Strangest Programming Language Feature? - <AUTHOR> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1995113/strangest-language-feature/2002154#2002154 <comment><USER2> No mention of "ALTER" ([http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COBOL#Self- modifying_code](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COBOL#Self-modifying_code)) on the first page?

Self-modifying code was fairly common at the time COBOL was developed, but incorporating it in a high-level business language was, IMO, a very weird decision.

I also miss call by name ([http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_or_boy_test](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_or_boy_test)) on the first page.

In general, one should read the Intercal ([http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/INTERCAL](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/INTERCAL)) paper, and figure out from which language each of its features came.

<comment><USER3> Your mentioning "ALTER" made me think about a dialect of BASIC that I once used (STARDOS BASIC on a "Micro V" computer, back in the late 1980s). This BASIC dialect had an "XEQ" function that would pass a string to the tokenizer and execute it as an immediate-mode command. If you started the string with a line number you could create self-modifying BASIC code. It was dizzying to my young mind.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Smalltalk's "become" is a pretty interesting one... [http://gbracha.blogspot.it/2009/07/miracle-of- become.html](http://gbracha.blogspot.it/2009/07/miracle-of-become.html)

<comment><USER5> Smalltalk also is rather famous for giving developers enough freedom to more or less destroy the environment with the terrifying looking command "Smalltalk := nil"

<comment><USER6> I once crashed Squeak by making true := false. It was an interesting experience.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> It logically follows from how arrays in C works, so I don't really know if it qualifies for weird/suprising, but the old _array[i]_ / _i[array]_ thing is fun to show to people who haven't seen it before.

The most amusingly weird thing I can think of is INTERCAL's COMEFROM: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COMEFROM](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COMEFROM)

<comment><USER8> Can you explain your _array[i] / i[array]_ reference? I can't find it on Google.

<comment><USER9>
      By definition, the subscript operator [] is interpreted in such a
      way that ''E1[E2]'' is identical to ''*((E1) + (E2))''.  Because
      of the conversion rules which apply to +, if E1 is an array and
      E2 an integer, then E1[E2] refers to the E2th member of E1.
      Therefore, despite its asymmetric appearance, subscripting is a
      commutative operation.¹

¹ Dennis M Ritchie, _C Reference Manual_ , 1975 [http://cm.bell- labs.com/cm/cs/who/dmr/cman.pdf](http://cm.bell- labs.com/cm/cs/who/dmr/cman.pdf) (A revised version of this became Appendix A to K&R.)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> /me drops the MUMPS reference manual on the table

That whole language is one long-running WTF.

<comment><USER11> This line in MUMPS is not only valid, it also actually does something potentially useful:

        s:foo'="" foo(foo)=foo

It's actually a bit tricky to explain what it does. Everything in MUMPS is effectively a tree. Each tree has a value in the "root node" and you can set it like this:

        set foo="hello"

You can also put data deeper into the tree:

        set foo("fizz")="buzz"

So if something is passed to you and you want to know if you can treat it as a string, you test to see if it's a null string:

        if foo'="" do [something]

('= means !=)

Two more features: 1) Almost every directive can be reduced to one letter. 2) If I want to quit based on a condition, I can do either if condition quit or quit:condition

So the line above is more legibly written as

        if foo'=""  set foo(foo)=foo

So if foo="bar", it's equivalent to:

        set foo("bar")="bar"

<comment><USER12> It is amazing that MUMPS will be 50 years old in 2 years -- and it still alive and kicking.

An emergency MUMPS project is still my highest billing project (per hour) ever.

<comment><USER13> What was the rate?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Someone's already mentioned COBOL's ALTER X TO PROCEED TO Y, so I'll mention a programming language called COMAL. A friend with a C64 showed it to me, and it was very respectable for its time and the available resources; reminded me of BASIC09.

Apparently it was written by someone from Denmark, and there were commands to switch back and forth between English and Danish. I don't remember whether it was just for error messages or for those and for the language keywords as well; I want to say the latter.

</comment><comment> mck- In CoffeeScript I discovered the other day that:

      0 <= "" <= 0   # True
      "" is 0        # False

<comment><USER15> I guess that is because coffeescript's <= operator is just javascript's <= operator, which does implicit type conversion.

but coffeescript's "is", aka ==, aka === in javascript, doesn't.

[https://developer.mozilla.org/en- US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Refe...](https://developer.mozilla.org/en- US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Operators/Comparison_Operators)

having "==" be semantically quite different to "<=" doesn't seem a particularly nice choice of notation.

arguably coffeescript has made things worse in this case compared to plain javascript, where you're probably not going to expect === to behave similarly to <=.

not obvious how you'd improve this to make it consistent, without say redefining how "==" and "<=" work to make them raise type errors or evaluate to something undefined if the types of the arguments don't match.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> >GOD is REAL, unless declared INTEGER.

I'm stealing the hell out of this.

</comment><comment><USER17> : 2 3 ;

... redefines the constant 2 as 3. FORTH. Go figure :-)

<comment><USER18> In Forth, the following are fairly common definitions in the core:

        0 CONSTANT 0
        1 CONSTANT 1
        -1 CONSTANT -1

In an Algolian language like C++ or Java, if the syntax were legal, these would be:

        const 0 = 0;
        const 1 = 1;
        const -1 = -1;

The reason for this is to do with the interpreter. How the Forth interpreter works is very simple:

1\. Read one word, where "word" is literally defined as "a sequence of non- space characters delimited by spaces". Some standard words include DUP 2DROP 1+ - . " and :

2\. Attempt to find the word in the dictionary. If found, execute it.

3\. If it's not found, attempt to interpret it as a number. If that works, push the number on the stack.

4\. If neither 2 nor 3 succeed, emit an error message.

So the reason for defining a constant named "0" is to save time: it's quicker to interpret the word "0" if it's in the dictionary; otherwise you have to search the whole dictionary and then do a text-to-number conversion, which takes too long.

So really it does make sense.

<comment><USER2> It is about space, not time. What you describe happens interactively. At that time, performance does not matter much, after compiling, it does.

At compilation time (the word : is one of the ways to switch the system to compilation mode), Forth doesn't execute words and numbers if finds, but it adds their addresses (in some form, depending on the implementation) to the generated code. When running the code later, the runtime simply fetches each of these function addresses and 'calls' them (that's what makes Forth systems fast without the need for any convoluted compiler technology. Depending on the implementation, that 'call' may be an actual call in the CPU, but it typically is just another 'grab the addresses found there in sequence and execute them' and yes, it can't be turtles all the way down, but Forth gets awfully close)

Now, the question is: how do you compile "push this constant on the stack"? Forth does it by compiling the word called LITERAL, followed by the constant.

So, compiling a function called 0 or 1 adds a function address to the compiler output, but compiling a literal constant adds the address of the function called LITERAL and that constant. For constants used more than a few (where the exact limit depends on he particular Forth implementation) times, the extra space needed for that function gets more than compensated by the gain. In typical Forth systems, -1, 0, 1, and 2 already are space savers before the user types his first character. That's why they are predefined. If you use another constant often, you can easily define it. Many Forth systems even have a function called CONSTANT for it, but you can define it yourself, if it is absent.

For those wondering how the system knows that that constant it compiled isn't the address of a function to call: it doesn't. Instead, the function called LITERAL, when called, hooks into the runtime, uses the 'current instruction pointer' to read the value to push on he stack, and then increases that pointer to point past the constant. When LITERAL returns, the runtime just reads what it thinks is the next pointer and calls it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> INRAC, the langauge RACTER ([http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racter](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racter)) has the most bizarre flow control I've ever seen in any computer language, ever. It can best be described as "a random, pattern matched GOTO/GOSUB" which is the most succinct description I can come up with.

I have a blog entry about it ([http://boston.conman.org/2008/06/18.2](http://boston.conman.org/2008/06/18.2)) but in short, each line of an INRAC program (unless it ends with a '#' mark in which case execution continues to the next line) is a subroutine, each with a label. The label does not need be unique, but when you "call" a subroutine, INRAC will just pick one line with that label at random to execute. The pattern matching comes in because you can select the label with wildcard characters (which just picks a line that matches the pattern at random).

There isn't much about the language on the Internet. In fact, the _only_ other page aside from my blog entry (which I wrote as I went through the existing source code I found for Racter) is the Racter FAQ ([https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/rec.arts.int- fiction...](https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/rec.arts.int- fiction/RTV5CUkJ8fs)) which has a few inaccuracies (or perhaps was looking at a version of the code before processing).

</comment><comment><USER20> C++ has all sorts of fun stuff. One example is std::vector<bool>, which is not implemented as a simple array of booleans like every other std::vector, but instead it is a bitmap. Afaik this behavior is required by standard. One fun side-effect is that you can't take the address of individual elements of the vector.

Compare these two:

[http://ideone.com/qC9yOp](http://ideone.com/qC9yOp)

[http://ideone.com/jF4krp](http://ideone.com/jF4krp)

</comment><comment><USER21> I'm the only person thinking of the way MATLAB passes everything by value, including compound objects and structs?

</comment><comment><USER22> Snobol... where patterns are first class constructs, and every line can end with a GOTO. That definitely lets you write some very, er, compact code. But it was superb to program in.

And how about the assigned GOTO in older versions of Fortran? "GOTO N" where N is an integer variable whose value will be known at runtime.

Happy days...

<comment><USER23> I'm sure you'll be pleased to find that gcc has kept the assigned goto alive as a c extension.

        #include <stdio.h>

        int main( int argc, char ** argv ){

          void * p = && lol ;

         bounce:
          goto *p ;

         lol:
          printf("lol %p\n", p);
          p = && wtf;
          goto bounce;

         wtf:
          printf("wtf %p\n", p);
          p = && lol;
          goto bounce;

        }

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> Fun fact, this is also the reason why 'i' is commonly used as a name for the loop counter variable.

<comment><USER16> Source?

<comment><USER24> I mean google around. It's not "it's definitely from Fortran" more like "it has been repeatedly suggested that...".

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> The control structures in Icon are not quite what you would expect and qualify as strange: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Icon_(programming_language)](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Icon_\(programming_language\))

<comment><USER26> I don't see what you mean; could you spell it out?

<comment><USER25> I thought the wikipedia article could explain it better than I, but here are some more references:

[http://blogs.kde.org/2006/10/21/ralph-griswold-icon- language...](http://blogs.kde.org/2006/10/21/ralph-griswold-icon-language- designer-passes-away)

[http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=104659](http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=104659)

[http://research.microsoft.com/pubs/69724/tr-99-64.ps](http://research.microsoft.com/pubs/69724/tr-99-64.ps)

look at Goal-directed evaluation of icon

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> The COBOL MOVE-CORRESPONDING verb. I'm not going to try to explain exactly how it works here, but imagine, if you will, copying the contents of one table to another table with a different column structure, but sort of the same names.

<comment><USER28> This is one of the COBOL features that makes a lot more sense if you think of COBOL as SQL for tape drives than as something that is trying to be, say, Pascal or Ada and failing. (Along with, say, pretty much the entire DATA DIVISION...)

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> C switch fallthrough. I know it's old and everybody's used to it and I get why it's there, but it's freaking weird. I love c#'s response that you must use goto <case> instead to make fallthrough explicit.

</comment><comment> dj-wonk I _heart_ what should be called a "truth injection attack" in Python: [http://stackoverflow.com/a/2021553/109618](http://stackoverflow.com/a/2021553/109618)

<comment><USER30> You can do a similar thing with Java, although it's a bit harder... [http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3301635/change-private- st...](http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3301635/change-private-static-final- field-using-java-reflection)

I think you can do something like this in C# too (not surprisingly).

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> Duff's device is certainly a very strange construct.

[http://www.lysator.liu.se/c/duffs-device.html#duffs- device](http://www.lysator.liu.se/c/duffs-device.html#duffs-device)

</comment><comment><USER32> This question is a beautiful invitation for everyone to defend their favorite languages! :)

</comment><comment><USER29> in vb.net: off-by-one array sizes so people who do one-based arrays don't get hurt. Also, two sets of boolean operators, the simpler ones don't short- circuit (or vs orelse, and vs andalso).

</comment><comment><USER33> Line numbers in BASIC

<comment><USER34> It kinda made sense, because there wasn't anything fancy like Notepad. If you wanted to read some section, you had to specify the range. If you wanted to change a line, you overwrote it by using the same line number. If you wanted to insert a line, you had to pick a line number which lies between those other two line numbers. That's why you used an increment of 10 (or whatever) instead of 1.

</comment></comment><comment><USER35> For…else in python.

Weird. or dutch.

<comment><USER36> Cool!

</comment></comment><comment><USER37> "not really a question. closed."

<comment><USER9> Here is a route to interesting reading (or HN karma, if you're into that):

[https://www.google.com/search?q="This+question+exists+becaus...](https://www.google.com/search?q="This+question+exists+because+it+has+historical+significance"++site%3Astackoverflow.com+-meta.stackoverflow.com)

</comment></comment><comment><USER38> Javascript's DOM</comment>


How to see everything you've Googled while logged in - <AUTHOR> http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2015/04/20/how-to-see-everything-youve-ever-googled-if-youre-so-brave/

<comment><USER2> What happens when you disable the search history?

A) Google no longer stores your search history.

B) Google no longer lets you see or download your search history.

<comment><USER3> Those are not the only options. It could be

C) Google stores search history, but it is not associated with your Google ID.

<comment><USER4> ...but it is associated with your IP address and Browser's USER_AGENT that google likely stores.

<comment><USER5> And also associated with your probably-unique 150 degree of freedom browser fingerprint.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Why does Google need to keep all of this data, when they could just classify (cluster) people based on their searches, and keep only that information? That approach would anonymize the data to a great extent.

EDIT: In fact, perhaps users should be enabled to specify the amount of dimensions in the "cluster space" that Google is permitted to store.

Or, alternatively, specify the "uniqueness" of the data. So, for example, if I specify that I want my data to be 100% unique, Google will retain all of my information. But if I specify that I want my data to be 1% unique, Google will only remember that I'm a programmer that likes Japanese movies (and not the details, such as specific programming languages I use and specific movies I watch).

In fact, this could be enforced by allowing Google to only store N bits of information about me, where N is a user-defined constant.

And this would not only be useful from the viewpoint of privacy, but also from the perspective of not getting trapped in a filter bubble. [1]

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

<comment><USER7> > Why does Google need to keep all of this data, when they could just classify > (cluster) people based on their searches, and keep only that information?

That assumes you can take a pre-generated cluster and add information to it without having to recompute with all the original information.

It also assumes there's nothing you can do with personal search histories to either target adverts more effectively or add features, which would absolutely amaze me.

<comment><USER6> Good point. Please see my note about the uniqueness of the data that I just added to my comment.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> This is why I (probably naively) often Google things in incognito mode.

<comment><USER9> Incognito from an IP that you have associated with one or more google accounts?

<comment><USER8> Hence 'naively'.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> All non-ASCII characters are missing from the JSON dump.

</comment><comment><USER11> I disabled web search history on my account a while ago, but they have re- enabled without notifying me.

<comment><USER12> You might have accidentally clicked on one of the nag screens Google throws at you (in Google Now for example). I turned my search history off a long time ago and it's still disabled.

<comment><USER9> I don't click 'accidentally' on anything and the same thing has happened to me.

<comment><USER13> "I don't click 'accidentally' on anything" number one thing users say to every person who works in IT.

<comment><USER9> Sure. But I'm _very_ privacy conscious and am _very_ sure that I did not give google permission to harvest my queries. Not that I have any illusion that changing that setting does anything concrete but I'm kind of surprised to see that the setting did not stay in its 'do not log' position. There are accidental clicks on ads and then there are accidental clicks on privacy violating features like these and since it's down a few menu options clicking it by accident is just about impossible.

<comment><USER13> The point I believe the person above is making is that it isn't a few menus deep. They apparently (I've never seen it) use some dark ui patterns and pop up a little box "Do you want to turn search history on?" randomly. Unless someone has eidetic memory they can't really claim they haven't clicked something like that ever.

<comment><USER9> I don't have an android phone, don't use other products than 'search', 'maps' and 'docs', if there are 'dark pattern' 'do you want to turn your search history on' in those products that randomly pop up to trap unsuspecting users then I will discount those as not being valid. One thing I'm sure of: I never _consciously_ re-enabled my search history, if google wishes to swindle people that's entirely their problem but I highly doubt that such practices are ethical, assuming they are legal.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Well I think this is interesting when I try to turn off sharing my searches with Google.

> Please note that even when this setting is paused, Google may still use > searches you make within active sessions in order to improve the quality of > your search results.

</comment><comment><USER15> The curiosity in me wishes I didn't have search history disabled.

<comment><USER16> Don't worry - it's not THAT great. Mine went back to 2007, and taking a quick look it didn't really remind me of anything.

Maybe I should disable it...

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> I google things using Bing. How can I get this to work?

</comment><comment><USER18> And this is why I keep Google accounts quarantined in a separate browser (Safari), and never ever log in using Firefox.

</comment><comment><USER9> What really bugs me is that I switched this off in the past and now find that it is back on again!</comment>


I Feel Naked - <AUTHOR> https://www.ifeelnaked.org/ <comment><USER2> Meta, but a question I ponder often:

These turn key totalitarian infrastructures have broad bipartisan support, especially among old hat insider politicians like Clinton and Feinstein.

What is the motivation? Is it just the typical thing bureaucracies do to try to grow their size and power? Or is there a capital-R Reason there is such a global push to put these things into place.

Do the inside players at the top know something?

I've toyed around with two speculations. One is that there is concern over natural resource depletion leading to serious economic collapse in the mid- term future, and these systems are there to deal with the mass unrest of a "permanent recession." Another is that present day oligarchs simply know their history. Major transformations in communication tend to be followed by serious social upheaval and a changing of the guard. The printing press more or less indirectly beheaded quite a few European royals.

Any other speculations? Informed ones would be particularly interesting.

<comment><USER3> > Do the inside players at the top know something?

Maybe it's the other way round: maybe the people doing the surveillance know something about the inside players?

<comment><USER4> That's excuse making. The Clinton's have had plenty of misdeeds exposed, they still have millions of dollars and no one cares. They aren't being cowed to silence by the NSA.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I'm not sure what this is supposed to do. You're showing a congress a list of people who disapprove of privacy violations. Then what? Congress knows people disapprove and they don't seem to care.

I dislike slacktivism like this. I feel that it's damaging because it wastes attention and effort that could be put to good use. Instead of taking a photo of yourself and writing a hashtag, become an informed and educated voter who actually votes, votes for people who represent the majority of your beliefs (don't be a single issue voter), and votes for someone who has a track record of governing as they promised they would. Encourage others to do the same. It's literally the only thing that will fix these problems.

<comment><USER6> > I dislike slacktivism like this. I feel that it's damaging because it wastes > attention and effort that could be put to good use.

I don't think it's a waste of attention. This is also something you should share after you've done -- the hope is to raise awareness. In addition, they want to put faces to the constituents who are against privacy violations. Ethos is a valid appeal.

"Slacktivism" is a word that devalues small contributions on the part of constituents who might otherwise do nothing to express their voice. Behind every group of "slacktivists" is a passionate group whose goal is to make unheard voices apparent. To decry "slacktivisism" is to decry the work of those people, to say it doesn't matter when in reality it has a measurable effect. E.g online activism against SOPA/PIPA, Aaron's Law, these are outgrowths.

> become an informed and educated voter who actually votes... Encourage others > to do the same. It's literally the only thing that will fix these problems.

The people running these campaigns are doing exactly that, encouraging people to vote if they can. Barring that, signing petitions is the next best thing. Anecdotally I've become better informed because of projects like these, and in doing so become a better voter.

<comment><USER5> The issue is not a lack of awareness. The vast majority of the voting-capable population has heard, to at least some extent, that the NSA/others are surveilling communications. The issue is either they don't care, they agree with the surveillance, or they are too lazy to become informed and vote to change it.

There is literally nothing on this site about being involved in voting or the politicians supporting or fighting this type of activity. If they at the very least gave visitors some way to continue their participation and become informed, I would be fine with it. Right now it's just attention for the sake of attention. It needs to be channeled into something useful.

<comment><USER4> The site is a showcase for the organizer to get attention to win a job at a big tech company. See also: the online self-appointed leaders of Occupy who went to work for Google on adtech.

<comment><USER6> This isn't true, and is an incredibly cynical sentiment.

[https://www.fightforthefuture.org/aboutus](https://www.fightforthefuture.org/aboutus)

> See also: the online self-appointed leaders of Occupy who went to work for > Google on adtech.

I don't know about the veracity of that but it doesn't seem relevant. Some people care / try to effect social change. These people are some of them. This is one of the main groups that helped bring SOPA / PIPA to light (see: Aaron Swartz)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Who is behind this? Is it the EFF? Because it should be the EFF. I gave money to them years ago to do exactly this kind of lobbying, but they haven't been doing much that I can see-- except posting a lot of blog articles. The EFF seems to have gone the way of greenpeace. (I once gave greenpeace a bit of money and then they spent 10 times that hounding me over the next 5 years for more.)

<comment><USER8> They've sued the NSA, and the case has been running until this year (not sure if it's finally dead, though): [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewel_v._NSA](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewel_v._NSA)

EDIT: They also sued the DEA regarding mass surveillance just last month: [https://www.eff.org/press/releases/human-rights-watch- sues-d...](https://www.eff.org/press/releases/human-rights-watch-sues-dea- over-bulk-collection-americans-telephone-records)

They also develop the HTTPS-Everywhere addon and file Amicus briefs on other court cases (e.g. Raynor v. State of Maryland).

See [https://www.eff.org/issues/privacy](https://www.eff.org/issues/privacy)

<comment><USER9> > They've sued the NSA, and the case has been running until this year (not > sure if it's finally dead, though): > [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewel_v._NSA](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewel_v._NSA)

It's worth mentioning that the EFF sued the NSA _long before_ the Snowden leaks were revealed. They've been fighting this fight far longer than most people realized just how important it was.

They've also been involved in suits against the NSA after the Snowden leaks as well, but it's not even like they just jumped on the bandwagon. They've been committed to this fight for ages.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> That's a truly creative and bold effort on the issue of everyone's right to the personal privacy. Applause!</comment>


Please help find Filip Novonty, he's hitchhiking in Japan, last seen April 20th - <AUTHOR>

Please help us find our friend Filip Novotny!
He's from Czech Republic, he is on a hitchhiking trip, see his Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/takemeeast<p>When he last contacted his friends he was somewhere around the Tokyo university of arts.
If you have any information or have seen him, please contact Orianne at email@example.com
Thank you very much!
http://www.reddit.com/r/japan/comments/23v0sb/please_help_find_my_friend_filip_novonty_hes/
http://www.reddit.com/r/Tokyo/comments/23uzmj/please_help_find_my_friend_filip_novonty_hes/ <comment><USER2> Like the other guy said on reddit. He's hitch-hiking. Relax, he probably just hit somewhere on the country side without wifi.

<comment><USER3> Actually, per the Facebook page, he's been arrested in Tokyo.</comment></comment>


TSA cannot get PDF redaction right. - <AUTHOR> http://cryptome.org/0001/tsa-ssi-02.htm

<comment><USER2> They should demand that airplanes flying to the US be painted entirely black. That way the terrorists won't be able to see them and blow them up.

<comment><USER3> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paint_thinner>

Foiled again!

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> One month ago; <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=980465>

<comment><USER4> Actually, I think it's just déjà vu plus the TSA never learns: The date on this is December 31!

<comment><USER5> yeah, it's a different document.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> What is the right way to do PDF redaction?

<comment><USER7> I suppose one way would be to use an older "portable document" format (aka plain-text) and replace the sensitive text with strings of "x" characters.</comment></comment>


How to Read a Book - <AUTHOR> http://www.farnamstreetblog.com/how-to-read-a-book/

<comment><AUTHOR> I highly recommend reading this book, of the same title: [http://www.amazon.com/How-Read-Book-Intelligent- Touchstone/d...](http://www.amazon.com/How-Read-Book-Intelligent- Touchstone/dp/0671212095)

It expounds on what is mentioned in the blog post, and it is something I really wish I had truly grasped when I was in college, but has helped immensely since then.</comment>


'Apple CEO may have six weeks to live' - The Times of India - <AUTHOR> http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/7514447.cms?prtpage=1 <comment><USER2> Related:

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2228842>

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2228854>

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2230042>

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2230361>

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2230702>

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2231730>

</comment><comment><USER3> Rumours like this benefit no-one especially Steve Jobs and his family.

</comment><comment><USER4> If so, then he has the blood of another potential transplant patient on his hands.</comment>


Ask HN: best platform for selling windows desktop software - <AUTHOR>

I'm looking to sell a $15 windows app and I'm looking for a platform to handle the eCommerce and digital delivery side of things.<p>FastSpring ( http://www.fastspring.com/ ) looks pretty good. I was wondering if anyone had experience using them or if there  other platforms I should investigate. <comment><USER2> Well what is the app?

<comment><AUTHOR> It is a "soundboard" app targeting pen & paper role players. Makes it easy for a DM to control mood music and SFX.

Probably useful for podcasters and theater shows too. Similar to this: [http://www.ambrosiasw.com/utilities/soundboard- mac/](http://www.ambrosiasw.com/utilities/soundboard-mac/)

Also plan on selling "packs" of themed music and SFX.

<comment><USER2> [https://www.braintreepayments.com/](https://www.braintreepayments.com/)

There are a bunch of alternatives

as for eCommerce that might be a little specific so I would do as much research as possible.

Obviously don't use paypal

<comment><AUTHOR> I'll check it out... curious about not using PayPal... I know it has an awful rep but do you have a personal horror story?

<comment><USER2> Yea my aunt was running an Ebay business selling vintage clothes/ art/ jewelry (I was helping her out and putting in a lot of hours)

4 bad reviews from the same person within an hour locked her paypal account and all the money inside for 6+ months. She wasn't allowed to sell more than 10 items a month when she was averaging 100+ items a month. It was feeding her and her kids. Weeks went by and she didn't have any money so she went on food stamps for those 6+ months. Paypal simply didn't give a fuck and after 1 email where she asked very nicely why she couldn't sell more than 10 items they locked her account indefinitely. 2 years later she still doesn't have the money and she isn't allowed to sell under any other ebay usernames.

Well if that didn't happen she wouldn't have found her new job making triple the money at an actual store front.

Besides that story I would recommend using something like braintree in order to make them stronger and grow.

Paypal can suck my dick :)

<comment><AUTHOR> Sheesh that sux.

Unfortunately [https://www.braintreepayments.com/](https://www.braintreepayments.com/) is not world wide yet (I'm in New Zealand) but I will keep an eye on them.

<comment><USER2> [http://www.payoneer.com/](http://www.payoneer.com/)

[https://www.payza.com/](https://www.payza.com/)

[https://www.skrill.com/en/](https://www.skrill.com/en/)

Apparently payza is global</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


IE 10 on Windows 7: What's the Deal? - <AUTHOR> http://www.pingzine.com/ie-10-on-windows-7-whats-the-deal-22646/

<comment><USER2> IE10 to me is like Bing, it almost doesn't matter what they do with it, the train has left the station. And as a web developer' even though they're catching up, don't get me started about it...</comment>


Wikimedia v. NSA: Wikimedia Foundation files suit against NSA - <AUTHOR> https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/03/10/wikimedia-v-nsa/ <comment><USER2> I have some sympathy for our fellow hackers who work as contractors or in big companies, many of them with security clearance. Database engineers, software developers, data experts - the five eyes intelligence agencies directly and indirectly fund many of you readers of HN.

They might be becoming increasingly disillusioned with their chosen life and/or unable to change course. Perhaps the money is too good, perhaps their contracts too restrictive. They might have inside knowledge and believe that the NSA is in the right, but they would not be able to voice that belief to us, their friends and colleagues. Unable or unwilling to change course if they believe their country is in the wrong and unable or unwilling to speak up in defence if they think it is in the right. I'd certainly like to talk (in private) to those I knew who at the start of the Snowden affair openly said that he was a traitor and hear what they now think.

<comment><USER3> I have no problem voicing my beliefs publicly. I'm always more than willing to explain the policies of the NSA, and happy to denounce the actions of Edward Snowden. I don't think he was a traitor, by definition, but what he did was wrong. It isn't necessary to divulge confidential information, the situation is pretty clear. I don't see any point in re-litigating the whole thing on this particular thread though, it would be off topic.

I just wanted to say that people who support the NSA aren't hiding in fear. Only a small minority of people who work for the government, directly or as contractors, are ashamed of their employer or having a crisis of conscience. In general, nothing polarizes people and brings them together like an external threat. If everyone is shouting that you're bad, the most basic human instinct is to shout back even louder.

This whole thing has been a delight for management in the intelligence services. Some employees and contractors are much more motivated now. And many of those who support Snowden are still indifferent about the issues that he raised. It's either "go team!" or "eh, a job's a job." Only a minority are racked with self-doubt because of what's being posted about their employer on hackernews and reddit. Most will gladly tell you what they think, openly or in private, with no fear of criticism or backlash.

<comment><USER4> > I just wanted to say that people who support the NSA aren't hiding in fear.

Unfortunately, that doesn't appear to be backed by evidence. Every single lawsuit challenging mass surveillance has been resisted by the Executive on the basis of state secrets and lack of standing. The Executive is using a judicial tactic to avoid having to answer the question of whether these programs are constitutional. When that question is asked, it usually ends in the programs being illegal[1][2][3].

So if you're not afraid, would you mind answering some questions? One of the biggest problems I have right now is that your side simply stonewalls or deflects core questions thrown by my side. I would love to be convinced that what you're doing is right.

1) How are broad secret court[4] and non-court[5] orders constitutional? The 4th Amendment appears to only allow targeted warrants, so from where does the government draw this broad surveillance power? So far, the only legal defense been invoking the state secrets privilege[6], which prevents the core question from being addressed.

2) How is the DEA's parallel construction program[7] constitutional? This seems as if the DEA is not allowing a fair trail by withholding evidence from the defendant.

3) If you think the above are unconstitutional, why should they be allowed to exist? How can the rule of law persist with unclear or secret exceptions? Are there things that are more important than the rule of law? What possible impacts does this prioritization have?

I thought we should strive to live under a rule-of-law, and I feel like the Executive and their workers (including you) don't mind having a rule-of-man system. Please convince me otherwise.

[1]: [http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/12/cops-illegally- na...](http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/12/cops-illegally-nailed- webcam-to-utility-pole-for-6-weeks-to-spy-on-house/)

[2]: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyllo_v._United_States](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyllo_v._United_States)

[3]: [http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/07/world/europe/electronic- su...](http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/07/world/europe/electronic-surveillance- by-spy-agencies-was-illegal-british-court-says.html)

[4]: [https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/06/what-we-need-to- know-a...](https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/06/what-we-need-to-know-about- prism)

[5]: [https://www.eff.org/issues/national-security- letters](https://www.eff.org/issues/national-security-letters)

[6]: [https://www.eff.org/nsa-spying/state-secrets- privilege](https://www.eff.org/nsa-spying/state-secrets-privilege)

[7]: [https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/08/dea-and-nsa-team- intel...](https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/08/dea-and-nsa-team-intelligence- laundering)

<comment><USER5> I think you're focusing on the wrong thing. It doesn't really matter if it's legal or constitutional, because if it's not then they'll change the laws or reinterpret them in a new way or write a new Patriot Act.

What we should focus on is whether a government should be allowed to operate in secrecy, without any public oversight or knowledge, and whether the government can be morally justified in surveilling citizens without probable cause.

<comment><USER6> It matters to me, at least, that the law be followed as written. Rule by whim and secret dictate does not seem like a good system of government.

<comment><USER7> What if the law says that secret courts can decide using secret proceedings?

<comment><USER8> _> What if the law says that secret courts can decide using secret proceedings?_

Then at least it's on the books as a choice our society has made. OP's issue is there's currently no clear legal chain of certain programs back to a democratic decision.

<comment><USER7> The FISA courts have been authorized by an Act of Congress. That's what the checks and balances are for, though, and the courts can overturn it.

I wonder if the system will stand uo though. The addiction to bigbdata is strong once tasted, and spy agencies actually enjoy getting away with stuff.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> The EFF is surprisingly absent from this coalition. The other organizations listed as participating are:

The National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International USA, Pen American Center, Global Fund for Women, The Nation Magazine, The Rutherford Institute, and Washington Office on Latin America.

From: [https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/03/10/wikimedia-v- nsa/#cite_...](https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/03/10/wikimedia-v- nsa/#cite_note-2)

<comment><USER10> I wonder why they are not part of it? Maybe they are prepping to do something on their own.

I'd like to see the NSA under fire from many opponents rather than just one.

<comment><USER11> > Maybe they are prepping to do something on their own.

As listed above, it's probably because they're already in the middle of their own[0] (assuming that they will appeal, which I'd imagine is almost certain assuming they can fund it).

The EFF has been fighting this battle long before the Snowden revelations, so it's certainly not for lack of interest that they're not a claimant in the Wikimedia case.

[0] [https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/02/jewel-v-nsa-making- sen...](https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/02/jewel-v-nsa-making-sense- disappointing-decision-over-mass-surveillance)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I am a Wikipedian, a contributor of free content to Wikipedia. (I contribute in Chinese, in German, and in some other languages too.) I read the Wikimedia Foundation blog kindly submitted here by an early Wikipedian and read all the comments here posted before mine before writing this reply. In the last two weeks, I've renewed acquaintance with quite a few local Wikipedians at two Wikipedia Edit-a-Thons that occurred in my town.

I see the Wikimedia Foundation has a rationale for its suit based partly on United States law. It writes, "Our aim in filing this suit is to end this mass surveillance program in order to protect the rights of our users around the world." Because I edit Wikipedia in languages other than English, crucially including Chinese, I am painfully aware that there are a lot of restrictions of the rights of users of Wikipedia all over the world, evidently some of them not within the reach of the United States legal system. There seems to be no prospect, for example, of the Wikimedia Foundation suing the Russian or Chinese central governments (not even to mention north Korea's regime or the ISIS self-styled regime) to protect the rights of users of Wikipedia. That's too bad. If the NSA surveillance programs ceased later today, there would still be a lot of places around the world where Wikipedia would be inaccessible or Wikipedia users would be harassed by agents of other governments.

<comment><USER13> Well put. Another comment ITT[0] also pointed out the global surveillance arms race and the futility of pressuring the US to unilaterally disarm. This is particularly true in light of the many legitimate global threats to freedom mentioned in your comment.

Knowing how unpopular this opinion is here, I still feel the need to share... Lawsuits like these strike me as either incredibly naive or a cynical public relations stunt. I don't enjoy my donations supporting either kind of effort and unfortunately, will likely cease future contributions.

The NSA does not surveil domestic communications without a court ordered warrant and I have heard no arguments to convince me that this is not a legitimate use of authority. If there was a single change to the NSA that I could advocate, it would be stronger and harsher mandatory minimums for anyone found in violation of the existing prohibitions on domestic surveillance.

[0] [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9177073](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9177073)

<comment><USER14> > The NSA does not surveil domestic communications without a court ordered > warrant and I have heard no arguments to convince me that this is not a > legitimate use of authority.

Oh what faith you have...

        <snowden> How are things over there?
        <poitras> I'm at the Guardian. They're publishing TEMPORA today.
                  They are very nervous about an injunction.
        <snowden> The NSA love that program.
        <poitras> Why?
        <snowden> Because they aren't allowed to do it in the US.
                  The UK lets us query it all day long.

</comment></comment></comment><comment> Dorian-Marie The solution should be technical: You don't want to NSA to read your communications: encrypt them (eg: HTTPS everywhere, encryption built-in everywhere). And that's us, builders of technologies, that need to make that happen.

Basically securing against the NSA is the same as securing against hackers, it should be treated as a security threat like any other.

<comment><USER15> It's not one or the other, and the NSA has demonstrated that it will use all the resources at its disposal to circumvent any technical protection.

The NSA also holds a trump card: the law and the US government. I assume at some point that Congress will pass laws, or the secret court will authorize, compelling every American company to essentially open itself to unfettered access and surveillance. US companies already are subject to NSLs, and the Law of Boiling Frogs suggests that it's only a matter of time until surveillance is openly and explicitly compulsory.

The only long term effective way to cut this off is to cut off the NSA's budget and scale back their efforts. But I also believe that will not happen until the first ski resort opens in hell.

We're burning our own village to save it.

<comment><USER16> This is why I am increasingly convinced that GPL(v3) is going to become a bastion of hope for privacy. The major problem is that companies want to make money off the software, close it up and proprietize it, and then the gov comes along with a NSL or blackbox or other comprimise and backdoors/weakens the system, and all of a sudden all the customers of the company are vulnerable. FOSS and in particular GPL, is the way around this. Software companies should be selling support, not the software (IMHO).

<comment><USER17> Software can always be disassembled. I'm much more concerned about proprietary firmware and hardware backdoors. You should be too. Another thing also, is that the NSA have been shown to be weakening crypto standards like RNGs and, possibly, ECC. The problem with this is other standards like TLS and such ultimately use this infrastructure and that affects all software, FOSS included.

<comment><USER16> I agree with you about firmware, but you will notice a very important overlap between the firmware and the software sectors here, in that it tends to be true that you end up with closed software to match the closed hardware (cellphone radio modems having DMA to the same address space as the CPU all under proprietary firmware and software blobs is a good example). I very much agree that we need open hardware, but it doesn't seem to be much of a priority for any of the big players that I am aware of.

Regarding the weakening of crypto standards, this is why I think everyone is wrong when they tell you not to roll your own. Even William Binney (NSA whistleblower) has been saying so recently.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> This is an important lawsuit which will cost a lot of money. I urge you to donate:

Wikimedia: [http://m.wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Ways_to_Give](http://m.wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Ways_to_Give)

ACLU: [https://www.aclu.org/donate/join-renew- give](https://www.aclu.org/donate/join-renew-give)

</comment><comment><USER19> I miss groklaw. I wish PJ comes back online. That'll help us, the non-lawyers, especially outside the US, make sense of this lawsuit (besides others).

<comment><AUTHOR> PJ stopped doing Groklaw out of disgust that the law was so deeply disrespected by the government. Perhaps when Snowden is elected President.

<comment><USER20> I miss Groklaw dearly but also understood there was a little more than disgust in play.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> Despite what they say in the article, I really don't think they have standing. But I would love to hear why they do from someone familiar with the legal argument.

<comment><USER22> I thought that too at first. But the NYT op-ed does a better job of explaining.[1]

Basically, they think that the NSA has the ability to index anonymous readers with pages visited, and anonymous editors with pages changed. Then if the NSA is sending that data to a bunch of governments around the word (Egypt, Israel, the Five Eyes, whoever else), dissidents around the world are at risk of being caught for browsing/editing Wikipedia for the crime of being opposed to the government in power.

[1] [http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/10/opinion/stop-spying-on- wik...](http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/10/opinion/stop-spying-on-wikipedia- users.html)

<comment><USER23> "Then if the NSA"

That's a big IF and one that will be almost impossible to prove. I don't see how the case holds any merit if they can't prove this happens.

<comment><USER22> Seems like a hard battle for sure.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> I've been thinking about surveillance lately and have come to the conclusion that it's simply here to stay.

I really doubt any legal action will change anything what the NSA does. The future is digital, they cannot and will not step down while other countries, basically everyone that is capable to do it, will do it. It's such a big power factor that it cannot be ignored.

The arms race in cyberspace has begun long ago, and there's just no way it will simply stop.

All we can do is decide how we handle it personally and whom we trust to keep our data safe. And if we really need to create certain kinds of data in the first place (with many kinds we have no choice).

<comment><USER25> On NSA stories, the top HN comment is always "too bad. whatever. let the NSA do its thing." _NO._

This is not about you. This is not about your data. This is about our society's collective ability to think and act for itself. Blanket acceptance of surveillance is a dangerous attitude and shockingly common.

Political efforts, technological efforts, societal changes are all required to keep democracy alive. And that's what's at stake here, not your personal files. Nobody cares if you can keep those safe - I want my _democracy_ to be safe, please.

<comment><USER26> well if you love democracy so much you need to recognize that the majority is against you on this point.

<comment><USER5> Well as you're seeing with gay marriage bans being overturned, just because the majority want to strip the minority of their rights, they shouldn't be allowed to.

<comment><USER27> Then what you want is a republic or some system of anarchy, not a democracy.

<comment><USER28> The US _is_ a republic.

<comment><USER27> I know that. It was a general point. In a pure democracy, 51% has complet power.

Also while the US is a formal republic, it does often emulate a democracy. Based on common belives the constitution is reinterpreted, or simply ignored. This has been well documented by legal scholars such as Richard Epstein.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> As people become increasingly inured to the trickle of revelations, I do think that lawsuits are important. If Wikimedia doesn't have anything more than a logo on a slide, however, this will be tossed for lack of standing, like several cases before it.

<comment><USER30> I have a new idea for government lawyers, if anyone _does_ show lack of standing, claim that the evidence of harm is a state secret, try and jail them for spying before hearing the case, claim they must serve the first sentence before it will hear the original case.

My argument has many parallels with existing statements by the Supreme Court that lawyers representing terror suspects could they themselves be tried under the 'material support' law for simply filing paperwork with the state to clear their client.

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> This is great news. We need more powerful voices like these to really be heard.

Remember Wikipedia's blackout against SOPA!

</comment><comment><USER32> wish I had more time to search for it right now, but is there a link where people can donate specifically for this cause? (if not a general donation will have to suffice)

please post if so

<comment><AUTHOR> Not that I know of. But I do know that charities find tied donations a goddamn PITA - if you trust someone to do good work, just giving them the money for the general pool is the right thing in almost all cases.

But they _do_ love to know what inspired a particular donation. So I would suggest dropping a few bucks to the ACLU and WMF's general contribution addresses, but including a note that this is why :-)

<comment><USER32> that does seem like a hassle - general fund makes sense

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> I'll be interested to see how the rulings on standing go. That seems like the crux of the matter to me, because the issue is not just "was your name mentioned," but also "were you harmed?"

4th Amendment cases are usually litigated in the context of a criminal appeal; obviously a defendant is facing real jeopardy in a prosecution, and therefore has standing.

Civil lawsuits exist to make plaintiffs whole after suffering a harm. But the court might find that being surveilled, alone and by itself, is not harm. The court could say that nothing has been removed, destroyed, prevented, or altered in Wikimedia's servers, so they have no harm to make whole.

The court could say that merely copying data does no harm to the original data creator or holder. (This argument might sound familiar here on HN, as it is sometimes used to argue that file sharing does no legal harm to publishers.)

</comment><comment><USER34> Is no one targeting the 12333 Executive Order? Isn't that the one that causes the most mass spying abuses. It's great to see the FISA "warrants" targeted as well, as most just seem to look at the Patrio Act's 215 section, but I think they should look at the 12333 EO, too.

</comment><comment><USER35> Almost all of our communication protocols and technologies are built on trust on those who run various services. So as long as that is the case, imho there is no way to stop surveillance.

It would be great to start from scratch and build things without the expectation of any trustability from anyone, but I don't see that happening ever!

Sad to see that the people elected by other people like us to do good for all the people tend to do everything other than that.

<comment><USER31> It is a fact that the internet - designed to be de-centralised - is becoming more and more centralised, evolving around service providers.

> Almost all of our communication protocols and technologies are built on > trust on those who run various services.

That is why we need to build and use de-centralized systems like Bitcoin, Tor and physical mesh networks to share and communicate. These evolve around people, not service providers. Of course, there's a huge difference between trusting people and trusting corporations.

> It would be great to start from scratch and build things without the > expectation of any trustability from anyone, but I don't see that happening > ever!

Too bad that you're not too bright about the future. A lot of people are working on fixing it. Maybe these links will inspire you to think about it differently?

[https://bitcoin.org/en/](https://bitcoin.org/en/)

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

[https://ssd.eff.org](https://ssd.eff.org)

<comment><USER35> > Too bad that you're not too bright about the future. A lot of people are > working on fixing it. Maybe these links will inspire you to think about it > differently?

I have come across these things that you have pointed out and yes they are steps in the right direction. But if you ask me if any of those will become the mainstream de-facto thing that everyone will use some time in the future? Based on the evidence available at the moment, I would still stick to what I said and maintain that it is highly unlikely given the current state of affairs. Yes, I would be very glad to be proven wrong but not enough atm to feel optimism. :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> The NSA is here to stay because who can remove their power without being removed from office? They have all communication.

</comment><comment><USER37> Wikimedia's evidence that it was targeted was due to a leaked slide. What's going to stop the court from dismissing that key piece of evidence due to it being a "state secret"/"matter of national security" that was not meant to be publicly disclosed?

</comment><comment><USER38> Bravo. They've earned my donation this year.

I hope that more organizations come forward with similar suits so that we can get back on the right path.

</comment><comment><USER39> "If you don't like people looking why not try putting on some pants?", my response on the Wikimedia Blog: [http://www.reddit.com/r/wikipedia/comments/2yjda6/wikimedia_...](http://www.reddit.com/r/wikipedia/comments/2yjda6/wikimedia_v_nsa_wikimedia_foundation_files_suit/cpa4627)

(cross-posted to reddit because I could provide links there)

<comment><AUTHOR> SSL in the casual case relies on all CAs being uncompromised. I understand this is not the case.

In any case, both technical _and_ legal approaches are appropriate. And you know as well as I do that everyone at WMF desperately wants SSL for everything, and that this is a thing they are specifically working toward (but it turns out to be a bit more complicated than just switching everyone to SSL) - there is no way in which the legal approach precludes the technical approach.

I mean, you're right, this has been a problem for ages and you personally yelled really loudly and quite appropriately at them for it, and I really wish WMF had moved forward sooner. But if yesterday was the best day to act, then today is the next-best day.

<comment><USER40> CAs aren't the only possible point of failure.

Simply by obtaining private keys for Google/Facebook/YouTube/Yahoo/Baidu, the NSA can passively decrypt a HUGE percentage of the world's traffic. Any server encrypting for Google will need to have these keys so it's quite difficult to keep all these servers secure, and given the keys' values, the NSA would have no trouble budgeting infiltrating companies to get them.

<comment><AUTHOR> Absolutely, I was just giving one example.

<comment><USER41> It's' simple love. .m</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Why Use OpenStreetMap Instead of Google Maps? - <AUTHOR> https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/jbelien/diary/44356 <comment><USER2> I totally support OSM 1000%...

But frankly, it seems it's still a _lot_ of work to build OSM into your own website/app, setting up your own tile server.

I know there are instructions for this [1] [2] -- but to really get popular, it seems like there really ought to be up-to-date, auto-updating, officially recommended and totally secure server images on Digital Ocean, AWS, Google Cloud and Azure where anyone can spin it up for $5/mo without even ever having to SSH in once (except to update the root password), and then embed a live JavaScript map into their web page with two lines of code -- one to load the library, and one to insert a live map of a given size centered on a given location. Where the whole process shouldn't take more than 10 minutes, and most of that is waiting for the image to be copied to your server.

I've Googled but I can't find anything like that -- with the links below, I assume I'd be using _at least_ a day to set things up, especially since setting up servers from online tutorials never goes smoothly, as you have to google error messages that arise since newer versions have changed slightly since the tutorial was written... And most times where I just want to "throw in a map", I don't want to spend a day+ doing it.

[1] [https://switch2osm.org/manually-building-a-tile- server-18-04...](https://switch2osm.org/manually-building-a-tile- server-18-04-lts/)

[2] [https://ircama.github.io/osm-carto-tutorials/tile-server- ubu...](https://ircama.github.io/osm-carto-tutorials/tile-server-ubuntu/)

<comment><USER3> We can't really use google maps in the Danish public sector where I work, because they track your data. So we use osm and I think you're daily spot on.

I work in a small municipality so we don't really have the resources to do the integration ourselves. What we did was find a company which specializes in making google maps like APIs/integration to osm as well as having a support line that can correct osm mistakes for us.

This is not free, like doing the integration ourselves would be. I can't give you the exact price, but it is a lot cheaper than google maps and it's worked great for us for several years now.

We did by a package with little osm support because we can update osm ourselves, but calculating routes is something we could never do within our budget.

If your country doesn't have any companies offering these types of osm services, then I bet you could make a lot of money by building it though.

<comment><USER4> > We can't really use google maps in the Danish public sector where I work, > because they track your data.

Perfect example of stifling regulations hurting the average person.

<comment><USER5> This _has_ to be sarcasm.

<comment><USER6> It certainly feels like it.

If it did not have that snark though, one could make the point that the data could still be 'deanonimitized'.

<comment><USER4> It's not sarcasm. It doesn't actually matter at all if Google Maps "tracks" you. But this pointless legislation decided it does and now people have to settle for surely inferior alternatives.

<comment><USER7> You're saying the "pointless legislation" had a point. Just not one that you agree with.

This is a guess, but I suspect the point had to do with data privacy. Maybe someone wrote legislation that prohibits public websites from hosting ads, or third party browser-tracking software. And google maps fits that.

In the parent comment, there's also this bit:

> but it is a lot cheaper than google maps

If true, this is an example of government regulations working as intended, and saving money.

<comment><USER4> If an alternative was cheaper and of comparable quality then legislation shouldn't have been required for it to be chosen by whoever was in charge of the decision.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> And if you can't use OSM, try Here maps.

They are easy to download for offline use. Following the suggestion of friends, I have repurposed an old phone as a "travel phone" with maps of the whole world (or at least the parts I can download!)

Not perfect, but when I catch a plane, I don't have to worry about local networks.

Fun story: recently in Europe, Google Maps stuttered. Now and then, there was a networking issue. It is almighty wiseness, Google Maps was then showing a white page instead of showing me the previously downloaded maps. This was irksome, especially in navigation mode. I was litteraly following my way on the screen, when it turned white in front of my eyes. Several times. I turned white too.

After that, I decided I would take a chance with the backup plan. I turned off the phone and used the travel phone instead. No network, so no lookup of business names, but Here maps offline with street addresses did better than Google Maps online.

I called that a learning experience. I later was told Google Maps lets you download some tiles, but it is not as convenient as having litteraly every continent saved. I do not want to plan what part I may need. Just "down it all"!

<comment><USER9> Your anecdote falls into the trap I see often when comparing OSS software vs proprietary. You've found a obscure, uncommon use case where OSM works better. However, the opposite needs to be true for adoption. OSM needs to work better for 80% of the use cases, not the other 20.

<comment><USER10> Working without a network is niche now?

Anywhere you go far from a city will lack a network.

<comment><USER11> Or working on a slow, spotty network, which is par for the course for 'the next billion users' that tech execs keep talking about.

<comment><USER12> Or if your mobile connection has strict data caps...

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I am an avid traveler currently traveling South-East-Asia. One of the most favorite tools used by travelers is an Android app Maps.me, that is based on Openstreet maps. You can download any Country or region and have it for offline use, only need a GPS connection.

There are some practical caveats in using it though: -If You are planning a ride by car, the estimated time for Your journey most likely be way (waaaaayyy) off. Especially in Asian countries that are less covered. It can show 3 hours in a journey that is 8 hours without traffic. -some areas are completely not covered (I mean at all)

But for bigger cities it's pretty good in coverage

<comment><USER14> Have you been improving the less-covered areas during your travels?

<comment><USER13> Only in available ways. When it is easy to update the situation (add place to map), I do it. But it's only easy to label areas and buildings, and much harder to add whole villages or roads that are missing

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> I like that the arguments for OpenStreetMap were more about the advantages over Google Maps, instead of "because Google is a 'bad' company" like so many Google debates delve into.

I love using Google Maps for my applications, but I'll definitely look into OpenStreetMaps now.

<comment><USER16> Reviewing the difference, OSM actually puts the street name where I can find it. The first thing I want with maps are street names and for whatever reasons, google maps makes that very difficult in some cases.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> I'm a big supporter of open mapping data and initiatives. I hope companies continue to contribute to the datasets, vs keeping higher quality data within silos.

I registered the domain thislocation.com a while back. Through some other work I'm doing, I'm hoping to release a platform and datasets that allow you to build/upload/download arbitrary metadata schemas that you can attach to a location (coordinate/POI etc).

The data will be freely available to other platforms, OSM compatible as much as possible. The goal is to pull up a location and there could be hundreds of interactive datasets about it specifically or nearby. Anything from a live audio recording of a space, to drone footage, lidar/radar captures.

The project started when capturing lidar & precision gps data recently, and not having an easy, agnostic platform to just upload and allow it to work easily. The goal is to understand common data patterns so the App will just consume where it can, or allow extension via custom schemas where needed. Everything now seems to be poorly design UI's, corporate desktop software, or if it is a modern online platform, it's too specific to a particular vertical.

I don't really feel like the layers/photos etc experience of google earth are really the best way to explore mapping data, as well as displaying thousands of markers. We are trying for different approaches based on the types of media.

A user can keep their data private, or share it publicly but it will be just like opening Google maps online, typing in an address etc, then toggling datasets in a modern, beautiful way that just works. hiding the map when needed, activating different pages when more appropriate. Everything defined in JSON Schema etc, no new standards or KML/XML, maybe compatible exports if needed.

Apologies for the long pitch, just wanted to share about this side project, and love for open mapping data.

<comment><USER17> Another piece would be slowly filling out everything possible that could document a specific location, from the soil, asphalt type/quality, temperature, smell/sound, haze in the air, scientific measurements, video/drone/lidar. Until all checkboxes are completed/amassed.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> > The latest change (June 2018) has much more impact : Google decided to > reduce the limit of free requests (25000 map display per day to 28000 per > month - that's around 1000 map display per day, so 25 times less)

IMO the biggest takeaway from this article. I've hacked up plenty of projects on using Google Maps, but would definitely think again with this much lower free limit. Though, on the bright side, it seems that Google has finally made Maps pricing transparent:

[https://mapsplatformtransition.withgoogle.com/calculator](https://mapsplatformtransition.withgoogle.com/calculator)

<comment><USER19> Around a similar time Mapbox also made their pricing much cheaper for lower usage users.

<comment><USER20> Current Mapbox pricing came into effect July/2017.

<comment><USER19> Ah yeah I say similar time because I don't check it too often but the pricing used to be: free, $500/month, and "contact us"

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> I just recently spent a few hours working with OSM and Nominatim as part of a project for my university, an event planning page for ActivityPub social media: [http://fedevent.herokuapp.com/](http://fedevent.herokuapp.com/)

OSM maps are quite detailed, perfectly serviceable...but Nominatim is not very good (at least in my experience?) I used [https://github.com/perliedman/leaflet-control- geocoder](https://github.com/perliedman/leaflet-control-geocoder) to interact with Nominatim but entering something that can sound relatively common (like a mall or an abbreviation of an institution) will come up with locations in entirely different countries than the user had in mind and at least in the case of that geocoder control (props to the dev for making it, BTW) there isn't a clear way to determine WHERE something is before selecting it.

I noticed this when I searched for "Mall San Pedro" and was returned the right location but it was displayed as something completely different, under the name of the street. It's a little disconnecting.

I appreciate that it might come down the libraries and tools that are querying Nominatim with certain design decisions, but the useful of a database is in the implementation of it into tools.

<comment><USER22> Did you have a look at overpass turbo[1]?

With this API a lot more is possible than with nominatim.

[1] [http://overpass-turbo.eu/](http://overpass-turbo.eu/)

<comment><USER21> This looks useful for the purposes of describing areas in detail but setting an event usually doesn't require more than a couple pins to show where it takes place.

I will keep this handy for any future geomapping projects I work on (which sounds like a possibility given that this was interesting to work with)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> OSM is supreme when it comes to paths, trails and other such details (like wind shelters). Google Maps seems to be devoid of these.

<comment><USER19> Absolutely, I use OSM all the time for walking paths and mountain bike trails because the coverage of them is perfect. Google maps seems to fall short where there isn't a lot of money to be made.

<comment><USER24> Yep, I use OSM to plan runs and rides for anywhere I travel to, and then add any new trails I find.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> Not sure how the article makes the mental leap from "google is limiting free usage to a few thousand views per day" for a system that costs a lot to operate, to "google may hide stuff or change country borders at will". If that's the main argument for switching to openstreetmaps, it's not very compelling.

</comment><comment><USER26> What I would love to see in OpenStreetMaps are translated or transcripted place names. And since place names are extremely political, this should also be mentioned that a place has several names in different languages and cultures.

<comment><USER27> That exists. This blog post explains how to add Welsh names: [http://cardiff.theodi.org/2018/02/23/mapio-eich-milltir- sgwa...](http://cardiff.theodi.org/2018/02/23/mapio-eich-milltir-sgwar/)

<comment><USER28> There's quite some resistance to adding translations and transcriptions, as they aren't really names as such.

An example would be small towns in the US. They probably don't have a Welsh name, even if there happens to be a direct translation into Welsh.

<comment><USER29> Cymraeg users often have a strong hatred of English language use, and users, and want to deny that Welsh counties were annexed in to England and want to try and hold back the tide wrt English language use in preference to Cymraeg.

We get silly things in Wales like Cymraeg mono-lingual government announcements/adverts on the radio (accessible to about 7% [1] of the population vs c.100% if they were in English), motorway signs that are only in Cwmraeg for half the people passing them (they change over, useless if you passed already), travel announcements in Cymraeg first. Heck, if you ring 999 in an emergency you have to wait for the Cymraeg speaker to finish their 20s message before you start your call.

Welsh people use British-English language predominantly; the Welsh name is the name in English, the _Cymraeg_ name sometimes differs.

[1] roughly: ~15% of the adult population say they know any Cymraeg, half of those are fluent (self reported). FWIW half of those fluent say they prefer to use English. So one could argue you're catering to <4% of the population.

<comment><USER30> _Cymraeg users often have a strong hatred of English language use, and users,_

Not my experience (English - Somerset based - with quite a lot of work and friends the other side of the bridges). If you show some respect towards others, I generally find it returned. They are also not users but speakers. The only time I find dual language to be a bit of a pain is in lifts: being told the doors are closing in two languages is bloody stupid.

 _and want to deny that Welsh counties were annexed in to England and want to try and hold back the tide wrt English language use in preference to Cymraeg._

You might want to reread your history books and concentrate around 1066. The Norsemen didn't really give a shit whether you were "welsh" or "english" (neither of which, as we now know them, really existed as such at the time). You were probably a vassel, whatever language you spoke. I can't remember or even be bothered to look up when the concept of county was created. I think we still had hides and hundreds back then.

<comment><USER29> Harold put a vassal in place in Gwynedd in 1063. But IIRC they were already ruling and had originally taken Gwynedd by force with an Irish & Danish army.

Re counties, there were established principalities in the West of the British mainland -- Gwynedd managed to subdue many of these other counties (ie independently governed areas), whilst paying fealty/homage to the English Crown, once Gwynedd had subdued Deheubarth and Powys and such, they (Llewellyn The Last) stopped paying the Crown. At which point Gwynedd was put down, handing their recent won territories over to be annexed to the "English" King's territories (Edward I).

I don't think the Welsh counties in general were divided in to hundreds until Henry Tudor (who also issued a writ demanding use of English across his whole territory). Hides and hundreds, like the words, are Anglo-Saxon I think?

AFAICT Gwynedd grew strong (post-Romans) by earlier conquest by Vikings and Irish-Scots.

You're right, the Norse, like the Romans before them didn't care what tribe you hung with, Wales is called that because it's the bit the Romans hadn't conquered yet (cf Walloons, Wallachia (? in Romania)); which is down to physical geography. Same with the Norse AFAICT. And the same in the other direction with why Gwynedd was able to conquer the principalities but not subdue the Marches or Pembrokeshire.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> I always wondered who actually pays for the bills in OSM? Who pays all the servers, all the traffic, etc...?

<comment><USER32> With OSM you have to host the map tiles yourself if you add maps to your website, because OSM servers only provide limited traffic hosting via the API.

<comment><USER33> Anyone providing service on top of OpenStreetMap can or ideally should host/render stuff on own mirror server. However for small uses I recommend utilising simple reverse proxy caching e.g. with nginx. Here is snippet of nginx config from my geo side-project: [https://pastebin.com/brTQ68nw](https://pastebin.com/brTQ68nw)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> OSM does not offer live traffic data, which makes it hard to use it for real life navigation. Does anyone know a project that takes care for this kind of data?

<comment><USER35> Are you from the USA? I'll assume so, because I've often seen this on HN/Reddit: a lot of people there seem to use Waze or other traffic info sources for getting _around_ traffic. I want to know whether I'll be delayed so I'll check before a trip (and also during a trip if it's >2h), but I can recall driving around a jam maybe once in my life. It usually isn't faster, and that's assuming the byways/B-roads aren't congested as well, in which case standing in the jam is definitely faster. It sounds like spreading the load over multiple roads in the USA is a must.

<comment><USER36> Some of this is probably due to American vs European driving habits, with respect to long trips. It's hard to gain much by routing around congestion along a half-hour trip, but if you're going to spend half a day or longer then you definitely want to know when there's a wreck that makes it worthwhile to get off the interstate to avoid.

<comment><USER37> I'm in the UK. I have a half hour commute by car when there's light traffic. Congestion can easily add 10-15 minutes to that. There are at least three almost entirely independent routes that I can take to work that are the same without traffic so it's absolutely worth routing around it

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> One of the interesting trends I've been seeing are the amount of companies that are rebuilding there maps from the ground up. While Google currently provides the best data set, there is a resurgence of companies mapping from the ground up to solve problems that Google isn't solving for its customers. You've got Apple[1], Tesla[2], and Uber[3] all rebuilding maps and all current/previous customers of Google.

[1] - [https://techcrunch.com/2018/06/29/apple-is-rebuilding- maps-f...](https://techcrunch.com/2018/06/29/apple-is-rebuilding-maps-from- the-ground-up/)

[2] - [https://electrek.co/2017/07/03/tesla-map-navigation-open- sou...](https://electrek.co/2017/07/03/tesla-map-navigation-open-source- platforms/)

[3] - [https://www.uber.com/newsroom/mapping-ubers- future/](https://www.uber.com/newsroom/mapping-ubers-future/)

</comment><comment><USER39> Maps make even more sense to be free for the public to access, than the summary of human knowledge known as Wikipedia.

This is a literal description of the physical space we occupy. The knowledge of "what is there" should not be owned by any entity.

Now, I am aware that map data includes more than just "what is there" and one could argue that certain types of metadata can be more appropriately owned than others. But on the whole they should be the minority. In particular, the metadata required to "make sense of it all" should be free: Systems for searching between the wildly different naming conventions and other mapping oddities in various parts of the world.

I am also aware that certain parts of map data may be classified to certain governments. Exceptions could be made. I'm not sure what the best solution is but it's not that important as these spots are a minority of the world's mapped area.

</comment><comment><USER40> Open Street Maps is great as a data source, but the front end client apps for using it are somewhat lacking. On my iPhone, I use Maps.me when I travel to Cuba and Google Maps almost everywhere else. If I was building an app, I'd definitely use OSM and probably Mapbox.

<comment><USER41> On Android, Osmand works very well.

<comment><USER42> I've found it rather slow and temperamental, plus their business model of charging for access to map updates basically means that you have to pay them to use corrections you contribute to OSM.

<comment><USER41> > plus their business model of charging for access to map updates

Not sure what you are talking about, but I am not prompted to pay for updates. In fact, I'm installing some updates and new maps right now. Even the 'live' feature works. I am using the f-droid version of the app though, so maybe that's the difference?

<comment><USER43> The version in f-droid provides anything free, which the version in google play does not.

This app is excellent. I'll probably donate. I would be totallly comfortable with doing this if they made their UI free, making osmand a completely free software.

I which I could use it on a regular computer, or if a web service provided something similar to what we get with osmand, the experience of its offline search included.

Next step would be mapillary providing a free app to contribute to their database or osmand providing a way to do it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER44> I developed a Maps centric app recently I realized all the things mentioned in this article and made a comment recently on HN related to Apple maps about this.

Popular times (Maps) in Google Maps is incredibly useful and a good example, requests to expose this data are ignored. Some may argue Google has a right to therefore it should. The data is gathered in numerous ways, perhaps unsuspecting mobile users is one which method is used to.

I want more competition, I don't think a flood of Maps providers is a good thing either. A single source of really good data is what is needed. Perhaps OSM can be that, or perhaps smaller Map providers can provide data to an open standard for which OSM can use through some type of exchange license.

</comment><comment><USER45> From the purely practical, pragmatic point of view both GM and OSM are very far from perfect. Similar services offered by local service providers can be much better in some cases. For example Seznam's Mapy.cz is feel much much better than Google Maps when it's about the Czech Republic. I don't work for them, that's my purely pragmatic user experience.

</comment><comment><USER46> I quite like [https://maps.openrouteservice.org/](https://maps.openrouteservice.org/) as a UI for OSM that has sensible search and routing.

The routing has many different cycling modes, and you can also click the little leaflet icon on the right and switch the view to "OpenCycleMap" to get a more cycling-oriented map view.

<comment><USER47> Another OSM-based cycle map and routeplanner you might be interested in: [https://cycle.travel/map](https://cycle.travel/map) (disclaimer - my site! Western Europe/North America only at present).

<comment><USER46> Very nice, interestingly it doesn't always come up with quite the same route as openrouteservice does.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER48> So roads are great and all, but the info I really care about is what's _on_ them. I know all of my possible commute routes like the back of my hand, and couldn't care less about which data source is more accurate for them. What I don't know is _which_ one is the fastest to use _right now_ given current traffic conditions. As far as I know, OSM alone doesn't collect or store such ephemeral data.

(Please remember: driving, like all practical and modern travel modes, is the art of getting from point A to point B as quickly as possible. I don't get paid to sit in a goddamn parking lot that calls itself a "highway", nor to sit in the other parking lot that calls itself a "two-lane rural road", nor to superspeed through an overly non-straight two-lane rural road while the other roads are actually performing as advertised.)

</comment><comment><USER49> I generally favor Google Maps for the things they care about--like major roads, directions, etc. But, while not perfect, I find OSM is far more likely to have things like hiking trails and other types of features that are apparently not on Goggle's list of things it actually cares about.

</comment><comment><USER50> I've stopped using Google Maps as a map altogether and subscribe to the service of a navigation map maker directly. Their maps (they do combine proprietary materials and sources like OpenStreetMap) are of higher quality and have a satisfactory degree of completness as well as good search.

Gmaps has stopped being useful to me since searches in a given perimeter do not show all results spatially at any given zoomlevel, and whole roads and labels go missing if you zoom out a little bit to much or too far in. It used to be a fairly good product around 2012 but has since then declined in utility, especially in contrast to all the catching-up the competitors did in the meantime.

I suppose a huge part of Gmaps business nowdadays is the embedding of Gmaps in 3rd-party products.

</comment><comment><USER51> While I love OSM for the data and the free approach, one thing which annoys me with OSM is that their main map doesn't support hdpi (retina) displays. That makes the map look ugly on iPad and MacBooks at least, I suspect on much more recent devices.

<comment><USER47> There's tentative discussions underway about providing a vector-based rendering on osm.org to augment the current raster styles, which of course would be resolution-independent.

</comment></comment><comment><USER52> > What if Google decide to "hide" or "highlight" certain kind of shops for > instance

Doesn't google already do this? Shops with paid advertisement come much higher than unpaid shops.

<comment><USER53> Or for navigation: walking, biking, public transit, driving, _uber_

</comment></comment><comment><USER54> MapTiler Cloud is also an alternative based on OSM data. It is free for personal use and prices for businesses are fair: [https://www.maptiler.com/cloud/](https://www.maptiler.com/cloud/) We also offer many advanced services like hosting own data, easy map customization tool, support for 55 languages with an autodetection and much more!

</comment><comment><USER32> " but also made it mandatory to give your credit card number even if you do not go over the free limit !"

Only if you are a new user. Google published a transition document for existing users and it says they don't have to add a card, but then of course your maps stop working for the rest of the month if you go over the $200 free quota.

So current users have it easier, but new users have to add a card.

<comment><USER55> One must supply a credit card or have an account with billing enabled. Existing users will have accounts. But they must be altered to have billing enabled if they do not have it enabled already.

* [https://cloud.google.com/maps-platform/pricing/](https://cloud.google.com/maps-platform/pricing/)

<comment><USER32> There is a separate guide for existing users and it states:

"If you choose not to add a billing account, there is a risk that if your usage exceeds $200 in a given month, your Maps API implementation will be degraded or other API requests will return an error."

[https://cloud.google.com/maps-platform/user-guide/pricing- ch...](https://cloud.google.com/maps-platform/user-guide/pricing-changes/)

So you can choose not to add a billing account if you are an existing user, but then maps won't work beyond the $200 credit/month.

<comment><USER55> You might want to re-read the "all Google Cloud Platform services require a credit card and billing account" in the first sentence of that. (-:

Which agrees with "Is a credit card or billing account required? Yes." on the other page.

<comment><USER32> I read it. And then comes the second part: "If you choose not to add a billing account..." If a billing account is required then the second part makes no sense, because then it would simply say the service won't work at all without it, but it talks about the monthly free credit instead.

That second part is the difference between the docs for new users vs. existing users.

But we'll see who's right soon. Tomorrow.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER56> What I miss is actual functionality that makes my life better as a user. I totally agree on all points made, but it is not going get me a better mapping experience in any way. For me to consider OSM, I need most features that are as good and some that are better. I don't like to say it, but OSM does not (yet?) offer this.

</comment><comment><USER57> Also you can try [https://windymaps.com/app](https://windymaps.com/app) I think they're using osm data for their maps. Can navigate also on bike or hike.

<comment><USER58> Yes, they do, for most of the world, at least. In fact, it was originally a Czech-only map website Mapy.cz (and later a mobile app), with their own map data (they even have their own Street View-like function) in the Czech Republic. For the rest of the world, they used map data from the common commercial providers. Then, they switched to OSM for the rest of the world (keeping their own for the Czech Republic). And finally, they launched the international version of the mapping app after the success of the Windy weather app which used the map layer.

</comment></comment><comment><USER59> _what if they decide to draw the border between countries wherever they want_

This seems a bit tin foil hat to me. Has Google been caught doing something like this before with malicious intent?

<comment><USER60> I would not call it "malicious intent" but for example the borders of Tibet are very controversial: [https://qz.com/224821/see-how-borders-change-on- google-maps-...](https://qz.com/224821/see-how-borders-change-on-google-maps- depending-on-where-you-view-them/)

<comment><USER59> Interesting stuff. Thanks for the link.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER61> I'd gladly use any map except Apple maps for navigation on my smartphone, but its the only map software that navigates through the lock screen on my iPhone.

</comment><comment><USER62> I used OSM instead of Google Maps for a tracking project because I didn't have 11000USD to pay them upfront for the licence.

</comment><comment><USER63> Back in the days, I rode hundreds of kilometres on my bike to map empty areas of OSM, but I never really used OSM.

Google Maps is not perfect but is there an OSS alternative to :

\- a map

\- a strong search engine

\- POI synced on the cloud

\- powerful transport/traffic route calculation

I can't use a map service without these features.

</comment><comment><USER64> Ironically the website is giving a 500 error.

</comment><comment> cup-of-tea I just finished a week long drive and "wild" camping trip in Scotland. I have Maps.me and Osmand on my phone and it was excellent. Helped me find all kinds of things that aren't on any other maps. The best thing is, as a mapper myself, I know the people who mapped it are people like me, rather than people doing their job or trying to make money. It also makes me think someone has probably appreciated my mapping at some point.

</comment><comment><USER65> What about mapbox?

<comment><USER66> The article talks about them ("probably the easiest way to switch from Google Maps to OpenStreetMap") and links to them, and they use OSM data. What more were you expecting?

</comment></comment><comment><USER67> Can one use Google maps offline?

<comment><USER68> Yes. There's an option to download sections . It shows how much space it will take. Expires in 1 month I think and gives a notification to update it to reflect latest changes.

</comment></comment><comment><USER69> Whenever I say this kind of stuff on HN lately — supporting open source over proprietary solutions — I get downvoted.

Facebook and others will always be in charge unless open source software gets good enough to form decentralized networks compete with it. It has to be user friendly and developer friendly enough to gain massive adoption.

Here is Qbix Platform. It took 6 years to develop, is open source and free.

[https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=pZ1O_gmPneI](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=pZ1O_gmPneI)

</comment><comment><USER70> Well, Google can "correct" your spelling and take you to the correct city (let's say it's not a big deal), but mainly Google Maps rules for multiple points navigation A->B->C->... I think it allows 10(-ish) intermediary points.

<comment><USER43> Osmand on android provides this feature. You can also ask to avoid a specific road in the map.

Correcting the spelling and always guessing what your query means... Well not so much.</comment></comment>


Apple's strategy leaked in a video…from 1988 - <AUTHOR> http://gerger.co/yalimslodge/2011/11/03/apples-strategy-leaked-in-a-video-from-1988/

<comment><USER2> So, they where watching STG at Apple.

<comment><USER3> Ahhh come on...This video is not some futuristic nonsense. It is almost like an engineered speculation. In the last decade Apple did nothing but implement this vision. In several cases, the implementation surpassed what Apple engineers thought was possible in 1988.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Why are spamming services (aka 'cold email') on the rise? - <AUTHOR> I've been getting more and more spam from entrepreneurs and growth hackers who send "personalized" emails (with automated followups at 1, 2, and 4 week intervals) using services like yesware, ninjaoutreach, etc to my non-public work email. The pitch verbiage is always similar like they're all using a shared script.  Most violate the CAN-SPAM act as they have no opt-out mechanism while some others use a link to whatever service they are using to send the spam.  Most also use tracked links as well as a hidden image to try to track open rates.  Without fail, when asked, the sender will claim they 'got your email from LinkedIn' (where it has never been published) or 'guessed what it would be'.<p>Are other folks seeing a similar rise in this annoyance?  Any thoughts on why spamming is suddenly 'sexy' and 'growth hacky'? <comment><USER2> Yes I've definitely noticed a rise. Each email always mentions something about me that gives away where they scraped my email from. Some of the sources I've gotten spam from:

github (most common), academia.edu, HN who's hiring, Show HN

I don't get annoyed at emails like this because I accept that if I'm posting my email along with my work in a public place, I am inviting people to email me about it. Emails are easy to ignore, so I don't get annoyed at receiving emails like this. Even if these services are automated, at least they're _semi_ targeted, and maybe 1/10 might interest me. One time someone emailed me promoting a business with an interesting business model and I replied and spent some time discussing it with him.

What _does_ annoy me is that they get through my very strict gmail filters. I filter every email to an "ignore" label unless it's directly addressed to me and not categorized by gmail as "primary" (i.e., not one of social/promotions/updates/forums). It works very well and basically zero newsletters get into my primary inbox. But these emails are different. It seems these emails are categorized by gmail as "primary" which means they escape my filter. I wonder if, ironically, gmail filters newsletters by looking for an unsubscribe link. Because as you mentioned, I have noticed that none of these emails have an opt-out link.

<comment><AUTHOR> I'd have less of a problem (bit still a problem due to automation) with it if this email address was "public", but it isn't. It leaked once due to a misconfigured git ignore file in sometime else's open source project.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> The reason is pretty simple: the punishment is not great enough. If the gain from doing "bad" acts is greater from any expected punishment, expect the bad behavior to continue.

</comment><comment><USER4> I'm not seeing a rise. But more sophisticated software exists for it now compared to 10 years ago, that's true.

Guessing emails is also common practice, but it's also likely that you're on a lead list somewhere. And the original person curating that list probably got your email from another service, guessed it, or simply found it on your website provided in your HN profile.

It's not going away any time soon - cold emails play an integral role in the sales funnel for the vast majority of online b2b services. It's easier to ignore it than to let it annoy you.

</comment><comment><USER5> Emails still have a higher conversion rate than other methods. There have been a number of blog posts and podcasts recently about how much better cold emailing is. This could explain the recent uptick.

I tried to guard my work email, but someone signed me up for some things they thought would be useful to me. Suddenly, my email gets sold to list after list. I am thankful our company has a really nice anti-spam system that prevents 99.99% of the spam from reaching me.

</comment><comment><USER6> I don't really know.

\- firstname.lastname@example.com

</comment><comment><USER7> just setup an autoresponder saying "click here to see my phone number" and have that link be an amazon affiliate link.

<comment><USER8> know its a joke but FYI amazon really doesn't like people emailing affiliate links so your account will probably be disabled.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> Because it works</comment>