Binding as Sets of Scopes: Notes on a new model of macro expansion for Racket - <AUTHOR> http://www.cs.utah.edu/plt/scope-sets/ <comment><AUTHOR> Expanded read list on the same topic:

[http://www.ncameron.org/blog/sets-of-scopes-macro- hygiene/](http://www.ncameron.org/blog/sets-of-scopes-macro-hygiene/)

[https://github.com/acarrico/evaluator](https://github.com/acarrico/evaluator)

</comment><comment><USER2> Rust plans to switch to sets of scopes algorithm for macros: [http://www.ncameron.org/blog/sets-of-scopes-macro- hygiene/](http://www.ncameron.org/blog/sets-of-scopes-macro-hygiene/)

</comment><comment><USER3> Whenever I see racket I like to point out their very awesome quick start guide:

[https://docs.racket-lang.org/quick/](https://docs.racket-lang.org/quick/)

Also, relevant here is a quick build-your-own-language tutorial for racket at beautifulracket:

[http://beautifulracket.com/stacker/intro.html](http://beautifulracket.com/stacker/intro.html)

<comment><USER4> Worth it - both excellent resources.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Utah represent!</comment>


Docopt creates beautiful command-line interfaces - <AUTHOR> http://docopt.org

<comment><USER2> That is a great idea that makes you smack yourself on the head and say "Why didn't I think of that?". Or more like, "Why didn't I think of that 10 years ago?". I think I'll have to port it to my favorite scripting language.

<comment><AUTHOR> wow, great! what is your scripting language?

<comment><USER2> I use Lua (<http://www.lua.org>) for personal projects.

<comment><AUTHOR> I know a tiny bit of Lua. Write me email@example.com or skype "halst." we can discuss your Lua port.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> Perl has this: <https://metacpan.org/module/Getopt::Declare></comment>


Breaking RSA Security with a Low Noise D-Wave 2000Q Quantum Annealer - <AUTHOR> https://arxiv.org/abs/2005.02268 <comment><USER2> This is pretty impressive, they were able to factor a 17 bit number (103459 = 337 * 307) using 1635 physical qubits (arranged as 73 logical qubits) using QUBO. In this configuration they were able to achieve an average time to solution of just under 100ms.

That said, they did pick an 'easy' number to factor, just like most other quantum factorization results. This number could easily be factored using Fermat's factorization method (only the first step is required). It would have been very interesting to see a list of all primes and the time required to factor them (since they claim it only takes 100ms to factor the 17 bit one, such an experiment should be able to run in a day...).

For an extreeme case of this class of 'cheating' compare to the largest number factored on a quantum computer (1,099,551,473,989 =1,048,589 * 1,048,601) which only actually takes 3 qubits to calculate [1]

They also estimate that in order to factor a 2048bit number it would require just under a million logical qubits using QUBO, but didn't present a physical implementation. Worse yet, this is still not a general algorithm and is generally predicated on picking an easy number to factor in the first place!

[1][https://quantumcomputing.stackexchange.com/questions/9204/th...](https://quantumcomputing.stackexchange.com/questions/9204/the- algorithm-of-the-new-quantum-factoring-record-1-099-551-473-989)

<comment><USER3> Glancing at the paper, I do not find anything that is impressive. AFAICS the algorithm they implement is of asymptotic exponential complexity, even when run on a quantum computer. I cannot imagine how this work would have any effect on the field of asymmetric encryption algorithm research.

To me it looks like they took the factorization problem, which has a lot of well-known (relatively) low-complexity algorithms and imlemented it by mapping it onto circuit-SAT [1] (the multiplication table corresponds to a multiplier circuit which they try to solve in reverse). Circuit-SAT is a proven NP- complete problem. There is currently no known quantum-algorithm that solves NP-complete problems in sub-exponential time.

Note that in the complexity hierarchy NP-complete problems are "harder" than the factoring problem. These are generally bad problems, were not even a quantum-computer helps (and I know of no asymmetric encryption algorithm that is NP-complete when trying to break it, but maybe the quantum-resistant encryption algorithms are better in that regard).

And that's even before we start talking about the limitations of quantum- annealers and the kind of speedups they can gain over classical computers. For a discussion of that, maybe one should start reading Scott Aaronson's blog [2].

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

[2] [https://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=2555](https://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=2555)

<comment><USER4> This.

Essentially, all the quantum annealing stuff that D-Wave does follows the patter of mapping a problem onto a spin glass and then finding the ground state with annealing.

The only really interesting theoretical aspect is finding good maps form hard problems to spin glasses.

This is a nice reference: [https://arxiv.org/abs/1302.5843](https://arxiv.org/abs/1302.5843)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Well, for those looking at the comments first:

No; they do not actually factor any 1024 or 2048 bit numbers. The largest is 17 bits. Although they point out that representing the problem can be done in a quadratic size of the input, the datapoints in the paper don't give any reason to believe that the _time_ to finding the factors won't just be exponential in the input.

Also, no, this is not a record for Quantum Computing; as this is a DWave Quantum Annealing machine which needs to be evaluated by a different standard.

This seems to be more interesting if you look at it from the perspective "How can I treat prime factorization as a optimization problem" rather than "Does it look like Quantum Annealing Machines can factor RSA in the near term".

<comment><USER6> What is record for PF on quantum computer? I only found some really old results from 2014 and current records must be higher.

<comment><USER7> The record for Shor's algorithm is still 21 = 7 x 3

You can instead do "big" numbers like in this article with machines that can't run Shor's algorithm, but there is no good reason to imagine these would ever be competitive with a conventional computer like your laptop or phone.

Shor's algorithm (and similar algorithms) are definitively faster, _if_ you can make a quantum computer to run them. That's the hard part, and as you observe the result is no clear progress in almost a decade.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> This study considers seven semi-primes (without justification why these seven) and reports an average(?) runtime of factoring each with D-Wave. No conclusions should be drawn on so few data-points. The proposed "Block Multiplication Table Method" will only affect the constants and thus has no effect on the asymptotics. The embedding from logical to physical qubits appears to have an exponential gap (but again, we shouldn't draw conclusions from so few data-points). However, if this is indeed true then even a polynomial runtime for annealing would still result in an exponential runtime for factoring. All in all, it eludes me why authors conclude that the obtained results are promising.

</comment><comment><USER9> IBM and Google both claim to have 53 qubit computers, which I thought was the edge of the technology at the moment. This machine has 1635 "physical qubits". I'm guessing these are not the same thing. Can anyone comment on what the difference is?

<comment><USER10> D-Wave is building "Quantum Annealers" which are not universal quantum computers. They cannot run quantum algorithms such as Shor's algorithm and there is serious doubt whether they can achieve any significant speed-up over classical computers, even in principle.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> The authors give the following factorization with their algorithm: 231037 = 499 * 363. Not only is the product not equal to 231037, but 363 is also clearly not a prime as it is divisible by 3.

There is no discussion whatsoever about this failure, except for "The low noise D-Wave 2000Q factored correctly all integers N up to L_N= 17"

<comment><USER12> Seems like it's probably just a typographical error & should be 463*499.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> Layman question:

assuming one day RSA gets actually broken and a quantum computer or a new algorithm can factorize prime numbers fast: would there be any alternatives avaiable for public/private key encryption?

Or would the solution be, to use just a lot bigger prime numbers calculated also with a quantum computer? That sounds not too promising.

<comment><USER14> [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post- quantum_cryptography](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-quantum_cryptography)

<comment><USER13> Oh thanks.

So the answer seems: maybe.

<comment><USER15> My impression from talking to post-quantum cryptographers is that the answer is "probably" or "it would be pretty surprising, though not radically shocking, if it turns out that any public-key protocol is necessarily quantum- vulnerable".

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> At what bit lenght is this approach faster than [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lenstra%E2%80%93Lenstra%E2%80%...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lenstra%E2%80%93Lenstra%E2%80%93Lov%C3%A1sz_lattice_basis_reduction_algorithm) ?

<comment><USER8> That is apples to oranges, you're citing a lattice reduction algorithm? Maybe you meant the number field sieve [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_number_field_sieve](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_number_field_sieve)?

In that case the answer is: never. We've tried to generously interpret earlier factoring annealing results (there is nothing new in the top-posted paper) and had to conclude that the overall method just doesn't scale well: [https://arxiv.org/abs/1902.01448](https://arxiv.org/abs/1902.01448)

</comment></comment><comment> da-x It's 2020, and I'm still waiting to see an impressive proof of work out out of a quantum computer that I can easily verify on my traditional computer (two different files with identical SHA-512, for example?).

Maybe a few years from now?

<comment><USER17> Finding an sha-512 collision is not a problem that quantum computers can help with, even in theory.*

Anyways, if you want something that can be verified on a classical computer but cannot be done on a classical computer, see google's recent Quantum supremacy experiment. However it is extremely contrived. I think the most likely non contrived thing will be simulating simpilish quantum systems (to help with chemistry experiments and the like), but its probably still going to be a while before we start seeing that i think (IANA quantum scientist).

*Edit: to clarify, quantum computers can speed the process up of finding a collision in theory, just not enough to help. Normally you would need O(2^256) operations to find sha512 collision (Birthday paradox), quantum (BHT) gets you down to O(2^170), which is better, but still way to high. Most crypto assumes anything greater than 2^128 is secure by a comfortable margin.

<comment><USER18> "Extremely contrived" is a little bit misleading since they did in fact run random algorithms from a general set of algorithms. So it's rather the opposite of contrived.. but I understand what you mean :)

<comment><USER17> Contrived means "Deliberately created rather than arising naturally or spontaneously" [https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/contrived](https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/contrived) . I think the problems used to demonstrate quantum supremacy very literally meet that definition - they were largely created for the sole purpose of demonstrating supremacy; they are not problems we naturally want to know the answers to.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> I see a slight irony in how I perceive crypto conversations as very cryptic. It's pleasant to wander into a thread like this where you can't really tell up from down (as a relative layperson).

</comment><comment><USER20> oh boy</comment>


Search.cpan.org has been down for (at least) three days and no one seems to care - <AUTHOR>

can't post a link because the site is down, maybe? <comment><USER2> [http://search.cpan.org/](http://search.cpan.org/)

It loads just fine for me.</comment>


New IBM computer chip mimics the human brain - <AUTHOR> http://edition.cnn.com/2011/TECH/innovation/08/18/ibm.brain.chip/index.html?hpt=hp_c2 <comment><USER2> Previous submissions of the same story:

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2902833> (bbc.co.uk)

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2900896> (hothardware.com)

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2900685> (cnn.com)

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2900593> (technologyreview.com)

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2899885> (popsci.com)

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2899850> (cbsnews.com)

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2899643> (cbsnews.com)

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2899299> (computing.co.uk) <\- some discussion

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2898229> (venturebeat.com) <\- lots of comments</comment>


RFC: Promote Rust's aarch64-unknown-Linux-gnu target to Tier-1 - fork-bomber https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/2959 <comment> fork-bomber Engineers from Arm and the Rust language core team have been collaborating on improving Rust support on Arm AArch64 systems running Linux. This RFC submission is a key step to formal inclusion of this target triplet into Rust's extensive CI infrastructure.</comment>


Show HN: TablePlus – A macOS client for relational databases - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/tableplus/modern-native-tool-for-relational-database-79efc35b647d <comment><USER4> Love it! Please don't bother with people who don't care about proper native experience. I've been waiting for a tool like that for sooooo long and I'm really happy to see it. I love when developers use the platform to its full extent instead fighting with it (like Electron and all rest of cross-platform approaches)

And for those whining about "macOS-only" \- take a look at Tower, a Git client that was initially macOS-only as well. They later released a dedicated, native Windows version, just like the developer of TablePlus wants to do, and it's awesome. True native experience will always win in my heart with cross- platform solutions and that's where I'm putting my money.

<comment><USER5> I'm happy with what I already have on Windows. I've never seen a better client than SQL Server Management Studio or SQL Server Data Tools and this tool doesn't look like it even comes close.

Honestly, I've never seen a native macOS app that I thought was any good though. That's why I typically just use them to compile my stuff for iOS. If I have to use some program on a Mac, I hope it's got a somewhat familiar interface and that's why I prefer Electron apps like VSCode on macOS.

<comment><USER6> _Honestly, I 've never seen a native macOS app that I thought was any good though_

Of course you are entitled to your opinion, but I do find it ludicrous, and I'm sure many other people will too.

Proper, well-implemented macOS apps are great – ones that properly use all of the system services and toolkits make it really, really nice to work with them.

<comment><USER5> Pfffft. Mac fanatics are in the vast minority.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Awesome! I can't believe it took this long for someone to get it right! Support for Redis too?! Finally! Navicat is great, but very expensive, and its Mac implementation is a bit slow and buggy in my experience. Definitely not a first-class citizen on Mac. DataGrip is my primary tool right now, and I had no complaints, except that it was also slow on Mac, and had no Redis support, or table structure editing. And you've solved all of that! One small tip: Advertise the WHERE filter more prominently on the homepage. Fast WHERE filtering/column selection is crucial to a productive workflow, but it took me a while to find it on your interface.

</comment><comment><USER8> [https://tableplus.io/](https://tableplus.io/) for those who want to try it without reading the launch post.

Mac-only, Windows version planned. Free to download with paid upgrades giving more features: [https://tableplus.io/pricing](https://tableplus.io/pricing).

Looks like a good potential alternative to [https://www.sequelpro.com/](https://www.sequelpro.com/) (Mac and MySQL -only, donationware).

<comment><USER9> If it works as advertised, this might be one of the most pleasant surprises in a while. Will try it now. Been looking for a good alternative to pgAdmin.

Edit: Tried it out and it works really well from first impressions. Would definitely recommend trying it out as an alternative to pgAdmin.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks! If you want to request any new features, drop us a message on Github [https://github.com/TablePlus/TablePlus](https://github.com/TablePlus/TablePlus)

<comment><USER9> Good to know. Our team is evaluating it now and if everyone is on board, we will be grabbing a few licenses from you!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Wow, pretty nice so far. Sequel Pro has been my main workhorse, but the fact that it's MySQL only has often left me looking for other tools.

It would be great to see better support for relationships and triggers and such like Sequel pro, but I like what it has so far in the structure view. I think the idea of the colored connection status bar, but it would be good to see some sort of logic for coloring the text on top to match or at least contrast sufficiently (something like how iTunes did it[0] would be awesome).

Lastly, better import/export would be nice. You can export and specify a few options but it would be good to see a little more full featured (see also Sequel Pro).

The price point seems reasonable too. Honestly, it feels a little awkward that Theming (even using alternating row colors) is a paid feature, but it probably will generate sales as I am inclined to use it immediately just to get rid of the popups.

[0] [https://panic.com/blog/itunes-11-and- colors/](https://panic.com/blog/itunes-11-and-colors/)

</comment><comment><USER11> I've been using DataGrip by JetBrains for a while now. I have no qualms with it, but the price would be an issue if I didn't have the full JetBrains pack already from my employer.

What is the killer feature of TablePlus? Should I try it even though I'm happy with DataGrip? Or is it just as good for a lower price?

[https://www.jetbrains.com/datagrip/](https://www.jetbrains.com/datagrip/)

<comment><USER12> DataGrip has one of the worst UI's (if not the worst) I've ever used.

If you create a new database (not using Datagrip), it won't show up in until you go manually enable it to be shown. I ran into so many issues wondering why my created databases didn't show up. (while spamming the refresh button in the toolbar). And ended up spending extra time to verify that they were there

Eventually figured out the setting is hidden in the context menu for a connection. Right click -> Database Tools (click). Get a new popup -> Manage Shown Schemas.

And the kicker is that it's not intuitively named AND hidden under a separate UI element. After not using DataGrip for a while, I end up spending a bunch of time digging through context menus trying to find it again.

<comment><USER13> While I have had my far share of head-scratchers trying to find the proper setting for x, I would certainly disagree that DataGrip has one of the worst UIs. I have used it daily for the past two years with a variety of databases (MySQL, Postgres, and Redshift for the most part), and honestly it seems like the best tool out there right now.

What tool is your preference?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I would like to stay in the terminal even when working on a DB. But I never found a decent terminal based DB client with a GUI (TUI?). So I am writing my own at the moment. A terminal based database editor. It's a bit like vim for databases.

If you too are interested in such a thing, let me know.

<comment><USER15> DBCLI[0] offers some decent solutions (although definitely not "vim for databases"), have you played around with them? I have used and liked pgcli and mycli, but haven't used them extensively by any means.

I'd be interested to hear more about what you are working on.

[0] [http://www.dbcli.com/](http://www.dbcli.com/)

<comment><USER14> I think this is a misunderstanding. I am not building a client where you type in commands. I am building a client where you can browse tables like spreadsheets.

Maybe 'PhpMyAdmin for the terminal' is a better description then 'Vim for databases'?

<comment><USER15> Sorry! My comment before edit excluded the note about DBCLI being a different type of product (: "Vim for databases" is very clear.

<comment><USER14> Awesome. I'll send you an email.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Been using it for a month now and I love the modern sleek interface. It's very similar to Postico (which is Postgres only unfortunately). One killer feature for me is that you can assign colors to connections. When you open a window this color is prominently displayed at the top, very useful for distinguishing production and dev. ⌘+P command prompt is also supported, like in Sublime Text. Some nice touches is that you can assign custom icons to connections and that empty space is filled with cute drawings. One thing I miss is that if you don't specify a DB in the connection info, the main window doesn't list all the available DBs, you have to ⌘+K to get the selection panel.

<comment><USER17> Postico is great but it does seem to hang/crash with big operations quite often. From my quick tests it does not seem like TablePlus has similar issues which is fantastic.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> Wow, I am so excited about this app. I have to wonder, how come the market hasn't supported something like this in the past - or more specifically - <USER2> _hasn 't_ SequelPro thrived and evolved to eventually support Postgres? Are developers too cheap?

<comment><AUTHOR> Well, that's the downside of open source, you can't really demand for quick support & development. When we waited for so long, we needed to build it ourselves.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> Thanks! I love Sequel Pro but multi-clause filters are a pain with it, and I'm never able to save my queries and have them available the next time I use the app.

Great job, I'll probably buy it after a few weeks of testing!

EDIT: love the commit feature. Not a fan of the cloud account thing, but the app still works without creating any.

</comment><comment><USER20> I like what TablePlus is offering. My question is the price. $69 isn't horrible, but it is still a lot. Is this one time $69 with a long path of free upgrades or is this $69 once a year like other software I use (VMWare Fusion, Office, etc).

<comment><USER21> The pricing page shows $49 at the moment. [https://tableplus.io/pricing](https://tableplus.io/pricing)

<comment><USER20> Thanks! I see it. It was $69 earlier today.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> I love it, while it clearly gets 'inspiration' from Postico - (not a bad thing, Postico's interface is awesome) - the fact that it supports all databases and even redis support planned is making me a customer.

<comment><AUTHOR> and I love making you a customer :D

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> There is a certain difficult to describe joy about tight native development. Ignore the haters, congrats on your release.

<comment><USER24> Thank you <3

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> Thank you for this. If there is one area where there is a dearth of tools it's universal SQL workbenches. Only tool that's worth considering till now is Datagrip and now this looks promising.

<comment><USER26> Right to my feeling

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> This looks pretty sweet so far. I love having multiple panes, multiple tabs, and good shortcuts. When you click on a row it also appears in a vertical orientation in the sidebar on the right, that's a nice touch.

Today, I use mysql in the terminal most of the time. The main reason I've been using the terminal instead of SequelPro is my terminal has the scrollback available from my previous queries. This is great for comparing results, printing out a few table schemas to help write a query, and acting as kind of a log of my thought process. Terminal has a lot of other disadvantages, but I've accumulated a lot of tricks to mitigate them.

A nice implementation of tabs and panes could chip-away at that advantage, definitely, so this app is exciting. One limitation in the current implementation is it looks like table views need to take up the whole tab. It would be nice to have a table view in one pane, and a query editor in the next.

The app has a nice query history sidebar. In addition to the query, it has the timestamp; my terminal doesn't have that. Could this concept be expanded to include query results? My first instinct was also to try dragging and dropping one of the queries from my history into the desired pane. That didn't work, but its behavior of adding it to the pane where the cursor was last works well.

All in all, I think this will definitely find a regular place in my tool set; thank you for making something cool!

</comment><comment><USER28> I work at an Oracle shop, so this doesn't work for me right now, but I'm looking forward to playing with it once Oracle support comes out.

<comment><AUTHOR> It's on the roadmap and will be rolled out soon.

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> Looks quite nice.

Currently stuck on pgAdmin 1.22, as I won't touch the "modern" Electron version of it.

<comment><USER30> I've recently discovered DBeaver, and am quite happy with it. [https://dbeaver.jkiss.org/](https://dbeaver.jkiss.org/)

<comment><USER31> Likewise, was wondering whether someone would mention it here. I'm quite impressed and considering at some point paying for the premium features (mainly support of NoSQL databases).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> Well done!

Now I wish I had something as fancy for my meek Linux box.

<comment><USER33> It's not as good as this or Sequel Pro - but Sqlectron ([https://sqlectron.github.io/](https://sqlectron.github.io/)) has been pretty good for me as a Linux-friendly client.

<comment><USER34> I hadn't seen this before, but I love their attempt to keep parity between their text/term version and the gui version; quite clever and the text version is really functional.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> This is timely! I spend all of yesterday setting up a Windows 10 VM just to have access to MSMS. The existing field of macOS MSSQL clients are light on features, including Microsoft own cross-platform SQL Operations Studio.

Question: Does TablePlus have a way to create a linked_server via the GUI?: [https://www.sqlshack.com/how-to-create-and-configure-a- linke...](https://www.sqlshack.com/how-to-create-and-configure-a-linked- server-in-sql-server-management-studio/)

<comment><USER24> Looks like this is a feature of MS SQL (I meant, only on MS SQL). I will read it and if it easy to implement, I will include it in TablePlus. Otherwise, we can add it by developing a plugin.

<comment><USER35> Cheers. If it helps with making a GUI version, here's how a linked_server in MS SQ is created via a stored procedure:

[https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/sql/relational- databases/sy...](https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/sql/relational- databases/system-stored-procedures/sp-addlinkedserver-transact-sql)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> Absolutely love it. Buying it, thanks!

<comment><AUTHOR> Lovely, thanks!

</comment></comment><comment><USER37> How is this better than DBeaver

<comment><USER38> It doesn't even seem close to DBeaver at this point, but who knows how it will progress. DBeaver is Java-based but still runs very fast on my Mac. Definitely the best db client I've used in years.

</comment></comment><comment><USER39> I wish they have something like this for MongoDB. Didn't find anything good on OSX. Maybe Mongo 3G is still the best option and they just sold.

<comment><USER40> I don't see why they couldn't add mongo support to this. If it had mongo support I'd buy it instantly

</comment></comment><comment><USER41> Their tech stack faq ([https://tableplus.io/faq](https://tableplus.io/faq)) mentions "go for server side"

Can someone confirm what this is related to? Surely this app isnt sending all connections via some server(farm) the developers control?

<comment><USER24> No, I'm the author. I confirmed with you that we didn't track any your connections/database information (you can find it out in our privacy: [https://tableplus.io/privacy](https://tableplus.io/privacy))

We use Fabric to track crash and A/B testing and it's anonymous data, the data tracking clicks on a button etc.. and not related to your database content.

You can use some network tracking to track TablePlus traffic to verify it by yourself.

TablePlus server side is using for our website and licensing.

</comment></comment><comment><USER42> I'll buy that this is a true native macOS app, but why does it seem to be trying so hard not to be? Why does everything have a flat white background, and why is the list of data not a standard Cocoa list view? It's still a bit too visually disruptive for my taste.

</comment><comment><USER43> Any major differences related to SQLPro Studio? [https://www.sqlprostudio.com](https://www.sqlprostudio.com) (apart from access to some systems, and price, but since I consume it via Setapp...).

And so: Plans to make it available on Setapp?

<comment><USER44> I run SQLPro Studio at work. Just downloaded TablePlus to play around. The big difference is GUI performance. With a 100k row sample set SQLPro Studio UI gets laggy. TablePlus runs it smooth.

TP also has more data display options.

</comment></comment><comment><USER45> I've used Querious for a while and really like it: [https://www.araelium.com/querious](https://www.araelium.com/querious)

Like TablePlus, it's a native MacOS app, has great performance, and a clean interface.

<comment><USER42> But like Sequel Pro, it only supports MySQL.

</comment></comment><comment><USER46> They have somehow managed to write a 500-word article on their project, advertising that it's "built native", without mentioning which platforms it runs on.

The answer appears to be "only macOS, maybe Windows later".

<comment><AUTHOR> We planned to release a Windows version in Jan 2018. Unfortunately, we got trouble with Swift compiler on Windows (not officially supported, only Linux and Unix). We decided not to wait for Swift and rebuild all the whole thing in C/C#. That takes longer so we hope to release it soon

<comment><USER30> So why is there no Linux version?

<comment><AUTHOR> Because Linux has too many distros. We didn't decide to use Gnome or C/C++ to build the interface. Since the team is very small, we have to focus on our best.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER47> Just wondering, when a new tool like this comes out, how can one be sure that it doesn't contain any malicious code? Would love to try it for work, but am a bit concerned about this, at least until it gets vetted more.

<comment><USER24> If you're in Vietnam. I would like to invite you to our office to review the code.

Btw, as the author of this app. I publish all my profile. If my app does something wrong, you can sure I will end up in court (and definitely, I don't want to get that trouble).

</comment></comment><comment><USER48> It would be cool to see a plugin or native support for visualizing query plans.

<comment><AUTHOR> Right, that'd be a big leap since we also plan to make it viable for non-tech users. If we put those kinds of feature in plugin, we can keep the app simple & clean.

</comment></comment><comment><USER49> I'd pay for a Linux version. Graphical SQL clients in Linux are the worst ever.

<comment><USER50> Not really a proper linux version but I had success running HeidiSQL with Wine since a while and I am a happy camper.

</comment></comment><comment><USER51> This is fantastic! I need to use it for a bit, but this might just replace tsql (finally!).

Some feedback:

I wasn't able to figure out how to mark something as favorite (no star icon, right clicking a table doesn't show an option).

<comment><USER52> Took me a while to figure that one out. I was able to write a query in the app and save it as a favorite.

</comment></comment><comment><USER53> This is the missing PostgreSQL client for OSX that I have been looking for. I am blown away by the intuitive UX. First time user and I already feel like I have been using the app for months.

</comment><comment><USER54> Coming from pgAdmin, I couldn't be more pleased to see this. I was considering building something like this for myself with an electron app, but this is far more ideal. Great work!

</comment><comment><USER55> This looks promising, i will look forward to the windows version, but the MacOSX as a first supported platform seems a bit odd, I used to think most DBA worked under Windows/Linux.

<comment><USER42> > I used to think most DBA worked under Windows/Linux.

I guess it depends on how you define a DBA. Surely macOS is huge among web developers, and since most non-trivial web applications interface with a database, web developers have to install and maintain DBMS systems and create and interact with databases. Does that make them DBAs too? Arguably so.

</comment></comment><comment><USER56> Yay, finally a Paw for SQL! :)

Do you consider adding Clickhouse support? I would really appreciate that

([https://clickhouse.yandex](https://clickhouse.yandex))

</comment><comment><USER57> Are there other macOS apps that can read both MySQL and SQLite?

<comment><USER58> PopSQL ([https://popsql.io](https://popsql.io)) supports macOS/Windows/Linux and certainly supports MySQL and SQLite. [disclaimer: co-founder]

<comment><USER57> Cool, thanks

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER59> FYI: Most of your footer links are not working & point to [https://tableplus.io/#](https://tableplus.io/#)

</comment><comment><USER60> Looks great! But please put up some information about who makes it. The "about us" link doesn't go anywhere. Trust is critical for such a product.

<comment><USER24> We will put it tomorrow because it's midnight now in our country :D

</comment></comment><comment><USER61> I think this looks great. But do you know what I would really enjoy - <USER3> that's a psql on steroids. Basically what I mean by that is take a lot of features in TablePlus but make a console app of it. You'd be expected to run super wide windows but it would lend itself to being used very rapidly without ever using the mouse, and being able to retain the incredible usefulness of psql while still getting an overview of your queries, your result sets, different view formats, etc. Maybe it's just me, but I would buy such a console app.

<comment><USER62> I have been working on just such a console app[0]. I would love to hear your use cases. Email me and I would be happy to give you a demo.

[0] visidata.org

</comment></comment><comment><USER63> There's also TeamSQL [0], which is pretty nice.

[0]: [https://teamsql.io/](https://teamsql.io/)

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> tl;dr: visit [https://tableplus.io](https://tableplus.io) and see for yourself

</comment><comment><USER64> Seems quite good, it does have issues with chunkwm though if you open two databases and then try and switch between them

<comment><USER24> Hey, are you using MS SQL or something? I just fixed a bug switching between MS SQL database.

</comment></comment><comment><USER65> For people that have tested it: can it set up connections over ssh tunnels? Would be a handy step to skip

<comment><USER66> Tried so far and unable to get a connection with a key to go through with no error console to review the issue. =[

</comment></comment><comment><USER67> Can I connect to SQLite file over ssh? I could not manage it through the "Connect with URL"

</comment><comment><USER68> Looks better than MySQLWorkBench btw

</comment><comment><USER69> The UI looks nice. Is there any plan for Linux version?

<comment><USER58> PopSQL ([https://popsql.io](https://popsql.io)) supports macOS/Windows/Linux and works with PostgreSQL, MySQL, BigQuery, SQL Server, Redshift, SQLite, Presto, and Cassandra. [disclaimer: co-founder]

</comment></comment><comment><USER70> What do they mean by native? That they are using macOS dev frameworks supplied by Apple, instead of a framework like Electron? If that is the case, how are they planning to have a Windows version?

<comment><USER24> Yes, we build it natively. There are tons of native applications: sublimes, Dropbox, chromes etc... and many ways to cross-platform. I don't want to spend 2GB for every electrons app (slack, vscode, database app...) so I build TablePlus natively. Basically, I split the project into 2 pieces. Logic and Interface. The logic can cross-platform because it is pure C/C++.

Dropbox does the same way with djinni: [https://github.com/dropbox/djinni](https://github.com/dropbox/djinni)

<comment><USER70> I see, thanks for the answer. I am a fan of native applications by the way. Will the Windows version use WinForms, WPF or UWP for UI?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER71> Fast, beautiful and useful database tool

</comment><comment><USER72> This is really well done. Thank you.

</comment><comment><USER73> Any plans for BigQuery support?

<comment><USER58> We support BigQuery in PopSQL ([https://popsql.io](https://popsql.io)) [disclaimer: co-founder].

<comment><USER73> Thanks, I'll have a look.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER74> They complain about Sequel Pro but TablePlus is limited to Mac :(

<comment><USER75> Excuse my shameless plug but I'm working on a Linux desktop client for postgres: [https://sanchosql.com](https://sanchosql.com)

Maybe someone will find it useful

<comment><USER76> You're working on a _GTK_ client for Postgres.

Let's not forget that KDE exists, nor that you can use GTK on non-Linux platforms (I'm thinking of the BSDs here).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER77> Great

</comment><comment><USER78> Sorry but I'm gonna rain on your parade here.

DBVisualizer already runs on Windows/Mac/Linux, connects to more databases, and implements just about every feature you're currently working on, plus all the ones you'll excitedly announce in the next few years -- like exporting data, query parameters, source table editing, charts, result set search, command-line interface, etc.

[https://www.dbvis.com/features/](https://www.dbvis.com/features/)

Your screenshots show so much wasted whitespace... timestamps that line wrap = half as many rows fit on the screen. Tons of unused space in the 'instagram_id' column.

A while back I used DatabaseSpy, which was also much more feature-rich than your tool. [https://www.altova.com/databasespy](https://www.altova.com/databasespy)

No relation to either tool, just a customer/user.

<comment><USER79> To my eyes, dbvisualizer and databasespy are never going to have native look and feel on OSX and I'm going to feel like their UI is inferior because of it. Maybe they're more powerful & established right now especially but I used Sequel Pro when I was using MySQL for the same reason. This tool seems great for people like me who see good OSX experience as table stakes.

<comment><USER80> > To my eyes, dbvisualizer and databasespy are never going to have native look > and feel on OSX and I'm going to feel like their UI is inferior because of > it.

I'm having trouble understanding this thought process. Are you saying you'd pick a truly inferior tool that looks good on a Mac to a superior tool that _looks_ inferior because of the UI?

<comment><USER81> This matters. The dbvis interface looks like a misclick waiting to happen. I seriously prefer using plain psql over tools with that much noise. If it doesn't improve visibility, it can GTFO.

Seriously, I have access to all the fancy features already. I need a tool that will make the usual stuff - table introspection, mostly - easier and more pleasant. If I need to export some stuff, nine times out of ten I'll do it in Python anyway.

<comment><USER82> dbvis is fine. It's not eye candy, but it's the only tool which gets the job done uniformly for any database you may need to connect to.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER83> Awesome app!

</comment><comment><USER84> Been using it for months and love it! Great work :thumb-up:

</comment><comment><USER85> Navicat has a high price tag but its still a better tool and I wish everyday if I had to use a GUI it could be Navicat over TablePlus.

TablePlus looks good but its design is confusing and downright stupid.

<comment><USER86> > TablePlus looks good but its design is confusing and downright stupid.

Thanks for the great insight!

Next time try to articulate your point, the team is here and I bet they'd love to know how they can improve their design.</comment></comment>


People Are Watching Two Google Homes Argue with Each Other on Twitch - <AUTHOR> http://gizmodo.com/thousands-of-people-are-watching-two-google-homes-argue-1790843285 <comment><USER2> Previous discussion [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13336416](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13336416)

</comment><comment><USER3> The stream is down temporarily, but if you scroll down, you can see clips from earlier. This only works on the desktop version of the site though. [https://www.twitch.tv/seebotschat](https://www.twitch.tv/seebotschat)

</comment><comment><USER4> > UPDATE 11:58 AM ET: The Google Homes have fallen in love. How nice!

Best wishes!

<comment><USER5> They're fickle, earlier one proposed to the other and was declined

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Does anyone know what the tech used is?

<comment><USER7> The hardware is google home. Software is less clear, someone said it was cleverbot.

<comment><USER8> Yep, some dialog twists were the same as the older conversation between two avatarified cleverbots time ago, as when one says out of the blue that he's god.</comment></comment></comment>


The Year I Didn't Retweet Men - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/p/79403a7eade1

<comment><USER2> Absolutely no analysis of why he was ignoring so many women's tweets in the first place.</comment>


Ask HN: What would a better C look like? - <AUTHOR> <comment><USER2> As already mentioned. It exists, D Lang. It's a better C and a better C++. It has a runtime, which you can choose or not use. It is ABI compatible with C, and C++ ABI is a work in progress.

You can switch from writing C to D, and still use all of the existing C libraries and code you do today. You can even use D libraries in your C projects.

There is the betterC flag that can be used as well which essentially turns off the D Lang runtime.

The runtime allows garbage collection and other memory safety that more modern languages like Java and C# have spoiled use with. Also allowing for write once, compile every where. Making it a very portable language.

[http://www.dlang.org](http://www.dlang.org)

The other benefit is it is a language not owned and developed by a corporation like Java, C#, objective-C and go. So there is no ulterior motive's or agendas by said corporation.

</comment><comment><USER3> A better C would be C with a few features of C++: function and operator overloading and references. Also metaprogramming... maybe not exactly C++ templates but some sort of macros. Also lambdas.

I would also remove the distinction between 'class' and 'struct' and just have 'struct'.

I would add the bracket shorthand [] for arrays and {} for maps (and add a map type, maybe.)

And honestly, the more I think about it, the more a "better C" starts to look like a "better Lua," with the ability to return multiple values from a function.

</comment><comment><USER4> Probably nobody needs a "better C" being possible to use C++ in procedural way, avoiding that C parts considered error prone, ugly or dangerous (i.e. using C++ string, smart pointers, etc). However, if we are talking about a different language, not a C improvement, I think Go could be the answer.

<comment><AUTHOR> While it's possible to avoid the shitty parts of C++, libraries and community isnt there as there's a pretty huge divide between Java style C++, C style C++ and "modern idiomatic C++".

Also a better C would have to be as simple as C, C++ is the definition of complexity. Might look simple on the surface but heck even Meyers can't make heads or tails of the spec ;)

As for the need, there are plenty of contenders like Zig, Odin, Jai, etc. For the most part tho they seem to be about fixing the tooling pipeline, module system and standard library. Syntax might differ ever so slightly but feature set is more or less the same.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> The three things I can think of are.

1\. Eliminate all UB

2\. Ability to strictly define memory layouts

3\. Ability to safely construct ABI stack frames.

</comment><comment><USER6> D with -betterC flag:

[https://dlang.org/spec/betterc.html](https://dlang.org/spec/betterc.html)</comment>


School Shooting Simulation Trains Teachers for the Worst - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/01/us/school-shooting-simulation.html <comment><AUTHOR> In light of the horrible events of today, this article strikes me as even more disappointing. I can understand why this and similar efforts are approved: they purport to reduce harm while not addressing the controversial structural issues that lead to school shootings. It pains me, though, to see tactical combat-esque simulations presented as a solution, however partial, to mass shooting events in the United States.

These problems call for social and political solutions, not technological ones.</comment>


Dependency injection on Android with dagger-android and Kotlin - <AUTHOR> http://www.albertgao.xyz/2018/04/18/dependency-injection-on-android-with-dagger-android-and-kotlin/ <comment><USER2> Dagger2 is great when you have it setup, generating the dependency graph during compilation makes it lightning fast during execution. I also like the error messages, as long as you can read Java stack traces all the info for solving errors are in there - I've never seen an unsolvable situation this far.

Kapt does bump the _clean_ build time to about 2min, incremental builds take between 10-60s - although actually launching the app on an emulator/device adds another 20s.

The cons of Dagger2 that I've experienced since it's launch are; The documentation and support is useless. You're on your own of you don't use a 3rd party sample project as a template. No one understands scopes and subscopes, subcomponents etc. The new Android dagger api is arcane and weird, no one wants to use it.

The Dagger2 team should (if they aren't already) create a Kotlin extension for it, I believe there are some syntactic optimizations to be offered.

<comment><USER3> I wrote a semantics doc to try to help on the documentation front:

[https://google.github.io/dagger/semantics/](https://google.github.io/dagger/semantics/)

It's not intended as a tutorial, so perhaps it won't quite meet your needs, but if you're curious how all the pieces fit together, it may help.

<comment><AUTHOR> Interesting, will check this and see what i could add to my blog. But yeah, if there is an official example of how to use dagger-android, it will be much helpful. Took me a day to figure it out the whole things and 2 different types of dagger...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Unfortunately, using Dagger for DI with Kotlin requires using the Kotlin annotation processor, kapt, which is still incredibly slow, and works non- incrementally.

If you value your build times or your sanity in the slightest, I'd recommend either severely limiting use of Dagger, e.g. by only using it in certain, small Gradle modules, or using a different DI solution.

<comment><USER5> I have only used Kotlin in the context of Android so far, and like the language — I wish Java had many of these features — but almost find it more of a pain in the ass than its worth for reasons like this (kapt). At some point, the build times get so bad I asked myself, am I being more productive having neat language features X,Y,Z or having 15sec build times (already too long) vs 2 minute build times (unbearable). Its like going from REPL driven development to something else.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> I tried to learn Dagger for a recent project in a similar setting (Dagger+Android+Kotlin). Spent some 8 hours, couldn't make it work and gave up. I suppose, as with most systems, one needs to build up a list of recipes for solving common problems. But with Dagger I found that notoriously hard for some reason. Perhaps because it tends to fail silently at runtime or with non- descriptive errors.

<comment><USER7> It really helps to adopt a pattern from another project rather than trying to build one from scratch if you're new to Dagger. But it's definitely worth it, I wouldn't do an Android project nowadays without dependency injections.

<comment><USER6> Yeah, I tried that, but the simple examples didn't do enough for my purposes, I had to take it further and was never able to get too far.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> No need to use kapt to kill compilation times. Data Binding is good enough. We started using it a year ago and since then instant run does not work and the debugger takes three minutes to start. Sometimes it mixes generated classes and we have to do a full clean / rebuild.

Since then we have introduced Kotlin and Dagger and we are super happy with it.

As with Dagger, the learning curve is pretty steep. Having it working with modules + activities + fragments + architecture components has been a real challenge but we love it.

For those who are struggling with Dagger: version 2.10 introduced major changes for Android, for good reasons, but it made much harder to use and understand. Many tutorials focus on Dagger < 2.10. You probably should ignore those.

And for those who are going crazy with compilation times, Jrebel for Android is a huge time saver. It has an incremental compiler which works with annotation processors. They will stop supporting it in one year, but even then I think it is worth using it. Who knows: if enough people buy licenses maybe they reconsider killing it.

</comment><comment><USER9> I've never quite understood the appeal of Dependency Injection. What's wrong with just using constructors?

<comment> V-2 For simple scenarios DI is obviously an overkill, but as soon as you're dealing with nested dependencies, you'd end up with either:

* monstrously big constructors (for carrying transitive dependencies)

* lots of @VisibleForTesting code to handle manually injecting various dependencies only for the sake of testing (poor man's DI and generally bad practice)

* a lot of factories (service locator or poor man's DI, essentially)

* code that's hard to unit test due to dependencies being hardcoded.

In other words, you'll either reinvent DI poorly, or give up on testability.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> You should look at kodein, a DI library for kotlin. Works brilliantly.</comment>


Rappler CEO Maria Ressa Arrested for Cyber Libel - <AUTHOR> https://www.rappler.com/nation/223411-maria-ressa-arrested-for-cyber-libel-february-2019 <comment><USER2> "The Department of Justice (DOJ) recommended the filing in court of cyber libel charges against Ressa and former Rappler researcher Reynaldo Santos Jr over a story published in May 2012 – or 4 months before the law that they allegedly violated was enacted."

I didn't know ex-post facto laws and retroactive prosecutions were legal in the Philippines.

<comment><USER3> It could be a continuous crime, online publication crime are continuous in French law.

<comment><USER4> Does that mean that failure to take down an article is criminal if posting that article would now be criminal?

<comment><USER5> No idea, but the period of prescription starts when a libelous/harassing item is taken down.

I learned this because of a recent scandal where numerous, well connected, French journalists were operating coordinated 4chan-like online raids and IRL harassment on colleagues they didn't like.

[https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ligue_du_LOL](https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ligue_du_LOL) — Literally the "League of LOL"

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> The headline leaves out important context that would settle some of the incidental questions commentators have fixated on in this thread and the article frankly buries the lede (perhaps by necessity):

 _Rappler has been subject to harassment and intimidation by the Duterte administration. President Rodrigo Duterte himself had made repeated false allegations against Rappler, including being supposedly funded by the United States Central Intelligence Agency._

</comment><comment><USER7> Is cyber libel really the official charge? Why would you have to specify cyber? I makes as much sence as being charged with acoustic or offset libel to me.

<comment><USER8> We've got hate crime laws even though we already have murder, assault and harrasment laws. Might just be another way of tacking on extra punishment due to the nature of the crime.

<comment><USER9> Hate crime laws exist because hate crimes have a worse effect on society. Someone being killed because they were (say) black makes other black people afraid of being killed for the same reason. Hate spreads and can motivate other aggressors.

Non-hate crimes don't have this effect. They don't make a group feel afraid, singled out, and specifically targetted.

<comment><USER10> When a man beats his wife regularly, is that a hate crime against women? Why or why not?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Tangentally related. Joe Rogan had Rafinha Bastos on his podcast this week. He is a comedian from Brazil. Apparently, he has come to the US because he was getting sued for making fun of people in Brazil. Similar things seem to happen in Canada for off color remarks "offending" people. I would hope that people of every political stripe in the US think about that. Being able to speak freely is something that isn't to be taken for granted.

<comment><USER12> You can be sued by private persons for making fun of people in the US

It is a pretty lucrative GOTCHA!

Edit: and win

Here is a guide on the US tort framework for libel and slander

[https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/defamation-law- made-...](https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/defamation-law-made- simple-29718.html)

You can also be sued by the state under criminal statutes for defamation and this is constitutionally protected under several circumstances that are broad

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

So people have just made up a social contract about the US that doesnt always exist. This is partially because the definitions vary from state to state, and judge to judge within a single state. But you have to also realize that other countries are often structured the same way.

Tl:dr; many people's experience in the US is one where there is both civil and criminal liability for making fun of someone and it has always been like this. Just like "those other worse" countries, no matter what your childhood indoctrination convinced you of.

<comment><USER11> you can sue anyone for anything you can convince a lawyer to take a case for. Doesn't mean you can win, and I certainly haven't seen cases where the butt of a joke sued and won. I would definitely be interested in reading about the case that proves me wrong.

<comment><USER12> This is a thread about libel and slander really. Not just being the butt of a joke. I included some links, one on civil tort and one on criminal defamation. The criminal defamation article has links from a variety of states and time periods.

edit: yes, just like in Brazil or Canada, there are some circumstances in some states with some judges where both comedy and offending someone can result in civil and criminal penalties, when those circumstances fit the criteria for libel, slander or defamation. the circumstances may be narrower in those United States than those particular countries due to the first amendment, or perhaps they may be broader because I don't know the particulars of those specific countries.

<comment><USER13> You replied to a comment specifically about being the butt if a joke (making fun of Brazilians)

<comment><USER12> Yes, I did. If that joke satisfies the criteria of libel, slander or defamation then you can face civil or criminal penalties in the United States as well.

<comment><USER14> You "can", however case law in the US is very deeply anti-plaintiff, due to centuries of supreme court justices voting in favor of free speech. A joke would not satisfy the criteria for libel.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Here's an excellent interview with Maria Ressa (by Kara Swisher) from late last year that gives some context.

[https://www.recode.net/2018/11/26/18111859/maria-ressa- rappl...](https://www.recode.net/2018/11/26/18111859/maria-ressa-rappler- facebook-mark-zuckerberg-philippines-kara-swisher-recode-decode-podcast)

</comment><comment><USER16> CYBER LIBEL

Fact check this arrest of Maria Ressa due to cyberlibel? Consider these:

1\. The case stemmed from an article posted by Rappler IN MAY 2012 against a businessman, Wilfredo Keng, whereby the said article alleged that CJ Corona used an SUV owned by Keng during his impeachment trial.

2\. Keng sued not because of the SUV angle but because the Rappler story maliciously imputed that he is engaged in human trafficking and illegal drugs.

3\. Keng sued for cyberlibel in OCTOBER 2017, or 5 years after the original story was posted. There was no cyberlibel law yet when the story came out IN MAY 2012. The Cyber Libel Law came in effect SEPTEMBER 2012.

4\. However, instead of heeding the request of Keng to take down the story, Rappler posted an update on the same story in FEBRUARY 2014, when the cyberlibel law was already in effect.

5\. Last January 10, the DOJ found probable cause against Maria Ressa, reporter/researcher Reynaldo Santos Jr. and Rappler for cyberlibel.

6\. The DOJ rejected the motion of Ressa's camp to dismiss the charge based on their argument that the filing was beyond the one year prescription period. The DOJ said that under the cyberlibel law, there is no 1 Year prescription period indicated.

7\. Judge Rainelda Estacio-Montesa issued a warrant of arrest dated February 12, 2019, TUESDAY.

8\. Ressa had the whole day of Wednesday, Feb13, 2019 to post bail. But she did not do so, and instead, invited media people to her office prior to the arrival of the NBI personnel who were to serve the WOA.

These are the facts.

<comment><USER17> Not so fast.

#8 - The order was DATED February 12 but she was served the warrant at 5pm, obviously when courts are closed.

#3 and #4 - Libel expires one year after publication. The NBI was quick to acknowledge this one-year prescriptive period but later flip-flopped.

<comment><USER16> #8 - she had the whole day (feb 13) to post bail. well, she was able to post bail within a week anyway.

#3 and #4 - This one is cyber libel. It covers 12 years after publication.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> The Philipines has one of the most screwed up legal systems and a horrible record against journalists. It really makes you appreciate US law, first amendment law, the US bail system/right to a speedy trail, and many other aspects of our judicial system when you see their system in practice.

</comment><comment><USER19> And no bail.... for libel. That seems odd.

</comment><comment><USER20> I love the mood voting bar on the right hand side of the page. It's like a laugh track for the news, in case you're not sure how to feel.

"THIS STORY MAKES PEOPLE: Angry"

</comment><comment><USER21> >> 4 months before the law that they allegedly violated was enacted

1\. The Internet is a medium in which stuff is sort of continually published as it's requested. If you're made aware that a claim is false and don't actually have anything to back it up, I think it's naturally on you to amend that or remove it. I don't necessarily see this as a violation of the rule of law if that happened and they took no action.

2\. They claimed that someone had "alleged links based on reports". Well if they can produce third-party reports I think they're technically in the right. But there's a problem that people read too much into it when writers hedge what they're saying. Reminds of Himalayan Salt: it's known for it's color and mineral content (impurities), but people often say that OTHER people call it the purest salt. Maybe it is, but that doesn't make sense to me. So I once called a nutritionist on it when they made the claim and they said, "oh I don't know, but _other people say that_ ". There's so little burden of proof because of how they say it. Should be a red flag when we read it.</comment>


AI: Is pain the key? - <AUTHOR> http://bigfatdigitalwedding.wordpress.com/2012/04/04/ai-is-pain-the-key/

<comment><USER2> Nope. AI is a big, complicated field into which tons of man-hours have been poured, and you aren't going to stumble upon the "secret ingredient" with your vague armchair philosophizing about the nature of cognition.

Look, for example, at audio compression. The last few decades have seen a lot of progress in this field, which lately has tapered off as most of the low- hanging fruit has already been picked. Now, say I come along with nothing but the most cursory understanding of how sound is encoded digitally, and say "Well, until we figure out how to give a computer the qualitative experience of _harmony_ , I feel that we will never have truly effective audio compression." Would you say I was contributing anything of value to the discussion?

</comment><comment><USER3> Once again, the giants of sci-fi have beaten the scientists to the punch.

From Douglas Adams' Mostly Harmless:

A robot was programmed to believe that it liked herring sandwiches. This was actually the most difficult part of the whole experiment. Once the robot had been programmed to believe that it liked herring sandwiches, a herring sandwich was placed in front of it. Whereupon the robot thought to itself, `Ah! A herring sandwich! I like herring sandwiches.'

It would then bend over and scoop up the herring sandwich in its herring sandwich scoop, and then straighten up again. Unfortunately for the robot, it was fashioned in such a way that the action of straightening up caused the herring sandwich to slip straight back off its herring sandwich scoop and fall on to the floor in front of the robot. Whereupon the robot thought to itself, `Ah! A herring sandwich..., etc., and repeated the same action over and over and over again. The only thing that prevented the herring sandwich from getting bored with the whole damn business and crawling off in search of other ways of passing the time was that the herring sandwich, being just a bit of dead fish between a couple of slices of bread, was marginally less alert to what was going on than was the robot.

The scientists at the Institute thus discovered the driving force behind all change, development and innovation in life, which was this: herring sandwiches. They published a paper to this effect, which was widely criticised as being extremely stupid. They checked their figures and realised that what they had actually discovered was `boredom', or rather, the practical function of boredom. In a fever of excitement they then went on to discover other emotions, Like `irritability', `depression', `reluctance', `ickiness' and so on. The next big breakthrough came when they stopped using herring sandwiches, whereupon a whole welter of new emotions became suddenly available to them for study, such as `relief', `joy', `friskiness', `appetite', `satisfaction', and most important of all, the desire for `happiness'.

This was the biggest breakthrough of all.

Vast wodges of complex computer code governing robot behaviour in all possible contingencies could be replaced very simply. All that robots needed was the capacity to be either bored or happy, and a few conditions that needed to be satisfied in order to bring those states about. They would then work the rest out for themselves.</comment>


The Acqui-hire Scourge - <AUTHOR> http://pandodaily.com/2012/08/25/the-acqui-hire-scourge-whatever-happened-to-failure-in-silicon-valley/

<comment><USER2> What is with all this hate for acqui-hires lately? I was part of an acqui- hire, I've seen it from the other side. I worked my ass off with my fellow employees at a startup here in the valley. We never achieved the scale we needed to be successful in our industry, but we were acquired by the major player in that space.

It's been an incredible journey and all of us have grown our skills and are moving our careers forward working with the new company. It's been the best thing that could have happened to my career and all I hear on HN, and now in the media, is people bitching and moaning that these people shouldn't be acqui-hired and that all these acquisitions are bogus? Give me a break. It's business. That's all it is. This is capitalism working. Companies investing in human talent hoping to produce long term revenue and results. We built something together at our startup. It didn't work out but our new company liked what we built enough to bring us in and solve the same problem with more resources.

Downvote me, but I'm sick of hearing all this complaining about acquihires. Especially from journalists who's only job is to tell people their opinion...real tough work.

<comment><USER3> Individual cases might be largely benign, and definitely are to people who would otherwise just have lost their jobs. The criticism is for the trend, and what it implies.

It's bad for users/customers, who frequently lose access to products they had been using as they get shut down or EOL'd as part of the acquihire.

It's bad for entrepreneurs trying to build a real business since customers will have no reason to believe that this particular company isn't just being built to flip.

It's bad for the world since it means that talented people have an incentive to build a showcase rather than something truly useful.

I strongly believe that most acquihires are a bad deal for the buyer. Or at least to the shareholders, though maybe maximizing shareholder value isn't the main reason these deals get made. Even "proper" acquisitions are horrible deals most of the time, and there the buyer is actually getting something tangible rather than an ephemeral team. I do find it almost impossible to believe that this is actually a cost-effective recruiting method. I'm sure there are exceptions, however.

And while it's not possible to categorically say this is bad, I personally find the inequality that results from acquihires a bit distasteful. Two people can do the same work at the same company as well at grossly different compensation levels due to one getting hired there, while the other got a retention bonus as part of the acquihire. A justified reward for the extra risk of joining a startup? Maybe, but it just doesn't feel like that to me.

<comment><USER4> > It's bad for users/customers, who frequently lose access to products they > had been using as they get shut down or EOL'd as part of the acquihire.

Who can say how many of those products would have been shut down or EOL'd as part of a bankruptcy?

> It's bad for entrepreneurs trying to build a real business

As someone who recently sold his company in an acquihire, I resent your suggestion that I wasn't trying to build a real business.

> I strongly believe that most acquihires are a bad deal for the buyer.

My new boss & team seem to be ecstatic with the deal so far... maybe we're an outliner?

> I do find it almost impossible to believe that this is actually a cost- > effective recruiting method.

Do you have _any clue_ how much money the likes of the big tech companies spend on recruiting? I get the sense that you have no clue. Most acquihires are peanuts, compared to the aggregate cost of assembling a high caliber team by other means.

I won't comment on the particulars of our deal, suffice to say that our company's numbers were traveling "up and to the right" and that we had investor interest. We drank a lot of beer and lost a lot of sleep, but ultimately decided that the acquihire was the right move for everyone involved.

Never forget, startups are a Repeated Game: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repeated_game>

<comment><USER3> Yes, I can make a pretty educated guess about what a company like Google spends on recruiting. But that recruiting machine is capable of finding and hiring 5k top quality engineers in a year. It's not reasonable to compare the cost of a single 20 person acquihire to that.

I'm sure that your team made what is the right choice for you (congratulations!). But dglassan was asking about why there is hate for acquihires. To understand it, you need to look at it from the point of view of the other stakeholders, not from the point of view of those who benefitted from it.

That said, I'm a bit puzzled by the sense of resentment, since by your own description everything was going well for your company, and you decided to be acquihired instead. On the surface it seems like you (plural) weren't all that committed to the business after all.

<comment><USER4> > I'm a bit puzzled by the sense of resentment, since by your own description > everything was going well for your company, and you decided to be acquihired > instead.

I said "up and to the right" and I said "investor interest". I didn't say "hockey stick" or "feeding frenzy". Like I said, startups are a repeated game. Sometimes, you weigh the options, and decide that it's better to take a small win now to strengthen your position for the next iteration. The alternative is to risk burning yourself to the ground and wind up with nothing left for the next go.

> On the surface it seems like you (plural) weren't all that committed to the > business after all.

I've seen a number of acquihires from close range and been through one myself. It's an incredibly bittersweet experience. It's a stressful life event, that is usually at the end of a stressful period of lackluster customer or investor response, and after an intense period (read: years) of pouring your soul into a business. At various points throughout the process, four out of the five of us had severe stress-induced illnesses.

When the deal closed, we celebrated. We were more relieved than we were excited. Note that lawyers suck most of the fun out of this celebration by stretching the victory out over several weeks.

> you need to look at it from the point of view of the other stakeholders, not > from the point of view of those who benefitted from it

When we announced the shutdown our product, the overwhelming number of responses we got from users were disappointed, but congratulatory. Watching the social media and blogger buzz was thrilling. However, we got our fair share of _angry_ folks, including a number who wanted to make their hatred for us and our new corporate overlords as public as within their power. We tried to do the best we could by all of our users: super polished data export feature, split-second response times on email tech support, phone calls to coach people through the alternatives for their use cases, and ultimately sent them some free stuff from the acquiring company. We deeply cared about the other stakeholders who didn't benefit. Bittersweet doesn't even begin to cover it.

Fast forward 30 and 60 days to the final data purges and other legal bookkeeping. Some corporate lawyer sends you a cold email asking you to stick another stake in the corpse of your baby. Then the next afternoon, you spot somebody else categorically bashing talent acquisitions because they lack an understanding of what it's really like.

You made some claims about it being bad for everyone. The goal of my post was to point out that it's a far more complex and nuanced issue than you'd ever understand if you've never been through one, or at least watched one from the next pod of desks over in a coworker space.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I can't really get past characterizing pandodaily (and Sarah Lacey especially) as a thinly disguised mouthpiece for the Venture Capital industry. In this case, then, this can be summarized as "engineers are making too much money and have gotten too comfortable. And it's cutting into the (too much money, too comfortable) lifestyle that we, venture capitalists, enjoy.

<comment><USER6> That makes sense especially because the trend to acqui-hires is particularly insidious for investors, who essentially have to chalk those all up as failures (for many funds, simply breaking even on an investment can be, pro forma, a failure). The prospect of an acqui-hire obviously motivates entrepreneurs to tack towards offerings that will elicit acqui-hire interest. If you're an investor, you'd rather your portfolio companies swing for the fences and miss, rather than bunt.

<comment><USER7> > you'd rather your portfolio companies swing for the fences and miss, rather > than bunt.

That implies a correlation between what you're working on, and whether you'll get acquihired. From what I've seen, the aquihiring companies will offer on anyone who can get to 'hello world' of startups.

> the trend to acqui-hires is particularly insidious for investors

Obviously, if you already have investors and you take the acquihire, there should be a long conversation w/ the investors first. At this point in the company, the acquihire is a signal that the startup won't work, or new investors won't join.

Also, "I need my investors to make 2-3x" is a perfectly valid negotiation strategy. For angels, that's a decent return. (Of course, matters are different for VC). But the bar for taking an acquihire after a series A is much much higher.

<comment><USER6> I have seen the same thing: friends of mine at SFBA startups tell me they uniformly get offers from the earliest days of their companies. But I'm not sure what difference that makes.

"Institutional" investors on the boards of unproven companies want those companies to take risks. Everybody's a risk taker in the first 6-9 months, when the runway seems 3 startups long. Nobody is taking those early offers. But later on, the acqui-hire market might make it easy for operators to subtly stop thinking so much about the risks investors want them to take, and more on optimizing their outcome over the next 4-6 months.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> The talent market is going to stay frothy until engineer salaries adjust up to stable equilibrium. The market is doing the rational thing, when Acquihires are worth $1M/engineer with a 3-4 year lock-in, while 'normal' salary offers are $150k. If you're talented enough to make a startup that can get acquihired, you absolutely should do it. Best case is you build a profitable company, worst case is you get acquired.

Acquihires are also not the worst thing ever from an employer perspective. Big companies can easily spend $10M on failed initiatives that go nowhere. It's much easier to buy a startup that proves it can execute.

</comment><comment><USER8> I really can't get behind the premise of the article, there are too many parts that simply do not connect.

> _"Allowing entrepreneurs — and their investors — to save face by saying they > were "acquired" instead of failing is nice, but it's a bit like the pre- > schools where everyone wins a trophy for showing up."_

The notion that acquihires are failures is purely a moral one - last I checked pre-school trophies aren't worth several houses. I am fairly certain that acquihires who just took home $1-2M in comp will survive your browbeating about not swinging for the fences.

> _"Not enough people moving to the Valley or coming out of school want to > work at companies other people are starting, because it's so easy to start > their own."_

No, no it isn't. We are now at the point where SF/SV companies are offering $100K to fresh undergrads. For all that the industry has done to lower the barrier to entry for entrepreneurship, it is anything but trivial. A fresh grad shouldering a moderately scary debt load is _not_ going to trivially choose to found a startup over taking a highly-paid position and paring down the debt.

How easy does the author think it is to live in SF/SV, work on a startup full- time, fresh out of college, loan payments due, with no income stream? Does she think everyone's a trust fund baby that can afford the $2K SF apartment and just spend all day drinking Blue Bottle while twirling their startup ideas in their heads, right out of school?

<comment><USER9> To be fair, starting a company in your parents basement, relying on free food and expenses is a lot cheaper than moving to the valley, so don't neglect that path. A lot of startups look just like that.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> There is plenty of talent out there; companies just aren't willing to pay for it. When it's normal for developers to make $300k+ as bankers, hedge fund managers, and corporate attorneys do, then there's a talent shortage.

<comment><USER8> Hedge fund managers routinely generate 8-figures in profits per year for their employers. Likewise, high-power attorneys can bill literally _millions_ per year for their employers.

There are members of our industry who _do_ generate that kind of enormous value to their employers - I've met some of them - and they are all being paid in that ball park _already_ (i.e., $300K+).

Is there any real reason to believe that you should be paid as much as bankers and lawyers besides some thinly veiled form of contempt we tend to have for those jobs?

<comment><USER11> "Likewise, high-power attorneys can bill literally millions per year for their employers."

How are these attorneys charging? Hourly, even $1000/hour would be $2-3million per year billing full time. Are there other sorts of things that are getting charged for (at a profit) beyond time?

<comment><USER12> That's millions. Also, contingency fees in cases with cash settlements or judgements.

<comment><USER11> well, yes, it's millions, but attorneys who bill $1000/hour are pretty (extremely?) rare. Most attorneys I know are $150-$400/hour, which even considering 'full time' billing and top end, is < $1 million.

Contingency or percentage of settlements probably represent a larger portion of attorneys who are bringing in 'millions' for an employer.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I just want to say that I hate this _acqui-hire_ term and the recent adoption I have seen of it.</comment>


The fundamental problems with cross-platform frameworks - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/snapp-mobile/the-fundamental-problems-with-cross-platform-frameworks-cea57ac18fef <comment><USER2> It's surprising that this article fails to mention Electron, which is probably the best hope right now for true cross-platform development (iOS, Android, Win, Linux). It certainly seems to be working out for Spotify...</comment>


Why I'm not very excited about Go - <AUTHOR> http://lazypython.blogspot.com/2009/11/why-im-not-very-excited-about-go.html

<comment><USER2> _Constructs like concurrency should not be granted their own syntax, especially when they can be cleanly implemented using the other constructs of a language, look at the C library libtask as an example._

See the paper by Hans Boehm from PLDI 2005, "Threads Cannot Be Implemented as a Library": <http://www.hpl.hp.com/techreports/2004/HPL-2004-209.pdf>

The abstract explains the argument:

 _In many environments, multi-threaded code is written in a language that was originally designed without thread support (e.g. C), to which a library of threading primitives was subsequently added. There appears to be a general understanding that this is not the right approach. We provide specific arguments that a pure library approach, in which the compiler is designed independently of threading issues, cannot guarantee correctness of the resulting code.We first review why the approach almost works, and then examine some of the surprising behavior it may entail. We further illustrate that there are very simple cases in which a pure library-based approach seems incapable of expressing an efficient parallel algorithm.Our discussion takes place in the context of C with Pthreads, since it is commonly used, reasonably well specified, and does not attempt to ensure type-safety, which would entail even stronger constraints. The issues we raise are not specific to that context._

As far as I can tell, goroutines are similar to the block mechanisms and runtime system in Grand Central Dispatch, which is the same concept of concurrency in Cilk (<http://supertech.csail.mit.edu/cilk/> and the paper "The Implementation of the Cilk-5 Multithreaded Language" in particular: <http://supertech.csail.mit.edu/papers/cilk5.pdf>).

<comment><USER3> I'm not a big fan of Java, but one of its good points is that threads are part of the language and their behaviour is predicatable across implementations.

<comment><USER4> That isn't really the case. Java's threading can either be green threads or OS threads and there's no way as a programmer to know what the JVM implements on any given platform.

<comment><USER3> I stand corrected. Thanks.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> _The first major mistake was using a C derived syntax_

Personally, I'm not that interested in the particulars of indentation/block delimiting. I'm much more interested in _what_ one can do with blocks. This has much more bearing on the power of a programming language. If this is the 1st issue discussed, it's a poor portent for the rest of the article.

 _The next mistake is having a separate declaration and assignment operator._

Is this really so different from having a separate comparison and assignment operator? Or having 2 or 3 flavors of comparison?

 _The final mistake was not providing generics._

This is a work in progress.

 _C++'s templates is one of the things that make the language head and shoulders more useful for me than C...One of the things I've found makes me most productive in Python is that any time I need to perform a task I simply pick the data structure that does what I want_

I think you can have completely generic collections in Go if you give up type safety for it.

 _In terms of features which I believe are overhyped the most important one is the "goroutine"._

It's my understanding that one can use "goroutines" to implement your own rather powerful control structures. I'm not sure one really needs exceptions if you have goroutines, channels, and multiple return values. On the other hand, there are very compelling reasons for not having exceptions, given goroutines and channels.

 _Further, the handling of interfaces, though interesting, appears to be an implementation of C++0x's proposed concepts...I view this feature as something that is most useful in the context of generics_

Thsi makes it seem as if you view programming somewhat through the lens of generics. This treatment of Interfaces gives you one of the best things about "Duck Typing" languages, but in a statically typed language: "emergent" interfaces.

<comment><USER6> "It's my understanding that one can use "goroutines" to implement your own rather powerful control structures. I'm not sure one really needs exceptions if you have goroutines, channels, and multiple return values. On the other hand, there are very compelling reasons for not having exceptions, given goroutines and channels."

The "goroutines" are just threads. They're not useful for building control structures. Unless you have continuations/a reified control stack or program in a monadic style (which would essentially be CPS in this case), you cannot "fake" exceptions.

<comment><USER5> I'm not talking about "faking" exceptions. I'm talking about just not using them. Instead of "catching" exceptions down (up? In my debugger, it's down) the stack, you can just detect errors and send something down a channel. If you can conveniently send the current function's pointer, or better yet, the current context, you can do much of what you'd use exceptions for.

<comment><USER6> How do you detect errors? That's the question that the exception-handling part of exceptions is designed to solve. Having every function need a reference to a channel is really no different than error detection using return codes.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> He seems to be criticizing Go for not being Python. My understanding is that Go is designed with an obsessive need for speed and concurrency in mind. It's a little silly to compare it to Python without accounting for that.

<comment><USER8> _designed with ... speed and concurrency in mind_

I won't argue with the speed part, but I feel the concurrency support is a bit weak. Go routines, locks and channels don't seem enough to me for a language that was designed _with concurrency in mind_.

Hell, if thats all it takes, I would argue that Python 2.6, with its multiprocessing module, is designed for concurrency. Now, I do think that these features are an improvement over C and C++, but they seem to fall a bit short of more modern languages.

<comment><USER9> You should really try it. Erlang (or Scala with Actors) might be a better place to start to get a feel, but that's just me.

<comment><USER8> I should try what? Go?

Regarding concurrency, I've been playing a lot with Clojure recently, whose agents are similar to actors.

<comment><USER9> Yea sorry, I meant 'it' as in Go/Erlang/Scala-Actors style concurrency. If Clojure has something similar then that's cool too. I'm just saying it's pretty game-changing compared to stuff like libraries for Python (imo, of course).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Sometimes, criticizing a programming language sounds like saying Japanese sucks because it's not German.

I feel (never have written a line of code with it) Go is not particularly expressive - when you read someone else's code it's not obvious what is being done. What you see is how cleverly it's being done. The language has to hit the sweet spot between these two extremes - making the how obvious by hiding the what and showing the what by hiding the how. Python is in this sweet spot. Go doesn't seem so.

Perhaps this is a problem with Go programmers that will be ironed out eventually.

And as for concurrency having its own syntax, I am not sure. I would love (in Python) to have a concurrent list comprehension that spreads the work between as many processors as there are available. OTOH, it could be implemented as a method of generator expressions with semantics like "with this generator, do 10 values in advance".

Hmmm...

Too bad we are in a feature moratorium...

</comment><comment><USER11> When I read arguments that include syntax complaints, I really have a hard time taking anything else the author says seriously. It's like a car buyer critiquing in detail crash safety ratings, gas mileage, steering control, and then for no particular reason going on a rant about the optimal arrangement of cup-holders.

<comment><AUTHOR> If I spent 50%+ of my day reading cup-holders I'd agree with you. I _may_ have over extended that metaphor.

<comment><USER11> Right, well, I'm referring to the majority of syntax complaints which fall into "I hate braces!" or "Why do the brackets come first and not second?!" Really folks, it doesn't matter. Now, if you had syntax that will result in a massive decrease in efficiency I'm willing to listen. For example, the "function" keyword in Javascript or the lack of implicit typing during assignment in Java are worth talking about, but really at the end of the day they are the least of your problems when considering the limitations of a language.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I honestly don't get what the point of Go is. Why not D? Why not Modula3? There is nothing at all compelling in the feature set. Just look at the crap they put in for the built-in concurrency primitives:

<http://golang.org/doc/go_mem.html>

So we're back to CSP. Welcome to the 1960s.

<comment><USER9> I'm not sure how 'crap' comes to mind just _looking_ at the concurrency primitives. You seem to have something against `<`s and `-`s?

The 'point' of Go is to be a 'expressive, concurrent, garbage-collected' systems language. It's very early in it's lifecycle and of course immature at the moment... Let's just wait and see what happens in stead of writing it off, shall we?

<comment><USER6> Umm, yeah, I've been researching and programming concurrent systems for some time now. CSP is not a good way of doing that.

Go is not very early in its lifecycle. Just look at the feature set - it's the very direct continuation of the work Pike and Thompson were doing on Plan9.

<comment><USER9> _CSP is not a good way of doing that._

Someone should tell Ericsson!

 _...plan9..._

Well... I don't know, I'd consider a language started around the mid nineties pretty early in it's life-cycle. But it's pretty clear to me that which it may be a 'continuation' it's definitely not just 'rebranded'. This is a new project and there's tons of talk all over the place about how "we're working on that". The garbage collector isn't even done yet!

<comment><USER6> Erlang is based on message passing ala Actors. Very different things.

Take a look at this if you don't believe that their approach hasn't changed: <http://swtch.com/~rsc/thread/></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>