How we built a Smart Office system based on Raspberry Pi - <AUTHOR> http://monterail.com/blog/2016/how-we-built-a-truly-smart-office-system-based-on-raspberry-pi/ <comment><USER2> Good to see in a DIY-solution:

> _The light control set up is fail-safe. If something with the RPi goes > terribly wrong, we could still operate the lights in the "classic" analog > way._

(I wish they'd explained how they do it, but I assume they use latching relays to switch the actual lights, so RPis and light switches can work in parallel)

Using the chrome debugging protocol for the remote screens is also quite clever.

<comment><USER3> I have Rpis controlling my various plant-grow-lamps around the house; the relays they switch are set to fail-open so if they fall over I can go back to manual control; so you probably assume correctly. Now if the relays themselves get sad I'd probably be in for a bad time but fixing that seems like a reduction problem? (I speak as someone clueless about actual EE beyond treating it like legos)

<comment><USER4> I don't know what kind of relays you're using, but most relays tend to fail in a closed position, so it's worth considering what happens if a light is turned on continuously. Also, hardware or software failure in the RPi could turn on all of the lights in your house, e.g., if the same software running on every unit encounters a bug.

<comment><USER5> And for those cases I decided to place wall switches in parallel. As automation fails you can still operate all lights with classic, wall switch, way.

Also, solution for jamming relays are SSRs. In practice there were issues only with two biggest light zones with multiple lamps switched at the same time.

<comment><USER4> I've had SSR's stuck shut too.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> A DIY-solution is nice (and as engineers something really fun to do) but they will have to maintain it in the future and this is not necessarily "future proof". They would have simply put some KNX[0] compatible components in the system, they would have had control of everything using an open standard. They could have connect light, security cams, door locks, the power plugs, etc... and because this is a standard, the day they move out of the office, they will be able to resell the system to the next users.

[0]: [https://knx.org](https://knx.org)

<comment><USER7> KNX would be definitely a choice but you have to be careful and shop around as many KNX manufactures are known to be incredibly greedy. The situation has improved a lot in recent years though.

Also the term _open_ is very relative here (you have to pay a fee (1000 euro + VAT last time I checked) to access the standard, naturally there are no redistribution rights, KNX certification process is order of magnitude more expensive.

You need a closed source configuration software to be able to configure the devices. Runs only on Windows (XP did it last time but things may have been changed). A single licence costs 1000 euro + VAT, unless you use limited version that works up to 20 devices and costs 100 euro + VAT (in many small cases that would be enough as the limitation is project based).

PS. It is rather an attempt to put things into a contexts than a criticism.

Minimum setup:

1) KNX power supply (provides power for the KNX bus),

2) KNX actuator (relay or dimmer or special (say LED stripe)),

3) KNX switch (or an input device (can use standard wall spring switches)),

4) KNX bus connector for programming (USB tongle, KNX/IP router, there are many options),

5) KNX configuration software,

6) Windows machine (VM works too).

This setup allows to map the actuator and switch in the configuration software and upload the configuration into the devices.

Please also note that encrypted communication between KNX devices is commonly not supported (but so is it also for a simple pulse signal from the wall switch to the relay).

<comment><USER8> Thank you for this clarification. I was interested when the parent mentioned KNX as a standard for these types of setup, but quite disappointed to realise it was another of these "open standards with high barrier of entry".

Took me a little while to find out what is was actually about on the website, most pages contains just marketing speak.

I wonder if there is any other (really) open standard that could be useful to follow in DIY systems.

<comment><USER7> Unfortunately this is the best there is to offer. Worse that could happen is that Google enters into this market.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Yay, this is my world! Looks like a super nice homebrew solution.

I don't think I've ever used or worked on a project with PLC's handling any sort of core logic though. Sure they'll occasionally run small components of simple edge systems (HVAC, lift motor control, physical access etc) but the overwhelming majority of systems are built with a network of embedded controllers. Any systems rolling out today will (or at least should) then combine this with some server side backend for analytics and shifting interaction logic away from the the edge systems to somewhere it's a little easier to change and adapt to the needs of the building.

There's some pretty established, older players (Crestron, AMX et al) that make full programmable solutions, but by all modern standards their development tools are atrocious - you'd need to be a complete and utter masochist to want to enter that world today.

The good thing about this is a bunch of amazing people building well designed, open source and non-proprietary solutions to make this world suck less.

My two favourites are [http://nodel.io/](http://nodel.io/), which runs a fully distributed architecture (and can even have the nodes running of RPi's) and [http://www.acaprojects.com/](http://www.acaprojects.com/) which is a keeps all the system logic server side.

<comment><USER10> Yeah, even stuff like Niagra is a pain. Most solutions are configurable more so than programmable (in the scripting sense). I've done a fair amount of modbus and bacnet with "standard" systems and more pi-style systems and agree that for a developer-minded user it can be like gazing into the mouth of madness to work with.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> I'm surprised all they found were PLC based solutions. I worked in lighting and building controls for years and most products used embedded systems and not PLCs.

<comment><USER11> Hey, you're totally right. Actually we would normally use some embedded solution for that (preferably STM32 or ESP8266 if wireless was needed), however, in this case we were focusing on designing it in a way so that it's easy to maintain by web-development agency, which we are. Not everyone here knows how to change and flash low-level code into a uC but almost everyone would be able to fix a bug in python code on the RPi :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> That's like saying "How we built a Smart Office system based on Electricity", the RPi is just any old single board computer here with some GPIOs.

In any case, I sure hope they have mounted their SD cards as read-only, because otherwise they might find their keycard system not working one early morning in approximately a year or 2-3 random power off events. Theres a reason for these PLC systems after all.

<comment><USER13> Are you suggesting that they will reach the flash memory's write cycle limit within a year? Or something else here?

Also, I would not have thought that random power off events would affect modern file systems as poorly as you're suggesting.

Interesting thoughts though.

<comment><USER4> There's something else. The RPi is prone to failure if it's writing to the SD card when power goes down. Articles that I've read suggest moving most of the RPi's files to some other form of storage, for instance:

[https://learn.adafruit.com/external-drive-as-raspberry-pi- ro...](https://learn.adafruit.com/external-drive-as-raspberry-pi- root/overview)

I've thought about the idea of having some super-capacitor based temporary power storage, and an interrupt that triggers a graceful shutdown if the power input goes down. I think it could be done with fairly basic circuitry.

<comment><USER14> such things exist (such as the pico from [http://pimodules.com/](http://pimodules.com/)) but I've had nothing but grief from its firmware using v1 and v2. There appears to be a new version, and I suppose it might be better now.

For most <1 day outages, a simple USB power-bank with passthrough capability (output whilst also possibly charging) will happily keep the pi going, but without some frankenbodging there's no 'power lost' signal that the pi can sense. I've idly toyed with the idea of a phototransistor on the powerbank status LED and an attiny or something.

Now that I think about it, there was someone trying to make a supercap idea, but I don't think it went anywhere: [https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/juice4halt- supercapacitor...](https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/juice4halt- supercapacitor-ups-for-raspberry-pi#/)

<comment><USER15> Could you not simply have a 5V DC power adapter on the same mains line, and detect if it is on or off via one of the GPIO pins? Is that considered frankenbodging?

<comment><USER4> That's what I would do. The loss of 5 V on the GPIO pin triggers a interrupt, which forces a graceful shutdown. As I understand it, there's a command which halts disk access, which is mainly what's needed for a graceful shutdown.

<comment><USER16> You can use "systemctl poweroff", /sbin/shutdown, "shutdown -Ph now" (in case of wonky ACPI), and a few others to gracefully halt.

You can also echo a magic sysrq key (eg-"b") to /proc/sysrq-trigger. "e i s u o" would do the full graceful shutdown. This nicely asks processes to quit, kills (almost) everything, halts the system, syncs disks, and remounts fs ro before going down.

Or you could create a service with systemd to (run a script to) check when dbus gets a particular signal, like a network device being added or removed if an SSID disappearing was your indicator of power loss, then halt.

I'd probably just plug them into a UPS, though. Just have it send one of the shutdowns to the "master" when running battery power for longer than a few minutes.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Some more technical implementation info - hardware, software and how it is all connected would be much appreciated!

<comment><USER11> Thanks for asking! I can explain you how the lighting unit works since I was taking part in designing it (better than nothing :) ). Since we didn't have enough GPIOs on the Raspberry which is controlling the lights, we used a GPIO expanders (MCP23017 [https://goo.gl/S4i9Gw](https://goo.gl/S4i9Gw)). RPi sends commands over I2C interface to switch their outputs on and off. MCPs outputs are driving optocouplers (on the same PCBs designed by us) to provide a proper level of isolation. Then the optocouplers' outputs drive the relays working in a "stair case" configuration with analog switches on the walls (see a my comment above and here [https://goo.gl/sJw9F1](https://goo.gl/sJw9F1)). All the "low-level" software is written in python using ready to go libraries and exposing API to a web-app which is basically a user interface for the system. If you need more details, just shoot!

<comment><USER18> Love your use of wire duct to keep things organized, and small attention to detail like ferrules on each wire going into the terminal blocks.

To my eyes this shows really you care about what you build.

Nice job!

<comment><USER11> Many thanks! It's always good to design your system like that. The same with software :) Makes it easier to maintain.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Anyone know what hardware they are actually using other than the RPis?

<comment><USER5> Relay modules from finder, custom pcb modules with current outputs for switching relays and optoisolators for voltage detecion, some custom expansion module for all signals interconnection. I will prepare some appendix to the blog-post with more technical data.

<comment><USER20> I'd love to see more details on that. The RPi is the easy choice for putting together a DIY system at home, but finding good and affordable remote I/O modules to run the show has not been that straightforward.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> Fun to see someone do this with the pi.

I wonder how they handle security. Especially since it also controls access to the facility.

Also, would be pretty funny if the RPis went all Hall one day.

<comment><USER5> RPi is only accessible in separate local network. Doors also has regular locks which are used after working hours.

In case of sytem failure almost all parts has alternative working conditions: lights can be controlled with wall switches, rfid lock can be programmed separatly, etc.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> Last time I tried, webkit for RPi leaks memory after playing audio for a few hours. It would be great to have a follow up post after the system is in production use for a while.

<comment><USER23> "Now, after a year from launching our smart office system based on 7 Raspberry Pis we know there is nothing to be afraid of!"

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> We've seen projects like these in DIY magazines since the 70s. But Nest took off, and thus so could this.

</comment><comment><USER25> Anyone know what boards they are using for their relay controllers?

<comment><USER11> We designed our own, simple ones having MCP23017 ([https://goo.gl/S4i9Gw](https://goo.gl/S4i9Gw)) as the GPIO expanders and some popular optocouplers to provide proper isolation level. I can't remember which exact part was chosen for the isolator, but this one should work like a charm [https://goo.gl/GS6twt](https://goo.gl/GS6twt).

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> You could do most of this with the X10 system.

<comment><USER15> Yes, and a TRS-80.

<comment><USER26> I don't think the Trash 80 came with network over power lines or wireless communication.

<comment><USER27> Radio Shack had a control module you plugged into the cassette port that interfaced with the X10 bus.

[http://www.trs-80.org/plug-n-power/](http://www.trs-80.org/plug-n-power/)

<comment><USER26> Now that's retro.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Understanding Python Decorators - <AUTHOR> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/739654/understanding-python-decorators#answer-1594484

<comment><USER2> For those interested, here are a few discussions of Python decorators:

[https://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/all&q=title%3A(p...](https://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/all&q=title%3A\(python+decorators\))</comment>


Show HN: Hospice.io – Vagrant configurations generator - <AUTHOR> http://hospice.io/ <comment><USER2> I'm not sure what connotations you were going for with the word "hospice", but I'd really suggest choosing a different name.

<comment><USER3> To me the name is so bad that even after the name changes I might prefer to use something else, all other things being close to equal.

<comment><USER4> Yeah...

Seems they're from Russia, so no native English speaker. Neither am I, and when I've first seen the site's name I've looked it up, found one of its possible meanings (backpackers' hostel) and liked the link to a vagrant.

<comment><USER5> You made me curious, and it seems that the words original (English) meaning was a "rest house for travelers" (From the French "hospice," which is from the Latin word "hospes, that also brings us the English "hospitality.) It is interesting how the meaning of words, especially English ones, can morph so.

But, yeah, anyway I would suggest changing the name. My first thought was of death, and it was really only a morbid fascination that caused me to click on the link.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Very cool. Django and the associated stuff (south, virtualenv, etc) would be a nice addition.

<comment><USER7> Yes. Also adding mercurial as a vcs option would be great.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Love it. Where can I find the source code for this nifty little utility so that I can add JVM/Clojure support?

<comment><AUTHOR> <http://github.com/aderyabin/hospice>

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> Why the Ruby dependency for creating cookbooks? I don't prefer installing frameworks I'm not using as add-ons for another product - can vagrant do the extras?

<comment><USER10> Well, Vagrant provides a hook for different provisioning frameworks. I believe that Puppet and Chef and officially supported. The project uses Chef, which is written in ruby and uses ruby-based cookbooks to do its work. So it is pretty unavoidable. Also, Vagrant is written in Ruby last I checked, so if you are using Vagrant you already have a Ruby dependency.

Sorry if I've misunderstood.

As an aside, I thought it would be cool to build a service like this, so it's great that somebody did it. However the name definitely has the wrong connotation.

<comment><USER9> >>Vagrant is written in Ruby

Well, so it is. I'll sit down now.

I tried to run gems (and ruby) from the command line, but it was local to the /embedded directory (on Windows) so not part of the path.

<comment><AUTHOR> We are waiting for 1.2.0 Vagrant release to make use of the librarian plugin. Vagrant self-installer will solve Windows issue. It contains several tiny bugs atm unfortunately :(

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I just started using Vagrant. Can anyone recommend me any guide or tips?

This configuration generator looks like a very nice way to skip all the intitial setup, which looks confusing for a new Vagrant user.

<comment><USER12> A tip: use it with VMWare Fusion and not VirtualBox. It is the best.

Sorry I don't have any tutorial but it is not so hard to use.

<comment><USER13> Really? This is possible without paying more than the cost of VMWare Fusion?

I'd love to switch to fusion (which would necessitate buying it), but I'm not going to pay more than the cost of fusion for the provider adapter for vagrant. Are there any free/open source ones about yet?

<comment><USER12> Because it works better. Less crash, freeze... And VMWare Fusion is product of VMWare so there is no other way to have it for free. But anyway it is not that much.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I'm new to both vagrant and chef, so this looks pretty useful for me . I selected rvm but it looks like it used rbenv, but I might be wrong. Also, the name really stinks.

</comment><comment><USER15> Any chance you could add salt stack generation as well?

<comment><USER16> It is usually more effective to create issues in GitHub repo, so I have created one for you: <https://github.com/aderyabin/hospice/issues/11>

<comment><USER15> Thanks! I was just thinking the other day about how I preferred when people do that rather than put requests in comments. Guess I'm just as guilty...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Any chance you could add Node.js? Perhaps installing bundler would be a good option too. That way you can get straight into development.

</comment><comment><USER18> Could you please add lighttpd as well?

</comment><comment><USER19> terrible name

</comment><comment><USER20> git, svn, where is mercurial?

<comment><AUTHOR> We were only able to add packages that we use ourselves for now. It will take some time but we are going to expand the list.

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> The only thing generated from a hospice is sadness...</comment>


What is Enlightenment? (1784) - <AUTHOR> http://legacy.earlham.edu/~mileske/Files/Kant%27s%20An%20Answer%20to%20the%20Question%20What%20is%20Enlightenment.htm <comment><USER2> Regarding 2:

>> Laziness and cowardice are the reasons why so great a proportion of men ... It is so easy to be immature. If I have a book to serve as my understanding, a pastor to serve as my conscience, a physician to determine my diet for me, and so on, I need not exert myself at all. I need not think, if only I can pay: others will readily undertake the irksome work for me.

This is beautiful in its simplicity and still has a piece of truth. But a more elaborate modern take would be probably that we also have finite resources. I do believe for instance that the earth surface is spherical, although I cann't immediately come up with an argument to prove this. I have not personally traveled around the world in a boat or launched satellites.

It seems that there is _fundamentally_ no choice but to trust some people or traditions of thought on some things and then somehow to decide when to start doubting. Which is why fake news is a problem, for instance.

<comment><USER3> You'd be surprised how much resources you have available if you spend zero time in front of the TV or surfing the web, and spend all your free time on a hard chair with pen and paper studying.

<comment><USER4> >>You'd be surprised how much resources you have available if you spend zero time in front of the TV or surfing the web

Not really. Your available time, even if not wasted is still tiny. Seriously, just think about it, after college maybe you have some 40 years of peak productivity, if not less (and I suspect it is a lot less for most people). That doesn't really sound like a lot to me. Especially if you want to spend it doing things that are none trivial.

>>and spend all your free time on a hard chair with pen and paper studying

You cannot do this. You need to unwind. You need to enjoy culture, watch some TV, have relationships. Otherwise you will likely just burn out early. Plus, inspiration many times comes when you are just relaxing doing something completely unrelated to what you are pursuing.

<comment><USER5> > _You need to unwind. You need to enjoy culture, watch some TV, have > relationships._

In my experience, these things merely distract from underlying pain, including the underlying pain of human mortality. When you free yourself of this pain, weird and unexpected things happen.

<comment><USER6> Could you explain further?

<comment><USER5> I propose that there exists an active mental state in which one is emotionally neutral (i.e. no emotional valence) toward any possible outcome -- removal of access to entertainment, pleasure, one's relationships, even your own death.

I don't claim that this mental state is "better" or that anyone should try to achieve it, but experiencing it does tend to disrupt beliefs about what is necessary and important in life. Evidence suggests that desires and pleasures and entertainment and social comforts and ways to unwind that previously felt reasonably harmless and natural start to feel irrelevant and unimportant.

As far as I can tell, most of the written evidence is from the spiritual perspective, which is not always the most intellectually rigorous perspective. For a more scientific treatment of the underlying neuroscience, I'd recommend Thomas Metzinger's work; "The Ego Tunnel" is a good start. My experience is that understanding the physiological mechanisms behind our awareness, cognition, and emotion gives us a better map of how we might engineer different mental states, some of which have significant overlap with historically desirable mental states.

Metzinger proposes that our conception of "self" is basically an illusion that our brain generates in specific ways for specific purposes. Conceptually experimenting with "if this was true, what would it imply?" seems to lead to a world in which no one and no event can hurt "me", because in a way of speaking, there is no "me". Then backing down the ladder of abstraction, if I _really, truly_ believed this, but of course still had the brain-generated perception of self, what would it imply for my everyday behavior?

The result seems to be sparser but deeper and more meaningful relationships (including with myself), much less interest in mindless entertainment and distraction, and intensified curiosity about the natural world. To the point where spending "all your free time on a hard chair with pen and paper studying" actually seems like a good idea.

<comment><USER6> Thanks for your comment. I've got Metzinger's book on my shelf so thanks for the reminder to read it :).

I must admit I have similar ideas about the self, I am currently inclined to believe that it is indeed an illusion but have not thought about the implications of that illusion (I have peace with it though).

I'm a bit more nuanced towards the emotional side. I think we all have emotions but being able to perceive them as just that, gives us true freedom. There are people that chase the emotional state/high of being happy above your normal baseline/hormonal levels, as the emotional state they want to have continuously. True freedom however comes with accepting all these states as they are. That means you are not chasing any "happy" states or getting out of other states.

How do you link the illusion of self to intensified curiosity about the world? I've always had an intensified curiosity but I'm unable to link this to "self".

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Michel Foucault also wrote about this essay. His essay starts thus:

> Today when a periodical asks its readers a question, it does so in order to > collect opinions on some subject about which everyone has an opinion > already; there is not much likelihood of learning anything new. In the > eighteenth century, editors preferred to question the public on problems > that did not yet have solutions. I don't know whether or not that practice > was more effective; it was unquestionably more entertaining.

> In any event, in line with this custom, in November 1784 a German > periodical, Berlinische Monatschrift published a response to the question: > Was ist Aufklärung? And the respondent was Kant.

([https://www.libarts.colostate.edu/leap/wp- content/uploads/si...](https://www.libarts.colostate.edu/leap/wp- content/uploads/sites/24/2017/01/Foucault-What-is-enlightenment.pdf))

</comment><comment><USER8> Paragraph 1 reminds me of a Yuval Harari quote from an article discussed here [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13905249](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13905249)

>The other major contribution, I think, is that the entire exercise of Vipassana meditation is to learn the difference between fiction and reality, what is real and what is just stories that we invent and construct in our own minds. Almost 99 percent you realize is just stories in our minds. This is also true of history. Most people, they just get overwhelmed by the religious stories, by the nationalist stories, by the economic stories of the day, and they take these stories to be the reality.

</comment><comment><USER9> Reading this through the lens of a current era where hierarchies are being subsumed by networks, and then reasserting themselves, this was written in a similar context, can't help but recommend "The Square and the Tower," a recent book that talks about the historical tension between networks and hierarchies.

Obligatory Niall Ferguson link for modern take on history, and a pleasant sunday afternoon listen: [https://youtu.be/f3rhUZPNqX0?t=576](https://youtu.be/f3rhUZPNqX0?t=576)

</comment><comment><USER10> > One age cannot bind itself, and thus conspire, to place a succeeding one in > a condition whereby it would be impossible for the later age to expand its > knowledge (particularly where it is so very important), to rid itself of > errors, and generally to increase its enlightenment.

Unless they are talking correctly about truths which are unchanging. in which case, good sir, you have a philosophical bias towards false progress.

Plato teaches me far more about true knowledge than does the enlightenment.

<comment><USER11> There is some truth in this. Two and two will never be five.

Unfortunately I most often see the notion of eternal unchanging truth invoked to defend very temporal and mutable things: cultural and aesthetic biases, social and economic hierarchy, gender roles, racial stereotypes, religion, the state, etc.

People wish to rub some of the eternal truth of math and logic onto their favorite idols but it never sticks. Human hierarchy and symbol are very mutable.

Nobody bothers to pound the table about the eternal truth of actual eternal truths. There's no point.

<comment><USER12> > There is some truth in this. Two and two will never be five.

unless you swap some digits name's :cough:

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> This review of _What Is Real?: The Unfinished Quest for the Meaning of Quantum Physics_ and _The Ashtray: (Or the Man Who Denied Reality)_ contains an excellent introduction to Kant's ideas:

[http://bostonreview.net/science-nature-philosophy- religion/t...](http://bostonreview.net/science-nature-philosophy-religion/tim- maudlin-defeat-reason)

<comment><USER14> +1

This was a really enjoyable read that goes through the history of science from the 20th century, and draws connections between the measurement problem from quantum mechanics and ideas from philosophy including logical positivism and transcendental idealism. It's well worth reading if you are at all interested in open problems in quantum mechanics.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> This piece is one of the foundations not only for Illuminism, but for modern thinking in the western culture in general. Thanks for submitting.

</comment><comment><USER16> Steven West's podcast `Philosophize This` has a neat explanation of how this work came to be and paints a picture of what life was like during this time. I think episode ~50ish

</comment><comment><USER17> Text in original language, German: [http://gutenberg.spiegel.de/buch/-3505/1](http://gutenberg.spiegel.de/buch/-3505/1)

The German "Unmündigkeit" has more formal connotation than immaturity in the English translation. For instance you are considered "Mündig" when you are 18 years old.

</comment><comment><USER18> >> Thus a public can only attain enlightenment slowly.

Its unfortunate that somethings never change. Even as technology is growing at an ever increasing rate, human nature sets to dampen most of its adoption. And since the largest expansion of population is coinciding with the largest increase in longevity, we're seeing a even larger dampening effect.

This is something a lot of our peers in the tech world don't realize. Too great an effort is put into building said technology and not enough is put into helping the public adopt it.

</comment><comment><USER19> Sad to see that the public discourse has moved away from point 5 with the freedom to argue. To the point of that I'm afraid of giving examples.

<comment><USER20> Tell me about it! Everyone in my village knows full well my neighbor is witch. But if I even suggest we hold a witch trial, some weak-kneed SJW tries to de- platform me. The Enlightenment is truly dead.

<comment><USER21> These days, the witch is a Russian troll, an alt-reicher, maybe a closet "bro", or heaven forbid, a g@merg00ber.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> It's a polically-correct (at that time) revolt against the King and the religion. The word light refers also to the religion (first words of the Bible and the angel of the light).

<comment><USER23> Nope. "Enlightenment" in German is "Aufklärung", which is not cognate with the German for light ("Licht").

<comment><USER22> It's a french invention.

<comment><USER24> 'Le siècle des Lumières [plural] … Le terme de «Lumières» a été consacré par l'usage pour rassembler la diversité des manifestations de cet ensemble d'objets [la superstition, l'intolérance, l'abus des Églises et des États].' (fr.wikipedia.org) — Except for Postmodernism, an era does not usually give itself a name. The term was coined later on (say, just about the acme of the revolution's Terror, when a cult of such lights/gleams/luminaries was contrived). Where in German it reads 'Aufklärung', in French 'éclaircissement' is used instead.

First words of the Bible: בְּרֵאשִׁית, בָּרָא אֱלֹהִים, אֵת הַשָּׁמַיִם, וְאֵת הָאָרֶץ. 'In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.' (Gn 1,1) — Okay, the third verse reads, in French (Bible de Sacy translation): 'Or Dieu dit: Que la lumière soit faite. Et la lumière fut faite.' — Not a plural.

The angel of the light = Lucifer (<Lat. 'light-bearer'); cfr 2 Cor. 11:14: 'And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light.' — I don't believe Kant could ever have imagined him being associated with satanism…

<comment><USER22> Probably not but he is german, not french. French philosophy and ideology assimilated elsewhere.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> sounds like blabbering to me.

</comment><comment><USER26> Your username suggests Indian heritage. I find a great deal of Indians interested in this topic, as am I.

I'm not sure how correct this description of enlightenment is, but my personal description of it is simply this: a state of total, mindful flow. Like when you solve a problem effortlessly because you have such a deep, intrinsic knowledge of it. It seems to impart a very profound feeling of calmness and equanimity across my mind.

A rather wise old man once told me, enlightenment is existing with intrinsic knowledge of your "sense of existence". Apparently it's very subtle and not so easy to pin down mentally... Still not sure how to interpret that, but part of me thinks there's some value in it.

<comment><USER27> It is simply being fully awake. We take our consciousness for granted, but in reality, we are sleep-walking the majority of our waking lives. Reacting, not Acting.

It is a wakefulness that is universal, I would image another species of intelligent beings also existing with full knowledge and acceptance of existence, be they organic or digital. It is not a human quality, but something much more.</comment></comment>


You probably won't make it to the top - <AUTHOR> https://m.signalvnoise.com/youre-probably-won-t-make-it-to-the-top-8d2146abb790?source=rss----668e14b18fb1---4 <comment><USER2> This is getting old.

DHH routinely posts "humble brag" type photos on Instagram of his exotic cars and his ocean side view. Meanwhile he's telling the rest of us not to bother trying to "make it to the top"?

If he feels so guilty about his luck, he should give it away or pay if forward in a constructive way.

<comment><USER3> read his post just before this one. its him apologizing about the sick lifestyle of humblebragging he let himself get into.

<comment><USER4> Written in the most pompous style I've read in a long time. He still has ways to go.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> There's a paragraph from a long-disappeared blogger about how to set life-long goals that's the exact opposite of what DHH says.

 _> One of the great insights of psychoanalysis is that you never really want an object, you only want the wanting, which means the solution is to set your sights on an impossible ideal and work hard to reach it. You won't. That's not just okay, that's the point. It's ok if you fantasize about knowing kung fu if you then try to actually learn kung fu, eventually you will understand you can never really know kung fu, and then you will die. And it will have been worth it._

It's virtually impossible to be the best, and it's actually impossible to stay the best, which is why it's such a good goal to chase. Trying to be the best programmer will fly you around the world, push you to talk to strangers, get you up in the morning before a conference or before work, fill your github with interesting experiments, top up your bank account, and mould your personality.

I know that DHH is saying something superficially similar about the journey being more important than the destination, but I wonder whether it's possible to walk the road without picking an impossibly distant destination to aim for.

</comment><comment><USER6> DHH has been cursed by success and he doesn't even realize it. This is a rather tone-deaf and unfortunate article.

From what I get from the article is: You can't be like me, but the best you can do is to better yourself. It's a completely demotivating and dangerous message.

It completely ignores the role that luck played, ignored the factor of social connections, and the struggle it takes to get to where he got to. He waxes on a lot in the article and completely ignores the economics of why he succeed and others didn't.

<comment><USER7> I think you may need to forget who the author is for a second and reread this.

He admits luck plays a huge role in success [0] (especially if you're using the success of others to measure your own success).

He's saying competing with yourself is the best way to measure success and achieve fulfillment. This probably stems from a lot of people using him as a barometer of success in tech. Comparing yourself to others is a great way to be miserable forever.

[0] "Besides, you only have limited influence on whether you're going to succeed at whatever you put your mind to. It's by no means within your exclusive sphere of control. There are so many things that have to come together at the same time. Only a couple of which you own."

<comment><USER6> There's many better ways to explain the role of luck in success, but I felt the way he mentions that was an add-on to his whole message of "don't bother." Competing with yourself improves you, not your positioning in the real world. When you improve yourself and the real world is more bountiful, that's a minor side effect purely based on your context and environment.

In the whole article, he doesn't bring up examples of others to make his point. His only source in this is himself from his point of view.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I'm not aiming for the top. I'm aiming for a good position on an alternate path. My 6-year goal is to have my own company that I work for full time, and my 10-year goal is to have a few employees. I don't want to build a tech company that will be acquired, I want to build a tech company that sells a product and provides me with a decent income, a solid upper-middle-class or lower-upper-class income.

I hate to admit it but this journey so far has seen me have to reprioritise my interests already. Instead of focusing on technical challenges I enjoy I've had to start thinking about customers, what do they want, what will they pay for and how much?

</comment><comment><USER9> I don't understand why commenters here are bashing this article and/or the author. Why do people see financial success as the only worthwhile goal?

<comment><USER4> Because the author is a millionaire living a millionaire lifestyle and telling other people not to try to imitate him. It just comes off as very hypocritical.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> DHH is a proponent of Stoicism. This article is an argument for the Stoic concept called "dichotomy of control", which can be summarised as: "Don't worry about things you don't have any control over. Instead, try to change those things for the better you at least have a some sort of control over".

Articles like these don't have to be motivated by feeling remorseful about or by trying to do some weird kind of penance for one's success.

Marcus Aurelius probably is the most well-known adherent of Stoicism during classical antiquity and he was Roman Emperor after all. Aside from Mount Olympus itself you can't really get any more to the top than that.

You rarely hear people say Aurelius was just humblebragging because he felt uncomfortable about his success, do you?

</comment><comment><USER11> I agree. We're all dealt different hands in life. The best thing is to strive to be the 'best you can', not 'the best'.

A motto from an old children's organization sums it up: "Do your best." It really is good advice.

</comment><comment><USER12> This ignores the role of optimism: if you believe you will make it to the top then you are more likely to get there.

<comment><USER13> While it is true that optimism generally is a sensible approach, I really dislike how it's often used to dismiss the various factors that can make it difficult for some to reach that top, or progress towards it.

Basically, it's good advice when applied to the self, but terrible when applied to others.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> "The top is full of people who hate what they had to do or who they had to become to get there."

What a great quote. There are _so_ many things I could be doing as a blogger/YouTuber/solopreneur/whatever to try to maximize my chances of success, but I would hate myself for doing them. Things like putting horrible newsletter signup popups on my website, or gaming the system on YouTube to get more subs (because it's all about the subs, right?).

I once worked as a software developer for a marketplace-type project where they started talking about faking analytics data for profiles so people would think the platform is successful. I voiced my hesitation at the time, and thankfully I ended up off the project before I was told point-blank to implement it, but that's the kind of crap people pull in order to rise to the top.

All the privacy headaches, security breaches, UX dark patterns, and other garbage we're having to deal with online and in the computer industry is all because of people sacrificing their morals on the altar of "making it big." Silicon Valley did an excellent job marketing itself as a better capitalism than the robber barons of old, but now we see the cracks in the armor. Props to DHH for constantly and consistently pointing out the fallacies of all the entrepreneurship BS.

</comment><comment><USER15> Eh there is a lot of "tops" and you can always find a new one. Also it's relativley easy to ge the best programmer in language that's 2 months old.

</comment><comment><USER16> Ah, the latest in a trend of anti-struggle glamour. These articles full of pithy aphorisms are no better than their counterparts on the other end of the spectrum.

</comment><comment><USER17> Seems wise but it really is built in our DNA to compete with the other lobsters

edit: this comment probably won't make it to the top</comment>


Politically motivated climate data deletions - <AUTHOR> https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/mar/28/arctic-researcher-donald-trump-deleting-my-citations <comment><USER3> This seems to be happening with enough frequency that we citizens of the world ought to create a third party mirror of all gov data so as to withstand leadership transitions and politically motivated deletions.

I'd say someone like the UN should coordinate this, but it would probably be better done by a Wikipedia style outfit.

Maybe on the block chain. Perhaps we need a DataCoin that fuels keeping this stuff alive.

I'm curious how much data we are talking about and how difficult it would be for us to automate backing it up so this sort of issue isn't as devastating.

Might also be a way for us to cite data in such a way that it automatically triggers archiving.

Ie. Using [http://dataarchive.org/govagency.gov/data/numbers](http://dataarchive.org/govagency.gov/data/numbers) would automatically store the source info as well as last accessibilily information.

Ideas?

<comment><USER4> Replying to you to clarify the article since you are the top voted comment and I think it might lend itself to other people making conclusions they shouldn't without reading the article.

While I agree with you, I'm not sure that is the case here. The research is not deleted in this case, just literally the citations. Here it sounds more like:

Either

A. People editing citations in articles need to be less lazy and relocate missing sources

or

B. Research sites need to follow proper SEO best practice and use 301 redirects when they move files

<comment><USER5> RTFA - Data is actually being deleted, along with citations.

<comment><USER4> I did RTFA and this paragraph threw me off:

> All in all, emails about defunct links of sites that weren't saved are > annoying, but harmless. Finding archived materials to replace them add maybe > 20 minutes of internet searches to my day – and a bit of anger at the state > of the country.

The way I read that was that the articles still existed elsewhere. But reading the article again I can see they are referring to other people's citations of the things that are deleted.

Also, the title itself:

> I am an Arctic researcher. Donald Trump is deleting my citations

Citation is defined by the dictionary as:

> "a quotation from or reference to a book, paper, or author, especially in a > scholarly work."

Not the source data.

So my apologies. I misread what the author was intending to say. But in defense if the author was intending to say that then the word citation in the title is used completely wrong. (or scientist have a different definition which I find odd)

Actually readying the article again. I am still not sure I was not right the first time. Deleting a citation is NOT deleting the source material. Deleting "cited material" is.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> They don't actually make clear where the information has been deleted from. But to me it sounds alot like the big fuss at the inauguration when Obama's Whitehouse website was archived and replaced with Trump's.

The stated 'The US National Strategy for the Arctic' and 'Implementation Plan for the Strategy', both sound like Obama policy which would have subsequently have been archived.

Blaming Trump for this is facile at best.

[http://edition.cnn.com/2017/01/20/politics/obama-white- house...](http://edition.cnn.com/2017/01/20/politics/obama-white-house- website/)

<comment><USER7> What is the functional difference between 'deleted' and 'archived but not available for anyone to view' or is there one?

<comment><USER8> The entire Obama Whitehouse site is still available for viewing at [https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/](https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/)

The Obama administration sites were moved to the National Archives and Trump started over with new sites. That's exactly the same thing that happened when Bush II and Clinton left office (Clinton was the first to have a web site, so we don't have any precedent before that). Nothing has been "deleted".

Oddly, no one seemed to screech when Obama "deleted" all the material from the Bush II administration. Why not?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Big bonfire of burning books: done

What's the next thing in the manual?

<comment><USER10> Round up the writers and dissidents

<comment><USER10> If anyone has not yet read The Gulag Archipelago, please brace yourself mentally and do so. A very realistic look at how these things happened at a certain point in recent history.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Exactly what was deleted? On what website? I can't tell from the article.

</comment><comment><USER12> so... they're not her citations in the sense of "things that I have written" but instead, changed or modified websites that now have dead links, with no pointers to the data.

I had the same problem this morning in looking for some old Mac software...

<comment><USER4> Thank you for being one of the only people to bring up the point of the article. It means the actual citations not the work being cited.

However, as the article points out, it is possible (perhaps even easy) to hunt down updated links to the research. Instead they were deleted.

If that was done to a Wikipedia article the article would be flagged and either the text deleted or the link fixed. So in a sense Wikipedia has much higher standards.

If anything this is a fable of SEO. Why you should always make sure your legacy URLs provide proper 301 redirects.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> "The concept of global warming was created by and for the Chinese in order to make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive."

I have no words.

</comment><comment><USER14> Can the Trump supporters here explain why this is a good idea? I'm genuinely curious.

<comment><USER15> The neocon (or alt-right, or whatever) attitude is that the planet is too massive and powerful for us to affect it. They believe that climate researchers and scientists have an agenda to push their liberal viewpoint about the world on people and control businesses that would otherwise prosper. The so-called "data" is - in the best case scenario - simply opinion, or - <USER2> the worst case scenario - faked. They believe that if you get rid of the "data", you can stop the liberals with their bullshit agenda.

And now one of their zealots is whispering in the ear of the President.

<comment><USER16> >The neocon (or alt-right, or whatever) attitude is that the planet is too massive and powerful for us to affect it

Not exactly, that's the idea that's been pushed on the people who don't think for themselves, and so those people believe it, just like they believe other fake news.

The "leaders" that actually pushed the idea know that global warming is happening, and that humans are (at least a part of) the cause; they just don't care, profits are more important.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> So is he sitting there pressing the delete key himself?

<comment><USER18> Don't be a defender, you're making it worse.

<comment><USER17> Nah</comment></comment></comment>


Moving From Oracle to CouchDB: Data Management at CERN - <AUTHOR> https://cloudant.com/blog/moving-from-oracle-to-couchdb-data-management-at-cern/ <comment><USER2> "In the end, Zdenek had a single-server CouchDB installation on the order of hundreds of megabytes of metadata stored."

I think the title is a little inflammatory, no?

<comment><USER3> "[I]t came down to storing lots of binary attachments that could be easily shared with other applications in the CMS. That was the main reason for the move."

Yeah this is a non-story. A better headline would be "Why a small application dropped Oracle for CouchDB". Compared with CERN experiments that generate petabytes per year, this is like publicizing Google's technology choice for its employee-list database. Not that ATLAS data goes into an Oracle database, but...

Where are the zealous HN title mods when you need them, eh?

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Misleading title. It is only about a single person that used to work at CERN.

CERN has tons of developer groups, each with his own set of technologies.

<comment><USER5> [http://home.web.cern.ch/about/updates/2013/02/cern-and- oracl...](http://home.web.cern.ch/about/updates/2013/02/cern-and-oracle- celebrate-30-years-collaboration)

[http://ais.web.cern.ch/ais/presentations/eoug99/Implementing...](http://ais.web.cern.ch/ais/presentations/eoug99/ImplementingWorkflow.pdf)

google:// Oracle CERN Technical training: available places in forthcoming courses

<comment><USER4> I used to work at CERN, what are you intending to prove with posting links about Oracle at CERN without explaining them?

<comment><USER5> see comment about Oracle.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bSEv4vF5CTs](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bSEv4vF5CTs)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Cost has nothing to do with it: they get it "free", as in US contribution in kind. And obviously, in the end of the day, Oracle profits much more.

[http://openlab.web.cern.ch/about/partners/oracle](http://openlab.web.cern.ch/about/partners/oracle)

</comment><comment><USER6> hundreds of MB? What? Use sqlite and be done with it.

</comment><comment><USER7> Important note that I'm not seeing in other comments here: they started with _both_ Oracle and CouchDB. This was basically a cleanup in favor of CouchDB, since running two different kinds of DBs is best avoided if possible for simplicity reasons.

</comment><comment><USER8> Surprised it is not everyone else's reason: Cost.

Regarding database dumps, I'm curious how/why data pump[1] is not what he needed.

1: Overview of Oracle Data Pump: [http://docs.oracle.com/cd/E11882_01/server.112/e22490/dp_ove...](http://docs.oracle.com/cd/E11882_01/server.112/e22490/dp_overview.htm)

<comment><USER9> Yeah, I'm not going to defend Oracle (or their pricing model), but in this case it sounds like the person who did the migration was just not an Oracle expert. Data pump is great for database dumps (and very fast), and SecureFiles is basically tailor-made for storing large amounts of binary data. There's a feature for schema versioning that would have allowed them to seamlessly run multiple versions of the same schema exposed to different sets of clients.

Oracle is vastly more powerful than pretty much any of the open source technologies, but it's eventually going to go away because of scenarios like the one described in the article. Tech folks are starting their careers on OSS technologies, learning on them, getting comfortable, and then when they stat working on something like Oracle, they aren't familiar with all of the capabilities under the covers, and migrate off of it to the more familiar platform.

And the cost, of course.

<comment><USER10> > Oracle is vastly more powerful than pretty much any of the open source > technologies

Does it have multi-master replication like CouchDB? What about append-only storage of data (so can do live backup snapshots)? Or a REST-ful interface (so can directly use it from web clients, via a simple proxy)? A web based data browser and viewer like Futon?

Becuase those are very important features I like in Couch. Now I am not saying it knowing Oracle doesn't have those feature, as I don't know Oracle much (maye it does). But it seems to me that your claim how Oracle is a strict super-set of all the other database technologies out there is a bit hyperbolic.

<comment><USER9> First off, I'm not saying it's _better_. It's heavy, complicated, incredibly expensive, the really cool features are even more expensive, but _feature- wise_ , it's an amazing example of what you can do inside of a relational database engine if you have years and years and billions of dollars to spend on R&D.

To answer your questions:

> Does it have multi-master replication like CouchDB?

Yes! It has several kinds of replication. Active/passive, active/passive with the standby available for reading, multi-master, cascading replication (master->standby->secondary standby). You can also do combinations of the above, like master<->master->standby<-master->standby->standby (if you want to get really crazy).

But it's a lot more than that. Synchronous? Sure. Asynchronous? Sure. Semi- synchronous? Yes, I can say that I want to allow the standby database to get up to X minutes out of sync with the primary before I switch over to synchronous and force clients to block until I'm caught up.

Hey, what about file-based replication for items that are not even technically managed by Oracle or inside the database? No problem.

What about failover? Well, Oracle can not only have its clients detect that a database has failed and handle the failover automatically, but you can actually have it fail over and automatically spin up another standby so you don't have a SPOF.

I could go on for pages just on replication scenarios that Oracle supports.

> What about append-only storage of data (so can do live backup snapshots)?

Yes, absolutely, but to be honest, you don't need append-only storage to do live backup snapshots in Oracle. You can do point-in-time consistent backups while the database is serving transactions (it works under the covers similarly to append-only, but the nuances are a little different). Not only can you run backups this way, but you can actually request that your session "see" a view of the database as it was an hour or a day ago. You can also simply say, "return the database to the state it was as of X transaction or at Y time", and the entire database can revert back to that state.

> Or a REST-ful interface (so can directly use it from web clients, via a > simple proxy)? A web based data browser and viewer like Futon?

Yes, Oracle APEX, which is basically an Oracle front-end application server, but lighter than a "real" J2EE stack, can do both of these things. If you want, there's a fairly simple markup language, similar to ERB, that you can use to write simple CRUD rails-like applications on top of APEX, but you don't have to if you don't want to.

Again, I'm not saying that Oracle is _better_ , because all of these features come at a complexity cost that is massive (and a technical debt that requires highly skilled specialty technologists). If I were building an application today, I would not base it on Oracle, because for what 90% of the world needs, there are open source databases or data stores that fill the need just fine. But you gotta hand it to Oracle for the sheer amount of technology they've crammed into an RDBMS.

<comment><USER10> Thanks for responding. I had no idea about these features. Well heck you can say it is better. That would be alright.

I have been living in the open source world and just never had to deal with commercial DBs at this point.

So I agree with your point. A lot of these features are there but up coming developers might not know about it and will always pick open source choices.

I guess PostgreSQL is the direct competitor at the moment and I have only heard good things about, and Oracle is hated by large numbers of developers (for reasons not necessarily related to technical features).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I wish they would have asked if there was anything about couchdb they don't like or have concern about.</comment>


Facebook's 'platform' (separating facts from illusions) - <AUTHOR> http://valleywag.com/tech/hypebusting/facebooks-platform-273355.php <comment><USER2> I don't think the massive decline in signups is an indication that these tools are losing popularity -- it's a reflection of how Facebook users are addicted and the news feed keeps them informed. I'm surprised that iLike and Slideshow and the like still get signups, since I thought that everyone on Facebook would have heard of and assessed them by now.</comment>


Ask HN: Why the downvote mechanism for comments, anyways? - <AUTHOR> As a frequently downvoted commenter on HN, I've done a lot of thinking about this mechanism, and I would like to propose a change to it.
Since the goal of HN is to encourage discussion and debate, why not require a reply to a comment before you can downvote it?
This would change the negative, conversation stifling enablement into one that requires a person to contribute to the discourse before voting their disapproval.  It would help to distinguish HN from other driveby, populist moderated forums. <comment><USER2> Some comments are so stupid and off-topic, example [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22766042](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22766042), a simple downvote is enough. Engaging in a reply is IMHO just feeding trolls who are trying to be edgy/funny and not add value to the discussion. "He's the one" (in the example), the reply to the "He's the one", the reply to that reply for example. Same for "+1", "LOL" and other one word exclamation comments. Looking at your comments, like "That will touch off the hoarding of kitty litter!", the downvotes are IMHO justified and I'd like to see less of those. I'm kind of saying they're a hint on the quality of said comment.

<comment><USER3> The problem is that many people downvote because they disagree, rather than as a reflection on the quality of the comment.

<comment><USER4> Downvoting for disagreement has always been the norm, even according to 'PG.</comment></comment></comment>


UBeam's Meredith Perry shows her wireless charging technology really works - <AUTHOR> https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/news/2017/06/01/ubeams-meredith-perry-shows-her-stealth-wireless-charging-technology-really-works/102336880/ <comment><USER2> Analysis of the article by former uBeam VP of Engineering Paul Reynolds:

> In all this time, have reporters still not learned to press on the key > questions? "How much power is being received?", "How much is being sent?", > "What's the efficiency?", "How much does it cost?", "Have you proved it > safe?", and "If this is what you have now, what were all those 'prototypes' > you were talking about 2 years ago?". But those are actual questions that > matter, and basically we know the same today as we did yesterday (which > indicates it was an awesome PR piece, lots of coverage with no actual info).

[http://liesandstartuppr.blogspot.com/2017/05/whats-in- pictur...](http://liesandstartuppr.blogspot.com/2017/05/whats-in-picture.html)

[http://liesandstartuppr.blogspot.com/2017/06/someone-was- pay...](http://liesandstartuppr.blogspot.com/2017/06/someone-was-paying- attention.html)

[http://liesandstartuppr.blogspot.com/2017/06/what-does-it- ta...](http://liesandstartuppr.blogspot.com/2017/06/what-does-it-take-to- switch-phone.html)

<comment><USER3> For safety, the transmitter could turn itself off if a receiver isn't receiving enough power. The receiver could radio back to the transmitter to identify its presence and power input.

<comment><USER4> Have you considered sending the engineering team thoughts like these, or any other offhand ones?

<comment><USER5> You were downvoted, and my interpretation is that people thought you were sarcastic and thought that this was an inappropriate jab, and downvoted for this reason.

I think they're right that you're being sarcastic, due to the word "offhand".

However, if we read your comment seriously (you are seriously stating it) then I actually agree with it: this means the "wrong" part of your comment is the /s (which you didn't include) and otherwise your comment is very solid.

I'd like to defend it.

Here are just some of the off-hand ideas that were demonstrated in this video:

\- Beam forming

\- Vision for device tracking. (VISION!!! DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA HOW OFF-HAND OF AN IDEA THIS IS?)

\- Inclusion built into every manufactured phone and uBeam beamers located all over the place, so that even a trickle ends up recharging the phone "throughout the course of a day" \-- assuming you aren't actually using it.

\- Have it be something you don't even notice. (So that for this reason it doesn't matter if it barely works). ie if you have your phone in your pocket for an hour while you sit and talk to your friend, it goes from 51% to 83% charge. That is a good and viable definition of "don't even notice it."

These are extremely off-hand ideas. It is extremely possible that adding a dozen other extremely off-hand ideas are all that it would take to make this a viable, pervasive technology, built into everything.

For example, it was demonstrated on a huge receiver that is much larger than the phone it was attached to. A couple of off-hand ideas about how to make the receiver smaller might be all it takes to make this more interesting.

There are further possible off-hand ideas. add in about a dozen and, if they have appropriate patents, they have a monopoly on a charging solution.

When you have a choice of two cafes across the street, and if you spend an hour in one of them your battery will be 10% more charged than before you entered, would you choose that one over the other one?

You would if you were at 1% battery level and waiting for an important client.

Bam. You've just made a case that this brings free users to cafes as a direct competitive advantage, much like having wifi might.

And what was this -- oh, right: an off-hand marketing idea I just had.

Don't dismiss off-hand ideas.

If you like, it's all Steve Jobs ever contributed. Send them - send them all. You might end up making uBeam work.

Note: I have no association with the company or any horse in this game.

<comment><USER6> >>>Don't dismiss off-hand ideas. If you like, it's all Steve Jobs ever contributed.

That's the most offhand description of what Steve Jobs contributed that I've heard. Let's not minimize the contributions of people when we have no idea what went into making them successful.

<comment><USER5> You entirely missed my point. individually, any of his contributions can be thought of as an off-hand idea taken to its logical conclusion and actually implemented, but jointly they make success.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> The picture shows a 32 x 32 array of small ultrasonic emitters. So that's 1024 emitters. The framed area is about 200mm square, so each emitter has a diameter of about 6mm. That's unusually small; typical diameters are 9mm to 20mm. I haven't been able to find the source of that transducer, but a similar one 9mm across is here.[1]

That one can deliver 112dB sound pressure at 30cm range. 1000 of those would deliver 142dB at 40KHz. (10x = 10dB). If they're all wired to one amp, you get a straight beam. The demo indicates they're only getting a straight beam; steering the beam requires electronics behind each transducer. Quite possible, but runs up the cost. If they wire up the transducers in rings and drive them with slightly different phases, they can tighten up the beam focus. Since the receiver is smaller than the transmitter, focusing would help. Frequency is probably around 40KHz; if you go higher, losses in air go way up.

I haven't worked out the drive power for this thing, but it's probably a few watts per transducer, or a few kilowatts for the whole array.

So they have a 142dBA 40Khz beam about 200mm square. They ought to be able to do some short-range charging with it.

Notes:

* That's a high-powered ultrasonic beam. Is it hazardous? Most of the literature on ultrasonic safety involves energy coupled directly to skin, as with ultrasonic scanning, where there's a gel to improve transmission. Generating high energy in air is rarely done. It's certainly going to heat up anything in the beam. The safety issue is a big deal. All that energy has to go somewhere.

* How far can they project this? At 40KHz, meters, maybe tens of meters.[2] Attenuation gets much worse with frequency, so this thing probably works in the low ultrasonic range. Early PR from UBeam talked about megahertz ultrasound, but the range would be a few millimeters up there.

* Efficiency is terrible. Kilowatts in, watts out.

* That array of transducers isn't cheap. Those things are usually a few dollars each. But in quantity, that could come down.

So the demo they did, at under 1m range, is possible, but doesn't mean it's a useful technology.

[1] [https://www.americanpiezo.com/images/stories/content_images/...](https://www.americanpiezo.com/images/stories/content_images/pdf/apc_10-3005.pdf) [2] [http://www.kayelaby.npl.co.uk/general_physics/2_4/2_4_1.html](http://www.kayelaby.npl.co.uk/general_physics/2_4/2_4_1.html)

<comment><USER8> > Kilowatts in, watts out.

Probably milliwatts out, you have the conversion efficiency _twice_ , once when you convert from electricity to ultrasound and then the reverse, where the reverse conversion gets the interference of the wave-fronts of all the sound waves emitted by all the transducers at the source all mixed up. It's not going to arrive as a nicely coherent wavefront.

That really is not going to help, and any losses to heating the air also need to be factored in.

Chances are the uBeam will end up pivoting to an ultrasonic heating system for coffeeshops.

Also, where do you see the 32x32 array?

Is it this pic?

[https://www.gannett- cdn.com/-mm-/6e692618ead22efd1bb5f481476...](https://www.gannett- cdn.com/-mm-/6e692618ead22efd1bb5f481476a66d82c39266a/c=58-0-966-683&r=x404&c=534x401/local/-/media/2017/05/31/USATODAY/USATODAY/636318369992673051-mp.JPG)

To me that shows a 10x10 array of much larger transducers.

The other device (the white ceiling tile) shows 7 hexagonal arrays each with 144 transducers, that works out to almost 32x32 for all 7 but they may be steering the beams to different phones from different arrays (they claim up to 5 phones) so it may be that only one such blade is active for a phone. And the total size of that array is much larger than 200 mm square.

<comment><USER7> The still frame from the video in the original article shows an aluminum frame with what appears to be a 32 x 32 transducer array. I'd assumed that was a tightly packed array of off-the-shelf aluminum ultrasonic transducers. Like this one from another sensor project.[2] It's common to build arrays like that as sensor devices; you can steer the beam on both transmit and receive. One of those is shown here.[1]

It's hard to tell; not enough resolution. Maybe that's just a grille over something else.

It would be straightforward to do this with microwaves. Transmitting from a microwave source to a rectenna works fine.[3] Efficiency has passed 50%. The solar powersat people have been fooling around with this for decades. But even a few watts of microwave power indoors is a safety concern.

What scares me about this thing is the claim that kilowatt levels of ultrasound are safe. Power levels like that are used to weld plastic.

[1] [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qxd7VYujMgQ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qxd7VYujMgQ) [2] [http://dm.ncl.ac.uk/benfreeth/2010/07/23/parametric- speaker/](http://dm.ncl.ac.uk/benfreeth/2010/07/23/parametric-speaker/) [3] [https://phys.org/news/2015-03-japan-space-scientists- wireles...](https://phys.org/news/2015-03-japan-space-scientists-wireless- energy.html)

<comment><USER8> > The still frame from the video in the original article shows an aluminum > frame with what appears to be a 32 x 32 transducer array.

I thought that was the cover in front of that 7 petal arrangement.

> I'd assumed that was a tightly packed array of off-the-shelf aluminum > ultrasonic transducers.

Ok, could be. But to me it looks like a cover over this:

[http://liesandstartuppr.blogspot.nl/2017/05/whats-in- picture...](http://liesandstartuppr.blogspot.nl/2017/05/whats-in-picture.html)

No contest about the microwaves, that would work just fine (it would also cook everything in its path).

> Power levels like that are used to weld plastic.

Yep. Ultrasound friction welding of PVC.

There is an article linked below that claims 53% efficiency for ultrasound energy transmission at 1 meter.

<comment><USER7> It's hard to tell what they're showing. The Blogspot article points out that they used a blur filter to hide the details of the sonar array. He thinks they're using Murata ultrasonic transducers. (Those were popular in the Stone Age of mobile robotics.[1])

I dunno. There's too much obfuscation here. Are there any high-resolution pictures of the transducer array with the cover off?

[1] [http://www.robotshop.com/en/ultrasonic-range- finders.html](http://www.robotshop.com/en/ultrasonic-range-finders.html)

<comment><USER8> There are several frames in that embedded video that are usable, that's where I counted the transducers and their arrangement.

At 0:54

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Umm, not to be really nasty but did they do a teardown of those sleeves?

You can buy a new phone but if you slip it into a sleeve that size then that still affords plenty of room for a rigged demo. (Sorry, professional deformation at work here.)

What would be far better proof that it works is a simple caloric setup showing how much power is transferred per unit time at which distances and angles from the transducer tile.

Also, where do the optical lasers come in? To find a target to steer beams to using phased arrays of transducers?

If so that would imply only line-of-sight.

edit: so yes, the article confirms line of sight only and very low levels of power delivery

<comment><USER9> I wouldn't want to be in that office on 'bring your dog to work' day :-)

I find these stories fascinating not by what they say about the technology but more what they say about the state of education in engineering these days and the ability to believe the impossible is possible. I wonder sometimes if someone told these people "if you can imagine it, you can BUILD it!" and they took that statement literally.

There has been a tremendous amount of work in energy harvesting from ambient sources which is really pretty amazing. There was a fun paper on harvesting sound for energy in 2013 [1]. The key of course is how much energy and at what efficiency.

The CEO's point was that if you can charge anywhere you don't need a full charge, you just top off. It would be interesting to see if it can charge while being used (so net positive charge). In the video at least you can see their device for showing the beam footprint.

I'm also wondering "why talk now?" clearly burned by previous skepticism, why not just wait until you have a fully realized product or are they doing a fund raising round and need some outside validation after their disastrous first go?

[1] [http://www.enggjournals.com/ijet/docs/IJET13-05-06-118.pdf](http://www.enggjournals.com/ijet/docs/IJET13-05-06-118.pdf)

<comment> gene-h You can actually buy commercial products that are powered by sound. Sound is actually a pretty great power source for wireless sensor nodes that monitor loud pieces of machinery. Sure, you don't get much power, but for a sensor node you don't need much either. Sometimes sound is the only source of power you can get for such things where it's too dark or parts need to move relative to each making wires difficult. Plus, sometimes you want to monitor the very same vibration that's giving your sensor power.

Now the thing that really gets me is some work I saw on developing a vibration powered sensor for highway bridges. So the best power source they found was a small wind turbine. But when they tried them out on a bridge out in the middle of nowhere, the problem was they were just too much of an entertaining object for people to shoot. So they made this rather large pipe with a magnet on springs inside and were able to harvest energy from the low frequency vibrations of the bridge moving around.

[0][https://www.microgensystems.com/](https://www.microgensystems.com/) [1][http://www.ni.com/white-paper/12128/en/](http://www.ni.com/white- paper/12128/en/)

<comment><USER8> There even was a company that tried to produce windpower based on that principle (windbelt).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> The reporters didn't see a tear down of the sleeves, and wouldn't be able to identify a battery if they had. They showed sleeves and a charging indicator, rather than a simple wattmeter. This was a fraud—though like many inventors of perpetual motion machines, it is plausible Perry first fooled herself that the battery in the sleeve is just "to cover the initial surge" or "until we can fix this efficiency problem."

The important lesson here is that USA Today and similar papers can be fooled by a rigged demo and a sincere voice. Read the front page with similar skepticism!

<comment><USER11> It would require a lot of engineering work just to fake a demo to have a battery that charges when the sleeve is in the beam and doesn't when it isn't or the beam is blocked. More likely, there is actual power transmitted and received but not enough to charge the battery when the phone is doing anything at all. The charging indicator will turn on if you're putting 50 mW in, but that's not going to do much good when displaying the charging indicator uses more power than that.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> On an electronics forum I lurk, there has been an ongoing discussion about uBeam ever since it began, and the general consensus is that it doesn't work:

[http://www.eevblog.com/forum/projects/the-ubeam- faq/](http://www.eevblog.com/forum/projects/the-ubeam-faq/)

(There's more discussion about the recent developments in the last few posts.)

</comment><comment><USER13> Transmitting energy through the air is going to be inherently less efficient than wires. It looks like you will have to have a direct line of sight. Wireless energy transmission Bankrupted Tesla and he had a lot money back then, and he was one of the smartest people ever. 26 Million dollars seems like a lot of money to put into a project like this when physics would seem to dictate it isn't going to work.

<comment><USER14> I'm certainly not long on uBeam (even after this fragile demo), but what physics dictates that it won't work? Sure, you're certainly going to take an efficiency loss, but wall outlets already output far, far more power than your phone uses while charging, so the real questions are how inefficient is it, how safe is it, and how convenient is it (can a final product survive if it needs line of sight?). While these are certainly very difficult and perhaps intractable engineering problems, I'm not aware of a fundamental physical limit on any of these that would limit an application like phone charging.

<comment><USER15> > _what physics dictates that it won 't work_

Wirelessly transmitting energy is fine. It's reliably transmitting a meaningful amount to tiny, moveable objects near people that's the problem. You end up with unfeasible combinations of tracking, safety and efficiency issues. Serious work on remote power transmission doesn't start with consumer devices.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> This is fake. They got some gullible reporters to plug their phones into black boxes, which are supposedly receiving power. In reality, those boxes contain sensors to tell them when to pretend to receive power, plus batteries.

If it were real, they would've given the demo to someone with technical sophistication. They wouldn'tve bothered taking a trip to a phone store, since all the observers already had their own phones. And, also, the laws of physics would be slightly different.

But this scam isn't aimed at us. It's aimed at investors, who will never read this Hacker News thread, or any other thread where smart people are around to debunk it. Because if they did read that sort of thing, they wouldn't be an investor.

<comment><USER17> While I agree with you that this demo is suspect, I think your comment would be more useful if you backed it up with some of the physics/engineering principles that support your point of view.

<comment><USER18> Here are osha safety guidelines for ultrasonic sound:

[https://www.osha.gov/dts/osta/otm/new_noise/appendixc.pdf](https://www.osha.gov/dts/osta/otm/new_noise/appendixc.pdf)

tldr: Maximum 115 dB

Here is a calculator to convert decibels to watts:

[http://www.sengpielaudio.com/calculator- soundlevel.htm](http://www.sengpielaudio.com/calculator-soundlevel.htm)

tldr: ~0.3 watts per _square meter_

Surface area of a google pixel: 14.3cm x 6.95cm = 0.01 _square meters_

Therefore approximately 0.003 watts over the surface area of a phone at safe volumes. At 5v that's 0.6 mA. Barely enough to light up LEDs. It looks like they're working with larger holders, say 20cm x 20cm that's 0.04 sq meters or 2.4 mA at 5v. It takes about 10 mA to trip the "charging" indicator on an android phone:

[http://liesandstartuppr.blogspot.com/2017/06/what-does-it- ta...](http://liesandstartuppr.blogspot.com/2017/06/what-does-it-take-to- switch-phone.html)

This is based on the _raw power of the sound waves_. There will be inefficiency converting from sound to electricity, so they are probably dealing with greater than 115 dB sound at the phone. They are probably just barely tripping the charge sensor for 100 hour charge times. If they are charging significantly then they are working with very excessive excessive sound levels (>125 dB).

Given imperfect transducers for 100% conversion of sound to electricity and the above dimensions they would have to be working with > 122 dB sound at the phone for 10 mA charge current.

So, it's either a scam or it's not safe. Jamming that much air pressure in a small space will cause problems and will probably be inefficient.

Sound is not a laser. You can beam form it, it just won't be as tight as a laser, or even a flashlight. You can't expect clean narrow patterns within a 45 degree cone from the source. There will be high and low intensity interference patterns. You can even see it in the demo.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> > Perry says the sound waves generated by uBeam tech are safe, and the company > will be "conducting third party tests to assure folks the technology is > completely safe."

And this is why I don't want uBeam doing the testing- they're certainly not going to go, "Welp, this technology has some negative health effects. Better return those venture bucks and shut down the company!"

Any test they do is the scientific equivalent of "Man declares himself not guilty of fraud."

</comment><comment><USER20> This kind of technically unfeasible product scam is surprisingly common. When I worked for a large Internet company years ago they were looking at an investment in a start-up that claimed to transmit gigabits through high voltage long distance power transmission lines. No amount of citing Shannon and pointing out that said transmission lines are built with fiber lashed to the ground wire would dissuade them. And these were technically educated people.

<comment><USER21> Huh? Where's the infeasibility there? I mean, PLC is already a reality, just at 220V instead of 100 kV range but that can be solved by inductively transmitting signals.

<comment><USER22> We use coax, fiber, and twisted pairs to transmit signals for a reason -- the signal stays inside the cable(mostly) and other signals(interference) is kept out of the cable.

The line voltage is not the limiting factor. To get gigabit speeds your need to transmit at RF frequencies, and that hundreds of miles-long power cable is one giant antenna that will interfere with other users of the spectrum.

The power levels used in home powerline network gear are tiny, and the sources of interference much smaller. And even they have power and interference restrictions from the FCC to protect other users of the spectrum.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> This reminds me a startup that was at techcrunch disrupt a few years ago. Cota[1]

The tech seems to be the same whereas it tracks the position of the device then beams the power. Note however that Cota only sends one WATT of power per device.

How much does UBeam sends?

[1][https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_joxrZ6vdYc&t=461s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_joxrZ6vdYc&t=461s)

<comment><USER8> Their claims are even more suspect than uBeam's.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> Is that an infrared camera mounted to the top of the unit? If so, it would seem like it's detecting the location with infrared and pointing some energy at it. What if the device is, say, in a pocket?

All the pics also seem to show the charging sleeves with their backs pointed at the unit. If they can't work from other directions, that's a huge red flag.

</comment><comment><USER25> This looks more promising, "Demo of Short-Range Wireless Power Transfer":

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13663193](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13663193)

</comment><comment><USER26> uBeam really must be the longest running joke in the history of SV. I don't wear a hat, but I'm going to buy one so I can eat it if it turns out they're not a scam after all.

</comment><comment><USER27> UBeam sounds like it should have been an university research project, not a startup. Even if the technology does work, is it actually useful and worth its cost?

<comment><USER28> Yeah, I had the same impression.

I'll concede that I probably use my phone less than a lot of people, but this looks like a "solution in search of a problem" to me. I'm still using a Nexus 5 that's several years old, and my battery rarely drops below 80% over the course of the day. (I only charge my phone when I sleep, and never "top it off" during the day.)

When I do need to charge it, I plug it in, and can get a full charge in about an hour, if I remember correctly.

Even if we were to assume that this product is viable technologically (which is a big "if"), my hunch is that it won't be viable _commercially_ for much longer as advances in battery and phone technology make it irrelevant.

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> I was really skeptical about her company but the pictures in the article and the article itself seem legit.

I wonder how they'll combat the inverse square law and make their technology actually feasible.

<comment><USER30> Not to be defending/advocating that uBeam's tech is actually any good, but the inverse square law refers to omnidirectional transmission, while uBeam's claims are related to directional transmission of power.

<comment><USER8> Have you ever seen an audio frequency transducer (say up to 200 KHz) that delivered an actual beam?

Usually the inverse square law is very much in effect when it comes to audio, this is because the medium (waves in air) behaves as water does with waves do in a pond rather than say the light coming out of a laser or any other focused source of electromagnetic radiation.

Distance from the transmitter will very much be a factor.

<comment><USER31> These people got 53% efficiency at 1 meter, which gives some hope for ultrasonic power transfer: Roes, M.G.L.; Hendrix, M.A.M.; Duarte, J.L., "Contactless energy transfer through air by means of ultrasound," IECON 2011 - 37th Annual Conference on IEEE Industrial Electronics Society , vol., no., pp.1238,1243, 7-10 Nov. 2011

Abstract: An alternative approach to the wireless transfer of energy is proposed, employing acoustic waves in air. Unlike conventional methods, acoustic energy transfer is able to achieve energy transfer at high efficiencies over distances that are large in comparison to the dimensions of the transmitter and the receiver. This paper gives an overview of the principle and explains the different loss mechanisms that come into play. A theoretically limit on the achievable efficiency is calculated. It exceeds that of a comparable inductively coupled system by an order of magnitude. First preliminary measurements indicate that AET is feasible, although the measured efficiency is lower than the predicted theoretical limit.

<comment><USER8> Grr. I can't access that paper but thank you for digging that up. If Animats' calculations above are accurate though then uBeam is at a very small fraction of that 53%.

Is there anything in that paper that could explain the difference?

<comment><USER32> Not sure, if linking to the pdf is frowned upon here: sci-hub.cc and paste the paper name, voilá.

<comment><USER8> Thank you!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> So what is new since the last demo?

</comment><comment><USER34> Look at the pace at which the battery is charging on the smartphones. That's not even possible with a wired connection. If they're pumping that much energy through the air I imagine they would be dead already?

<comment><USER35> In case you're not joking, that's a common "charging" animation in the video. The animation loops and its speed is unrelated to actual charging speed.

</comment></comment><comment><USER36> It's amazing what this generation will go through to keep their dopamine dispenser (their phone) going at all times and available every second to them.

No technology is too inefficient when dopamine is on the line. Kilowatts of ultrasonic beams aimed at your head to give your phone a trickle charge.

</comment><comment><USER37> "Your phone could be at 1% charged all day."

Wow, phones are something like 60% battery at the moment. Imagine cutting that in half?! Phones could become much more powerful.</comment>


From dial-up to 5G: logging on to the internet - <AUTHOR> https://qz.com/1705375/a-complete-guide-to-the-evolution-of-the-internet/ <comment><USER2> In the UK unlimited data Sims (1000GB fup) for £20 a month are starting to be used for home broadband. 30-100mbs speeds are typical on 4g. The landline network is just starting to hollow out. It's unsettling.

<comment><USER3> What do you mean when you say you find it unsettling?

<comment><USER2> Change I guess. If enough people give up their landlines the economics of it will alter and the rest of us will be forced to follow whether our choice or not. Perhaps 5g won't have enough bandwidth for everyone at once. Still perhaps it will be better, certainly different.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I have already read about it in other 5g presentations, and I still don't get why should 5g bring more "virtual presence". Wouldn't a fiber optic connection be always faster since it has one less medium to pass? Also, reliability, if I'd need a surgical operation, or to make an important business conference, I would prefer it to be made on a fixed line connection, than over the air. Why do they always insist on this thing about 5g?

</comment><comment><USER5> > According to a recent consumer report (pdf) commissioned by networking > hardware company Ericsson, the average smartphone owner in the US currently > uses around 8GB of data each month.

Whaaaat? I figured that must include Wifi so I looked at the PDF, and no—apparently that's the actual mobile data usage. It's a self-reported survey, but still. Up here in Canada I have a 10GB plan which is more than anyone else I know, and is way, way more than I generally use. The only time I've ever come close is when I've been on vacation and done a bunch of tethering.

I'm not surprised that some people use 8GB per month, but I find it very hard to believe that's anywhere close to a national average, unless usage in the US is dramatically different than in Canada. (I know our cell plans are more expensive so it's probably _somewhat_ different, but that much?)

<comment><USER6> Everybody I know in the US - mostly non tech people - uses a lot of mobile data now, largely consisting of stray video streaming. 8gb of monthly usage seems very low compared to what I'm seeing normal people use now.

At a Thanksgiving thing on Sunday a family member was streaming an NFL game on his phone. He has an unlimited data plan with AT&T, but regardless you can imagine the data usage for that HD stream over an hour. That's typical usage now in my observation.

<comment><USER5> Huh, interesting. I'd never even heard of an "unlimited" mobile data plan. Just did some research and it appears a few of our carriers just released nominally unlimited plans for the first time this year. However, they still have a data cap (10-50GB usually, depending on the plan), after which it's capped at 512kbps. So not really unlimited. These plans also _start_ at $75/month (or like 55 USD).

I don't envy your politics, but I envy your mobile data plans.

<comment><USER6> Yeah naturally it's not unlimited, there's no such thing, it's always a marketing gimmick with fine print when a service provider uses that. You're going to hit a limit one way or another.

T-Mobile as an example, has a four line plan at $35 per line avg, with "unlimited" data, with this note:

"During congestion, the small fraction of customers using >50GB/mo. may notice reduced speeds."

I've never used T-Mobile, so I don't know what kind of wall you realistically hit with them at that point.

What I've seen in the US over the last few years is that people seem to have shifted heavily away from the old expensive cable & DirecTV plans and moved some of that expenditure over to streaming services (cheaper) and more expensive higher limit mobile data plans. Which makes sense given what consumers are most often using these days.

<comment><USER5> Of course nothing is truly unlimited. Still, I took a look at some of the US plans (AT&T etc.) and they're definitely better than what we get. The lowest ones start to throttle at 50GB, vs 10 for ours, and even the ones that don't throttle until 100 are cheaper than the 10GB ones here. To me it's a lot more reasonable to call something that may be throttled over 50 or 100GB "unlimited" vs something that will always be throttled (and to 512kbps!) at 10GB.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Is LTE in US really just 25Mbps?

<comment><USER8> Although the theoretical limit is higher I think 25 mbps ± a few is what you can expect in most of the world.

Here are some speed tests by country [https://www.opensignal.com/reports/2018/02/state-of- lte](https://www.opensignal.com/reports/2018/02/state-of-lte)

<comment><USER7> Erm,

the average results are off for Serbia. Our regulatory body for electronic communications does mandatory speed and quality testing for 4G networks of all 3 cell providers, and the results:

[http://benchmark.ratel.rs/public/lp2018/src/measurement- scop...](http://benchmark.ratel.rs/public/lp2018/src/measurement- scope/fig-18-fdtt-http-dl-throughputs.png)

Show that the maximum speed is 90 Mb/s and minimum speed is ~40-50 Mb/s. This is a chart for big cities, however, here are real-life some results:

[https://imgur.com/a/LUyJlME](https://imgur.com/a/LUyJlME)</comment></comment></comment>


US scientists launch world's biggest solar geoengineering study - <AUTHOR> https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/mar/24/us-scientists-launch-worlds-biggest-solar-geoengineering-study <comment><AUTHOR> Science is not my forte, but I've been distressed ever since reading about the _methane loop_ [1]. Part of me wishes I had never looked at the data [2]. Scientists are now trying to " _to establish whether the technology can safely simulate the atmospheric cooling effects of a volcanic eruption, if a last ditch bid to halt climate change is one day needed._ "

> _Frank Keutsch, the Harvard atmospheric sciences professor leading the > experiment, said that the deployment of a solar geoengineering system was "a > terrifying prospect" that he hoped would never have to be considered. "At > the same time, we should never choose ignorance over knowledge in a > situation like this," he said._

The Paris climate goals are overly ambitious, due to the inertia of policymakers [3]. Particle injection is going to buy us more time.

> _If lab tests are positive, the experiment would then be replicated with a > limestone compound which the researchers believe will neither absorb solar > or terrestrial radiation, nor deplete the ozone layer._

[1] [http://siberiantimes.com/science/casestudy/news/n0905-7000-u...](http://siberiantimes.com/science/casestudy/news/n0905-7000-underground- gas-bubbles-poised-to-explode-in-arctic/)

[2] [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPdc75epOEw](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPdc75epOEw)

[3] [http://www.vox.com/energy-and- environment/2017/3/23/15028480...](http://www.vox.com/energy-and- environment/2017/3/23/15028480/roadmap-paris-climate-goals)</comment>


Bear vs. Bike: Cyclist Hits 300-Pound Black Bear - <AUTHOR> http://www.treehugger.com/files/2008/09/bear-vs-bike-bicycle-cyclist-missoula-montana.php

<comment><USER2> From the 2005 PDF (Status Report, Vol. 40, No. 1, Jan. 3, 2005) at the above link:

      Types of vehicles that struck animals,
      killing vehicle occupants

                                  Number Percent
      Passenger vehicles            80     54
      Motorcycles                   55     37
      Medium or heavy trucks         9      6
      All-terrain vehicles, mopeds   3      2

      Animals in the collisions in which
      vehicle occupants were killed

             Number Percent
      Deer    113     77
      Cattle   13      9
      Horses    9      6
      Dogs      9      6
      Bear      1      1
      Cat       1      1
      Opossum   1      1

Further, in 5 percent of the single-vehicle, and 10 percent of the multiple- vehicle, fatal crashes involving animals, the animal went through the windshield of the victim vehicle.

</comment><comment><USER2> A lot of road users are killed each year by collisions with animals.

[http://www.iihs.org/research/topics/vehicle_animal_collision...](http://www.iihs.org/research/topics/vehicle_animal_collisions.html)</comment>