Reddit Status - <AUTHOR> https://www.redditstatus.com/ <comment><USER2> I am convinced that Reddit's status page underreports outages, there are a lot of times I can't access the site for 15min but it never shows up on here. (And I don't even visit it that often.)

I think they're the major company with the fewest 9s of uptime.

<comment><USER3> > I think they're the major company with the fewest 9s of uptime.

I think this possibly shows that they have a good understanding of what's most important to their users. If they were to ensure the application was highly available (think six 9s), then they would be sacrificing resources elsewhere in order to achieve this. They could recognize that an outage will not be a "life or death" event for their users and have decided the trade-off was worth it.

Counterpoint: Or, they could just be lazy (or incapable) and haven't tried to solve for higher availability. This is not likely.

<comment><USER4> If their time was instead spent on the redesign, it was completely wasted.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Does anyone know why Reddit seems to be alone among the world's most popular sites in having so many outages and frequent periods of slowness? I've been on it for more than a decade and its unreliability has been fairly constant. Is the engineering team more resource constrained than others or held back by unusual amounts of legacy code, or is it simply confirmation bias resulting from earlier experiences?

<comment><USER6> From AMA (ask [Reddit sysadmins] anything) announcement 2019/09/19 [https://old.reddit.com/r/sysadmin/comments/9ver7h/14nov_redd...](https://old.reddit.com/r/sysadmin/comments/9ver7h/14nov_reddit_infrastructure_ama/)

"I can answer this! According to various sources (mainly, complaints on the redesign subreddit), the new.reddit interface is a lot less tolerant of timeouts and delays. Old.reddit was much more relaxed and would wait longer before throwing up errors (like logouts and such), but new.reddit is RESPONSIVE!, and the backend isn't playing nice with the new, tighter tolerances."

Full AMA [https://old.reddit.com/r/sysadmin/comments/9x577m/were_reddi...](https://old.reddit.com/r/sysadmin/comments/9x577m/were_reddits_infrastructure_team_ask_us_anything/)

Also a 2018 AMA summary[https://github.com/yanhan/notes/blob/master/reddit- sysadmins...](https://github.com/yanhan/notes/blob/master/reddit-sysadmins- ama.md)

<comment><USER7> "Responsive" is not a word that comes to mind when thinking about reddit's new interface.

<comment><USER8> In my world (UX Designer) "responsive" means it responds to browser window size and accommodates all sizes from phone to desktop.

Compare Old reddit and New reddit by shrinking your browser window in the x-axis on desktop.

<comment><USER9> Is that the way 'responsive' is being used in this particular context? What does reflowing a webpage when the browser's window changes size have to do with these timeouts and delays in the backend?

<comment><USER10> theres some ironic use of the word in the post above. they are mocking that the new and improved "responsive web" site isnt responsive in a speed context.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Anecdotal, but old.reddit.com (besides search) seems to always work during these outages. I'm guessing they're always knocking out the AJAX and search machines for some reason

<comment><USER12> >besides search

Surely you're not attempting to imply that the search on old reddit worked in the first place?

<comment><USER13> Reddit's search was and still is terrible. Using "site:reddit.com <query>" with google search is pretty much the only way to get meaningful results.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I gave it some thought. I've distilled the reddit value proposition for me at least.

Imagine having to manage a separate login for a different forum for every topic you're interested in. And having to check 10+ forums a day for responses to your comments.

With reddit it's a common interface to every topic I'm interested in. I'm subscribed to about 60 subreddits now, from off grid cabins to deep learning to Spacex.

<comment><USER15> Lots of people still don't want a single account which crosses all topics.

I personally maintain three - A professional one mainly used on technology forums, another for politics only and then a final one for... Other stuff.

I know lots of people who do similar.

<comment><USER16> Sure, but reddit makes it easy to do that too, and it's still all in one place.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Anyone willing to put a price on 1 hour and 14 minutes of Reddit downtime? I would guess this cost less than a $1,000,000 USD but more than $100,000.

<comment><USER18> According to [], they had $119M revenue in 2019. That's about $14k/h.

[] [https://techcrunch.com/2019/12/04/reddits-monthly-active- use...](https://techcrunch.com/2019/12/04/reddits-monthly-active-user-base- grew-30-to-reach-430m-in-2019/)

<comment><USER17> My first exposure to empty set citations

<comment><USER19> {} would at least be consistent with python string substitution, but [] doesn't make much sense to me

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Oh, an actual status report.

I expected this to be a page that just said:

"Mostly upset about stuff, but still quite witty, completely random, and - this is a re-post."

</comment><comment><USER21> I really wish all the websites my company worked with had a status page as good as this.

<comment><USER22> This is the tool they're using and it can be used for any website.

[https://www.statuspage.io/](https://www.statuspage.io/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> Looking forward to this postmortem! Looks like their request rate has dropped by like 80%-90%!! Don't know if that include CDN requests or what, assuming it's just the reddit.com domain.

</comment><comment><USER24> old.reddit.com still works!

</comment><comment><USER25> Reddit is hosted on AWS. Are they using Fastly as their CDN because it's cheaper than AWS CloudFront CDN?

<comment><USER26> no, because its better.

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> "vote backlog" is an interesting metric. Does anybody know how the vote counting system works?

<comment><USER28> I believe comments, posts, and votes are placed into a queue and later (seconds usually) committed to the database. They're not visible to the public until they're committed (but they make the UI act like it's already there for the poster themselves). Just a guess from my observations though.

<comment><USER29> Pretty standard pattern. Facebook does it as well.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> > Monitoring - A fix has been implemented and we are monitoring the results. > Feb 19, 05:24 PST

</comment><comment><USER31> CDN was unable to reach servers.Happens again</comment>


India's Outsourcing Industry Is Slowing and It Might Just Be a Good Thing - <AUTHOR> http://offprint.in/#!/articles/india-s-outsourcing-industry-is-slowing-and-it-might-just-be-a-good-thing <comment><USER2> India follows the "Sheep Herd" mentality. The whole country's economy is based on people getting into "Profitable" domains mostly following the success of a pioneer in the field. The most recent example of this ideology is the "Business Process Outsourcing" industry. New BPO units are propping up here and there at a dime a dozen leading to a quality deterioration in the final deliverable. This process will continue till a saturation level is reached and then they will wait till another "Killer" domain picks up momentum. Till then India will be in a so called "Calm Period" where nothing great and major takes place.</comment>


Linux Kernel TCP Implementation Vulnerable to Denial of Service - <AUTHOR> https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/CVE-2018-5390 <comment><AUTHOR> Also for FreeBSD: [https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd- announce/2018-Au...](https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd- announce/2018-August/001837.html)</comment>


Steve Jobs Best Quote - <AUTHOR> http://sophisticatedfinance.typepad.com/sophisticated_finance/2011/10/steve-jobs-best-quote.html

<comment><USER2> "The ability to create an organization that reflected this approach was perhaps Jobs real gift." Couldn't agree more.

Being a leader is like being a head without a body; you need legs, arms, a torso, and a heart to carry out all those ideas. Without every single person involved in all of Apples products (not to mention the consumers who buy them) all of Steve's ideas would be moot. The world is putting all the attention on the head - deservedly so - but even Steve would be the first to admit nothing would have happened without Team Apple.</comment>


Is Windows 7 finally halting the Mac migration? - <AUTHOR> http://blogs.zdnet.com/hardware/?p=8117&tag=content;col1

<comment><USER2> The pundit is blowing it a little out of proportion no? Mac OS market share is still tiny compared to Windows. And a lot of switchers still run Windows by dual booting or in a VM.

Title might be better as "Is Windows 7 finally convincing XP users that they're not upgrading to a version of Windows that doesn't suck?"

<comment><USER3> The article isn't about existing marketshare, it's about the trend in how that marketshare is changing. This is the first time in a LONG time that Windows isn't losing marketshare to Mac and Linux.

That's a fact. The speculative part here is Why. Is it that Windows 7 doesn't suck? For all we know, Microsoft could have a new ad campaign, or had bought a sales lead sheet made of gold.

Time will tell, but I predict this is not a permanent reversal in the longstanding trend.

<comment><USER4> As someone who ditched Windows XP for OS X, Linux, or any other Unix, I tried Vista SP1 and it was very solid. Windows is slowly getting better. I wouldn't be surprised if Windows 7 was actually pretty good.

It doesn't solve the lack of a good command line, unix development tools, or a package manager, but most users don't care about such things. They just want to surf the web without crashing or getting viruses.

If I only used my computer for an hour or two a day, say to listen to music and go on Facebook, then Windows 7 would surely be good enough. I doubt I would look for an alternative OS.

<comment><USER5> I use win7 in a VM on OSX in order to do my day job. Prior to that I was using XP. I tried Vista, but resource wise it was horrible. Win7 stays out the way for the most part and it works - a lot like XP.

Am I going to switch back? No, but you're right that for most users win7 is just fine.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Mac sales up 33%, Windows sales up 35% -- wouldn't it be more obvious to conclude the PC market in general is coming back? Then again I probably wouldn't have clicked on a story titled "Computer sales improving" Kudos ZDNet.

<comment><USER7> Yep, I just bought one of each and quite happy with both.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> I switched from a Dell Studio XPS running Windows 7 to a new mbp running OS X 10.6 a month ago, and the mbp is noticeably less stable -- I have to reboot every few days to avoid Spinny Wheel Of Hell for no apparent reason.

(I prefer linux to both Windows and OS X, so I don't think I'm particularly biased here. :)

<comment><USER9> As a general rule the spinny wheel should by tied to a particular application. Are you noticing this somewhere specific, or does it appear to be system wide?

I ask because if it appears to be system wide it could be indicative of a hardware problem or a misbehaving 3rd party driver.

Healthy stock Macs running stock software don't go tend to go spinny system wide (excepting the disappearing network filesystem mentioned elsewhere in this thread, although even that is less of an issue in 10.6), at least in my considerable experience. Your mileage may vary with 3rd party software and drivers (although in my experience, _most_ of those play quite well).

I've had similar experiences with Windows: if you stick to software supplied by Microsoft, the system tends to be fairly stable. Perhaps I'm just lucky.

<comment><USER10> When mine started doing this, it was because the drive was developing bad sectors and mapping them out. The drive becomes unresponsive for some time while doing that, so as each application would need a disc io it would beachball.

Sadly the Apple supplied interface to S.M.A.R.T. data only gives the rosiest outer level summary so it showed "verified". Third party tools that show all the data confirmed the failing sectors, including another half dozen as I refreshed my backup.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> "Is Windows 7 finally halting the Mac migration?"

\-- No, Steve Jobs is!

</comment><comment><USER12> Core i5 and i7 windows laptops were available for 6 months before similarly equipped mac laptops. It kept me from buying a MacBook Pro when it seemed like I'd be paying a premium for old chips.</comment>


Ask HN: Calacanis calls it "controlled deflation" Is the Bubble talk over? - <AUTHOR> Jason Calacanis says on CNBC that the Bubble talk is over and Angel Investing evaluation has been cut in half, in cases two thirds. He calls it controlled deflation.<p>What's your opinion/insight? <comment><USER2> Most investors are not actually qualified to invest in technology startups based on evaluating their technology. They rely on other methods, like investing in companies once they've already achieved some traction, or companies founded by well connected people, or people good at schmoozing.

It's a small flock of sheep all watching each other's moves because no one knows what they're doing. If the economic problems in China scare a few of the sheep, the whole flock will react.

The traditional style investors will freak out, but the people trying to scale startups (like YC) will just double down by investing in every good startup they see.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Links:

[https://mobile.twitter.com/Jason/status/686949878094630916](https://mobile.twitter.com/Jason/status/686949878094630916)

video link: [https://amp.twimg.com/v/53817e94-a35c-402e-b347-4fc7f3ae502b](https://amp.twimg.com/v/53817e94-a35c-402e-b347-4fc7f3ae502b)

article: [http://calacanis.com/2016/01/13/the-controlled-deflation- of-...](http://calacanis.com/2016/01/13/the-controlled-deflation-of-the- bubble-is-almost-complete/)

</comment><comment><USER3> For the first 110 meters, the Hindenburg had a "controlled" decent into Lakehurst, too.</comment>


Let's destroy Bitcoin - <AUTHOR> https://www.technologyreview.com/s/610809/lets-destroy-bitcoin/?href= <comment><USER2> No, I don't think Bitcoin is going to be replaced or destroyed. There's obviously a reason why it still works. It seems that there is a need for a non-governmental e-currency that's available for people to use. That's a fact. Yes, there's going to be other cryptocurrencies. There might even be bigger ones run by big companies or the fed or just governments. But ultimately Bitcoin is here to stay.

I'm not even a fan. I hate the wasted resources.

<comment><USER3> People (in general) have a poor understanding of the magnitude of resources being wasted by fiat economies and malinvestment. The number could easily be over 50% of the population working on economically unproductive activity due to asset bubbles. The resources being used by crypto are absolutely nothing in comparison.

<comment><USER4> I believe inefficiencies caused by friction from control and industrial complexes are certainly hurting productivity and growth, likely by more than the 50% factor you mention, however I don't understand specifically what you mean about "resources being wasted by fiat economies and malinvestment." Can you provide some examples?

<comment><USER5> I don't agree with GP that fiat currencies are part of the waste - but I think it is obvious that an enormous amount of economic activity goes into asset bubbles, even open and generally acknowledged ones, like the housing market - or, in the most extreme case, bitcoin. I wouldn't be surprised if asset bubbles accounted for the majority of investment, even.

This ultimately causes a massive waste of time and resources - in the case of the housing market, it's resulted in young people paying far more of their income in rent - and consequently not spending it on more interesting things, like starting families or businesses.

<comment><USER3> Fiat currencies contribute largely to asset bubbles and malinvestment by suspending market forces. The Fed is actually on record stating their desire to create and reinflate asset bubbles, see Bernanke on "wealth effects."

<comment><USER4> Would this be possible if there was only a single, global currency, resulting in part where no single nation can print money? It feels like it would solve a bunch of major issues. It would obviously take a lot of delicate diplomacy to reach that goal.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I have one question regarding who is going to destroy Bitcoin. When the GDPR is effective, financial transactions are, by at least European law, required to be saved some x years, like 10 years. But when that time have expired it falls under GDPR and should be ereased. Can the blockhain handle that?</comment>


ReCAPTCHA V2 and Invisible ReCAPTCHA for Laravel - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/anam-hossain/captcha <comment><AUTHOR> reCAPTCHA V2 and invisible reCAPTCHA package for Laravel users.

[https://github.com/anam-hossain/captcha](https://github.com/anam- hossain/captcha)

This package comes with a very neat api which is very easy to use. The package is only developed for Laravel users. In addition, Blade directive is used for importing reCaptcha front end code.</comment>


Bryan Johnson invests $100M in Kernel to unlock the power of the human brain - <AUTHOR> https://techcrunch.com/2016/10/20/bryan-johnson-invests-100-million-in-kernel-to-unlock-the-power-of-the-human-brain/?hn <comment><USER2> The negativity in these comments is astounding.

Here's someone who's investing his _own_ hard-earned money into a "device aimed at reducing cognitive deficiencies for sufferers of conditions like Alzheimer's and dementia." And all anyone can do is complain that it's infeasible or that he's unqualified. I don't know about you, but I want _more_ people working on these problems, not less.

Seems very reminiscent of when Musk was starting SpaceX and everyone assumed he didn't know anything about the domain and would automatically fail.

<comment><USER3> True. I blame it on a trend of the 2010s: friendly people who would otherwise write moderate and/or optimistic comments a decade ago, have increasingly lost motivation to partake. This is my theory at least, I can't back it up scientifically or any of that. The causes and/or reasons are that many of those people may have become parents (myself included), or have grown tired of the negativity, or frustrated by the Orwellian developments. We all know the most obvious example on HN: leave a well intended comment and get at least one cynical or even suffocating response that doesn't even get downvoted properly. It gets tiring really fast. Fast forward a couple of years, and most of what's left is enforced so-called constructivism, hyperextreme political correctness, cynisism and depression.

The glory days are over, I think, and I strongly doubt that future generations will keep using the Internet for social interaction.

<comment><USER4> It also could have something to do with the socioeconomic landscape where a vast majority of individuals simply don't have the means or ability to contribute or even participate.

<comment><USER3> Sure, can't rule it out. But I'd say you're pointing out a different (though in and of itself legitimate) problem than the problem of hostility in the sphere which many of us from the 70s and 80s grew up and old(ish) in.

To be honest with you, if I just look at how those people in my very well developed country (with the Internet being ubiquitous, and being poor generally means receiving minimal benefits as opposed to having no money or place to live) behave who still do partake in the public discourse, I'd say that the problem is more with all of _their_ bitterness than that their bitterness is caused by those who never even had a chance in the first place.

As for me, I'm no saint either because I too can get bitter, annoyed, cynical and depressed from time to time. The difference is just that don't tell people off or post my unhappiness; I have the proclivity to just shut up and leave. "There's no use to arguing". Or I do my absolute best to be constructive, like now.

And to add to that: these days and even years I also barely share my own happiness and/or optimism online, because I don't want my vulnerabilities and/or soft spots to become targets. In fact, I'm not even sharing most of my humanity / personality / identity online with strangers at all anymore, unless it's to reflect or in an attempt to at least offer something to counter all of the now common harshness. Like in comments such as this one. And if I'm really _really_ honest then I also need to admit that this side of me is really closer to a character trait than that it's something implying actual personal involvement.

But I digressed, _sorry_ , so let me back up a bit to the two kinds of groups we've established. Maybe the latter group (the one you pointed out) could indeed bring something nice to the table. Assuming they could, it's not realistic to assume they _would_ , for clearly it's not exactly an hospitable, inviting environment these days, and I'd say this just doesn't make it appealing _at all_.

Simply put: it is what it is mainly due to those who _can_ join in and they either freeze, fight, or flight. Who in their right mind who's not here already would want to join in on _that_ mess?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I googled a bit. The background is quite interesting. Johnson founded and sold Braintree which is where the money came from.

The main brain tech guy is Theodore Berger who has tested implants in rats, monkeys and humans with some success [http://singularityhub.com/2015/11/15/first-human-tests-of- me...](http://singularityhub.com/2015/11/15/first-human-tests-of-memory- boosting-brain-implant-a-big-leap-forward/)

Berger on video [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bHubR09oKKE](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bHubR09oKKE)

<comment><USER6> Oh no. The guy behind my favorite company on bootstrapping page got rich selling it to a top schemer in payments industry and fell for others' bullshit that throwing money at neuroscience will make miracles happen. Wow. What an ending...

<comment><USER7> A guy bootstrapped a company and got rich doing it: the best possible inspiration to future bootstrappers, but you find that a bad thing? What's your problem with someone spending _his own money_ to chase something you think is impossible? Seriously, the amount of hate on HN for people that are actually trying to do hard things is astonishing.

<comment><USER6> "A guy bootstrapped a company and got rich doing it: the best possible inspiration to future bootstrappers"

Oh no. That's one possible inspiration. Another would be Braintree IPOing or continuing as a company providing an alternative to Paypal's BS I constantly read about while guy continues to make tons of money or get rich. Then he invests in hard problems we're likely to solve where we have the necessary foundation to begin to achieve the stated goals.

Instead, he got rich selling off his good company and now has money to blow on stuff like this. Good for him. Still inspirational with Braintree's early work still something I'm going to cite. Just still worth critiquing for where it went or is going wrong so next bootstrapper considers better alternatives.

Also, realize the irony that you don't like us criticizing what he did with Braintree or where the money is going while Braintree itself owed its success to correct criticism of how successful payment companies were doing things & where their investments were going. He pointed out the problems, showed a better way via his offering, and now we're talking about him instead of them. ;)

<comment><USER8> The man doesn't owe you a goddamn thing, and doesn't have some moral obligation to save you from shitty payment processing. You act like you rose him out of the ashes to save humanity and that's simply not the case.

<comment><USER6> "The man doesn't owe you a goddamn thing, and doesn't have some moral obligation to save you from shitty payment processing."

That's compatible with my comment. It proposes alternative to the path he took that other bootstrappers with utilitarian bent might find interesting. It doesn't require him personally to do anything. I even said his success was "good for him" in terms of efforts in and result achieved.

"You act like you rose him out of the ashes to save humanity"

You made that up. I explicitly said he didn't. His goal was to get rich. It would take more selfless individuals to do lasting things for humanity. It will take majority of humanity working together to _save_ humanity.

<comment><USER9> So giving away $100M of his own money isn't in the slightest selfless? He's a selfish individual? Helping terrible diseases isn't doing something lasting for humanity?

<comment><USER6> People have to be totally selfish or selfless says a false dichotomy. People seem to like those. I see people's actions to be along a spectrum between where the motivations vary depending on what they want to do. Some people seem to lean almost entirely toward one or the other but I'm not prescriptive about that.

We don't have to guess about his motivations, though. It's in the article:

"For Johnson, the quest is innately personal. His step-father has early signs of Alzheimer's."

He and his step-father are suffering through the effects of Alzheimer's. He definitely has personal gain from a treatment that would work. There's a clear selfless angle on helping the step-father. He probably, after personally experiencing it, also would like to prevent others from going through the same thing. That's my guess. Respectable motivations for sure.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> "We can program yeast to do a specific function. We can expect the same path with neural code."

Ummm... that's quite a big leap!

<comment><USER11> Yep. Biologist here lol.

It would be interesting to know how much biology this dude truly explored before plunking down his $100M on some other dude promising him to revolutionize the brain.

<comment><USER12> BME / sensory neurosystems guy here.

>It would be interesting to know how much biology this dude truly explored before plunking down his $100M ...

Not enough.

<comment><USER13> Would you guys prefer that Johnson donate his $100M to the NIH or a university that's already working on related research, or is there benefit to him taking a different route and funding Berger and this org directly?

<comment><USER12> I think i'm largely agnostic about that in principle.

In practice, collaborations are hard and setting up new ones is even harder, so striking out into the wild and being able to do cool stuff fast generally costs more than 100M.

<comment><USER13> From what I understand though, that's exactly why Johnson invested his own money and turned down outside investment: this is just the first step on a very long road, and it doesn't sound like he anticipates a viable return in an amount of time that a venture fund could justify participating in.

<comment><USER12> >" The futuristic device, which Johnson says might actually not need to be implanted beneath the skull at all, is designed to facilitate communication between brain cells by hacking the "neural code" that enables our brain to store and recall key information. "

Estimated timescale: centuries. Not for want of trying, but we have no credible idea what "the" neural code is, even in subcortical areas that are relatively simple to study like the optic and auditory nerves. Once you're anywhere beyond the inferior colliculus, all bets are officially off. (and if you have any good ideas, drop me a line!)

Our best tools fail to explain anything particularly interesting about much, much simpler analogous systems: [http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2016/05/26/055624](http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2016/05/26/055624).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Damn, I thought the guy was going to throw $100M at linux kernel developers. That would be nice.

<comment><USER15> I too briefly got excited when reading the headline. That would've really made my day. So many people could work full-time on the Linux kernel.

<comment><USER16> Making sure one of the most used parts of software in the world gets proper funding for additional security audits, better performance optimization for more platforms, leveling the playing field for small hardware vendors who can't afford their own Kernel Developers, allowing for more disruptive technology on top of the Linux kernel?

Nah. Not really Valley Style, lets just fund another AI Moonshot. Because there isn't enough money in AI already.

I mean sure, the ROI investing into the Linux Kernel is 0. But so much money is flowing into AI Moonshots currently that look like their value will be 0 that one gets disheartened quickly when important infrastructure for everyone is needing cash badly, but there is no businessmodel...

<comment><USER17> > Nah. Not really Valley Style, lets just fund another AI Moonshot. Because > there isn't enough money in AI already.

An AI moonshot if it works would change everything. It would change way more than the Linux kernel ever even dreamed of doing.

<comment><USER16> Going by that logic all money should be poured into Moonshots. Every available Ship should have sailed to find India. Every Researcher should be researching immortality...

Ambition isn't the only thing that counts. As much as I'd love to seeing a full cent of every taxdollar going into NASA, handing over the whole dollar would make very people feel very miserable very fast.

I hope this makes the resentment towards the ratio of money flowing into AI Moonshots compared to a little more down to earth things that are needed right now a little more understandable.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> What's with all the negativity on the comments here? Are all moonshots doomed after Theranos? Or may be there's already solid proof that this is the next Theranos?

I'm a very skeptical and pessimistic man, but can we extend at least some benefit of a doubt here, please.

<comment><USER7> It's astonishing, given that we're all communicating via a technology that would essentially be considered magic as little as 50 years ago.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> Neural implants are only a matter of time and money. Good to see someone making a bold bet here and with his own money and time.

</comment><comment><USER20> Trying and failing is better than not trying. Its his $100m and he earned the right to take a shot at this.

I have watched Bryan talk before and have been following him. He is determined enough to at least make a significant contribution in this area.

</comment><comment><USER21> > _a company with the sole purpose of building hardware and software to > augment human intelligence_

Human intelligence, while fallible and easy to turn off, is arguably our best feature. It's also very versatile.

Bryan Johnson can spend his money any way he likes of course, but one has to wonder why there aren't more initiatives to augment our _senses_ instead of working on intelligence (our own or the intelligence of machines).

I would love to gain a permanent ability to see in the dark, hear ultrasounds, know where North is at all times, etc.

And "all" one has to do with a new sensor is plug it in: the brain is very good at making sense of any new signal, and using it, without prompting or training.

The plugin-in part is non-trivial, of course (although there are shortcuts, such as using the tongue as a crude V0); but one can imagine that once we're able to build a general API to the human brain, many gadgets could be developed for it.

<comment><USER22> "And "all" one has to do with a new sensor is plug it in: the brain is very good at making sense of any new signal, and using it, without prompting or training."

That doesn't sound right. E.g. see stories of blind people who have gotten sight at a late age - I think the tendency is for them _not_ to be able to really utilize sight the way sighted-from-birth people do.

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> This reads like he really liked the Nexus book trilogy. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Nexus_Trilogy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Nexus_Trilogy) Even some of the language is the same. The theme of the book is 'running a kernel over neurons'. It is even an open source kernel.

</comment><comment><USER24> If they can find a way to tweak genes to force the brain to have more glial cells, the type of cells that support neuron functions, or enhance the glial performance, they can eventually make people sustain high mental performance for longer periods of time.

One of the findings after analyzing Einstein's brain was that he had a higher ratio of glias to neurons.

</comment><comment><USER25> What if the locked power of human brain is pure stupidity? Well... there is only one way to find out.

</comment><comment><USER26> "unlock the power of the human brain" lol, why not save yourself $100 million and just take a Deepak Chopra seminar?

</comment><comment><USER27> Smells like another Theranos: too good to be true

<comment><USER28> It is his own money in his own company, so very different.

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> I'd read somewhere that the workings of our brains are just too complex for us to understand, or rather, we are just too good to understand it thoroughly to "unlock the powers".

You see, if the brain was simple enough for us to understand its workings, we would not be even capable of understanding the basics of the nervous system functioning (we would have been just too dumb with such simple brains!), and therein lies this irony - We will never be able to fully understand our own brains, because that very impossibility has given us the ability to understand almost everything else in this universe.

<comment><USER30> ...what?

<comment><USER31> rms_returns is saying that our own intelligence and ability to comprehend things is a function of the complexity of our brains.

So, low complexity results in under-performing intelligent ability. On the other hand, high complexity results in a higher performing brain but more difficult to understand.

I wouldn't necessarily agree with this argument because I suspect intelligent ability is only partially related to neural architecture. Additionally, the ability to perceive things lies in having some kind of framework in which a question can be formed.</comment></comment></comment>


Google is changing its logo - <AUTHOR> http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2013/09/is-google-revamping-its-logo-hints-appear-in-new-chrome-beta-for-android/#p3

<comment><USER2> They use this one in print materials.

[http://deployment.googleapps.com/Home/user- resources/google-...](http://deployment.googleapps.com/Home/user- resources/google-icons-and-logos)

But if they're using it in Android apps it may point to more flattenification in KitKat/future releases. However, that doesn't seem to be the case:

[http://www.theverge.com/2013/9/9/4710634/redesigned- google-l...](http://www.theverge.com/2013/9/9/4710634/redesigned-google-logo- found-in-chrome-for-android-beta)

> Update: A person familiar with Google's branding tells The Verge that this > is not a replacement for the company's traditional logo. Instead, _the > flatter design is used in instances where the beveled logo may not display > well — such as on printed banners or other corporate use cases_. The logo in > question has been pulled from where it first appeared previously in Chrome > for Android, signaling that the company quickly realized its mistake. > Suffice it to say, the Google logo you know and love isn't going anywhere > anytime soon.

Case closed.

</comment><comment><USER3> Why is flat "modern"? I don't understand it. I'm not criticizing it, I think it looks neat, but I just can't understand why, after all this time we struggled to make shadows, rounded corners etc, everything is just flat.

<comment><USER4> Because it can afford to be now.

There was a time where most people didn't know how to operate a computer. We had to pull all the stops out to make computer use possible or easier for them - skeumorphism is one of the things that came out of that. We hoped that by emulating real-world objects, both in detail (see: iCal) or in more abstract terms (see: "3D" buttons).

Whether or not this ever really _helped_ usability is a matter of debate.

In any case though, basically everyone knows how to use the computer and the web now. The general UI elements and their rules - links, buttons, sliders, etc, are all known to just about everyone. At this point since we've trained everyone, we get to drop some of the frills around the UI without suffering a substantial drop in usability.

That and it's just the style. Why are cars today more beveled and sharper- edged than cars of the 90s? Whatever happened to the big hair of the 80s?

<comment><USER5> I'm 47, been using computers since high school, and find flat a disaster. I'm in Firefox right now. The forward/back buttons take _slightly_ different shades of gray depending on whether they are currently disabled or not. I endlessly find myself speculatively clicking on them to see if they work or not. Sure, somebody will respond that the difference is clear to them, but that does not obviate my data point.

Further, I often find myself completely unable to discern which tab is for the page I'm on. If you use chrome, the tab in the foreground lays on top of the other tabs, so it is clearer. Firefox - a slightly different shade again.

Are there more tabs than are visible? Again, this is denoted by a slightly different shade of gray. This probably works great for 20 somethings with great eyesight. It is very problematic if your eyesight or monitor is not so good, if your windows color settings are not the norm, and so on.

As for cars, they are shaped this way because of wind tunnel data. Data and utility matter, design is not just all about fashion.

<comment><USER6> It seems to me that your complaint is not so much with flat design as it is with insufficient contrast between active/selected items and other items. That can be a problem with non-flat UIs as well.

In any case, your point about the 20-somethings is a good one. Large portions of the web are usable only with difficulty for people with poor eyesight, or lack of experience with high-stimulation environments, or attention problems, or sensory-processing issues, etc. We see articles about making things usable by blind people, but very little about the much larger population of people who can't handle low contrast, overly busy pages, or tiny text.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> _this looks about a million times better than the current logo_

Even accepting that this is hyperbole, I think it reflects a disconnect between design aficionados and normal users.

The logos are pretty similar, and I'm skeptical that most people would have a preference either way.

<comment><USER8> Indeed... I find the second much harder to differentiate from the background. Especially the yellow o.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> Whether or not Google is about to flatten their logo, it's worth noting that Yahoo just un-flattened theirs. It's also not inconceivable that one of the reasons Yahoo did this was to appear more Google-like.

<comment><USER10> Makes me think of Dr. Suess's story "The Sneetches": [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sneetches_and_Other_Storie...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sneetches_and_Other_Stories#.22The_Sneetches.22)

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> Hm, I doubt this is a new logo. The bevelled logo is the one used in digital media. The flat logo is the one used in print and has been in use for a while.

For example: [https://cloud.google.com/files/KhanAcademy.pdf](https://cloud.google.com/files/KhanAcademy.pdf)

</comment><comment><USER12> This is funny HN headline: google is changing its logo Source Headline: Is google changing its logo? Source conclusion: No, google is not changing its logo.

<comment><USER13> If the answer was "yes", they'd have no need to make the headline a question.

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Personally I prefer the old one - I don't find it to be garish or over the top, and I find the new one somewhat lifeless.

</comment><comment><USER14> The old logo is what most first time photoshop users would end up with shortly after discovering the bevel feature. It's about time they updated it.

<comment><USER15> It's funny how tastes shift. This whole "flat" look that's currently in would have looked babyish in the tech space 10+ years ago. And so it goes with bevels, shadows, and all the rest.. looks silly to us now but was _de rigeur_ back then! :-)

Of course, things will continue to shift and today's trendiest looks will seem ridiculous in 2023..

<comment><USER16> In 2023 all the hipsters will use B&W design. "You use colors? OMG, that looks like it was designed in 2010."

<comment><USER17> 2023? Visual Studio switched to largely B&W icons in its 2012 release. Some of the websites that have been linked from HN as prime examples of flat design also used the B&W icon motif (I don't recall which ones specifically though).

<comment><USER18> Ick, don't remind me. Looking at the source control browser in VS2012 makes my eyes want to bleed.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> So essentially Marissa took the bevel along with her from Google to Yahoo?

</comment><comment><USER20> The old logo, warts and all is a classic by now. It's actually surprisingly timeless. In one word it's playful. I wouldn't change it just to follow the latest design trend.

<comment><USER21> Which of the old logos are you referring to?

<comment><USER20> The one shown in the article, which has been in use since 2010 I believe?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> This is speculation at best. We see this kind of news every time Google changes their favicon.

[http://googleblog.blogspot.co.uk/2009/01/googles-new- favicon...](http://googleblog.blogspot.co.uk/2009/01/googles-new-favicon.html)

</comment><comment><USER23> > but Joshua Stewart figured out that just by incrementing the number to 5 or > 6

Wait what, people still do this and admit to it?

<comment><USER24> Yeah, somebody needs to lock this criminal Joshua Stewart up. Maybe he can share a cell with weev.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> The actual Ars Technica headline begins (now, at least; perhaps it's changed) "Is Google changing its logo?", and recent updates to the article suggest that, as per Betteridge, the answer is "no, probably not".

</comment><comment><USER26> It's not a new logo. It's not even a different logo: the glyph shapes are exactly the same in both versions, it just has different shading for when it needs to be displayed small.

Apple has been known to try different shading and color for its logo, but that doesn't mean that whenever they do so, they've adopted a new logo.

</comment><comment><USER27> Windows logo got flat before it was cool.

</comment><comment><USER28> So Google becomes flat and keeps its serifs, while Yahoo! unflattens itself, but loses the serifs. Huh.

</comment><comment><USER29> Well they probably save several terabytes a year with the new logo!

</comment><comment><USER30> If you look closely, it's not flat. There's a very thin bevel.

It's symptomatic to me of Google's inability to make up their mind in the design department: UI different across products, UX disaster when they introduce discrepancies between products, not able to decide whether their logo is flat or bevel....

Really, Google is good at doing nerd stuff, but they should just outsource everything regarding design.

<comment><USER31> _If you look closely, it 's not flat. There's a very thin bevel._

I can't see it, where? I can see a gradient though. It's slick, font isn't though.

<comment><USER30> thin gradient, or bevel, or shadow, not sure how you want to name that. The thing is, it's not flat.

<comment><USER32> In that case, iOS 7 isn't flat either

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> Interesting. Yahoo ditches flat for 3D. Google ditches 3D for flat. The result? Neither have good logos.

<comment><USER34> Yahoo's change was more the CEO deciding that she can redo it in a weekend. I would think any change from Google would go through a UX/UI design team and a ton of redundant meetings... not sure which is worse.

<comment><USER33> I don't think they went through any UX team here. Google needs a new face, a new logo. The colorful serif-font logo looks very childish and 90's.

<comment><USER35> "Googol" is a word invented by a child. "Google" is a homophone of this word. How to do you give the logo a less-childish treatment while maintaining a name that is also childish?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> It's about time. Old logo reminds me of times when people used tables to design web-pages.

</comment><comment><USER37> If they really are changing their main logo to match that one, I wonder if they are doing it because Yahoo just changed their logo.

Maybe Google is trying to compete with Marissa Meyer and her new strategies at Yahoo.

Edit: Flat is so hot right now.

</comment><comment><USER38> The title of this article, as posted to Hacker News, is "Google is changing its logo." The title of the article linked to by this post is "Is Google revamping its logo?".

This is a significant difference.

<comment><USER39> Especially since the answer, as always, is no.

</comment></comment><comment><USER40> The new one is not completely flat, there's some really subtle shading there. I like it a lot. More elegant.

</comment><comment><USER41> "...recent Yahoo disaster..." \- thats what you get when focus-groups drive your design.

</comment><comment><USER42> I'm surprised that it didn't take 30 seconds to load while missing letters.

</comment><comment> martin-adams Maybe the new logo compresses better and Google are tightening it's belts.

</comment><comment> olog-hai Why link to #p3? Let me read the post from the top without making me scroll up.

</comment><comment><USER43> Doesn't exactly shout "rapid technological progress".

</comment><comment><USER44> This modern look seems to typically have a slight gradient as well.

</comment><comment><USER45> I'm not sure that taking the shadows out of their logo is actually changing it. Google uses flat logos on t-shirts and elsewhere I'm sure. Imagine a black t-shirt with a white google logo on it. Flattening a logo is something you might do in the context of usage, so I just don't know why flatening it for their default (which matches a lot of their existing design anyway), is seen as a big deal.

</comment><comment><USER46> Yahoo! What a great logo!

</comment><comment><USER47> The world is flat ;-)</comment>


Hohm – Need Beta Testers - <AUTHOR> http://signup.myhohm.com/

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for taking the time to comment.

We're in the very early stages of the app, thus the limited information. However, Hohm brings together a complete solution to organize families. Some of features will include:

Metadata manager for digital files, Family Activity feed, Family Location Tracker, Family Photo/Video Archive.

</comment><comment><USER2> If you won't tell me what it is/what it does, why would I give you my information? 'Keep your family life centered'? What does that even mean?

</comment><comment><USER3> It would be nice to know what I'm signing up for.</comment>


Image compression idea - <AUTHOR> http://filamentgroup.com/lab/rwd_img_compression

<comment><USER2> Reminds me of the trick from the early web where if you really wanted to compress a JPEG it was better to resize the image smaller rather than go below about quality 25 and then display it at the larger size. Still blocky, but a different kind of blocky.</comment>


Dissecting the 128-byte raycaster (2014) - <AUTHOR> http://finalpatch.blogspot.com/2014/06/dissecting-128-byte-raycaster.html <comment><USER2> Bonus content: Terry Davis randomly shilling TempleOS in the comments.

<comment><USER3> What happened to that guy? Haven't seen anything lately.

<comment><USER4> Alive and kicking: [https://www.youtube.com/user/COCONUT202](https://www.youtube.com/user/COCONUT202)

<comment><USER5> So he's not homeless?

<comment><USER6> AFAIU, he's on disability pretty much permanently.

Which I'm all for FWIW.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> The author implemented\improved the shader as [https://www.shadertoy.com/view/MdXXz2](https://www.shadertoy.com/view/MdXXz2)

I copypasted the original code here - [https://www.shadertoy.com/view/MdtcDX](https://www.shadertoy.com/view/MdtcDX) \- neat!

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Heads up to userbinator who posted about this in yesterday's mini Wolfenstein post BTW: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16534119](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16534119)

</comment><comment><USER8> writing in assembly is such a joy ... cuts to the essence ... such speed, power and danger ... especially when doing graphics pre gpu ... your post inspires me to get back on that saddle ... loved back when I found how to control one pixel then over a few days implemented bresenham's line algorithm then had objects moving in 3d with perspective projection all in a few pages of code, of course no libraries ... electrical engineering majors who get assembly as their first programming course like me are exposed to programming in the spirit of a chainsaw haircut

great post

</comment><comment> s-macke To calculate a simple xor (color=x ^ y) to produce a texture for walls was a common hack in the early days of computer graphics. I used it frequently under DOS. It is still useful for these kind of hacks :-)

<comment><USER9> It's visually distinctive as well. As soon as I saw the screen capture I thought "that's an XOR".

<comment><USER10> It's known as "munching squares": [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Munching_square](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Munching_square)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Author (of the article, not the demo) here. I still remember debugging this thing in Turbo Debugger in DosBox and the CDQ instruction was causing trouble because Turbo Debugger could not recognise it.

</comment><comment><USER12> I just tried it in dosbox 0.74 on Linux and it doesn't work - it renders very slowly and nothing that looks like that youtube video. Does it work for anyone else?

</comment><comment><USER13> Thanks for posting this! It was a great read. I have always been interested in low level graphics programming.

</comment><comment><USER14> That's real time? Awesome!</comment>


To "swivel" - <AUTHOR> http://blog.vitei.com/to-swivel/#more-314 This is an interesting post discussing the evolution of a game project. <comment><USER2> Love the art here. The giant crashed robot looks like an homage to "Iron Giant" ([http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Iron_Giant](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Iron_Giant)), one of my favorite movies as a kid.

</comment><comment><USER3> Peter, the blogger in this post, is an excellent artist :) Watch his work on _Paper Wars_ as well : [http://pandoralive.info/?p=1375](http://pandoralive.info/?p=1375) (for iOS and Open Pandora, sometimes soon)

</comment><comment><USER4> As a fellow Vitei backroomer, it was great fun watching Peter and Chris work on this. Hopefully we'll find a way to pick it up again sometime in the future.</comment>


Digital Modernism Done Right - <AUTHOR> http://blog.getprismatic.com/blog/2012/4/23/digital-modernism-done-right.html

<comment><USER2> The whole concept of "digital modernism" is a fluke since modernism emerged from seeking functionality, not aesthetics, while the former is trying to emulate modernism on GUIs. Print design can appear "modern" and "Swiss" since its function is to be read. GUIs are different, and require new thinking to design and style correctly. Just removing the "style" portion and calling it modern is like adding fins onto the back of a car to make it more "space-age". Apple already debunked this movement, since the general user obviously prefers the higher-fidelity GUI -- even if the trend is now growing out of proportion. For a designer with a trained eye, of course s/he needs less visual cues to figure out the GUI, so anything remotely physical looks overdone. I would react the same way when approaching from a modern graphic design standpoint: Hey, that's not how things should look if I apply the grand unified theory of modern design that I learned in design school. I'd say no one is closer to getting "digital modernism" correct than Android, but essentially redefining what it means for a GUI to even be modern. This idea from the article to knockoff the Swiss movement is sadly, a joke. I've used Prismatic beta, and the UI didn't wow me, at all (from either designer or layman standpoint).

</comment><comment><USER3> These Prismatic posts have been popping up every couple of days. I'm not even certain if they've even launched yet ("Request an Invite"), but this seems to be a textbook example of good 'launch' blogging. The consistency and depth of these posts is actually making me consider using this service.

<comment><USER4> Glad to hear it. Signup and you'll get an invite before long. The craftsmanship shows even better in the product than in the blog posts. ;-)

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> So far I'm very impressed by these guys and I think they are doing so many things right. However, their UX is not one of them. This is the case where too much love of aesthetic is working against functionality. Their main service is content discovery and their layout is working against that.</comment>


Airbnb patents AI that judges if you have neuroticism, narcissism, psychopathy - <AUTHOR> https://www.engadget.com/2020/01/17/your-online-activity-effectively-social-credit-score-airbnb/ <comment><USER2> Airbnb went from cheaper than hotels and generally less BS, to way more BS and way more expensive than hotels. I now yearn for the simplicity of a boring hotel chain. Check in and check out are easy (and consistent). The room is private. The pricing is transparent. The process for cleaning and other standard housing maintenance tasks is invisible.

<comment><USER3> My go-to is Wyndham properties. They have a good app and great loyalty rewards.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Sheesh.

This makes me happy about two things. One, that it's actually pretty hard to find much information about me on the net, and two, that I'm really, really happy that I don't use Airbnb.

</comment><comment><USER5> How does this not explicitly violate the ADA?</comment>


Show HN: Crowd-sourced software review website - <AUTHOR> https://meagle.org <comment><AUTHOR> I've been building this crowd-sourced software review website called Meagle. Essentially you can write reviews about any version of any piece of software. If it isn't already in the system, you can add it in.

The whole site is crowd-maintained: top users are rewarded and bad users are punished.

It's very early stage but I'd appreciate feedback / comments / suggestions. Try posting some reviews and adding some (legit) content. Thanks!</comment>


Tales of a Part-Time Sysadmin: Dogfooding Docker to Test Docker - <AUTHOR> https://blog.jessfraz.com/post/dogfooding-docker-to-test-docker/

<comment><USER2> So, basically, the continuous integration system that the docker team uses to do continuous integration, makes heavy use of docker.

This is not meant to sound terse, but that is not that interesting.

How about writing about how you setup this CI platform? You mention you use jenkins, and mention that jenkins runs using the official docker image for jenkins, but what about all your other hosts and configuration management? You mention consul, but don't go into much detail about it.

Surely there is a lot of moving parts here, I would be interested in knowing all the work and thought that went into setting it up.

<comment><USER3> I enjoyed it! If you only want extremely detailed walkthroughs, fine, but people don't have to write their personal blog posts to cater to those tastes, and other folks don't have to upvote according to those tastes.

She has written some other fun posts about her various crazy setups--she runs Debian on her Mac and walked folks through how to do that:

[https://blog.jessfraz.com/post/linux-on- mac/](https://blog.jessfraz.com/post/linux-on-mac/)

and almost never installs packages on the host (rather than in containers)--to that end she Dockerized Chrome, Spotify, and a 3D Steam game:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GsLZz8cZCzc](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GsLZz8cZCzc)

[https://blog.jessfraz.com/post/docker-containers-on-the- desk...](https://blog.jessfraz.com/post/docker-containers-on-the-desktop/)

(Maybe I have a soft spot for unusual setups. I worked from a netbook for six months, and currently bemuse my coworkers by using an ARM Chromebook as my main machine and doing most of my coding in a WordStar-inspired text editor named joe.)

<comment><USER4> _Not only that, I can control how much CPU and Memory the app uses. Yes, the cpu /memory hungry Chrome is now perfectly contained!_

Ooh, I like the sound of this!

<comment><USER5> This was one of the first things I ever did with Docker, and now essentially everything I ever run is inside a container. I believe this kind of process granularity and segregation is going to become a lot more common than just a couple of docker nerds doing it for fun and profit. It makes perfect sense, just that it's not yet automated, which excludes a lot of people who are attracted to this idea.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> If I understand correctly, they're using pre-release Docker in their primary test infrastructure as well as just being the system under test. I'd be curious what this does to the robustness of the test system.

When I was at VMware, we had analogous testing to do with ESX. But there, I was pretty careful to differentiate between "infrastructure" and "system under test," and used known-good versions on infrastructure.

The reasoning was that the test automation was mission-critical and, while dogfooding was good, the cost of the infrastructure going down would have been too high to take the chance and we probably wouldn't have had the luxury of time to debug against it anyway.</comment>


Ask HN: A site that allows you to create programs other people ask for? - <AUTHOR>

For example, I need an app that does this and this, but I don't know how to code. I would go to this website and post it saying what I want. Then a programmer could come along and fill that order.
I think it would be a good place for ideas as well as good inspiration for some projects.
Anyone know of such a place? <comment><USER2> Are you referring to reverse-auction programming sites? There's plenty of those to be found.

I do not have a favorable opinion of most of them, and that's because they list the bid amount and bid text. It ends up becoming a race to undercut each other, to the point where I have seen a prject with a $10 USD bid that would take me 10 hours.

I frequent Guru.com to pick up small side projects here and there. It does not list the bid amounts, lists the country of origin (for both employers and freelancers), and uses an escrow service.

<comment><AUTHOR> I was thinking along the lines of free.

<comment><USER2> When you consider the aforementioned $10 USD for 10 hours, and the fact that Guru.com takes 7-15% of the fee, it's practically free.. :)

What would be the motivation to code a product for someone else for free? Especially considering they might profit off of it, or that you will likely hand over the rights to it afterwards. I'll admit that I am interested in coding fun projects, but that's questionable.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> There was a post about that on HN just a few hours ago. The site was <http://www.builditwith.me/>

I am myself working on a project called Startup Garage where people will be able to collaborate on startup ideas and set up "virtual companies". We have a site up and running but the feature set is so far pretty limited as we are still very much in beta. Google us if you're interested. :)

<comment><AUTHOR> Hmm, not exactly what I was looking for but close nonetheless. I'll check out your site though, looks good.</comment></comment>


EHarmony Founder Wants to Spend $10 Million to 'Figure Out' Homosexuality - <AUTHOR> http://betabeat.com/2013/02/eharmony-founder-wants-to-spend-10-million-to-figure-out-homosexuality/ <comment><USER2> "At the very best, it's been a painful way for a lot of people to have to live."

And statements like that, and the mindset behind them, are a good part of that pain.

I'd like to see companies contribute $10 Million grants to study cluelessness. _That's_ a painful way to live.

Won't you help?

</comment><comment><USER3> What a fool.

He should instead spend a fraction of that amount and get himself some therapy to figure out why he is so obsessed with other peoples' sex lives.

</comment><comment><USER4> Whats to "figure out"? People like pleasure, and enjoy "getting off", and will pursue any avenue to obtain an electro-chemical rush(love).

<comment><USER5> So you're equally as likely to pursue the electro-chemical-rush-called-love with anyone who can get you off? I didn't think so.

Let's try this again. What's to figure out? It's past time for people like this guy to "figure out" that some people are born with an affinity for their own gender, they're perfectly happy that way, and there is nothing wrong with them, period.

His comment about "what a painful way to live" is remarkably illuminating thing for him to say...and disturbing. He deserves to be roundly criticized for it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> I feel so bad for this guy.</comment>


Twitter Needs a Spam Filter? No, We Need a Marketer Filter - <AUTHOR> http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/twitter_needs_a_spam_filter_no_we_need_a_marketer_filter.php <comment><USER2> I feel no pity for people who don't want to see #moonfruit tweets. If it's that big a deal, unfollow your greedy friends who are willing to spam you in order for a shot at a laptop.

<comment><USER3> Yep. Twitter's best use case seems to be awareness of what good friends are doing (<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=139421>). If people stay true to that you should never have more than 7 subscribers who post a lot.

If you want to subscribe to more, _none_ of them can post a lot. Otherwise the infrequent posters will get drowned out and you'll be likely to miss their updates. (<http://akkartik.name/blog/2009-06-06-18-18-34-soc>).

<comment><USER4> I follow a ~350 people. Most don't seem to toot much. But I don't expect catch everyone's postings; that's not the point for me. It's more like being in a really crowded room, where i occasionally wander around and overheard bits of conversation. I can step in if I like, or like it flow past. Sometimes I have a twitter client running where I can change stuff via peripheral vision. Usually I just poke in to see what the recent 100 posts happen to be.

It's an ambient medium.

I'm surprised, then when people speak of using twitter to get news out on something (such as an upcoming local event), since there's a very good chance people will not see it (unless it gets repeated and re-repeated).

I _have_ stopped following people who tend to not offer much useful info (I really don't care where you are eating breakfast, nor want to be reminded that you enjoy being a shill for someone's business). Basically, I prefer that any random slice of messages will have some actual information content in the mix.

<comment><USER3> You don't care about catching everything, fair enough. But do you care equally about everyone you follow? I contend that you don't. If you sample randomly you bias for those who post often rather than those you care more about.

<comment><USER4> "But do you care equally about everyone you follow? "

Of course not. That's not how use Twitter

"If you sample randomly you bias for those who post often rather than those you care more about."

If a random sample routinely has someone posting items of little to no value to me, I follow. So it works out.

The people I really care about I connect with in other ways: phone, E-mail, blogs, conferences and local meetings, and so on.

Twitter is but one of many ways I get my daily data bath. That I miss this or that is not a big deal. Besides, the important stuff tends to get repeated so it usually finds me anyways.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> If you took out the people trying to market something (or themselves) there would be hardly anyone left

</comment><comment><USER6> I very much agree.

I wonder how much traction there will be in the next 18-24 months for a social network service that advertises a "No marketing" policy for it's users. I think people would value a service that refused to advertise to them or otherwise sell their data.</comment>


Ask HN: Where do the real hackers hangout? - <AUTHOR> Is it still Freenode / IRC?
Why do I ask?
I remember 15 years ago, say 2004, technical sites weren't commercial. Except Experts Exchange ofcourse.
Nowadays I can't trust opinions of people because I fear they are selling me something. Framework authors are only building frameworks on the side, their real business is building a hosted service for whatever they are building.
Nothing wrong with that.
I just miss a simpler time. And want a slice of that again. <comment><USER2> I had similar feelings a year ago and wanted to setup a "diet" for my mind; I'd only allow quality information, opinions to enter my mind, not just random stuff.

Firstly, the best way to access/find valuable knowledge is still books. Then, I have Freenode open in background for technical conversations, and also follow some good quality podcasts in non-technical subjects; from history to art.

If I got a question, I either ask in Freenode or ask trustworthy people by e-mail.

No social media. No news websites (except HN).

I'm a lot happier with this set of communication and information channels.

<comment><AUTHOR> That's a great way to put it - a diet for the mind.

On that note, do you mind sharing the list of podcasts you subscribe to?

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Freenode is a good place.. the /list command will show you channels once you connect. Popular ones are #hardware, #linux, #windows, #python, #debian, #bash, ##networking, etc. There is a channel for most major technologies.

<comment><USER4> My biggest gripe with Freenode is that a lot of popular channels are silent. Hundreds of users, but all lurking with very little conversation going on.

For me, the best channel was always #csharp. Every time I logged in, there was always a group of people talking. Any time I had a question, I could ask it and a handful of people would either give you the answer or would talk you through the problem and help you come up with an answer. That kind of guidance is often lacking from modern programming forums/q&a sites.

<comment><USER5> > _I could ask it and a handful of people would either give you the answer or > would talk you through the problem and help you come up with an answer._

The best times for me are when members help me come up with a _question_. I'd have a problem I could vaguely formulate in long paragraphs, and then someone from the #python channel would write down my problem in one concise question of technical writing that is so spot on that I immediately think of the correct solution.

The #python (and mailing list) crowd has done this to me so many times.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I think I'm one of those people you are talking about. I don't hang out in a secret place. I hang out here, subreddits for languages I'm interested in, many Slack groups for things I'm interested in, iMessage/SMS with current and previous co workers whom are enjoyable to talk to. I also hang out with my family and read a ton of programming books. If you find a secret place with more of these people I would love to know.

</comment><comment><USER7> Please define "real hackers".

<comment><USER8> People who don't sellout to the corporate agenda... watching HN'ers downvote me for pointing out the videogame industry has been stealing PC games for the last 20 years was alarming. We went from owning diablo, warcraft and starcraft games to not owning them... that is a major change and to see a place that calls itself the place of "hackers" and nerds, who theoretically should all be about fighting to preserve culture against the corporate onslaught against our basic rights to own our own software and not have it tied to "the cloud" is disturbing in it's own right.

Seems everyone wants to be a slave to the mainframe and have no privacy and no general computing.

Not getting that the corporations of the world are hell bent on turning the PC into a dumb client and everyones bending over is disturbing.

The stuff Microsoft has in the pipe with UWP and encrypted computing is alarming on its own, "honest files" of the past, not trapped in some vm or some remotely controlled new microsoft file system and license servers for this new Software as a service (aka stealing your software an selling to back to you at inflated prices) is madness itself.

There is no reason for any piece of software whether that be an OS, Office application or Game to be divided between our computers and the companies.

<comment><USER9> I see what you're saying. But I'm curious what the future you described will actually look like. I am NOT curious in the least about the good old days. I know it, it's boring to me. Having privacy and total control over your computing is fine, whatever, I've seen it a thousand times already. It's good. But in today's world what is the benefit of that? The market doesn't respond to that, does not reward it. Human psychology likes the alternative of thin client and total survelience much better because it's more convenient and because it already has more momentum.

So I'm curious what will happen when you can't do almost anything on your computer without it being inside proprietary cloud. When everything I do is recorded, aggregated, and analyzed by mismanaged big data experts. When real life decisions are made that affect me based on this data by some faceless entity without consulting me. Kind of like what China does with their social credit score but much more elaborate. When there are people who are within this system and those who are outside because they are rich and powerful.

It really fascinates me. It can't get so bad as to be intolerable in my lifetime. And what if I become rich and get real power? The ability to make important decisions that change the global landscape. Will I be good or evil? Nowadays rather than complain about the top 0.0001% it's better to put the energy into becoming the top 0.0001%.

And by the way, you never owned Warcraft or Diablo. I suspect that to satisfy you all one needs to do is to realse a few really good and engaging games. You shall have your games and you will play them in the evenings. But during the day you WILL write survelience code for collecting plausable reasons to crush somebody inconvenient to the illuminati.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> There is no such thing as a real hacker. Same as there is no true Scottsman - [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman)

I take issue with "real" hacker categorisation as it implements a gatekeeping barrier for people and the definition of what a hacker is differs between communities.

</comment><comment><USER11> Mostly the same places they always did. Inertia is strong like that. Most of them miss a simpler time, just like you do, but hey, so it goes.

</comment><comment><USER12> mostly (and still) on the un-encrypted IRC :D

<comment> non-entity Ok, so hear me out: I'm a young dumb kid, and I just don't get irc. I'll join a supposedly active irc channel for something I'm working on, do whatever the channel wants as far as registering, etc. Once I'm in, nothing.

No one seems to be chatting about anything, the only messages I see are logging people joining and leaving. One time I left an irc client open for hours and i finally saw some other human asked a question. After that , more nothing, I don't think anyone replied to them. These servers often show 100s or 1000s online too!

Am I doing something wrong, or am I missing something I need to use irc?

<comment><USER13> This is my experience on irc today as well. It's dead.

I used to keep a few channels open at work all day long in 2007. #j2me, #java, #c. The conversation was active with no more than a few minutes of silence at a time. People would say good morning at the start of the day, goodbye at the end, they would talk about their weekend. It was like a virtual break room where you could ask tech questions (except #c was hostile to questions, those guys were weird) and make friendships.

It's not just less active now. It's dead every time I look.

<comment><USER14> This is just over the past couple days: [https://i.imgur.com/WUFiL18.png](https://i.imgur.com/WUFiL18.png)

I wouldn't call it dead at all.

<comment><USER15> where/how do you connect to these rooms? I would love to hang out in the #linux room

<comment><USER16> The channels from his screenshot are on Freenode.

<comment><USER15> thank you!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> I spent a part of my youth on Open Projects network especially in phreaking channels, I think real hackers are still there. Also I think that some of them decided to be more public and start to be active on Twitter or Telegram communities.

</comment><comment><USER18> Most likely in private, invite-only chat servers and email lists of various kinds. Anything that's publicly exposed to the internet has too much noise these days. I remember when it was difficult to moderate a chat channel or a web forum back in the 00's. It's much tougher today because of the volume of people you're exposed to.

"Only once you can successfully wrestle a herd of monkeys will you truly be ready to manage your forum."

[https://megatokyo.com/strip/209](https://megatokyo.com/strip/209)

<comment><USER19> > Most likely in private, invite-only chat servers and email lists of various > kinds. Anything that's publicly exposed to the internet has too much noise > these days.

Honestly, this is the best answer. I would argue private IRC channels and servers because the people who use IRC are less likely to use the data- collecting behemoths that are Slack and Discord.

<comment><USER20> Didn't the Capitol One hacker brag about it on Slack?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> what/where lone wolf hackers do to hang out

A cheapo router as in goodwill or bargain basement, that has nas functionality, can often find a home in starange places. be creative about using other than factory casings, and find a place to piggyback some power, you will have a dead drop. secure the router with something hackish for a password, and even use LAN encryption. Keep doing this as often, and as wideley as possible, and when you come back to maintain the drop, and review the dropped material to scrubb out the knuckledragger porn and flaming, you can reveal a number of precious gems. it doesnt need to connect to the internet it only needs to be reliable and have storage. you may even get enough access points to mesh them.

[https://www.instructables.com/id/Wireless- DeadDrop/](https://www.instructables.com/id/Wireless-DeadDrop/)

this should give you some ideas as well:

[https://hackaday.com/2018/06/27/literary-camouflage-for- your...](https://hackaday.com/2018/06/27/literary-camouflage-for-your-router/)

look for old telephone subscriber boxes or other casings that are common in the wild to put your dead drop into.

Im from the era when BBS ing was moby huge, and we would war dial all night to get a list of potential BBSs and other fun numbers that gave a modem handshake.

</comment><comment><USER22> Not hacker specific but IMO its somewhat unfortunate that most of the good/intellectual internet has moved into private chats, secret slacks, etc.

This is OK except that it makes it much more difficult for newcomers to find the good thing, so the pipeline is worse. Sometimes nowadays it is hard to discover and be discovered.

Twitter still works OK.

</comment><comment><USER23> Check out Noisebridge in SF.[1] It and other hackerspaces around the world are full of people tinkering with and making stuff. You only have to stroll around the space to see the fruits of their labor.

[1] - [https://www.noisebridge.net/](https://www.noisebridge.net/)

</comment><comment><USER24> Other peoples boxes /joke

</comment><comment><USER25> If you have to ask, you're probably not leet enough to join us... jk, freenode of course!

</comment><comment><USER26> digital - freenode, in person - hackerspaces. try googling hackerspaces in in your town/city. if there aren't any, start your own.

</comment><comment><USER27> I don't imagine that information will be shared here in an open forum.

<comment><AUTHOR> Clarification - I don't mean "hackers" as depicted in the movies.

I'm referring to nerds, geeks, engineers, tickerers etc. who do it for the love of doing it. Not for building a commercial operation.

<comment><USER28> in the walled gardens of the r&d department of big corporates

<comment><USER29> lurking in private Slack channels and Blind

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> group meetups

</comment><comment><USER31> github issues

</comment><comment><USER32> Try your local makerspace

</comment><comment><USER33> True hackers can see the underlying structure of things others don't see. True hackers have the ability to solve problems others don't see. Real hackers are somewhere learning to see and helping others connect what's true so they can see too.

<comment><USER34> So, Slack?

<comment><USER35> Riot, Keybase, Freenode, the list goes on...</comment></comment></comment>


Google is building Chrome OS straight into Windows 8 - <AUTHOR> http://www.theverge.com/2013/10/5/4806562/google-building-chrome-os-into-windows-8

<comment><USER2> I don't get it. I noticed in a recent thread about Firefox that people like Chrome far more than I can understand. I still have an open tab with the recent 'Setting up a Chromebook Development Laptop' article - that really sounds interesting.

But why would any single person in this world run chromeos on a machine that runs Windows 8? The very same machine already either runs Windows (if that's your eco system) or is powerful enough to run Linux. Why would you _ever_ run Chrome OS here?

Put differently: What's the whole point of Chrome OS, unless bundled with cheap/slow hardware, as a kind of Damn Small Linux, the Web 2.0 version?

<comment> chestnut-tree _" What's the whole point of Chrome OS...?"_

I don't get ChromeOS either. I find it completely unappealing. I'm guessing that Google realised that many computer users (perhaps the majority) spend most of their time in the web browser. Yet, to run a browser you need a complete desktop operating system. Perhaps Google considered this overkill and thought a browser-based operating system would make sense. Plus, as an internet company, they could integrate all their online apps and services into one seamless experience and gain even more users.

To me, the whole experience of using a browser-based OS like Chrome feels like a giant step backward, especially since you have to be signed in to a Google account to do anything. Want to set up your printer in Chrome OS? Yes, sign in first. Seriously, does that actually appeal to anyone? Plus, for your locally connected printer, you have to go through Google's cloud print service (and route all your print jobs through them).

As for their apps, they are too clunky and basic for many tasks (in my opinion). Take their word processor. You cannot even span a table cell (hardly an advanced function). Worperfect 5.0 could do this over 20 years ago. This is not progress.

<comment><USER3> It's not that users are spending most of their time in a browser, it's that browser technologies are quickly becoming an ubiquitous platform. The OS is not changing in a browser, the browser is changing in an OS.

The fact is many peope don't care about the word processor. The computer isn't an accounting and mail-printing device anymore. People buy phones and tablets, use iOS and android. ChromeOS is perfect for them.

The best thing that could happen to open source today would be to have an html5 desktop to replace gnome and friends for consumer devices.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Interesting. Great for people completely submerged into Google's ecosystem but still clinging onto the Windows OS. For others especially who uses one or few of Google's products, this sucks. When I got my Surface Pro tablet, I just wanted to install Chrome Desktop, but nope, it automatically installs into the metro apps and goes ahead and sets itself as the default browser. The worst part is that it sucked compared to the IE metro. On desktop it doesn't get better, with the lack of support for High-DPI scaling, the touch events are about an inch away resulting in false clicks all the time.

I hope they don't ruin the Chrome browser with techniques used to promote Google+. I don't want to see a tomorrow where you download Google Chrome and it comes pre-installed with Google Drive, Google Docs, Google+ etc. Shoving things down people throat isn't going to end well.

<comment><USER5> As mentioned in the article, a browser has to be the default browser to be able to be a metro app due to the restrictions Microsoft puts on them. I haven't updated to Windows 8 yet, but at least according to the help article[1], the Chrome installer asks if you want it to be your default browser. That might be something they added more recently, though. HighDPI is coming[2]

[1] [https://support.google.com/chrome/answer/95346?hl=en&ref_top...](https://support.google.com/chrome/answer/95346?hl=en&ref_topic=14660)

[2] [https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=160457](https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=160457)

<comment><USER4> >a browser has to be the default browser to be able to be a metro app due to the restrictions Microsoft puts on them.

Ahh I think I got into this whole limbo by trying to set Chrome as my default browser in Desktop and IE as the default in metro.

>HighDPI is coming

Glad to hear that.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I really don't get this. It doesn't make sense at all.

Its like going into McDonalds and finding a Burger King stall inside it.

This is going to be an experience as smooth as a 1974 land rover with no tyres on it.

<comment><USER7> When the user discovers that after a while owning a Windows computer and rarely going outside of Chrome, their next computer may not be Microsoft at all. It might be a Chromebook.

<comment><USER6> Like they know what the hell is going on?

Most people don't know the difference between Windows and Word. This is just going to confuse them further which is not a great way to win market share.</comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: Goodbye my.yahoo after 15 years – what should I use? - <AUTHOR>

After using Yahoo! as my portal for the last 15+ years I must move on. It is a dysfunctional relationship that I must end. I have just recently recovered from the forced email upgrade debacle and now the forced my.yahoo portal change that forces a massive ad down my throat. Please, recommend what I should switch to. And quick. <comment><USER2> There are some good alternatives here, protopage and ustart look promising

[http://www.techsupportalert.com/content/6-great- alternatives...](http://www.techsupportalert.com/content/6-great-alternatives- igoogle.htm)

</comment><comment><USER3> I prefer

about:blank

and some bookmarks. For email I use fastmail.fm.

</comment><comment><USER4> gmail aol hotmail/live

A few alternatives i've used, Gmail being my favorite although they mess around with the UX from time to time.

</comment><comment><USER5> Why would you not be using Gmail at this point?

<comment><AUTHOR> I have a gmail account for email too. I am talking more specifically about a news portal. Any thoughts there?

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Anyone using my.yahoo.com for financial purposes, such as stock portfolios?

I'd love to know of a good alternative. I don't mind paying a few dollars per month.</comment>