Hacker News Google+ Community - <AUTHOR> https://plus.google.com/communities/104388679763490357266

<comment><USER2> G+ community doesn't appear to be solving any of the old online community problems. The first question I would ask here is: Who's Hacker News Community is this? Each and every member of the HN can create his or her own HN community on Google+ and that's exactly what Google+ is allowing so far.

You are calling it Official, and that is another set of problem, because then I would ask (assuming you run HN which appears not to be the case): why? Why is there a need for a Google+ community for HN when HN is already a community here?

Is anyone following the issues?

</comment><comment><USER3> I find community proliferation like this very entertaining. People learn to identify so well with one community or its content, that they replicate it inside other communities. For example, I was bemused recently to learn that Reddit has an r/4chan. I asked, "Wouldn't you just go to 4chan?" But they found it more moderate, more suited to a Reddit user's taste.

To each their own, eh?

<comment><USER4> The existence of r/4chan is met with scorn every time I've seen it mentioned on 4chan. People seem to either completely hate Reddit itself, or meekly admit that they follow a few tiny subreddits. Given that (and the response you received to your question), it would seem that r/4chan is composed entirely of people who don't actually browse 4chan! One has to wonder what proportion of these members of the "Hacker News Google+" community actually participate on HN.

The more I think about it, the more strange the existence of these offshoots seems: The average 4chan user hates Reddit, and the average HN user seems to not care much for Google+, either (though I'm not sure if that has more to do with its community or the way Google is currently shoving it into everyone's faces).

<comment><USER5> > Given that [the existence of r/4chan is met with scorn on 4chan], it would > seem that r/4chan is composed entirely of people who don't actually browse > 4chan!

Non-sequitur (really a classic syllogistic fallacy if you consider who does the scorning). Peer pressure exists ('meekly admit'). One could even imagine that the kind of 4chan user who might prefer to sometimes express themselves in a more 'moderate' environment such as on Reddit would be the kind least likely to provoke a visceral response by outing themselves as a user of r/4chan.

It's very difficult to know anything about the 'average' member of an online community, especially without surveys.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Looks like there's a few different HN communities on G+. Maybe someone should reach out and try to consolidate into a single group to avoid confusion.

<comment><USER7> I think it will be a fight for numbers today. Consolidation will happen around the biggest community.

<comment><USER8> I think you've already won, considering the position of this post on the HN front page.

Congratulations!

<comment><USER9> [https://plus.google.com/u/0/communities/11403730774446099672...](https://plus.google.com/u/0/communities/114037307744460996720) is more focused on HN Content and is a closer representation of the community...

<comment><USER8> Sorry Jay, but this sort of thing is always a land rush, and it looks like this particular one is over.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> You should add the intend of the g+ community somewhere. Also I wouldn't name it "The Official Hacker Community" unless it's started by pg.

</comment><comment><USER11> I've joined but I'm afraid signal/noise ratio will be much lower than desired.

</comment><comment><USER12> I think this is probably a good opportunity to remove my Hacker News G+ Circle with thousands of people in it.

</comment><comment><USER13> It seems natural that these sorts of things would appear, especially around a community like HN. But what's the point? HN is already a community because of HN.

Isn't this like the programmer who wanted to create a standard to unify the n variations only to end up with n+1 variations?

<comment><USER14> There has been many attempts to produce something to compliment the hacker news site and allow for more unstructured chat. Not sure anything has really stuck though.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> It was once said that the great thing about standards is that there are so many to choose from. It seems the same goes for targetted online communities.

</comment><comment><USER16> This is probably an internal strategy by google to try increase g+ engagement. Create these social groups on g+ that already have strong community behind them. The thinking is that on g+ things like photography, and geek related could become a beachhead community for them and they can use that as the foundation to build up additional communities to drive up engagement.

<comment><USER17> Ya think? :-) Actually while its clearly an attempt to get more people using G+ on a deeper level, as a replacement for Groups its showing possibilities. I wish the editor in G+ was a bit more full featured. Maybe not full on Buzz but would love to be able to do better hyper links with it.

It is interesting to contrast the feel of that to the feel of this site.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> this seems like a bigger version of the HN community: [https://plus.google.com/u/0/communities/10438867976349035726...](https://plus.google.com/u/0/communities/104388679763490357266)

</comment><comment><USER7> Yeah, there are tons of Hacker News communities popping up, we took out the "official" bit.

</comment><comment><USER19> Nice! Like a lobby for HN in which mingling and informal chit chat can take place.

</comment><comment><USER20> Why?</comment>


Ask HN: Google Cloud limits you to 5 projects per billing account: why? - <AUTHOR> Recently started doing work with Google Cloud Platform, and as much as I like it I'm having difficulty understanding WHY certain decisions got made. I have approximately 40 projects in the developer console, and I've set up a billing account and I have 5 projects attached to the billing account. I tried to attach a 6th project and I get this odd error message "You have reached the limit of projects on which you can enable billing. You can request an increase in your billing quota if you need to enable billing on additional projects.". I wouldn't actually care, except that you can't use certain things without a billing account attached to the project (like Cloud Storage). Unfortunately without Cloud Storage you can't use Cloud Functions (which is actually what I want to use). I've applied for the quota increase using the always helpful form, but I'm quite confused as to WHY you'd need this limitation? Why only 5 projects before you need to request a quota increase? I'm assuming there is some deeper data point driving that limitation: wondering what that might be. Right now it is just frustrating that they have introduced an organizational structure with no direct cost impact (as far as I can see) and then restricted its use.<p>Also hoping if there is someone from the Cloud team lurking here on HN (looking at you @boulos) could I get an assist? <comment><USER2> Fraud.

You get X amount of quota (YY cores or ZZ bytes of GCS) per _project_. So while we charge you ASAP these days, if you can create 1000 projects you can have 25000 cores even if your fake credit card will bounce or bounce after it charges more than say $10.

It totally sucks to have to deal with this, but it basically costs almost $0 to get a fake credit card or a stolen one that'll pass for at least a few bucks. So this means your getting started experience has friction due to the folks that would like to burn our precious cores for whatever the most valuable coin mining is.

<comment><AUTHOR> I eventually figured it out: once I created a separate billing project not attached to the free trial credit and attached it to my account I was able to proceed.

I mean: totally understand the fraud issue. Incredibly deceptive error message though. Just say what you need so I can be objective about the next step I should take: I already had multiple credit cards and bank accounts attached to the payment profile, but it took me nearly 2 hours to figure out that "you've reached your quota" means "you need to create a billing account that doesn't have free credit attached".

Free advice, so worth what you paid: your experience here would be WORLDS better with a simple "Upgrade your account" button that runs the $10 charge or whatever you've decided is required for forward progress.

That said: once I was past that gate, progress was swift, so there is that. Worth the money: you just need to make it straightforward to take my money.

<comment><USER2> I'll see if I can find the error string in the console about that (we _should_ state the why). There are (used to be?) Upgrade your account things all over the place, but perhaps your setup was sufficiently mixed mode to have the limit yet not the prompt? Feel free to email me (contact in profile) your project number and I'll attach it to a bug.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> I think I'd come across this problem a year ago. May be it was number of vms limit or something similar. Every time u deploy, a new vm is spun up. So try avoiding that. And temporary fix can be to override an existing app for 6th project. I'll try pasting a link later. Yes at least having an indicator of how much trial resources are available will help a developer instead of finding it out of blue.

</comment><comment><USER4> Preventing stupid and costly mistakes. Same thing happens in AWS - you're limited to a relatively small number of resources until you ask for more. It's obvious for things that cost you money (stops you from reserving 1000 instances by accident), but could be applied for the same reason to all resources - you really want that many projects? Just ask for them.

Maybe you got an extra message like "watch out for Xxx as you create more projects" at the same time?

</comment><comment><USER5> The quotas are here for 3 reasons: A) make sure that the hardware is available with the Google SREs (to make sure there are enough VMs, SSDs, etc...)

B) validation for fraud (billing fraud, or free coupons and do bitcoin mining with it) You could create 100 projects get 100*n quotas.

C) prevent human errors

Because of B), billing quota requests follow a standard quota request</comment>


Why a scam company was able to raises $76 Million Series B? - <AUTHOR> http://www.businessinsider.com/justfab-raises-76-million-to-create-the-hm-fashion-brand-of-the-web-2012-7

<comment><AUTHOR> I just stumbled upon this piece on Business Insider "JustFab Raises $76 Million To Create The H&M Fashion Brand Of The Web". [http://www.businessinsider.com/justfab-raises-76-million- to-...](http://www.businessinsider.com/justfab-raises-76-million-to-create- the-hm-fashion-brand-of-the-web-2012-7)

It kept me wonder why a company with very questionable (I will try to avoid using the word "fraudulent") business model was able to raise big money. Didn't the VCs have to do the due diligence?

I didn't have any direct experience with JustFab. The victim was my girlfriend. Back in January or so, one of her friends emailed her a link to JustFab, then she bought a pair of shoes from www.justfab.com and never visit the website again. Only 8 months later, in early September she was appalled to find out that her credit card has been charged a $39.95 fee for the last eight months. Yes, $39.95 for 8 months, without geting anything from JustFab.

I then did a bit research on the internet. It turned out my girlfriend wasn't the only victim. Apparently JustFab works like this: once you buy something from their website, you become their "VIP member". Then you will have to log into their website between the 1st-5th of each month and click "Skip This Month". If no action is taken (either skip this month, or cancel your account), they just charge you a $39.95 fee every month.

According to the Business insider article, JustFab "will generate about $100 million this year" in sales, I wonder how much of this $100 million are from people like my girlfriend who simply didn't read their entire 2,500 words Terms of Service and were unaware that they were charged $39.95 a month for nothing.

<comment><USER2> I'm sorry for your gf's loss, but from what you have described I don't see anything justfab did wrong here. Next time read the terms first before giving credit card info!

<comment><USER3> Do you read the terms every time you swipe your card to buy a pair of shoes or a bag in a regular store? Why should it be any different online? If the intention of a consumer is clearly to buy a single item _once_ for a fixed fee then a forced membership buried in the terms of service is not what they expect, and not something they should suspect.

It's a ridiculous stance to blame a consumer for trickery like this.</comment></comment></comment>


Bug Out Bag Essentials for Reasonably Rational People - <AUTHOR> https://taylorpearson.me/bug-out-bag/ <comment><USER2> >"In the 1990s, the Argentine peso was pegged to the U.S. dollar. That meant the Argentine government guaranteed that you could always change one Argentine peso for one U.S. dollar. If you had 1,000 Argentine pesos in your bank account, you could walk into the bank and ask for $1,000 U.S. dollars and they'd hand it over.

By 2001, the peg had become unsustainable for a number of reasons and the government of Argentina abandoned it. As a result, the exchange rate went into freefall.

Imagine if you looked at your bank account and the value had gone down by 75 percent over the course of a year and you hadn't spent a dime of it. That's effectively what happened in Argentina.

In less than a year, the exchange rate went from 1:1 to 4:1. If you had US$10,000 worth of pesos in your bank account in 2001, a year later you would have had only US$2,500.

Attempts to withdraw U.S. dollars as the exchange rate plummeted were thwarted for most citizens, because the run on the bank (where everyone tries to take their money out at the same time) meant there were no U.S. dollars left to hand out.

Mimi told me she slept outside the bank for a week to no avail. 75 percent of her life savings disappeared. The same happened to others, and crime increased. To add insult to injury, she had to install bars over her windows to prevent her house from being robbed like many others in the neighborhood were."</comment>


The comfortable life is killing us - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/@erikrittenberry/the-comfortable-life-is-killing-you-61cae61622e7 <comment><USER2> > "most prosperous time in history" That is no longer true, at least not here > in the US. the most recent adult generation is now the 2nd or 3rd most > prosperous generation and not by such a large margin as everyone thinks. The > thinking goes that since GDP per capita is up and productivity is high, that > we are much wealthier but it's not true.

Even GDP per capita adjusted for PPP can't adequately measure wealth because it uses the wrong basket of goods. if you have a million dollars and you can afford 1000 iphones but a house costs 5 million, then your not wealthy.

Wealth is being able to afford the basics of life: Shelter, food and water and by extension: transportation (because you need to get to a job), education (because employers now require it, regardless of whether its useful), and medical insurance because you don't want to loose your shelter.

Those 6 things are just as expensive as ever, if not more expensive than ever and the average person is less able to afford them, at least in the coastal cities. Calculate how many hours of work per week it takes to afford shelter. people work longer hours than ever, and nearly 50% of their salary now goes just towards shelter which equates to 20 to 25 hours a week of work just to afford shelter. Was that the case 500 years ago?

Yes we've come a long way from 500 years ago, undoubedly we can afford much more food with much greater variety than ever. we eat like kings, dress like kings. But, still live in shelters we can barely afford.

<comment><USER3> And the richest person in the world 30 years ago couldn't afford a single iPhone because it didn't exist.

Shelter 500 years ago was barely better than a single-room, unheated hut. And you probably didn't even own it. You were a serf beholden to a feudal lord. (And that feudal lord didn't even have air conditioning)

And your food was whatever you could grow. In a good year maybe you made a little more than you needed. In a bad year you starved to death.

Even the bottom 1% in the US today have access to far better healthcare than the richest 1% 150 years ago. Antibiotics didn't even exist.

All 6 of the things you mentioned are far better off for almost anyone living today.

Also maybe wages have stagnanted in the US for this generation, but keep in mind the wealth improvements in the rest of the world have been staggering. Billions of people in India or China have been lifted out of poverty.

Focusing on the plight of college educated, middle class young adults seems pretty bizarre when compared with the far greater suffering of so many.

Sure strive to make things better... But if your worst trouble in life is having to work 20 hours a week to live in a comfortable apartment in the most expensive and exclusive city in the country... I'd say things were going pretty well for you.

<comment><USER4> > Also maybe wages have stagnanted in the US for this generation, but keep in > mind the wealth improvements in the rest of the world have been staggering. > Billions of people in India or China have been lifted out of poverty.

So, your premise here seems to be that even though your own life may be going downhill as long as everyone else is doing better you shouldn't bother with exploring the reasons behind or even trying to fix your own backwards slide. Is that correct?

<comment><USER3> It's about keeping things in perspective. Sure explore the reasons or try to fix the backward slide, but maybe we should have a basic posture of gratitude. I suspect most of us have it pretty good in life.

Also the consequences for policies are not always easy to predict. As an example, making college free seems great for the children of the upper middle class. But what about the majority of people who don't go to college?

<comment><USER4> Every time I see someone bring up that others have it worse, everyone else has seen huge improvement, etc I've always gotten the impression that they are somehow trying to minimize the issues people are talking about as not being worthy of consideration because of the other. From your reply it seems like I may be missing something because I can't see how anyone's level of gratitude or acknowledgement/lack of acknowledgement re the improving status of others is relevant to the concerns they have regarding their own situation or productive in resolving said concerns. And thus, I usually conclude that the only reason it is brought up is to minimize whatever issue the original poster brings up.

But I'm really curious as to what the underlying reasoning here is. I can sort of understand when it comes down to obvious luxuries, so long as those luxuries are not in fact mandatory for being a productive member of the corresponding society (eg complaining about not being one of the 100 people to have one of those newfangled telephones vs complaining about not having a telephone in an age where having a telephone is the default expectation).

How would having a basic posture of gratitude aid someone in resolving issues they face that deal with what may be seen as luxuries in areas that are improving but which may be necessities in their own area? What relevance does the improvement of others have to resolving or mitigating the backwards slide of another? Is it not better for _everyone_ to be experiencing improvement? Is there some fundamental mechanism that requires some areas backslide in order for others to improve?

I'm genuinely curious - you aren't the first person I have met that makes the assertions you have, and I have experienced the same sense of bafflement every time.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I read a nice explanation on LW. Imagine you need goods X and Y to live well. And imagine that in the ancestral environment, X usually came with Y. So evolution could get away with giving you the drive for X, but no drive for Y (though lack of Y would still make you suffer).

Now switch to modernity, where goods can be obtained more independently. For example, you can get tasty food (X) without some necessary nutrient (Y). So you end up suffering for lack of Y, but your drive is only for X. Moreover, as the market tries to provide X cheaply, it has an incentive to drop Y. I don't know how many such Y's we're missing now, but probably a lot.

<comment><USER6> Forgive me, what's LW?

<comment><USER7> lesswrong, if I had to guess

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I spent the first part of my life pursuing what was interesting and engaging to me for its own sake, not putting much effort into status signaling or a cultural mask. All I got was crushing loneliness and a severe social skills deficit. 0/10 do not recommend.

<comment><USER9> I spent the first part of my life pursuing an impeccably planned career trajectory, setting myself up with all the markers of status and culture that my peers and family expected, discarding the things I loved because they did not contribute back to that.

All I got was crushing existential depression and a severe social skills deficit. 0/10 do not recommend.

I realize this is a glib comment, please don't take it as an insult, just the tongue-in-cheek response of someone who felt a surprisingly mirrored experience of yours.

In fewer words, I'm not sure anecdata is not going to help in this case, but if someone is feeling "something missing" in their life, some of the avenues of questioning and introspection presented in the article may be useful.

<comment><USER10> It seems like the common factor is isolation and loneliness. I don't see why chasing either status or what you love has to necessarily entail isolating yourself from other people and letting social skills deteriorate. Either path could be pursued with others, and indeed would probably be helped by having friends and allies along the way.

<comment><USER8> The problem is obscure preferences. Maybe 30% of the time there's someone in my world who shares them, and maybe 10% of the time we're friends. Having a community usually requires openness to activities that would not have been my first choice, or my tenth. I never used to make that trade. It's worth it, though.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> > Just take a gander at Twitter or at the comment section of a political > article and you'll see just how violently enraged we've become.

Ahistorical nonsense. Ever since the vast majority of humans have become politically aware political violence has been a fact of life. Repression, revolution, purges, terror, assassinations, progroms, riots, barroom brawls, slander, muckraking, bribery, insightment are a constant fact of the modern and pre-modern world.

Before there was such a thing as popular political awareness the nobel classes engaged in all the same in their own way.

Since the 70s, America and Europe have enjoyed and continue to enjoy one of the least politically violent stretches in world history all the while carrying on an inflammatory and sometimes vial discourse. If you find the current rhetoric jarring it's probably because you lived in an enclave which was protected or benefited by the hegemony of the white professional class and so had no reason to be exposed to the anger and violent language that often accompanies the desperate demand for change.

<comment> crooked-v Some simple examples of that last point:

The Tulsa massacre in 1921, where a single mistaken claim of assault by a black teenager led to massive mob violence against the city's black community complete with private planes dropping homemade incendiaries on black neighborhoods. Estimates are that at upwards of 100 black people were killed and more than 10,000 were left homeless. More than 6,000 black people were arrested, but no action was ever taken against the whites who took part.

The zoot suit riots in Los Angeles in 1943, where mobs of thousands of American military servicemen and local white residents sought out, assaulted, and stripped every Hispanic they could find (as well as the occasional black person). More than 150 people were beaten. Police joined in on said beatings, and then arrested more than 500 of those same people who had been targeted by them, for 'vagrancy' and 'rioting'.

The Kent State killings of 1970, where the Ohio National Guard indiscriminately fired on a crowd of protesting college students, murdering four and injuring nine, and the Jackson State killings ten days later, where city and state police fired on student protestors, murdering two and injuring twelve. No criminal prosecution was ever taken against the people who did the actual killing or the leadership involved in either case.

<comment><USER12> Didn't know about those last college incidents, thanks for sharing.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> The more comfortable life gets, the more knowledge people will receive. The more time they have, the more they think. If you combine these two, it's inevitable to start asking questions about your own existence. Because there are no logical answers to that, people retreat.

That's why you have so many depressed people. They might not know it though.

To move on, we, as society, will need to grow and change. When there's no need to fight for everyday survival - shelter, warmth, water, food- , we'll be free for the first time in the history of our species. That's when it gets interesting.

</comment><comment><USER14> The answer to feeling disconnected and alienated from the world is not to disconnect further or to embrace the alienation. It's to call your parents and tell them you love them and ask about their week, to message your friends and ask when they're free next week, to learn the name of the cashier you always see at the supermarket, to volunteer to help fix whatever problems you worry about, and in general to build genuine connections with other people.

Investing money in experiences instead of goods is less important than investing time in others instead of isolated activities.

<comment><USER15> Hello, modern commercial advertising here. No, don't invest in people, invest in yourself, in fact we have the perfect product to sell you to do just that.

It is going to take a major change in modern lifestyles to force advertisers not to sell us lies. It seems every screen is selling is separation.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> The modern life is horrible to mental health articles that ignore alcoholism and violence and social problems of the past are always suspect.

Yes, some kids are on psychiatric drugs that should not and we don't have tolerance for kids that don't do well in early academic. But we also don't beat the shit oit of them when they misbehave, so it is not all just bad.

</comment><comment><USER17> "embrace your suffering"

Sorry but I don't understand this.

The whole "what doesn't kill you makes you stronger" meme is meaningless. Challenging one self to get pain and pretend you will feel better after is a pointless way to live life.

There is little point in climbing mount Everest. It's good for your health to practice physical activity and to occupy your mind and time. But this constant idea that we have to challenge ourselves, while we can't manage to fight inequality or climate change, shows that we're deluded.

Climate change will be the new equalizer. The right to emit co2 will be the new currency.

<comment><USER18> > The right to emit co2 will be the new currency.

Well yes, that's exactly how cap-and-trade and carbon-credits work.

<comment><USER19> Not in the us it doesn't. The two cap and trade programs in the us do little to stop someone at the individual level from needlessly emitting - there is no economic signal to stop. Even some large emitters aren't subject to any economic signals in rggi, and California has an odd habit of handing out allowances. In a more perfect world, you would be correct.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> >Carl Jung, one of the most prolific psychotherapists of the 20th century, remarked that about a third of his cases were suffering from "no clinically definable neurosis, but from the senselessness and emptiness of their lives. This can be defined as the general neurosis of our times."

I don't agree with his methods, but the Unabomber was a brilliant mathematician (and, incidentally, a victim of the MK Ultra experiments) and wrote on this subject in his manifesto. He observed that our modern lives are far removed from the hunting/gathering of our ancestors. We evolved to seek frequent small stimuli - hunting for mushrooms, picking fruit, occasionally chasing down an animal - and the rewards tended to be immediate and tangible. Now most humans spend all day working in one specialization with intangible rewards that come in the form of payment every few weeks. It's much harder for most humans to find natural meaning in these tasks, and they don't typically feel critical to survival because, well, we really are quite comfortable most of the time!

</comment><comment><USER21> No, a life that kills you is not comfortable.

An American life values money over ease of living though, as rightly pointed out in the article. But it's definitely not something to say to one who will view it unfavourably.

Putting people under constant adversity does not make them do better: Only happens if that adversity teaches them something.

<comment><USER22> Enough struggle encourages growth, too much struggle kills.

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> It is much simpler than this. Humans are social animals, we need upto 1000 close family members. Not friends, not colleagues, not church members - relatives. They should be really close, like you should see them almost every day. If you don't you develop unhealthy relationships with people who really don't care about you much. And this means you are alone in this world and you must be stressed - something is going to happen and nobody is going to help. This is natural reaction to an abnormal situation.

<comment><USER24> I hear you but in this situation what else can be done other than marching forward with self reliance and accepting the circumstances?

<comment><USER23> I accept that I cannot fix it for myself, but I am trying to make it easier for my children. Hopefully, they will have enough resources to fix it for their children.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> It's a nice piece on breaking out of the conditioning of society and gratefully embracing our time on earth by living fully and taking risks.

Some nice quotes from wise people:

> But as Alan Watts once reminded us, "This is the real secret of life — to be > completely engaged with what you are doing in the here and now. And instead > of calling it work, realize it is play."

> In the words of Henry Miller, "the aim of life is to live, and to live means > to be aware, joyously, drunkenly, serenely, divinely aware."

> "If you're going to try, go all the way. There is no other feeling like > that. You will be alone with the gods, and the nights will flame with fire. > DO IT. DO IT. DO IT. All the way You will ride life straight to perfect > laughter. It's the only good fight there is." - Charles Bukowski

</comment><comment><USER26> I feel very much the same way. Working in an office is incredibly dull, society feels incredibly dull.

I romanticise primitive life, and people often rebut that you would die at 30. I would be ok with that though, trading some amount of life expectancy for increased excitement, purpose, and struggle. I do this in some ways through moderately dangerous activities, off roading (moto and Jeep) and snowboarding.

I do not think the incredibly comfortable and coddled bay area corporate life is for me. It is another matter to figure out what is, and what will be sustainable.

<comment><USER27> > die at 30. I would be ok with that

Speaking as someone considerably older than that, I bet you change your mind on your 30th birthday.

<comment><USER26> I'll take that bet. I'm past 30. What did I win?

<comment><USER27> > What did I win?

Life after 30.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> It is harder to blame others for my failings if I have total freedom and opportunity. This forces me to direct anger towards myself.

With imposed constraints I could at least make myself content with my situation as it is. This is probably why monastic life appeals to certain people.

</comment><comment><USER29> ". . . Rollo May, defined it more accurately — "Depression is the inability to construct a future.""

That is especially true in the era of inaction/regression on climate change.

[https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/mar/01/out- on-i...](https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/mar/01/out-on-its-own- australia-the-only-country-to-use-climate-funding-to-upgrade-coal-fired- plants)

[https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/18/business/energy- environme...](https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/18/business/energy- environment/nuclear-power-westinghouse-toshiba.html) [https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/03/climate/japan-coal- fukush...](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/03/climate/japan-coal- fukushima.html)

[https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-01-13/germany-s...](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-01-13/germany- s-farewell-to-coal-complicated-by-new-uniper-plant)

</comment><comment><USER30> This is why I run ultra marathons, often in the mountains in incredibly bad weather. Well I should rephrase this, I run the first 20-40 miles, the rest is a hike, until the last ten of so miles which are a zombie shuffle. The thing is though, I spend hours just on my own (most of the time), with only my own wits to keep me going and entertained. I also get to side up real close to nature at it's rawest.

</comment><comment> card-io Things that helped me the most: cardio, diet. It's hard to escape biology and I don't know who said it (probably hardmaru retweet) but the brain is a motion co-processor so general movement goes a long way towards maintaining a healthy mind. It won't fix all your problems but it costs nothing other than some willpower and a trail you like in your local neighborhood.

<comment><USER27> For me it takes no willpower at all to go out for a walk. It does take a lot of willpower to sit in a comfy chair and do nothing.

I once went on vacation to a beach resort. I went out to the beach all set to spend time sunning and sitting, like they do in the movies.

That lasted less than 5 minutes.

<comment> card-io You make a good point. Even walking goes a long way for mental well being.

<comment><USER27> Every day I can go for a walk is a beautiful day.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> > Depression rates have been steadily rising in the US since the mid-1930s.

Are we accepting that as true? Is not our awareness of depression greater? How was depression among those in a small town reported back then? Was depression even a "thing" in common knowledge then? All the sudden everyone seems to have a gluten problem — a problem that, while real for a select few, is mostly a manufactured fad. Did human biology actually change that much, or are we just getting more messages that make us notice or perceive more? When the media says everything is a nail, we start to buy more hammers.

</comment><comment><USER32> I see mention of neither crippling medical debt nor the inevitable societal problems caused by widespread ignoring of the climate emergency. There is little comfortable about seeing the world as it is as an American.

</comment><comment><USER33> People forget that the harder is to do something the higher the satisfaction when you do it right. Life is a journey not a destination, death is the destination of life.

<comment><USER27> Yup. Once you achieve a goal, spend a few minutes celebrating, then on to the next goal.

</comment></comment><comment><USER34> There may be a survivor bias here.

</comment><comment><USER35> Its not the comfort, its polluted environment and economic burdens. No one has died from too much comfort. The article feels like another out-of-touch rich person harping on about that "money can't buy happiness".

</comment><comment><USER36> A much better piece of writing on this topic is "Industrial Society and its Future," also known as the Unabomber's Manifesto. You have to forget who wrote it and also ignore the worst 20% of it to get the most out of it though.

<comment><USER37> I can't forget who wrote it. I can't forget taking my computer in to get it repaired, and how much pain the repairman was in. A month or two earlier he had picked up a package left by the Unabomber. I can't forget what the Unabomber's ideas led him to do. I've _seen_ the results of his ideas, written in pain on a man's face. I can't forget.

<comment><USER36> The way I recommend reading it is, there is something in those ideas that you can act on, in a constructive way, in your own life, without hurting anyone.

<comment><USER37> But where do you draw the line? I'm not going to read _Mein Kampf_ looking for constructive ideas. Why? Because Hitler's position is so _de_ structive that trying to untangle constructive ideas from the destructive seems like a fool's errand. (Also dangerous - I don't want to miss some of the destructiveness and incorporate it into my thinking.)

So the question is, did the Unabomber have good ideas, but follow them to bad conclusions? Or is the destructiveness more pervasive in his writing?

For me, the destructiveness was too vivid and too personal.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> I had troubles understanding the article. The very first point is: Let Go Americans are among the most stressed people in the world. Eighty-five percent of workers worldwide....

So, how can you have a comfortable life and have a job that you hate?

<comment><USER26> I had an incredibly comfortable life working at Google while hating my job. I was making excessive amounts of money, they provided food, job was incredibly relaxed, pretty much there were no worries in life.

On the other hand, I felt like I was going insane because I couldn't stand it. I was working on a web application. I'm a security engineer with a passion for low level code. Web work and the Google code bureaucracy (read: mature software development practices) were so frustratingly dull.

That is how your life can be comfortable while having a job that you hate. I now work part time remotely (not for Google). I go on trips as often as I can. I'm working on work that I'm engaged by. I am making less money, but life is tolerable.

<comment><USER27> I make $0.00 working on the D compiler, but it is very fulfilling.

<comment><USER39> I assume you have enough income from other sources which gives you the freedom.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER40> Over the past year and a half I've had some personal insights into my own personal happiness. I would agree that for me at least some modern day comforts tend to dull me down rather than fire me up. Here's a personal experiences:

\- Netflix and TV - I really love watching movies,and series. I've binge watched a crazy amount of Netflix TV series. At my worst I'd stay up until 3am on a binge, and would sometimes combine this with drinking whiskey. Doing so would interfere with my sleep, the alcohol would affect my mood within the next few days, and of course living this way means I'm not spending time on more productive or worthwhile activities.

These days I hardly ever watch TV, and instead of watching movies at home I like to go to the movies instead. It's much more enjoyable and makes watching movies feel more special.

\- Coffee - I tend to think of coffee as the equivalent of little kids drinking hot milk - except we're adults now and our hot milk has been combined with coffee. One thing I noticed drinking coffee is that the caffeine increased my general anxiety levels. Another thing I've noticed is that consuming lots of dairy products makes me feel a bit sick and yuck afterwards. So I switched to a combination of herbal tea and sometimes have decaf coffee - I did get some headaches after I did this, so would recommend slowly weaning yourself off caffeine rather than going cold turkey.

\- Food in General - A lot of food these day is made for convenience. Cereals, bread, high in sugar products etc. I've slowly been getting a more nutritious diet and cooking a lot more. As mentioned with coffee, milk makes me feel a bit sick after so I don't buy any kinds of milk anymore. Sugar is something I'm still working on and is super addictive (also non-dairy milk usually has ~10% sugar in it!), so I'm working on weaning myself off that as well. I find that having a better diet has allowed me to recognize more easily what foods make me feel yuck. I believe diet is huge in affecting how you feel.

\- Exercise - Intense exercise makes you feel sick when you first start doing it, but over time the sick feeling goes away and it can lead to a much healthier lifestyle and feeling better about yourself. If I eat something bad or drink alcohol on a Friday, during my intense Saturday workout I know instantly what I did wrong. Creating a routine out of this has helped change my behavior because on a Friday I will intentionally not do certain things in order to avoid the sick feeling on the Saturday. Not comfortable at all, but totally worth it.

\- Sleep - I've been working on getting to bed much earlier (around 9-9:30pm). It's a work in progress but I feel much better for it.

\- Following your Dreams - Over the past year I've sacrificed a cushy salary and tried new things to support my dream of being a successful entrepreneur. I spent thousands of dollars on courses, and had a crack at phone sales. It hasn't always been easy, but I'm proud of myself for giving it a go. I believe that a big reason for feelings of depression or anger in life is because we've forgotten our dreams, and aren't being true to ourselves. Recently I found the book Think and Grow Rich and have been reading that, and have also had friends that have been supporting me with their words and thoughts. In particular I have a friend I've made in recent years who is actively encouraging me, and I can tell you that having just one person that encourages you can make the world of difference.

\- The Mind's Focus - A work in progress for me is where I focus my mind. If I can actively do something to make a situation better, then I think of what action to take to improve that situation. If I'm unwilling to change that or if I'm powerless to do so then I do my best to let it go, or to remove myself from that situation. Sometimes this is difficult. Sometimes I have to take a big action, let people down, or there might be things I want to care about that I've realised just aren't worth spending the emotional energy on. This is a big one when it comes to comfort - it may be more comfortable not to step up and do something, but you're worse off for it.

</comment><comment><USER41> This article is insultingly bad. Americans are depressed because we have no social safety net and are one medical incident away from financial ruin.

<comment><USER8> That link is not exactly clear cut. There's probably something to it, but there are unhappy rich countries and happy poor ones.

[https://slatestarcodex.com/2015/01/15/depression-is-not-a- pr...](https://slatestarcodex.com/2015/01/15/depression-is-not-a-proxy-for- social-dysfunction/)

<comment><USER42> So therefore no social safety net and no medical is acceptable?

<comment><USER43> That isn't a charitable interpretation of @[https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=closeparen's](https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=closeparen's) response, no matter how laudable the goal you're advocating may be.

 _Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that 's easier to criticize. Assume good faith._

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

<comment><USER42> Indeed, I jumped to a conclusion

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER44> Maybe it's because neoliberal economical policies (deregulation, austerity, lower taxes for the rich) has accelerated economical inequality in developed nations such as the US and UK, and the majority of the working class people are no longer able to pay for critical services such as healthcare and education. And the establishment has been so quiet about this issue and just acting as everything's perfectly fine, and smartphones are the "real" reason people are so depressed. The basic reasons behind today's societal depression and eventual political instability can really be explained with simple economics, even if you ignore the cultural changes that neoliberal ideology have brought.</comment>


Quick script to track the active application in Mac OS X - <AUTHOR> https://gist.github.com/koirikivi/8435565

<comment><AUTHOR> The script outputs the following data, in CSV format, from the active (focused) application in Mac OS X:

\- name of the application

\- name of the active window

\- active url, if the application is Chrome

\- (current date and time)

It's obviously very quick and dirty and tailored for my needs, but I'm glad if someone benefits from this.

Inspired by RescueTime, some code stolen from [http://stackoverflow.com/questions/480866/get-the-title- of-t...](http://stackoverflow.com/questions/480866/get-the-title-of-the- current-active-window-document-in-mac-os-x)</comment>


Prisoners in England to be taught code - <AUTHOR> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-47570134 <comment><USER2> Numbers from 2015, 46% of prisoners have literacy issues that they are at the level of an 11-year-old. 52% have numeracy issues, a third self-reported having a learning difficulty or disability. Ref [https://www.prisonerseducation.org.uk/media-press/new- govern...](https://www.prisonerseducation.org.uk/media-press/new-government- data-on-english-and-maths-skills-of-prisoners)

"carefully vetted" prisoners as described in the article is likely to mean prisoners with literacy/numeracy skills.

No issues with people being able to learn and better themselves, a bit of a nonstory it's just another training course on offer for people incarcerated. The only bit that concerns me is "prisoners will work on real-world projects with external clients" I hope they are not just being used as cheap labor.

<comment><USER3> As someone who has been coding and developing software for almost twenty years, started young, had an aptitude for math and reading comprehension, scored high on standardized tests, got an advanced education and all the while, basically lived in front of a computer learning the full stack from top to bottom, painstakingly solving problems as they arise, debugging server configs, hardware issues, more debugging, and on and on ... I still find software development very difficult and mentally taxing.

I am having a really really hard time buying any of this teach prisoners or coal miners to code mantra (my first word choice was 'nonsense'). And I am also having a hard time finding proof that even a single ex-coal miner is gainfully employed in a coding job today and I am seeing stories going back to 2012 about programs popping up to teach miners to code. I am sure there are a few, but it must be vanishingly few.

It just doesn't seem like a good fit at all. It's opposite ends of the spectrum. Why don't we teach out of work coders to play professional rugby too?

I guess teaching coal miners to become plumbers or electricians or heavy equipment operators (all of which they would already have many skills for if not already qualified) wouldn't grab headlines.

<comment><USER4> As someone who has overcome incarceration, spent years behind bars reading every book I could get me hands on, realizing that despite all of my short- comings I could find a way to be a software developer. . . this comment reads as quite offensive; smacks of typical HN snobbery. I never finished my degree, neither did my roommate for that matter (hell, he worked in a pizza shop and a brewery for years). Yet, we both are gainfully employed (full-time remote work, full-stack react, GatsbyJS, ReactNative etc.), we both work on a startup that is profitable, we both have found a way to persevere despite the naysayers. To any coal miners reading this, do what makes you happy. If that is writing code and becoming a software engineer, the only person holding you back is yourself. I read a comment on here this morning that rang true, "I can do anything, I just can't do everything".

<comment><USER3> I did not mean to sound snobby. In fact, the opposite, I was stating that despite all those things, I still find programming very difficult.

And I applaud you for learning it and am impressed. You likely have a much higher aptitude than me to be able to learn a difficult skill without an extensive background.

But surely you don't disagree that ex-cons or coal miners are an odd choice to target with government programs to teach them to code?

You seem like an extreme exception. Or do you feel like many of those you came in contact with in incarceration would also be well suited to do what you are doing?

And in case I didn't make it clear in my first post, there is nothing wrong or lesser about trade jobs like plumbing, electrical, welding, etc. They are challenging and honorable professions that may end up outlasting software development when the automation/a.i. monster comes knocking.

<comment><USER4> That is fair enough but I do believe that focusing on software has been a boon. It has been a deciding factor in my sobriety among many other things. That said, yes, you are right in the sense that many of the people I came into contact with would scoff at the idea of spending time reading books and studying. I was ridiculed a lot. I guess in the end the comments struck a chord but there are surely others out there who could benefit from these programs. If even a handful of people can find salvation in coding then I am all for it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Just a guess, but wouln't ops/devops work be a better fit for prisoners? Sitting for hours in front of a monitor, trying to solve an algorithmic puzzle doesn't seem to be the kind of hobby that gets you into prison. Conducting a complex operation, assessing the risks, hands-on work with hardware, even being on-call and saving the day when outage hits, that's more like it.

<comment><USER6> prisoners in control of production systems, what could go wrong?

<comment><USER7> I've employed or worked with many ex-cons in my years. It was always the good guys who screwed up.

<comment><USER6> I'm sure a good percentage of prisoners are there due to one stupid mistake, and many (hopefully most), leave prison reformed, or even enter prison reformed. I'm 100% for giving ex-cons a helping hand, and for offering training while they are prisoners - coding, of course, why not, it's a valuable skill.

But that's not at all the same thing as having them sit monitoring/dev-oping production systems, which on the one hand is exploiting the prisoners, and on the other, exposes an obvious channel for un-reformed criminals to exploit.

So yeah, prisoners doing devops work (rather than just devops training) is a dumb idea.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I wonder if the nearly unlimited free-time they have will offset their lack of internet access when it comes to learning speed.

<comment><USER9> I'm not sure 'free-time' is what I'd call it. More like trapped-time.

<comment><USER10> The time is free. The prisoner is not.

<comment><USER9> But you aren't free to do what you want. You are very constrained.

You could do what Nick Yarris did and read thousands of books. I suppose you can let your mind adventure a little. Just seems so ironic calling it free time.

Perhaps 'unallocated' is a better word?

<comment><USER10> That's what free time already means.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Is giving a criminal the skills to write Malware really a smart move?</comment>


Why We Should All Dump Yahoo - <AUTHOR> http://www.dumpyahoo.com <comment><USER2> While I agree with the sentiment.

Here's why you should not delete your yahoo account.

Once you delete your account, yahoo will make it available again to everyone.

This means that if you have not unlinked everything it can be used by others to reset accounts on services you forgot that you linked to your yahoo account.

Instead of deleting it, forward it all to another account and stop using it.

Do not forget to log in every 12 months to keep it active.

<comment><USER3> This is an excellent argument for setting up e-mail using your own domain name, though, and for using that for all new accounts and transitioning existing accounts to your new e-mail address as soon as possible.

The Internet works just fine when it's decentralised, but particularly with e-mail, relying on the big service providers (or an ISP-provided address, for that matter) immediately locks you into someone else's systems for no particularly good reason.

Registering your own domain and setting up mail forwarding can be done with any number of services and costs less for a year than many people pay for a week of their cell phone service, and crucially, the domain is registered by some specialist service but is your domain and can be transferred to another service any time you want.

Unfortunately it can be a scary-looking process for non-technical users, but for those with enough confidence to arrange it, I highly recommend it.

<comment><AUTHOR> Although that also introduces risks. Losing control over your domain would be problematic. It happens.

The argument for individual domains suggests itself, or an equivalent follows- the-person mechanism.

<comment><USER4> Yes! Reducing the risk of losing control of the domain is a great reason to prefer gmail.com, outlook.com, or another similarly theft-hard mail domain. Otherwise, if an attacker can trick the registrar or nameserver, it's game- over for all accounts that use mail or mail-dependent factors for authentication.

<comment><USER3> _Otherwise, if an attacker can trick the registrar or nameserver_

That's a mighty big "if", though. For any of the TLDs I'm familiar with, there are significant protections against unintended domain transfers, and that has been the case for a long time for the major ones.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> "...I care about my own privacy and security..." and yet your website has no encryption. Thus, when I enter my details on your form, it is being passed over the same internet in plaintext, thereby violating the exact "privacy and security" this "protest" aims to create.

<comment><USER6> Well, I think the concept here is to publicly pledge to dump yahoo, in order to convince & pressure others to do the same. Saying you care about your privacy and security doesn't mean you remove yourself from all forms of public expression. It's the most basic form of free speech.

If you want to privately pledge, just write it down on a sticky note, and put it on your monitor.

<comment><USER7> Still. I think its a bit absurd.

<comment><USER8> This is a site collecting information for a public petition. By definition your GOAL is to share your information publicly. How is it absurd to do so in the open?

<comment><USER7> What if I decide I don't want to share publicly. By then the contents of the page as I have viewed have been sent unencrypted.

<comment><USER9> Your headers would still be unencrypted -- including the domain and URL you accessed.

<comment><USER10> The domain is unencrypted over HTTPS, but the path is encrypted.

<comment><USER11> So the difference is "you accessed www.dumpyahoo.com" vs "you accessed www.dumpyahoo.com asking for / "...

<comment><USER10> I agree in this case it isn't very helpful.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Yahoo is simply the first company that we publicly know of that scans incoming emails. If the government can force Yahoo, they will force all of them.

Yahoo has more disgruntled former employees to reveal secrets than Google, Microsoft, etc...

<comment><USER13> To be fair, according to this article, Google, Microsoft, Apple, and others have explicitly denied allowing government officials direct access to their servers.

However, due to the secrecy requirements of the law, we cannot know if they did allow the government some other form of access that was functionally equivalent to a rootkit on the server in terms of what the government could access.

Pure speculation on my part: Yahoo probably got the court order and made the decision that the government was going to get what they wanted anyway in the end, and resistance was going to be futile, and they probably figured that since no-one was going to be able to hear about them fighting against this order, it wouldn't even do their reputation any good to fight it. Of course, if I'm right, they miscalculated a little bit on that last part, since they obviously didn't count on a leak of the fact that they did roll over, which now has damaged their reputation.

<comment><USER14> > To be fair, according to this article, Google, Microsoft, Apple, and others > have explicitly denied allowing government officials direct access to their > servers.

Right, but the statements were very carefully crafted PR statements that only implied that there were no similar feeds while leaving open the possibility that there may be.

Having watching the industry for some time (Skype's PR denials come to mind as well as all the companies implicated in the Snowden disclosures) I have no confidence that those PR releases mean anything of significance besides a recognition from the companies that their users might not like certain activities by their customers.

<comment><USER8> Bruce Schneier agrees with you, which lends your argument some credence to me, but I thought "We've never received a request like this, and were we to receive it we'd challenge it in a court" was about as broad and clear a statement as could reasonably be made about this. What would you need them to say?

<comment><USER14> Something like "We do not have _any_ programs or agreements whatsoever with law enforcement to share any user data or metadata or summaries or analysis of said information. We screen our employees for infiltration from intelligence community members, putting them only in positions where they can not influence our systems without significant risk of discovery and where they can not influence our systems without involving a large number of other people who we empower to contact the public and the media if they see anything suspicious. Furthermore, we have no shareholders or executives with business, security or personal relationships with federal police / national security personnel. Finally, we've designed our product such that the very most minimal set of information and meta information is ever available to us, even if we try, and so the amount of abuse that we could perpetrate is at the very most X, where X can be understood by someone who carefully looks at our design. In addition to this, I and significant parts of our company leadership will step down from our roles if any information contradicting any of this ever comes out."

Though I wouldn't hold my breath.

The wiggle room in "request like this", for example, is huge. That's not something that I'm being particularly pedantic about - it's something we've seen repeated evidence for.

Basically, I've lost trust in the public relations portions of these businesses - which are not empowered to know the truth about what goes on at their organizations to begin with. The only technologies I feel confident placing trust in are ones that don't require placing a trust (forever) in one of these corporations (as well as all future employees and shareholders).

(Twitter is a good example of a company that has held out for a very long time, but has eventually given way to pressure.)

<comment><USER8> Your proposed requests would include responding to legal warrants, which all of those companies already admit to doing.

Could I suggest "We do not ever voluntarily comply with any requests for user data or metadata or summaries or analysis, we resist involuntarily, legally mandated compliance as much as legally allowable, and we publish as much information about information we give away in as much detail as we legally can."?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Just be careful about "deleting" your Yahoo account.

> Register a previously used ID

> A deleted Yahoo account ID may become available for future use, and you're > welcome to try to register it. However, Yahoo can't specify how long until a > deleted ID may become available, and we can't guarantee that it will become > available.

[https://help.yahoo.com/kb/SLN3060.html](https://help.yahoo.com/kb/SLN3060.html)

And make sure it doesn't get removed for inactivity:

> If you rarely use your account, it will go into an inactive state and then > be deleted. You can prevent this by signing in to your account using any > device at least once every 12 months.

</comment><comment><USER16> The Yahoo fiasco is horrible, but it shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone who has heard of Snowden and his leaks. He talks about programs like this, though I don't remember the program's name. So, in other words, shouldn't we all have dumped Yahoo (and everyone else) in 2013? Also, it's rather irrelevant if you communicate mostly with other Yahoo, Gmail, etc. users because, unless you encrypt (good luck with getting your friends and family to encrypt) all messages, you still can't keep it private. So let's not pretend like this is a surprise or it's only Yahoo doing it. That last claim would be the most ridiculous.

<comment><USER17> You are probably thinking of the PRISM program, which demands information from technology companies based on warrants from the secret FISA court [1], and the MUSCULAR program which sniffs internal Google/Yahoo cloud traffic from servers based in foreign countries. MUSCULAR is completely warrantless because the information is collected outside of the United States [2].

[1] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM_(surveillance_program)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM_\(surveillance_program\))

[2] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MUSCULAR_(surveillance_program...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MUSCULAR_\(surveillance_program\))

<comment><USER18> While these programs are horrible, I'd like to mention how great the naming of the programs have been. One of my favorites was FIRSTDATE then BADDECISION leading to SECONDDATE.

Again, not condoning behavior, I just wish I could be so creative when naming systems.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Right, because if I care about my privacy, I really want to leave my name, email and zip-code on some random form on the Internets.

<comment><USER20> I don't care if people have my email address, I care about people reading my emails.

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> Should I drop dropbox, google, apple, MS, CloudFare, LinkedIn, Ebay + paypal, amazon, MasterCard and Visa for the same reasons?

<comment><USER22> Doing so is just so increasingly limiting on our lives. What might be a more ideal scenario is to change the government's priorities, and enact strict(er) privacy laws that prevent these and other companies from sharing our data, or to be able to speak out when a hidden government department asks them to keep it under wraps.

<comment><USER21> From the listed above I have only amazon, linkedin and MasterCard anyway, so not that limiting.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> If we wanted to show that we weren't letting them do this without consequence, we'd be suing Yahoo and the Gov't like real Americans. We'd be suing for such an egregious amount that our national debt would look like a bit of pocket change. We would threaten the very life and livelihood of this country if we TRULY cared about our rights and privacy.

But no, instead you want us to sign a petition.

Give me a break.

<comment><USER24> Okay, so go find a lawyer willing to make it a class-action and start the suit. Find a list of damages and try to justify the large cost, then file.

Or is angrily commenting on Hacker News easier?

Give me a break.

<comment><USER23> You don't need money. If you've ever bothered to read the paperwork to file a suit, you'd notice a spot that says "I cannot afford the fees for attorney nor filing. Waive them."

Then you prove that, make it a class-action suit, and you watch as lawyers scramble to make their name representing you and the class.

This is how America works. If you haven't figured this out, I hope you do very soon, as it will be the only way you can defend yourself in eventuality.

</comment></comment></comment><comment> at-fates-hands This is useless really.

Those people who are security minded have already switched to a secure email provider, or run their own email servers. Those who are not so security minded people don't care, won't care and have no desire to stop using Yahoo. If you didn't know or think the NSA does this, then you've been living in a cave for the past decade.

While I appreciate the outrage, it seems most people have become fatigued by this constant barrage of evil corporations getting buddy:buddy with the NSA and have either done something about it, or have just accepted it.

</comment><comment><USER25> Unfortunately, even though I would very much like to abandon mine (even though it's used only for some spammy registrations), email forwarding is not possible unless you pay them, which is obviously out of question.

So basically, the best I can do is start changing my associated email address at the services I care about that are still using my yahoo email address. After a while, my yahoo inbox will be 100% spam (as opposed to 90% spam now), so I'd be able to move on.

<comment><USER26> Some email services will allow you to "fetch" mail from another service. For example, I think it's possible with gmail to configure it to log in periodically to your yahoo account and fetch the email.

I run a hosting business and our email stack supports this feature. We use a combination of open source technologies to transfer email like imapsync for the initial transfer and then use a glorified version of fetchmail in a cron job.

</comment></comment><comment> awinter-py how is yahoo's action different from a court-ordered pen register?

I respect the lavabit guy for his decision to implode, but you can't expect a large public company to behave that way.

<comment><USER27> Presumably in that traditionally an actual normal court that is accountable to the public would have to based on evidence approve a warrant naming particularly the individuals and why and for a finite duration of time.

This is fundamentally different from building a tool that would allow them to access any or all of your customers communications forever with no further oversight forever based on a secret courts request or in fact sometimes nothing more than administrative request or even breaking in.

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> Well dang it, I only keep my Yahoo account around so I can log in to Flickr, which is something I've been using long before Yahoo's acquisition of that service.

</comment><comment><USER29> This is a great way to sign people up to your mailing list.

<comment><AUTHOR> This is actually one line of discussion I'd hoped to spark in posting the item.

There are a few dyanmics here:

1\. Goodwill for a company with repeated security breeches.

2\. Goodwill for a company which rolls over in the face of government surveillance.

3\. Privacy expectations in the face of third-party hosted services. Frankly, Yahoo's actions should send stone-cold shivers through anyone using such systems.

4\. The whole question of online petitions and such.

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> I thought this was going to be directed toward Yahoo stock (YHOO). While I agree with the sentiment I would probably dump Yahoo stock too...

</comment><comment><USER31> "I want to make it clear to the government, to Yahoo and to other internet companies that they cannot compromise my security, privacy and safety without consequence."

Well... then you should dump your phone too because the government has direct access to all telecom networks. By law! no spying necessary.

</comment><comment><USER32> It takes longer to sign the "pledge to delete" than to just delete your account.

</comment><comment><USER33> I just use yahoo for fake emails. I think it serves that purpose wonderfully.

<comment><USER34> I just use Mailinator[1] for that.

[1] [https://www.mailinator.com/](https://www.mailinator.com/)

<comment><AUTHOR> That's inbound only though, correct?

You need another provider for sending.

<comment><USER35> If it's for something to sign up to get a free bonus or coupon I use "10 Minute Email" [https://10minutemail.com/10MinuteMail/index.html?dswid=-8354](https://10minutemail.com/10MinuteMail/index.html?dswid=-8354)

<comment><AUTHOR> Oh, I'm quite familiar with mailinator on that end.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> > Yahoo was recently sold to Verizon for 4.8 billion dollars.

Yahoo has not been purchased yet.

</comment><comment><USER37> This article is a great way to build up confidence to short Yahoo stock

</comment><comment><USER38> Think we have flattened this site...

</comment><comment><USER39> the only thing I ever liked about yahoo is flickr.. I'll miss it if its gone.

<comment><USER40> Yahoo Groups has some useful groups of which I've been a member for many years. I'd prefer that they'd just move to Majordomo-ish mailing lists but short of that they're preferable to Facebook Gruops.

There is a mail icon in the top-right of my Yahoo Groups screen which I've never clicked. Hovering over it says 'we're unable to preview your mail'. I'm half-scared of _why_ that is.</comment></comment>


California disavows 'inevitable disclosure' rule on which HP's Hurd case relies - <AUTHOR> http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1202471748471

<comment><USER2> I'm surprised they're even trying. There's little obvious overlap between HP's hardware business and Oracle's software business. I presume they're primarily worried about Oracle HP's consulting/managed services contract business, which I understand is quite lucrative; but I find it hard to see any more overlap between HP and Oracle than there was between HP and NCR (Hurd's previous employer, potential conflicts with whom were deemed adequately addressed by a boilerplate paragraph in his agreement with HP about 'respecting rights of former employers'), notwithstanding Oracle's general remarks about HP being a competitor in the July 10-k (complaint p.44).

I guess it's normal practice and/or required for compliance with California or federal law, but I can't help noticing in the attached suit that neither the confidentiality nor separation agreements make Hurd's severance payments contingent on his honoring the non-compete clause - that is, they can seek redress for their loss (A/B/C p.8), but it's not keyed to his compensation. Obviously a company wouldn't want to put a ceiling on their potential damages if someone truly abused their confidentiality, but I had expected to see a clawback for the specific amount of his severance before the more open-ended remedies.

Are such clauses illegal, or were they just too trusting? I can't imagine HP wants a protracted legal fight with Oracle, but I'm betting that for the sake of appearances they would like to snatch back the $12m + ~40m in stock options Hurd took out the door with him.</comment>


Startup lets landlords scan tenants' Facebook to check if they can pay rent - <AUTHOR> http://www.theverge.com/2016/6/10/11903082/landlord-social-media-credit-check <comment><USER2> One of the downsides of posting so much information about ourselves online is that it can be used against us and there isn't really any way to stop it.

This is why I don't post very much on my FB account and use it mostly just to get updates from friends/family.</comment>


Ask HN: What are the "big five" dedicated server hosts to look at first? - <AUTHOR>

I am after a basic entry level dedicated server and don't want to go with a fly-by-night operation.<p>What are the first 5 dedicated server companies I should take a look at before anyone else? <comment><USER2> I made up a chart of who hosts 300 YC-funded startups:

[http://www.dangrossman.info/2012/09/24/who-hosts-the-y- combi...](http://www.dangrossman.info/2012/09/24/who-hosts-the-y-combinator- startups/)

Rackspace and SoftLayer are the only dedicated providers with significant numbers. I host Improvely and W3Counter at SoftLayer.

<comment><AUTHOR> That is even better than random HNer's advice/votes.

Thank you for making the list.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> You'll get better answers if you ask a more specific question. E.g. Hetzner is an established company that will give you lots of server for your buck (and you may be interested in <http://www.serverbidding.com/>); but if you're trying to run a game server for your buddies in the US, the fact that's in Germany means that you won't have the best ping possible.

Similarly, OVH's budget brand KimSufi is unlikely to go under any time soon, but your questions won't exactly be a priority for support. RackSpace is the opposite - they try to offer excellent support, but they definitely aren't the cheapest.

Finally, AWS and Linode have their own advantages; unless you're sure you want to stick with dedicated, at least consider those - if only because you can claim "cloud" experience. ;-)

<comment><AUTHOR> >Similarly, OVH's budget brand KimSufi is unlikely to go under any time soon, but your questions won't exactly be a priority for support.

What kinds of questions won't be a priority specifically? "What is linux?" or "Can you please reboot my server?" types of questions?

<comment><USER3> From sniffing around a bit a year or so back, while considering them, they're pretty fast with "please reboot", but you'll have to get "real" OVH if you want support that will help you with more complicated questions. Reading HN, it seems that this is still the case.

OTOH, as you suggest, there are lots of questions a capable sysadmin can find the answer to without help.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I'm surprised Internap hasn't been mentioned, they're quite large, have a great network and support.

Other worthy mentions include Rackspace, SoftLayer, Leaseweb, Peer1 and SecuredServers (aka PhoenixNAP) all of which are large companies by hosting provider standards.

Also, in Canada there are iWeb and Netelligent who have great networks.

Based on personal experience with all of the above, Internap, Rackspace and Netelligent have given us the best value and overall experience.

</comment><comment><USER5> Our data here might help you: <http://reviewsignal.com/webhosting/compare/#tab3>

We show any company offering them, so they may not specialize in them. I don't want to bias your own process for evaluating though by injecting my thoughts. I hope the data helps and if you have any questions, I would be happy to try to answer them.

</comment><comment><USER6> What is Wikipedia hosted on these days? The last time I looked at Wikimedia Foundation's tax exempt organization documents, a big part of the foundation's expenses were paying for web hosting.

</comment><comment><USER7> You can build your own server for several hundred dollars and ship it to a colocation datacenter. When you do the math, paying $100/month for a $300 server doesn't make sense after 3 months.

<comment><USER8> You're not paying $100/month for the machine. You're paying $100/month for management, and paying $300 for a server is a waste of $300.

I admit, it's been a while since I've done any systems administration myself, but I wouldn't even trust my personal blog to a $300 machine. I'm not even sure I'd trust a $300 rackmount chassis.

When I start to think about colocating my own server - and thus being the one responsible for its maintenance - I immediately think of redundant _everything_. That means RAID. That means dual, redundant, hot swappable power supplies. That might mean two machines.

Because even if I live in the metro area that I'm colocating in, me driving in to get physical access to the machine means downtime. And that assumes that I have exactly what I need to restore that machine on-hand. (I probably don't.)

And these are things that I'd rather pay somebody else to deal with.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> I think that I'd start with Rackspace, Amazon, Softlayer, and "other".

</comment><comment><USER10> Pick the one that feels gut-right, and look for reasons to shoot it down. Giving yourself a menu of choices leads to analysis paralysis.

Better yet, back it up a level... why do you need a dedicated server, rather than cloud hosting? Dedicated servers go strongly against industry trends.

<comment><USER11> Why do you think that is? Hosts push cloud as it furthers their bottom line.

Cloud is popular because it is cheap. For consumers and providers. If you know exactly the resources you'll need and have infrastructure in place to scale then sure, VPS/cloud hosting might be good if you're looking to cut costs.

In the end though, you'll always be sharing and limited. If you're approve dynamic allocation then you'll just be paying for it at a premium.

<comment><USER10> Not saying that cloud over dedicated host is the answer. Saying that it is an important question (and the answer should be application-specific).

When you find your business decisions going against the herd, you should really ask yourself WHY you're going against the herd, because our herd is pretty smart. That doesn't mean you should never go against, just that you should make sure you're thinking it through.

<comment><USER11> I did receive that from the upper portion of your response. I was just eloboarting further for the OP as your first did insulate that de facto equals to correctness. Yes precisely but one with such a question has already deomstated anayalsis to a level of a threshold where such alternatives would not hwve been considered if not for the existence of prior sufficient evidence for valid uncertainty of accepted standard.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Rackspace, Softlayer, Savvis, Hetzner, ServerBeach.

</comment><comment><USER12> If you look at five of them you are overthinking it. You only need to pick one.

<comment><AUTHOR> I am not looking at 5 but I wish that I were.

What is your dedicated server host of choice? Or did you just come here to detract from the conversation?</comment></comment>


Google kills off seven more products  - <AUTHOR> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-15853323

<comment><USER3> From what I've heard from people who work at Google, the environment there is one where there are tons of projects ongoing but seemingly little long-term dedication/passion in making these products successful.

Employees do what's in their job description but don't go above and beyond because they don't know if the project is going to be continued to be supported by upper management. Its a self-fulfillng feeling of inevitable failure. My impression is that management needs to have better vision and commitment other than "let's throw everything half-hearted at the wall and see what may miraculously stick".

However, Google is still the king of search and making gobs of money - <USER2> least they're still doing the biggest and most important part of their products right.

</comment><comment><USER4> I was surprised when I learned that google was launching a project to search for efficient renewable energy sources - doesn't seem like their field at all. That they are closing it now without having produced much (has anyone heard about anything they might have figured out?) makes me wonder if there was ever such a projet or if they did it just for PR.

</comment><comment><USER5> Could be due to them refocusing on five products as suggested by the late Steve Jobs to Page

[http://googlesystem.blogspot.com/2011/10/how-steve-jobs- infl...](http://googlesystem.blogspot.com/2011/10/how-steve-jobs-influenced- googles.html)

</comment><comment><USER6> How about Brand Fatigue? could it be that people are tired of hearing Google this Google that. Why can't Google build brand from the ground up for some of their products?

</comment><comment><USER7> UGH very sad to see RE<C going away. With Google's resources , both technical and people, I thought they would do great things in the renewable energy space.

</comment><comment><USER8> Google's 11' strategy to kill product and go crazy on the monetization of GAE, Maps and things like that doesn't make it the attractive company it used to be ?

</comment><comment><USER9> Has the Apache Wave project produced anything approaching the normal Wave experience yet? I'd love to run it on my own server.

</comment><comment><USER10> forgot google health

</comment><comment><USER11> Wave is the latest on the chopping block? You don't say!

</comment><comment><USER12> They're diverting resources to google x, so expect something big or bigger than the self driving car coming out soon.

</comment><comment><USER13> This is politics plain and simple.</comment>


Using Ruby Gem to root a box - <AUTHOR> http://www.reddit.com/r/ruby/comments/br9ui/using_gem_to_root_a_box/ <comment><USER2> Bad title. He was given sudo access to gem. So, of course he'll be able to run arbitrary code as sudo.

Don't use sudo gems. Rubygems works great with normal user access. In fact, best bet is to have a user ruby install too. RVM helps with this.</comment>


You don't think the next iPhone will be revolutionary? You're a fool - <AUTHOR> http://owened.co.nz/you-dont-think-the-next-iphone-is-revolutionary <comment><USER2> Revolutionary means (to me) it would change the way that you interact with that genre of 'thing', or change the way you live your life in some way.

A car that is faster, or more efficient, or prettier, is not revolutionary. A car that is driven by a computer is.

The original iPhone was definitely a revolution: it changed the way everyone made phones, and it changed the way we look at phones. The iPad, likewise, changed the way we use computers (or at least some of us).

This really looks like an evolution though. The only thing on that list that could possibly be revolutionary would be NFC, since it could dramatically change the way you pay for things (note I said _could_ , I personally don't think it's the future).</comment>