoft-makes-fun-google-gmail-man-video-again

<comment><USER2> Yeah, because random Flash ads are way better than text ads that possibly add value for the user. <https://skitch.com/masnick/g6fn9/hotmail>

I understand that Google needs to make money to provide a great service like Gmail for free, and I appreciate that they aren't shoving animated shit down my throat. If they have to algorithmically read my email to do that, so be it.

<comment><USER3> This ad is for Office 365, whatever that is.

<comment><USER4> Office 365 is a cloud-based office setup from MS - which includes email and office docs its aimed at corporations. It is a newer version of what was BPOS. Google have been trying to expand into that corporate world. MS are fighting back since it represents their bread and butter.

<comment><USER5> According to Gartner, Google Apps for Business represents .5% of Google's almost 40 billion revenue. That would be about US$ 200 million a year. What are Microsoft's BPOS/365 revenue numbers?

<comment><USER4> I have no idea about the numbers but by MS's "bread and butter" I was referring to business software sales of offline office suite. MS's response to google's entry into that market was to ramp up their own online versions of their more familiar office products.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Problems with hotmail/ms aside, I'm really glad a major corporation is going after google over the privacy issues. It's pretty hard to get people to care about privacy, and one of the few ways I could imagine the issue entering into the mainstream conscious is through a major advertising budget. Even if there's some hypocrisy involved, it's a win just to get people talking about it.

Here's hoping MS makes a campaign out of it. And that others follow suit.

<comment><USER5> > privacy issues.

Is it privacy violation when a machine matches keywords to ads? Unless the machine has some kind of consciousness, I can't see a privacy issue unless some human gets access to that information.

Does this mean Microsoft free Gmail competitor, Hotmail, does not relate ads with viewer profile and screen content?

<comment><USER7> I don't know how Google stores and uses the data gathered by keyword parsing and subjecting/contextualizing my emails. Or what info the advertiser/destination gets or can infer.

It could be a potential privacy violation if the data is hacked, leaked, used to gather intel on my business, analyzed, backed up for eternity, accessed by 3rd party, etc.

> Does this mean Microsoft free Gmail competitor, Hotmail, does not relate ads > with viewer profile and screen content?

Hotmail does not analyze your emails for keywords. They display ads on other, less intrusive, factors.

<comment><USER8> You don't know how Hotmail stores your emails either, do you?

<comment><USER7> The point is that I know Google parses the contents of my emails for keywords and then transfers that data around its ad systems (at the least). And hence presents an extra way for things to go horribly wrong.

I also know Hotmail (by it's own admission) does not do this.

Aside from running emails through a spamfilter, I'd rather not have my email provider gather intel on me via the contents of my emails.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Hotmail is a complete and utter mess; short passwords, constant account breaches, spam, spam, spam - I wouldn't throw stones.

<comment><USER10> You can use long passwords with Hotmail. Also, I get a lot more Gmail spam than on my old hotmail act, but that could be because I use my name with Gmail so bot's can just guess it.

PS: Both companies integrate your email act with other services. So I have been doing a side to side comparisons for a while and while I like Gmail's interface a _Significantly_ more, Hotmail seems to have a better backend.

<comment><USER9> I'll have to go check again I only recently got it working and I'm quite sure the password I chose was restricted to something like 10 to 15 characters. Nearly all my passwords for other site are a minimum of 25 (completely random) characters if not longer.

It took me a good solid week of e-mailing support, MS forums, Googling to get it unlocked. People constantly spam it or think it's their account (I've had it since '97) so they constantly try to log into it which apparently locks me the legitimate user out of the account, great feature!

<comment><USER10> Typing random passwords that long is simply a waste of time.

70^15 ~= 10^27 passwords assuming a 10 billion computers each checked a 100 billion passwords a second after 10,000,000,000 years there would be a 0.1% chance they cracked your account.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> While these kinds of ads/videos are fun and generate pageviews, they also scream to their audience "we're #2!" (at best). Other examples include the "I'm a Mac/I'm a PC" ads, and the Galaxy S II ad making fun of hipster iPhone owners [1].

[1] <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s5rDCbgXgBg>

Edited to correct Samsung phone model.

<comment><USER12> Your [1] is an ad for the Samsung Galaxy S II, not the Samsung Galaxy Nexus.

At least your Mac/PC and Galaxy S2 ads had some copy telling the viewer why they might want to use the product in question (Use a Mac because it's simpler, Use the Galaxy S2 because it has most of the features the iPhone 4S has (and you don't have to wait in line)). This Microsoft ad is just plain GMail bashing.

Edit: Yikes, why the downvotes?

<comment><USER13> >This Microsoft ad is just plain GMail bashing

Unlike the others, this isn't really an ad that is part of a big campaign, so it's not comparable. It is right now just an uploaded video to YouTube, and doesn't show up in popular TV like the other two ads.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> A "burning sensation" joke? Seriously, there's ample opportunity for comedy here and they went with this? Did Microsoft hire Adam Sandler's writers?

<comment><USER7> They didn't fail. The comedy in this video is supposed to be corny.

<comment><USER15> It's a very fine line. You can do overtly corny and still be funny. It just takes clever writing.

<comment><USER7> I don't understand what the complaining is about about.

Was this video supposed to be something else, presented in another way, with a different dialog? Was it supposed to make _you_ laugh? Is that who it was made for?

<comment><USER14> I'm definitely more in that target demographic than one for an Adam Sandler movie. It has a certain blandness about it, a comedy "uncanny valley". The general direction would've worked for me, but it lacks any kind of style. This looks like a corporate training video version of fun, something approved by the type of manager who likes to "liven up" his presentations by the occasional quip. This is like a joke told via Powerpoint.

It actually wouldn't need all that much to make it work. Make gmail-man a bit more creepy. Or aim for a certain style of musical (or era). And again, 'burning sensation' has to go.

(Can't believe I'm actually writing that much about what basically amounts to "meh".)

<comment><USER7> > Make gmail-man a bit more creepy. Or aim for a certain style of musical (or > era).

So you want to 1) ruin it and then also 2) make it so everyone thinks Microsoft is bitter.

<comment><USER14> Those are just two examples I could come up with on the spot, I'm sure there are cleaner and more mainstream ways to spice things up. I thought that if you're taking the pi __out of Google, you might as well commit to it. I think that quite a few people already consider this slightly bitter and/or envious.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Am I supposed to believe that none of MS' online mail properties do the same things?

<comment><USER17> They couldn't figure out how to algorithmically serve ads, so they just hire a real person to read your email and find the right ads.

<comment><USER16> They bought Powerset who had some great natural language tech (I had a chance to talk to one of their engineers before MS bought them).

I believe Bing incorporates Powerset in their search

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> If it's a violation of privacy to serve ads based on email content, why is it not a violation of privacy to filter out spam? It's exactly the same thing: a computer program "reads" your email, and then it does something with the information it learned.

<comment><USER18> It's not exactly the same thing. To serve targeted ads, you need to associate the information you inferred from e-mails with individual users (and with so much data that goes through your Gmail account, that means building a very accurate profile of the user: their interests, buying habits etc.). To filter out spam, you don't need all that. In fact, you can build a pretty decent spam filter that is entirely contextless i.e. classifies e-mails without knowing who's the recipient.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> This ad is meant to mislead laypeople into thinking that Google employs humans to read your email.

</comment><comment><USER20> I have to agree with a lot of what microsoft if pointing out. However, gmail is still superior in features to any of microsoft's email offerings, so I won't be changing providers. Can anyone name a competitor to gmail that has all of gmail's features?

<comment><USER5> Were Microsoft comparing Gmail to Hotmail, it could be a fair comparison. But then Microsoft wouldn't be able to criticize Google without admitting their own banners are completely unrelated to context (and, thus, offer much worse relevance and click-through ratios).

Or they aren't and, again, Microsoft wouldn't be able to complain.

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> Anthropomorphizing webmail are we?

Equating machine parsing to a human "reading" email is just straight out deception and preying on the uninformed. Hotmail and every other webmail service parses emails either to check for spelling errors or combat spam, Gmail uses adsense as well which is a much less annoying ad system than Hotmail's display ads.

Oh and Google Apps, the primary target to this Microsoft propaganda is ad free.</comment>


Linux in a Browser - <AUTHOR> http://angrave.github.io/sys/#playground

<comment><USER2> I love it!!! Awesome! Trying out linux has never been easier! gcc compiles and runs hello.c!

(Note: I'm noticing when using vi that the screen does not clear the previous text from the terminal.)</comment>