The Scene: Pirates Ripping Content from Amazon and Netflix - <AUTHOR> https://torrentfreak.com/the-scene-pirates-ripping-content-from-amazon-netflix-190707/ <comment><USER2> Tangential, but I've recently noticed that due to huge fragmentation in the streaming industry (Netflix, PrimeVideo, Hulu, Disney+ et al.), I'm only using two - Netflix and PrimeVideo, and a third torrent streaming service (PopcornTime) when I can't find a specific movie/TV series.

I prefer to use the third option as few as possible, but I find myself having to use it more and more often as the years go by - geolocked content, huge swathes of content being removed on the whims of providers (The Office comes to mind), and 'originals' that are beyond even the so-bad-it's-good category that cannot even _begin_ to fill the void left by the good content leaving.

I cannot _ever_ see myself subscribing to a plethora of services - the best case is subscribing to a service when it's absolutely necessary (HBO/Hotstar) and then unsubscribing when you're done, which is not at all conducive to fulfilling long-term revenue plans of such services.

So what is the endgame of such services? Is it simply to build a huge catalog of content that you'll mindlessly devour whenever you're bored? Or something else?

<comment><USER3> One more frustration to add to your list: only having x seasons of a show available instead of all y.

<comment><USER4> or splitting up the seasons in the UI like Amazon does it (the amazon UX is quite dismal anyway)

<comment><USER3> They also have interlaced two seasons of some shows together (noticed this on a couple kids shows for my daughter). So it would go season 2 ep 1, season 3 ep 1, 2-2, 3-2, etc. In general it wouldn't matter for a kids show that doesn't have a continual storyline, but when you only pay for season 2, it then stops at the end of each episode instead of continuing on automatically, and you have to go back to the UI and skip one.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Thanks to content owners/distributors we'll see a resurgence in piracy.

After Fox, Disney et al pulled content from Netflix, coupled with regional restrictions, there's literally nothing to watch on Netflix in Sweden except Netflix's own original content.

Hulu isn't available outside of US.

HBO is just as bad as Netflix outside the US.

Even iTunes Store is subject to regional restrictions (but the selection yhere is still much larger)

<comment><USER6> >we'll see a resurgence in piracy

I am not so sure about that. It will always exist, but it is getting increasingly difficult to break DRM. So we may have long periods where the rips are inferior compared to the source (i.e., transcodes via capping). All the new 4K stuff is already quite difficult due to SGX/other hardware enclaves. So it's not a question of just time/dedication to reverse engineer a blob.

<comment><USER7> An inferior rip beats 4k "not available in your country".

Also, hardware does get hacked too.

<comment><USER8> indeed, sgx is poor and broken like most of intel 'security' featurs :D

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> How do these pirates make money? It seems like so much work is/has gone into their operations that it can't just be for karma points.

Edit: I'm referring to the content ripping groups. Apart from the technical and legal challenges depicted in the article, they need to seed their files which (must be) very costly. Also, content is released consistently and extremely quickly.

The common answer is that the motivation is non-monetary: Fun, community service, group pride etc. But I find that hard to believe entirely. The product is just too polished, subjectively resembeing in quality a revenue generating operation rather than a(n illegal) side hobby.

<comment><USER10> Some people do things for other merits besides money.

<comment><USER11> Yeah... Bitcoin mining? :P

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> The article says that "Subtitle files... are not encrypted". Netflix subtitles are really interesting to me, because they're aligned in different languages. A lot of unofficial SRT files have different timestamps.

The reason is that I'm trying to collect data for learning languages, especially Chinese. Kind of like VoiceTube [1] and Youglish [2] are doing for English. So far it's only for personal use, not a revenue-taking company.

I tried investigating a Netflix stream, but the subtitles weren't plain text! They were distributed as PNG files [3].

Does anyone have more information about this? Do the pirates really OCR the subtitles for their MKV files? (I doubt it). Is there another way to get the plain text? Contact me directly if you're afraid to comment publicly.

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

[2] [https://youglish.com/](https://youglish.com/)

[3] [https://www.slideshare.net/RohitPuri23/timed-text-at- netflix...](https://www.slideshare.net/RohitPuri23/timed-text-at- netflix-58522643)

<comment><USER13> > The reason is that I'm trying to collect data for learning languages, > especially Chinese.

Subtitles sites (opensubtitles, podnapisi, etc.) have similar data and simple alignment algorithms will work for unaligned subtitles.

> Do the pirates really OCR the subtitles for their MKV files?

OCR is really simple for text. No reason why they wouldn't do it. There were free programs decades ago for OCR when you were ripping DVDs and they worked mostly on character patterns (you would start with an empty database and then just tag the pattern, after a minute you'd have the whole subtitle OCR-ed).

<comment><USER12> Please can you recommend a "simple alignment algorithm"? I can send some example ENG&CHT subtitles your way. There's a different number of subtitles, shown at different times, breaking lines in different places. It's a mess. If you know how to align it quickly, please tell me! Doing it manually takes me a couple of hours: longer than the whole movie. That's why I've only done it for a very few, specifically for movie nights with friends.

<comment><USER13> You need good dictionaries, giving you all possible translations of a word both ways. Given that subtitles in both languages will have matching sentences very closely you can easily determine (be it some counting criteria, simple linear model or dynamic programming) which sequence of let's say 3 subtitle lines matches a sequence of 5 subtitle lines in the other translation.

People/place/town names align stuff pretty easily. The fact that a sequence of lines matches some other sequence of lines makes finding the optimal alignment very efficient too.

I'm guessing that just making a set of words for each subtitle line, counting the common words and picking a criteria of deciding if line maps to other line is more than enough. Subtitles are much easier than free-flowing documents because they are time constrained.

<comment><USER12> Please show me your best transcriptions for this channel [1]. There's over 2 TB of video data. No way to get access to the original PPT files.

At least the subtitles on there are already aligned English & Chinese, but they do require OCR. Message me directly if you want my OpenCV script that can pull the yellow text out.

Tesseract gave me this. The W0「d n! Gnd has bP〔‥mE ‥任Sh 嬰孩降生 道咸肉員 Peace has Come for O… Km… 峒 ﹏m US 靜安 來自‵我君手 `

I'm sorry to continue insisting, but seriously, Tesseract gave me terrible results. Identical lines don't even give the same OCR result, so trying to run partial matches on Google Translate-quality word equivalents isn't going to cut it. The OCR can't even give me the right number of characters! In the end I'm trying to do it manually, but it's really time-consuming.

[1] [https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8_emPVKZvOwJnoBVpU0ytg/vid...](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8_emPVKZvOwJnoBVpU0ytg/videos?view=0&sort=dd&shelf_id=1)

<comment><USER13> Poured out on the feet of Jesus

我們傾倒耶穌腳前

This is my output from tesseract (chi_tra) (for [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RzIh2pamcwU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RzIh2pamcwU))

I have just extracted the U component (YUV colorspace), binarized the image and tesseract just loves it. The players in the background are completely removed.

I would probably use some background removal or some morphological operations from leptonica to make stuff more robust (instead of binarization).

Of course, if tesseract does something incorrectly you can do a quick connected components in leptonica, extract the symbols and do your own OCR (manually). For chinese it's a bit of an issue because there are bunch of symbols, but for english you will be done tagging all the unique symbols in no time.

<comment><USER12> That's amazing. Please can you tell me which version you're using? I tried

tesseract 3.04.01 leptonica-1.74.1 libgif 4.2.3 : libjpeg 9c : libpng 1.6.34 : libtiff 4.0.9 : zlib 1.2.11 : libwebp 1.0.0 : libopenjp2 2.3.0

If you could email me your scripts, that would be extremely useful. And then I'll send you some subtitles where alignment is important. I just used this channel as an example of where I'd tried Tesseract and given up.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> "The Scene" here also have a close relationship with the Demoscene, CrackmeScene and KeygenScene. These groups work/compete on challenging technical problems involving extreme and artistic programming. Almost all of these groups work with similar (and sometimes closely shared) custom compression, graphics, debug and platform code.

</comment><comment><USER15> I live in Canada, where regional laws force the majority of even casual users into piracy. One could not even subscribe to enough number of services to get the amount of content Netflix has in the USA alone. This may be an exaggeration, but honestly, it's been this way for years. I've honestly put a lot of effort into seeking out legal sources for material here in Toronto, and had little luck in certain cases I easily find through a proxy.

It's literally self-deprecating behaviour.

</comment><comment><USER16> Did anyone watch the WebTV series called "The Scene" ? [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Scene_(miniseries)](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Scene_\(miniseries\))

[https://youtu.be/xIs_5nfJKu4](https://youtu.be/xIs_5nfJKu4)

<comment><USER17> Remember the parody show called "teh Scene"? [https://archive.org/details/Teh.Scene](https://archive.org/details/Teh.Scene)

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> The big inconvenience of encrypted netflix content is that I cannot run it through madvr for better upscale 1080p->4k, the paradox is that a free torrent content might in the end take less size and look better. And let's not forget about some phones (poco f1) where netflix only allows lq because of missing Widevine L1.

</comment><comment><USER19> I own subscriptions for both Netflix and Prime Video and (try to) use them most of the times from my Linux desktop on a 21:9 monitor. I have to force proper full hd resolution using a browser extension but can't find a way to fix aspect ratio / black bars problems. Just yesterday I tried to watch the third season of Stranger Things and I had black bars on all the 4 sides. After boring my SO for about 10 minutes messing around with extensions I just fired up qBittorrent and fixed the problem in 2 seconds using the autocrop feature in mpc. I end up the torrent way so often that I'm starting to doubt the reasons that push me to support these platforms and their broken features. Is the desktop userbase a niche so small they can afford to ignore?

<comment><USER20> How much of their userbase do you think uses

\- Linux Desktop \- 21:9 monitor

? If you guys are cracking one 10th of a percentile I would be surprised. I also use netflix on linux desktop (regular monitor though) but I cannot pretend that they should have to care about such a tiny portion of their overall userbase.

<comment><USER19> They are different issues: Windows and Mac OS users using 21:9 monitors will have aspect ratio / black bars problems, Linux users with standard 16:9, 16:10 monitors will have problems with full hd and 4k resolutions. And even if these are two small user bases please consider the efforts required in order to fix the problems we are talking about. What could possibly take to lift the block on full hd as I am already doing with some browser extension? How hard could it be to copy the crop detection algorithm from mpc?

<comment><USER21> Black bars are not a problem. It's simply the result of another aspect ratio. It shouldn't be fixed.

<comment><USER19> They are a problem if you have 4 of them.

<comment><USER21> Zoom in. But black borders should be cropped, so it's an encoding error.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> So, on PC hardware, outside of Windos and Macos, _Widevine_ it's the only option available and it's capped at 720p, but the same DRM is used on Android and it's OK to stream at 1080p...

P.S. on Netflix, I should verify on Amazon Prime

Edit: after posting I recalled a plugin for Chrome/Firefox that forced 1080p playback on Netflix, the github page has the details [https://github.com/truedread/netflix-1080p](https://github.com/truedread/netflix-1080p)

</comment><comment><USER23> Tangentially related to the concern with platforms losing content and fragmenting: check your local library for their DVD library :)

<comment><USER24> I was shocked (in a good way) at the number of dvds/blul rays the library in my city has. No wonder all the video rental stores are gone.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> >After starting with a large raw file, the finalized version ready for release is around 30% smaller, around 7GB for a 1080p file.

Huh? Are they recompressing it? How else would it shrink? If they're recompressing it, why don't they just use a capture card and avoid the hassle of reverse engineering stuff?

<comment><USER26> Re-encoding with lower bitrate. 99% of the people won't be able to tell the difference.

<comment><USER27> Transcoding like that is very heavily frowned upon. A scene group would not risk their reputation like that.

I suspect what they are referring to there is the process of remuxing the file and removing extra audio streams, ie. a BD50 BluRay of "They Shall Not Grow Old" comes in at 20GB with two audio streams, DTS-HD and Dolby Digital. The remux of that BluRay comes in at 16GB and has an identical bit-rate on the video stream, but the Dolby Digital audio stream has been removed, as well as the menu graphics (though this would not apply to a WEB stream).

<comment> saiya-jin No its not, look at piratebay. By far the most downloaded versions are 1.5-3GB 1080p rips, or much smaller 720p ones. And on some 55" screen, they are just fine

<comment><USER28> The files on TPB generally aren't the original scene releases. They get transcoded to lower qualities by other people for the masses who don't care.

<comment><USER21> Depends on the release.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Autostereogram -- Wikipedia (hacking binocular vision) - <AUTHOR> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autostereogram

<comment><AUTHOR> As you go down the page, there are a series of increasingly insightful and enjoyable examples. I particularly liked the animated random-dot autostereogram, the one illustrating binocular rivalry (I had no idea there was a way to experience binocular rivalry without a stereoscope!) and the chessboard one (where even the pattern is 3D).

Incidentally, I have poor eye accomodation (ability to change focus quickly), and so once I acquire the stereo perception of a stereogram, I can easily retain it for 10-15 seconds even if I close my eyes. On the flip side, it's been 10 minutes since I read that article and I still can't focus my eyes normally on the screen!</comment>


Why NoSQL is still relational - <AUTHOR> https://blog.rocketinsights.com/why-nosql-is-still-relational/ <comment><USER2> This is a misleading title. The article shows that relational databases _can_ be built with NoSQL, not that NoSQL databases are de facto relational (because they aren't).</comment>


Free and beautiful Vue 2 admin dashboard template - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/epicmaxco/vuestic-admin <comment><USER2> This is neat! I like that it's responsive and provides a good variety of features along with auth pages. Will try and use this in my new project.

Some feedback:

* The envelope and bell icons at the top don't look great on a retina screen, can they be made into vectors?

* Not sure how I feel about the nav scrolling in its own container (vs just the entire page scrolling). Maybe it'll grow on me, but non-standard scrolling behaviour is a pet peeve of mine.

* Not a fan of the drop shadows around the place. E.g. the radio and check boxes look great, but I really dislike the buttons and alerts. The drop shadows around the "widgets" is also a bit much given everything else is flat. I'd suggest you go entirely flat or use much much more subtle shadows (a la material design).

* Black -> White icon transition on hover in nav is a little jarring, maybe a transition could help?

* Some form of separator in the messages and notifications dropdown might help to distinguish different items

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Hi everyone!

If you have any questions - I will be happy to answer :)</comment>


Show HN: My book on how to make a demo animation for your product. - <AUTHOR> https://bubbl.in/cover/demo-in-sixty-seconds-by-marvin-danig

<comment><USER2> Nice! It'd be nicer if the tutorial video of Adobe Flash is playable inside the book like other videos.

</comment><comment><USER3> Is there anything that can do html5 animation that is free as an alternative to Adobe Edge?

<comment><AUTHOR> There is Google Web Designer for something like that:

[https://www.google.com/webdesigner/index.html](https://www.google.com/webdesigner/index.html)</comment></comment>


Here's How iPhone App Store Ratings Work. Hint: They Don't. - <AUTHOR> http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/06/29/heres-how-iphone-app-store-ratings-work-hint-they-dont/ <comment><USER2> The big problem here is that Apple is not in the business of rating content like the Entertainment Software Rating Board or the MPAA, which makes it difficult for them to implement a similar age-appropriate-content rating system.

</comment><comment><USER3> Sounds like the last two were added per very specific instructions from Apple's legal team (I imagine the word "graphic" has a well defined legal meaning in this context), while the others were written earlier.</comment>


U-2 spy plane caused widespread shutdown of U.S. flights - <AUTHOR> http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/05/03/us-usa-airport-losangeles-idUSBREA420AF20140503 <comment><USER2> Kind of a misleading headline.

U-2s have been flying over Southern California at over 60k feet for 50 years (that is, after all, where they're based), and there are other more modern planes that also routinely fly at that altitude.

If we're pointing fingers, the new ERAM system that was just installed (in December, I believe) in the LA ATC is a more likely culprit, although even that isn't likely the whole story; this can't be the first high flying plane in the last 6 months. So, more likely an edge case that took 6 months to crop up, or maybe a new bug caused by a recent patch. But as the article notes, the FAA isn't talking, so we still don't know.

"U-2 spy plane caused widespread shutdown of U.S. flights" is a cool headline, but an accurate one would be "We still aren't sure why new computer system caused widespread shutdown of U.S. flights".

<comment><USER3> ERAM is a quite troubled project. Just read the Inspector General's report. Sadly, many decades after the Mythical Man Month and much learned about software project management, we continue to see such efforts flounder.

[http://www.oig.dot.gov/sites/dot/files/ERAM%20Final%20Report...](http://www.oig.dot.gov/sites/dot/files/ERAM%20Final%20Report%5E9-13-12.pdf)

<comment><USER4> The ERAM report is sad. I guess if Uncle Sam pays when you oveerrun your budget, it is a bonus.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> If a U2 can set its own altitude on the transponder the other possibility here is that the flight operator set it to an incorrect altitude that appeared it was flying in the same airspace as commercial planes but not within standard corridors.

This would generate significant number of collision warnings, given how busy LA regional airspace is, and that in turn might have demonstrated a limit to the number of simultaneous collion events this new ATX system can handle.

<comment><USER6> That sounds plausible

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> I wonder if it's because can fly higher than 65,535ft.

<comment><USER8> "the maximum altitude transmitted by a U-2 transponder is FL600: even if the aircraft is flying well above it, the Dragon Lady's mode C will show no higher than 60,000 feet." Which might be the issue if there was an off by one error in the code.

<comment><USER9> I want to know why a spy plane has a transponder. Can it be turned off when flying over Cuba?

<comment><USER10> Because it's a legal requirement to fly in a lot of airspace, to ensure that you show up on radar, and it's far easier to install one than to wrangle an exception. Of course it can be turned off, just like any other piece of equipment.

<comment><USER3> Even the B-2 bomber had a retractable radar reflector to defeat it's stealth. When flying in civilian airspace the reflector would extend so ATC could track the plane. Standard stuff to prevent collisions.

<comment><USER10> Why would they have a retractable reflector rather than simply using a standard radar transponder? Sounds like BS.

<comment><USER3> To start with, a reflector is passive, so it can't fail like a transponder. Failing is a problem when flying an intentionally very hard to see/detect airframe in dense civilian airways. Transponders only provide a secondary radar hit, while many (older) systems are looking for a primary hit to locate aircraft, which a reflector would do.

Before calling BS you could just Google it too. ;) For example, here is a nice explanation of the F117's reflector. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_F-117_Nighthawk](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_F-117_Nighthawk)

<comment><USER10> Any system that relies on a primary hit is going to have trouble. Something as simple as a composite glider is not going to show up well[1]. I'm not aware of any ATC system that relies on primary returns.

As for Googling it, that's an interesting picture. It's not retractable, but I suppose the point is made. Perhaps the B-2's is retractable. I did Google it this time and found nothing but some random airliners.net forum posts, not exactly reliable.

[1] [http://www.dg-flugzeugbau.de/radar-reflector-e.html](http://www.dg- flugzeugbau.de/radar-reflector-e.html)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> More details, and more expert analysis, available at the Aviationist[1].

[1] [http://theaviationist.com/2014/05/03/u-2-freezes-lax- radar/](http://theaviationist.com/2014/05/03/u-2-freezes-lax-radar/)

<comment><USER12> Given the number of new/identified aircraft spotted in the last few months there's a strong possibility this was simply not a U-2.

[http://theaviationist.com/2014/04/23/two-different-black- pro...](http://theaviationist.com/2014/04/23/two-different-black-projects/)

<comment><USER11> While that is a possibility, there's nothing to suggest it is stronger than the reported id of the plane, so I'll stick with U-2.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Quick sea story. To avoid interfering with launch and recovery operations, there is a 3-mile radius cylinder (the "stack") around U.S. aircraft carriers that military aircraft have to get permission from the tower to enter. One time, while operating off the coast of Pakistan, a U-2 called us up and asked permission to enter the stack, "at Angels Sixty."

Or in other words, 10 miles directly above all the other aircraft. They got permission.

<comment><USER14> Nice. That story reminded me of the good ol' SR-71 speed check one [1]. I'm sure I'm not alone in this among my fellow HN 'Aviation Week' enthusiasts:

[1] [https://groups.google.com/forum/m/#!topic/rec.aviation.stori...](https://groups.google.com/forum/m/#!topic/rec.aviation.stories/ueI6JKeEomo)

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> Note that the failure was in a new-ish, recently-deployed air traffic control system named ERAM (En Route Automation Modernization), and its backup system:

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

<comment><USER16> Do they fuzz systems like this, or do they just ship it as soon as the test suite passes?

It seems like there's a whole world of hurt waiting to arrive if people can start to inject data into these systems.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> So, what variable max values were not accounted for and tested in the software?

</comment><comment><USER18> Could it be that the U2 has sending an ADS-B signal with incorrect altitude to hide its actual location?

I would think that would be a feature of such a plane and it may have been activated by mistake.

<comment><USER19> I captured ADS-B packets from a U-2 in the LAX area (using an RTL-SDR dongle) on 2013-06-18. If you want to see them for yourself, the decoded packets (hex) are at [https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/7443278/Mode%20S%20Captu...](https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/7443278/Mode%20S%20Captures/mode- s-capture-2013-06-18.raw) (along with other aircraft).

The U-2 I picked up is ICAO ae094b, registration 68-10336[1]. You can decode the packet information using dump1090[2]:

      ./dump1090 --net-only > out.txt

Then in another terminal:

      cat mode-s-capture-2013-06-18.raw | nc localhost 30001

Then in out.text, look for "ae094b". You'll see packets like

      *0206042b1365a5;
      CRC: ae094b (ok)
      DF 0: Short Air-Air Surveillance.
        VS             : Airborne
        CC             : 1
        SL             : 0
        Altitude       : 60000 feet
        ICAO Address   : ae094b

[1] [http://www.airliners.net/search/photo.search?regsearch=68-10...](http://www.airliners.net/search/photo.search?regsearch=68-10336) [2] [https://github.com/MalcolmRobb/dump1090](https://github.com/MalcolmRobb/dump1090)

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> Altitude (appears) out of bounds, therefore we assume it is at an unknown altitude, so could be at any altitude, therefore any plane on a collision bearing regardless of altitude must be diverted.

</comment><comment><USER21> Wonder why nobody posted this on Sunday Bloody Sunday. Still, today is a Beautiful Day for a drone story.

</comment><comment><USER22> Protip: don't fly above 65535 ft. Or book a flight with ' ; -- drop tables: air

</comment><comment><USER23> She moves in mysterious ways.

</comment><comment><USER24> I sincerely doubt the accuracy of this article. The U-2 has been around for 50 years and only now has an ATC system been "overwhelmed" by it?

<comment><USER25> Is the system at LAX new?

<comment><USER26> Yes, that's what it says in the article.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> The idea that a flight routing system wouldn't take into consideration the altitude of the planes involved seems a bit like a movie rather then reality.

Now if they said the problem was the U-2 was moving so quickly that the calculations of all the planes in the air ground the systems to a halt maybe that would make sense.

Something smells very Hollywood here with this story.

<comment><USER11> U-2s don't fly very fast (~500mph). For comparison, a 747 cruises at about 570mph.</comment></comment>


Mozilla ponders policy change after Firefox extension battle - <AUTHOR> http://arstechnica.com/open-source/news/2009/05/mozilla-ponders-policy-change-after-firefox-extension-battle.ars <comment><USER2> "The developers behind the two extensions turned the browser into a battleground as their conflict escalated."

"Maone found new ways to work around the filters, but Ares2 consistently retaliated by adding increasingly draconian rules to the filter list."

"Eventually, Ares2 added rules that fundamentally broke the NoScript website. Maone lost patience and decided to use his own extension to fight back."

I am sympathetic to the notion that there are two sides to any argument, and Adblock is certainly an issue for many websites. However, framing this like a "controversial altercation" between two loose cannons does not do justice to the facts.

</comment><comment><USER3> I think in issues like this, Mozilla's policy is largely irrelevant.

Policy is just words, and people will still do stupid things.

</comment><comment><USER4> Why? It worked itself out, the community process worked, therefore no changes need to be made.

</comment><comment><USER5> What is a policy going to do? Sometimes I think the MoFo doesn't really understand open source. When anyone can fork your project at any time, you can't impose any restrictions. If you do, your project gets forked, and you lose control.

(They tried this once with their icons and the name "Firefox". The result is that I don't actually know of anyone that uses "Firefox" anymore, they use "Iceweasel". Wow, MoFo, you sure showed us!)

Along the same lines, there is an easy workaround for the NoScript/ABP debacle. You fork NoScript and remove the unwanted features. Then you tell everyone to use your fork instead. Problem solved. No policies needed. It's open source, guys.

<comment><USER6> >The result is that I don't actually know of anyone that uses "Firefox" anymore, they use "Iceweasel"

On the other hand, I don't know anyone else who has heard of IceWeasel and while I know what it is, I've never used it myself.

<comment><USER5> I guess what I meant to say was "all people that use Debian are cool" ;)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> What we're talking about is the gecko/xul platform behind Firefox. By definition it's a platform and should stay neutral about what is allowed and what is not. While the Mozilla platform is indeed more integrated and monolithic than, for example, an operating system, it's still an application platform.

All platforms have applications. Could you imagine GNU or Gnome setting policies for how different programs shouldn't mess and compete with each other? In an open market for applications, the bad applications just get weeded out for good. There's no need for Mozilla to intervene; the power of Mozilla platform is that extensions can do powerful stuff, upto and including battling each other. You can't go rule out just those things.

* * *

(Or are we in for a lengthy philosophical debate of whether it's possible to write a platform that only allows "good" things to happen? I don't think so. Those who disagree can go and drool Apple's iPhone application SDK and review process :-))

<comment><USER8> As above (<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=593872>): this isn't a platform issue; it's a distribution issue. The platform will almost certainly continue to support malicious and ill-behaved extensions, but a.m.o won't.</comment></comment>


Jony Ive Has Left Apple - <AUTHOR> https://www.theverge.com/2019/11/28/20986838/jony-ive-last-day-apple <comment><USER2> Wasn't this announced already a few months ago?

<comment><AUTHOR> The press release announcing his departure only said that it would occur "later this year.". If you check now the Apple leadership page, you can see that Jony Ive has been removed as of today.

<comment><USER3> Do you guys think the man who was responsible for pushing the commit that removed Ive from that page shed a tear while doing so?

<comment><USER4> You mean they don't just connect via FTP and edit the html file on prod? Times have changed</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Why hasn't Google released buzz for corporate accounts? - <AUTHOR>

<comment><USER2> Anything you deploy in the corporate world needs to be supported by a help desk for those who aren't geeks -- can you imagine the cost of supporting Google buzz?

<comment><AUTHOR> By corporate accounts I meant their existing mail/docs clients. Our company revolves around them, and it occurred to me (shockingly) that buzz would be a useful way for everyone to passively keep everyone posted on interesting stuff they're doing...and hence avoid the dreaded weekly/monthly status meeting where everyone is forced to do a show-and-tell to yawning people.

Since we're already using google apps, a 3rd party or public app would be a non starter. If it's already accessible from gmail it might be worth a shot.</comment></comment>


One of BMW's cars doesn't pass European emissions tests - <AUTHOR> http://www.businessinsider.com/report-one-of-bmws-cars-doesnt-pass-european-emissions-tests-2015-9 <comment><USER2> I am quite sure this won't be confined to strictly diesel cars soon. All cars emissions will likely need to be tested to insure the majority of possible configurations comply. There may even be cases where actual bugs in software lead to bad results and not actual malicious coding

<comment><USER3> The one good thing that may come from all this is a potential opening of code. Maybe not in the open-source kind of way, but hopefully at least in the auditing-so-we-know-you're-not-lying kind of way.

<comment><USER4> It honestly sounds cheaper just to subject these cars to randomized spot testing than to expect people to review this code all that well. Reviewing code is expensive in either time or money, and a lot of this code exists in the world.

<comment><USER3> The VW stuff was found by testing 30 cars 30 times each, and even then it wasn't a slam dunk. Besides, by then, it's too late.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Question, are these cars just tested right off the lot? Here in the US, there is a policy that mandates cars at random to be tested by EPA when they're between 2 and 5 years old. People will get randomly picked for that test and get compensated for it. I had my 2009 Dodge Caliber tested like this. They took the car for couple of weeks and gave me a nice rental along with several hundred bucks and any repairs free of charge. My car ended up failing the EPA tests so they replaced a few things in it to get it up to spec so it passes.

</comment><comment><USER6> Passing the test is critical, but making these tests meaningful is even more important: "Some of the emissions measured in the certification cycle differed dramatically from the real traffic emissions"[0].

[0] [http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Luc_Pelkmans/publication...](http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Luc_Pelkmans/publication/248319865_Comparison_of_on- road_emissions_with_emissions_measured_on_chassis_dynamometer_test_cycles._Transp_Res_Part_D_Transp_Environ/links/00b7d536b2ccec15fe000000.pdf)

</comment><comment><USER6> What's more important?

a) some cars have are equipped with defeat devices.

b) some cars shouldn't have passed the emissions tests.

c) all the cars emit much more NOx and fine particles than the European Environment Agency and the manufacturers claim.

</comment><comment><USER7> Clickbate title with little information.

<comment><USER8> The EU is urging all 28 member countries to start their own investigations.

[http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-09-24/vw- cheatin...](http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-09-24/vw-cheating- scandal-threatens-to-ensnare-bmw-as-probe-widens)</comment></comment>


Own a Vizio Smart TV? It's Watching You - <AUTHOR> http://www.propublica.org/article/own-a-vizio-smart-tv-its-watching-you <comment><USER2> I don't understand why you'd want a Smart TV. If something goes south (in this age of disposable tech) it becomes like those TV/VCR combos of the past where 1/2 of it doesn't work.

[http://www.howtogeek.com/176392/smart-tvs-are-stupid-why- you...](http://www.howtogeek.com/176392/smart-tvs-are-stupid-why-you-dont- really-want-a-smart-tv/)

<comment><USER3> Smart TVs don't cost more. And they function just fine as normal TVs. I got a 60 inch Vizio smart TV for about $400 and I'm pretty happy with it. I was pretty skeptical about the Smart TV features, but the built-in Netflix and Amazon Prime apps are actually very convenient and are more user friendly than a Chromecast. I can search, pause, rewind, change episodes, etc. without using my laptop. When the Smart TV features become obsolete, or I switch to a streaming service that's not available, it still has HDMI ports like any TV. As for this privacy concern, a) it can be turned off, and b) it's nothing new; Netflix tracks your viewing habits, Amazon tracks your viewing habits, Facebook tracks your web browsing habits, etc.

<comment><USER4> > Smart TVs don't cost more.

Yes, they do. My non-smart Panasonic was a couple of hundred dollars cheaper than the equivalent smart ones.

<comment><USER5> If you expect a certain set of features (3D, higher quality display, etc.), the only devices that satisfy those requirements have smart functionality built in. The non-smart TVs I've viewed at Best Buy in the last year or so all look washed out or otherwise inferior. It sucks, and I prefer to use a streaming box versus the smart functionality, but to get the features I wanted I had to pick a smart TV.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> The "fix" to this is to not let your TV connect to the internet. Instead, use a set top box that you trust to stream Netflix, etc. Mythtv or tvheadend are good solutions for live tv if you have a computer with a capture card.

<comment><USER7> No. The fix is to militate against "smart" TV makers and boycott them until they remove this malware and stop snooping as a means to gain more revenue. That is the only fix. No other fixes are trustable and verifiable at this point.

The fix is, don't ever buy a smart TV. Buy the stupidest TV you possibly can.

TV makers don't know anything about software and security, and they don't care at all about user privacy. So they shouldn't be allowed to write software and put features in their TVs.

<comment><USER8> _TV makers don 't know anything about software and security, and they don't care at all about user privacy. So they shouldn't be allowed to write software and put features in their TVs._

I'm not sure that blanket restrictions on evolving technologies are a good idea, but the manufacturers and any store selling their products _should_ be required to prominently disclose any unexpected or potentially unwanted behaviour so potential purchasers can make an informed decision. If we are truly going to see the Internet of Things invading our homes and household devices coming with privacy policies, perhaps we should legislate that those policies must be written on packaging and displayed alongside the products in stores in text large enough to read from as far away as you can usefully see the product itself. ;-)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> sneaky ass vizio.. the setting to disable this is buried under a system diagnostics section with the word "Reset" prominently showing as the menu entry. It's as if they want to discourage owner from venturing into that menu out of fear of the Reset.

<comment><USER10> Much safer to never give the TV network credentials.

<comment><USER11> One of the crappy things is, for example, the way LG chooses to approach this. My guess is they're just as bad as Vizio with their new "WebOS" TVs (disclosure: I own one, started reading disclaimer - they send all activity to LG proper as well). Opted out of everything thinking I won't watch any OTA or cable on the TV anyway since it's a media room panel, however I did want to use the built in Netflix / Amazon from time to time instead of having to provide another box in a minimalistic A/V setup.

Problem is... As soon as I tried to fire up Netflix the app on the TV needed an "update". To get the update you have to agree to all ToS. Complete and utter BS approach to forcing customers into a path of least resistance.

It's also hard to get a premium panel (I was specifically looking for 4:4:4@60Hz) without the "smarts". It boiled down to price vs features vs requirements and thus I ended up where I did. I ended up revoking my acceptance of ToS and biting the bullet to use an external device for streaming content... Unfortunately I don't think most people care, or if they would they don't realize they should in these scenarios. The unfortunate reality...

<comment><USER12> > Netflix the app on the TV needed ... agree to all ToS

Was the Netflix app one of the advertised featured?

Was this ToS presented[1] to you before you purchased it?

If they advertised a feature but failed to deliver it in the product you paid for, then I think you deserve your money back. They failed to deliver a merchantable good, as required[2] by UCC § 2-314(2)(f).

[1] "It was posted on our website" doesn't count, unless that was the place you purchased the TV. Requiring consumers to search every manufacturer's website before purchasing anything is insane.

[2] [https://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/2/2-314](https://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/2/2-314)

<comment><USER11> > Was the Netflix app one of the advertised featured? > [http://www.lg.com/ca_en/tvs/lg-58UF8300-uhd- > tv](http://www.lg.com/ca_en/tvs/lg-58UF8300-uhd-tv) \- It's not clear from > the product landing page what's included with regards to apps. However, > Netflix is installed out of the box and there doesn't appear any way to > uninstall it. But, it's unusable, as stated, until it's updated. The only > way to update it is to agree to the ToS.

You can see on this landing page: [http://www.lg.com/us/experience-tvs/smart- tv/use](http://www.lg.com/us/experience-tvs/smart-tv/use)

That Netflix is clearly part of the standard build (no installation required - Netflix comes with the TV out of the box, no interaction required.

Sounds like this is illegal. So what's my recourse with LG?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> They call the feature smart interactivity. Set to on. Talk about a dark pattern.

</comment><comment><USER14> This was on Ars a while ago. I mentioned how even today's "non-smart" TVs have to decode digital ATSC signals from the antenna (unlike the TVs of decades ago) in one of the comments, and how today's "monitors" are not that different besides lacking this decoder/tuner and a few other things like the IR sensor/remote.

<comment><USER15> I'm kind of surprised we haven't seen any tuners on a stick, given the increasing trend of things that directly connect to HDMI ports. On the other hand, most "dumb" monitors don't seem to often include multiple HDMI inputs, so that might explain that.

<comment><USER11> Tuners on a stick have been around for well over a decade (Hauppauge was probably one of the first consumer focused brands and still sells a myriad of tuners). The problem is CableCard (out of CableLabs, which is run by a consortium of all the providers) and it's amazingly restrictive licensing. This is part of the reason why you can't really get a tuner for things like MythTV... Well, you can - but even though things were relaxed for CableCards (since it was such a craptastic solution for everyone but the cable cabal as a whole) the providers still control the DRM. And so having a cable card on Linux without a relationship with the powers that be results in the bulk of non-public broadcast to be useless even with an "approved" CableCard on Linux.

<comment><USER14> I am talking about OTA ATSC tuners.

<comment><USER11> And like I said, plenty of those types of products exist to solve that problem...

[http://hauppauge.com/site/products/prods_hvr_external.html](http://hauppauge.com/site/products/prods_hvr_external.html) [http://www.silicondust.com/hdhomerun/](http://www.silicondust.com/hdhomerun/)

...what I was describing is the problematic issue with CableCard and the DRM problem: the inability to run a trustworthy OS (i.e. non-Smart-TV-solution- that-spies-on-all-your-viewing-habits) to process encrypted QAM and the like... ATSC solutions are aplenty, some of the best are the Silicondust hardware.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> The only winning move is not to play, as they say. Televisions are overrated anyway.

</comment><comment><USER17> The comments on that article are awful. Spare yourselves and don't read them!

</comment><comment><USER18> ive a vizio smart tv (they basically are all smart tvs now) its just not online. easy. the software sucks anyway.

</comment><comment><USER19> 1984</comment>


This 3-Minute Exercise Will Actually Fix Your Posture - <AUTHOR> http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/this-3-minute-exercise-will-actually-fix-your-posture/ <comment><USER2> Reasons I think this is probably bullshit

1) He claims that computer/phone induced postural changes are responsible for the forward stoop which occurs with age - the 'dowager's hump' \- yet this phenomenon has been known about for centuries and there is no evidence that it has increased in prevalence or severity

2) He claims this technique comes from a 'chiropractor'

3) The concept of 'stimulating the C5 nerve' (which isn't even a nerve, its a nerve root) is pretty meaningless

4) The resultant sensation of temporarily improved posture that one gets after performing this exercise is very brief, and there is no evidence it persists

Indeed one can create a similar effect in the arms: Cross your arms at the wrists and touch the backs of your hands together. Pull your hands apart so that there is pressure applied to the backs of the hands and maintain this pressure for about thirty seconds. Then hold your hands in front of you, and you will notice they tend to move apart. I imagine that a similar process occurs following this exercise. However you will notice that both the separation of your hands, and the sensation of your head being pulled back following the exercise in the video, is not at all permanent.

<comment><USER3> The main reason why sitting in the front of computer is bad for the posture is because shoulders are turned in and pectoral muscles are contracted long periods of time.

Stretching your pecks two times per day improves posture much faster than this exercise.

<comment><USER4> Your forward-facing deltoids are probably engaged too, as well as your scalenes, while your lower spine is getting compressed and your core gets weaker. More is going on that meets the eye.

Not only are there more muscle groups associated with these problems, but if you try to correct these problems improperly you can develop a muscle imbalance which can exacerbate all these issues. You need the right balance of muscle supporting other parts of your body for everything to function safely.

So before you tell people just to stretch their pecs, please consult a physical therapist to evaluate you and give you specific exercises tailored to your physicality. There is no 'one weird trick' to improving your body.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I forever struggled with my standing posture. I always had to put thought into it. Do I keep my shoulders all the way back? Do I suck in my stomach? How much? And because of all the mental load and muscular effort, I'd get tired very soon and over the course of a day, go back to slouching.

Recently I came across Phenibut. The first time I tired it, something happened that had never before: all my muscles were relaxed. Suddenly it felt natural and so easy to stand straight up with zero mental awareness at the time. And in a few days, I "learnt" what my problem was. I was tensing my chest and ab muscles all my life! That was a major beneficial side effect of Phenibut for me. Might work for others too.

</comment><comment><USER6> always a bit skeptical of those "one crazy hack that will [enter your problem]...", but as probably many other programmers, I could definitely improve my posture.

Can anyone vouch for this or explain if / how it might work??

<comment><USER4> From what I can tell, he's basically just giving you movements that stimulate muscles that are ennerved by the C4-C6 vertebrae. Ignore all the crap he's saying; you're still engaging (albeit very lightly) the muscles that support your back, spine, shoulders and neck while stretching the ones that are typically contracted all day over the computer.

This may _not_ correct any serious deformity caused by hunching over a computer for extended periods. For that you need to go to a physical therapist. But for people with just a little tightness or that have difficulty keeping correct posture, it can certainly help. But so can a lot of other things.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Here is the video a la carte: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LT_dFRnmdGs](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LT_dFRnmdGs)

This site is _obnoxious_ with its plethora of external metrics/adware hits. Even _after the page is fully loaded_ , it _hits them again every 5 seconds_. I'm blacklisting makeuseof.com from any future use.</comment>


Crayfish kept alone found to develop higher alcohol tolerance - <AUTHOR> https://www.newscientist.com/article/2128357-drunken-crayfish-show-that-loneliness-raises-alcohol-tolerance/ <comment><USER2> This is clearly a contender for the Ig Nobel!

</comment><comment><USER3> As usual in articles of this kind, the article's content contradicts its title. The study doesn't show that "loneliness raises alcohol tolerance," it shows a correlation between two measured traits.

In studies like this, two _effects_ are measured and found to be correlated. For lack of evidence, an assertion about _cause_ can only be conjecture.

<comment><USER4> I'm not sure that's true here.

They went further than showing a correlation between two traits. They directly manipulated the pre-alcohol state (alone, or with other crayfish), and measured whether that change outcomes in behavior and neural activity. Presumably they kept everything else the same[0], randomly assigned crayfish to isolation and social environments, and placed them in the same alcohol environment.

Just because the chain of causation is fuzzy doesn't mean A doesn't cause B. Maybe social isolation and alcohol response are trivially connected to something else like movement rate and other variables. That doesn't mean you can't make causal inferences.

[0] I don't know much about crayfish experiments - maybe there's some latent cause like isolated crayfish are handled differently and that causes changes in alcohol-induced behavior and neural activity. I would want to know whether the crayfish showed similar or divergent behavior in an alcohol-free environment. It's _possible_ that alcohol has identical 'gain' on behavior and neural activity, but that still indicates an effect, technically. And nothing is ever 100 percent the same across conditions (this is the fundamental problem with causal analysis) but that's true across every discipline.

If there's an objection to the title, it's that loneliness and social isolation are not the same thing.

<comment><USER3> > Just because the chain of causation isn't clear doesn't mean A doesn't cause > B.

Yes, that's true, but science isn't based on what can't be excluded, it's based on what the evidence supports. If this were not true, any claim that couldn't be disproven would _ipso facto_ become true.

Some have said it this way -- to a pseudoscientist, things are assumed to be true until they're disproven. To a scientist, things are assumed to be false until evidence supports them (the _null hypothesis_ ).

> That doesn't mean you can't make causal inferences.

Yes, you can do that, but it's not science. In science, it's not about inference, it's about evidence.

Before publication, any sort of speculation is the norm, it's part of the creative process. But when the science gets published and the title contradicts the article, something went wrong.

<comment><USER5> Except that there is evidence of causation, not just correlation. That is the purpose of performing a rigorously controlled experiment. If all we were looking for was evidence of correlation, that would be unnecessary.

<comment><USER3> > Except that there is evidence of causation, not just correlation.

In science, addressing causation requires a testable, falsifiable theory. Without a theory -- an explanation -- we can only _describe_ what took place. The authors of the paper freely acknowledge that they don't understand their result in a theoretical sense. But the article's title -- "Drunken crayfish show that loneliness raises alcohol tolerance" \-- is perfect nonsense and an embarrassment for a half-dozen reasons.

By the way, the moderators edited the submission's title since I posted this morning. Unfortunately, it seems that New Scientist's editorial standards aren't as high as those at HN.

<comment><USER5> The theory in this case is "Isolations affects alcohol tolerance in crayfish". This is falsifiable and testable. A theory does not need to contain an explanation to be a valid scientific theory.

The experiment that was done is evidence in favor of this theory. It is not conclusive, because it is only one experiment, but it does suggest a causal relationship, and not just a correlation.

<comment><USER3> > The theory in this case is "Isolations affects alcohol tolerance in > crayfish".

That is not a theory, it's a statement about an observation -- it describes, it doesn't explain. Theories explain observations.

> A theory does not need to contain an explanation to be a valid scientific > theory.

A scientific theory _is_ an explanation[1]. That's how it's defined. A description cannot be a theory because it doesn't say _why_ the result took place, only that it did.

If I say, "The night sky is filled with tiny points of light," I've offered a description. Another observer might contradict my description, for example by emerging from his cave on an overcast night and not seeing any points of light, but that contradicting observation can itself be contradicted on the next clear night, without any chance for resolution (so a contradiction is not a falsification). Apart from being shallow, inconclusive and trivial, this process is not science.

If instead I say, "Those points of light are distant thermonuclear furnaces like our sun," I've offered an explanation, one that makes predictions about phenomena not yet observed and that's falsifiable by empirical test. On the basis of this explanation we might build a small-scale star (a fusion reactor) to see if our experiment shows any similarity to the spectra and behavior of stars. This deep explanation represents a theoretical claim that's linked to other areas of human knowledge, predicts phenomena not yet observed and is conclusively falsifiable by comparison with reality (our fusion reactor might fail to imitate the stars). It's science.

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

Quote: "A scientific theory _is an explanation_ of some aspect of the natural world that can, in accordance with the scientific method, be repeatedly tested, using a predefined protocol of observations and experiments. Established scientific theories have withstood rigorous scrutiny and are a comprehensive form of scientific knowledge." (emphasis added)

<comment><USER5> "Isolation affects alcohol tolerance in crayfish" is not just an observation. An observation would be "Crayfish #5 has behavior X".

You are conflating two different definitions of explain. It is possible to explain what is happening without explaining how. It is possible to know that A causes B without knowing why (This is purpose of the scientific method). If it were actually impossible to have evidence that something is true without knowing why it is true, than it would be impossible to have evidence of anything at all. You could invalidate any knowledge by just asking "why", because there is always another "why". To give an example, we know that mass causes gravitational attraction even though we don't fully understand the mechanism that causes it.

<comment><USER3> > It is possible to explain what is happening without explaining how.

That's a description -- an account of what was observed. By definition, an explanation must add something to a description.

"The night sky is filled with points of light." \-- a description.

"Those points are distant thermonuclear furnaces, powered by atomic fusion." \-- an explanation.

"Similar bird species have differently shaped beaks." \-- a description.

"Bird species evolve traits that confer a survival advantage in their distinct environments." \-- an explanation.

> It is possible to know that A causes B without knowing why ..."

One cannot claim to know that A causes B without also knowing why, otherwise puddles cause rain. Science is not merely about knowing -- it's about knowing that we know. An observation asserts a fact without context. A scientific theory offers more than mere description, and its standing rests solely on the fact that it has resisted falsification.

> To give an example, we know that mass causes gravitational attraction even > though we don't fully understand the mechanism that causes it.

Yes, but that's not a scientific theory, it's a description -- mass causes gravitational attraction, or equivalently, gravitational attraction causes mass (my point is the claim is wrong but without a theory, we can't know that it's wrong). As long as there's no testable theory, the two descriptions are equivalent.

The Greeks believed our sight resulted from our eyes shooting beams out into the environment. Until we had a testable theory, no one could reasonably dispute that idea.

A theory is not a description -- it offers more than an account of observed facts. The water rises across the beach over a period of hours: a description. The sun and moon apply tidal forces -- a spatial differential in gravitational force -- to the water, causing it to periodically rise and fall: an explanation, one that can be tested and potentially falsified.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> The story of my life.

</comment><comment><USER7> I must be a crayfish....

<comment><USER8> Depends - where do you live? You might be a crawdad or crawfish: [http://blog.revolutionanalytics.com/2013/06/r-and- language.h...](http://blog.revolutionanalytics.com/2013/06/r-and- language.html)</comment></comment>


Photo-blogging Site DailyBooth Raises $1 Million - <AUTHOR> http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2009/10/19/photo-blogging-site-dailybooth-raises-1-million/

<comment><USER2> How can it have 6 million monthly active unique users, when

Compete shows them having only 144K uniques: <http://siteanalytics.compete.com/dailybooth.com/>

Quantcast shows only 15K uniques in USA: <http://www.quantcast.com/dailybooth.com>

Why such a huge discrepancy?

<comment><USER3> Does anyone know how Compete and Quantcast get their data?

<comment><USER4> I think they have people to install their browser toolbars, which monitor the sites they visit. Their statisticians then extrapolate the trends to the entire population.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> It seems as the market for content-creation expands, there is room for infinitely more products simply by taking the mid-point of any two existing products. e.g. Twitter, the mid-point of blogging and IRC. Tumblr, the mid- point of blogging and Twitter. And now DailyBooth, the mid-point of Twitter and Flickr (?). There's also 12seconds.tv, the mid-point of Twitter and YouTube, but I think that's a really stupid idea (Robo.to is also in that space).

So logically, the next product should be the mid-point of Twitter and email... oh, Google Wave.

<comment><USER6> A description of DailyBooth that I like is 4chan with completely different context.

So I wonder what other applications can be created from changing the context. Hacker News is reddit with a different context.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Congrats to Dailybooth! (I'm in too, but only for a little.)

</comment><comment><USER7> Kudos to Ryan and Jon!

When I first looked at DailyBooth, I thought: "OK, it's Twitter with pictures, so what?". It wasn't until I saw the growth and love of their user base that I realized how much potential they have.

And respect to Ryan, who spent the summer in the engine room keeping the site up through tremendous growth.

</comment><comment><USER8> Congrats, Ryan! Your product is pretty awesome, I'm really looking forward to seeing where you take it next!

</comment><comment><USER9> "WSJ: How do you plan to make money?

Mr. Wheatley: Scaling is the most important thing at the moment."

This is not criticism on DailyBooth but the answer above is basically a "we have no idea" and it amazes me that I and everyone here on HN kill themselves to build in legitimate business models into their apps and there are still folks who get funding who (seemingly) have no plan at all.

Or is the revenue idea super secret?

<comment><USER10> If you're going to edit his response you should say as much.

The full response (which actually sketches some ideas) was:

Mr. Wheatley: _Scaling is the most important thing at the moment. We have a few ideas around media-based businesses, premium offerings and offline distribution like photo-printing._

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> Just a reminder, DailyBooth.com is a YC summer 09 company, and hiring PHP hackers right now. Their growth looks to be faster than Twitter's at an absolute relative rate.

</comment><comment><USER12> I've been trying out DailyBooth for about a month now. I like it. As a common user, and not a celebrity, I find dailybooth more valuable than twitter. I guess "a picture is worth a thousand words."

<comment><USER7> I'd say a picture is worth a thousand words for person perception and impression formation. It takes a dozen tweets to figure out if you like someone, but only a few milliseconds of seeing his or her face. DailyBooth leverages that very well for dedicated community interaction.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> Congrats guys. You certainly deserve it!

</comment><comment><USER14> This could easily grow into a dating business.

</comment><comment><USER15> go team

good luck Ryan!

</comment><comment><USER16> curious to know what's their business model, or will be?

</comment><comment><USER17> This is a classical example of a typical startup - simple and obvious idea - instant photos, instead of texting. But I think this will not last long.

For example, an easy, deep integrated tool for upload photos right from mobile phones (they have a 3-5 megapixel cams nowadays) seems like next step in that direction, and Nokia's Ovi might gain the ground very fast.

Anyway, they probably should think about mobile apps to evolve.

<comment><USER18> Also how do you really make much money at it?

Seems like something facebook/twit could easily add as a simple feature.

<comment><USER19> Simply adding a feature is very different from the feature taking off and allowing for a community to form. The latter is not as guaranteed--no matter how big you are.

Biggest example is classifieds. People thought facebook could take on Craigslist overnight. Didn't happen. Facebook Classifieds for the most part failed.

<comment><USER18> I think that's for different reasons though. Facebook is about communication with friends, and allowing for quick and easy photo blogging fits well with that.

Personally, I don't want to look at classifieds on facebook, because it's not really a 'community' type of thing to do.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


How to Leave a Company Well - <AUTHOR> http://seankilleen.com/2015/02/how-to-leave-a-company-well/

<comment><AUTHOR> I wrote up this article after a nice conversation. I'd be interested to hear if it's helpful, and any other thoughts you'd care to add to it.

Also, pull requests accepted :) [https://github.com/SeanKilleen/seankilleen.github.io/blob/ma...](https://github.com/SeanKilleen/seankilleen.github.io/blob/master/_posts/2015-02-27-how- to-leave-a-company-well.markdown)</comment>


Study: Eating hot chili peppers linked to decreased mortality - <AUTHOR> http://www.upi.com/Health_News/2017/01/13/Eating-hot-chili-peppers-linked-to-decreased-mortality-Study/7841484331022/ <comment><USER2> What doesn't kill you makes you stronger?

I've been tangling with ghost and scorpion peppers lately and even for someone who likes hot food those things will wreck you. They're in the 1,000,000+ Scoville range and make Frank's Red Hot taste like salad dressing by comparison.

Does the heat matter, or is it just a property of the peppers themselves?

<comment><USER3> Wasn't there recently a link between actual heat (saunas &c) and decreased mortality? I wonder whether there's any connection.

<comment><USER2> That could mean a link between sweating and longevity, which would also explain exercise...

Causality not necessarily the case here.

<comment><AUTHOR> I use hot peppers as an antibiotic substitute. When sicker, I go for hotter things, like habanero.

If by _wreck you_ , you mean they will cause gastro distress, it is because they kill gut bacteria as well as other bacteria.

Capsaicin causes sweating and feels hot by forcing a cell channel open at abnormally low temperatures. This channel normally only opens when you genuinely are too hot.

So, the other reason I eat hot peppers is as a biohack to force my body to dump fluids. I have a genetic disorder that impairs the function of a different cell channel. People with my condition are prone to belly bloat, which I have pretty badly -- but not nearly as badly as I did before I began consuming hot peppers a few years ago.

My belly continues to shrink. The shrinkage correlates to overall improved functionality. I don't care if the belly bloat is merely a symptom of illness or a cause of illness or a little bit of each, I want it gone. I feel strongly that when it is gone, I will function much closer to normal. I don't give a rat's ass if that is because I need to fix things to get rid of it or if I need to get rid of it to fix things. Ongoing progress in reducing the belly bloat serves as an excellent benchmark for general progress.

I did discuss this with a guy with a phd in chemistry and some past a guy with a phd in biology to understand what was going on with my defective body when I accidentally discovered that hot peppers helped me a surprising amount and googling was failing to get me meaningful, useful information. So contrary to popular opinion, this is not just some former homemaker talking out her ass. I also read medical records as part of my job for over five years, etc.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Carolina reapers have given me great longevity</comment>


Should App Developers Keep Paying the Apple Tax? - <AUTHOR> https://reworkin.com/post/16583 <comment><USER2> In my opinion, these gated gardens aren't worth it. Sure, you can make quite a lot of money if you manage to release a popular app. But I wouldn't want to develop for a platform that I didn't use myself.

I doubt these store would allow any app if it undermines their direct business interest.

Furthermore, these kind of stores are packed with exploitative software that could challenge early warez-sites of the late 20th century.

I would like to believe that we would have a much healthier ecosystem on smartphones, if manufacturers had opened up devices, which opened their own marketplaces that overwhelmingly failed in most cases.

In the end I just don't do development work for mobile platforms. That is reserved for some poor souls to which this stuff is going to get outsourced. They make money, sure, but they do look unhappy.</comment>


Mimblewimble/Grin Mainnet is 1/15/19; Grincon U.S. in San Mateo 1/28/19 - <AUTHOR> http://grincon.us/ <comment><AUTHOR> Grin is an implementation of the Mimblewimble protocol. 100% open-source and community-driven. There's no ICO, no pre-mine, and no founder's reward. Repo at [https://github.com/mimblewimble/grin](https://github.com/mimblewimble/grin) and more info available at [http://grin-tech.org/](http://grin-tech.org/)

<comment><AUTHOR> Registration for the Grincon U.S. conference: [https://www.eventbrite.com/e/grincon-us- tickets-53080649652?...](https://www.eventbrite.com/e/grincon-us- tickets-53080649652?aff=HNC)</comment></comment>


Xerox internal memo about the Alto (1972) - <AUTHOR> http://research.microsoft.com/lampson/38a-WhyAlto/WebPage.html

<comment><USER2> A Word original? Can't have been the original original...</comment>


Jony Ive back as design lead at Apple - <AUTHOR> https://9to5mac.com/2017/12/08/jony-ive-design-lead-again/ <comment><AUTHOR> Let's see if this has impact on the MacBook Pro Design. Maybe we get MagSafe back?</comment>


College vs Start-up - It's not about the job - <AUTHOR> http://danieltenner.com/posts/0004-college-vs-startup.html <comment><USER2> A college degree is used as a white-collar/blue-collar litmus test by a lot of people. You probably don't care about gov't or big company jobs, but the following might matter to you some day:

       - Immigration, if you ever decide to work abroad

       - Banks, if you need to finance a house

       - Dates. Education level is one of the main filters

       - Parents of women you're dating

       - Universities, if you ever want to hang out for a year doing research between startups

You might think most of those people are flexible enough to realize, once they know you, that you're a bright & ambitious guy. But then, when they try justify you to other people, it's harder without a college brand name.

It's probably less of a handicap in life than, say, having "PSYCHO KILLER" tattooed across your forehead, but it's significant. You can get along, but you'll always be explaining it. People who never went often seem to turn into defensive people later in life. YMMV.

</comment><comment><USER3> The main reason I'm usually not a huge fan of the college-no-college discussions is because they're "big identity" discussions (<http://www.paulgraham.com/identity.html>). Most readers of this site made a choice when they were kids or very near to it and the position that they defend tends to reflect the choice, well informed or otherwise, that they made then.

<comment><USER4> Good point. Did anyone do one or the other and regret it?

<comment><USER5> I regret my college loans... like I said elsewhere in this comment thread, if I could do it over, I'd make it as cheap as possible for myself.

<comment><USER6> My college loans are by far the best investment I've ever made. I went to a good in-state public school (Purdue), and lived very cheap. If they weren't at less than 3% interest they would have been paid off in one year from the extra money it earned me at work.

I don't understand the blanket hatred of college; it appears to come from people who spent >$100k/yr and are now drowning in that debt. If doe properly it's a very good thing; I learned a lot, made connections and grew as a person. I would say it's worth more to me than what I paid.

<comment><USER7> $100k/year?! I thought even the expensive ones maxed out around $50k/year?

<comment><USER8> I found a list of the most expensive colleges ([http://www.campusgrotto.com/most-expensive-colleges- for-2008...](http://www.campusgrotto.com/most-expensive-colleges- for-2008-2009.html)). I don't claim that this is an authoritative source but I've seen very similar lists elsewhere). There are three colleges in the US that break 50k per year for tuition, room, and board. There are quite a few more between 48k and 50k, though, and so with a standard tuition hike of a few percent they'll be over 50k next year.

My own institution is proud to be doing its own "lowest tuition hike in 41 years", at 3.8 percent. Thankfully I'm a PhD student and so I don't actually pay my own tuition.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I think everyone overlooks the value of finding co-founders and ideas at top universities.

I do not have any experience at a state school, but I would posit that it is worth paying the premium for an Ivy just to meet some of the kids. I have often had this discussion of whether it was worth going to college with my friends. As I am from a small town and they are from different countries all around the world, we would have had no connection with each other. Additionally, the alumni base has helped me talk to tech CEOs and venture capitalists as an 18-year old.

Even though I think the classes are pretty much worthless for long-term success, the extracurriculars and connections you meet during your four-year experience are the shaping factors.

</comment><comment><USER10> What I think would be cool is if somehow high school could be replaced with college. Allow people to specialize earlier, and hey, if it turns out they're not interested in their specialization, at least they found out 4 years earlier.

<comment><USER11> What happens if someone spends 3 years in a specialization they picked out when they were 12 or 13 and realize they hate it? You can't reasonably expect people that age to know what they want to do for the rest of their life.

<comment><USER12> I am now a senior in high school and this year I am taking classes in Data Structures, Assembly Language and Shell Programming. I have already taken classes in C, Unix and Java.

For me, it has been great to be able to take classes that I am actually interested in instead of just the ones that involve the least work like many of my friends have (CS is the only department with that many specialized classes).

I wasn't forced to choose a specialization, if I was, I probably would not have chosen CS at the time. I chose different classes freshman year and started to gravitate towards CS as a sophomore. There was no commitment so I could have stopped CS and focused on something else if it turned out that I didn't like it.

<comment><USER13> Do you go to a specialized school? If only such classes were offered here. I too am a high school senior but everything I know (little compared to you) is self taught. I am looking to college to supplement that.

<comment><USER12> No, it is just my town's public high school.

Most of what I know is also self taught. Once you get into the more advanced CS classes at my school, it is very independent (I am the only one in each of my classes this year). I can ask the teacher for help on an assignment or have him explain something if I need him too but most of the time I work independently.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Why not both? I mean seriously at school worst case scenario you spend 30 hours a week going to class/doing homework. Thats a worst case scenario where you have 22 credits + homework.

Plenty of time to do a startup on the side, especially in the early stage where you have slow growth.

And its not like you have to become a hermit, you have plenty of time to have a social life

<comment><USER15> Well, one obvious downside is a mountain of debt.

<comment><USER14> Yes, but for that you get the following:

a) Interest free debt that you don't have to even think about for 4.5 years, and even then you only pay back a few hundred bucks a month and if you can't they'll work with you to defer payments or adjust them.

b) No other expenses for the 4 years(rent, food, high speed internet, utilities), nothing to worry about but school and startup.(this is if you live on campus..which you should since your loan can cover housing)

c) Plenty of engineering talent all over the campus who can take a risk with you and even work for free

d) Plenty of people who you can consult for advice(teachers/councilors)

e) Access to alumnis who you can eventually tap for angel level funding

f) No obligation to show up to classes/do homework...yes your grades will suffer(if you mess up on finals), but if you are doing a startup, you don't really need to care about grades, and this way you can be very flexible

And sure you'll end up 40-200K in debt, but so what? Everyone else is in the same situation as you. But unlike them who'll get a job at $40k/yr, you'll have a startup that you had 4 years to grow to profitability. And it doesn't matter what business model you have, in 4 years anyone can get profitable.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Im 16 and I dropped out of school to go learn CS at a university (tau.ac.il).

1\. Some of the professors are not interested in teaching- they do it because they have to. They rarely answer questions and go way to fast over the material.

2\. We have to take many math courses. I was very interested in math until I got to university. Why? Because if you have a bad teacher you cant learn a lot.

3\. Out of the about 300 people that learn with me in various courses there are probably less than 10 who are actually interested in CS (ie. program outside of school...).

4\. Because of (1.) it is actually easier to learn from a book and much more efficient. You just need someone to answer the questions that you get here and there.

The whole thing just isnt fun at all... not even close. I really dont know what to do.

<comment><USER17> I'm going to go out on a limb, and guess that you're in your first year. Stick it out -- the first year is the worst. The classes are large, the students are just exploring (and aren't "interested"), the professors are teaching boring introductory courses, and no one is particularly inspired.

Stick through this part, and you'll find that things rapidly become more challenging and interesting.

<comment><USER16> Thats right- Im in my first year. I really hope you are right.

<comment><USER17> Trust me...the professors don't like the first-year courses any more than you do. They're a necessary evil.

Once you've selected a major, the coursework becomes _much_ more interesting and difficult. There will be plenty to challenge you.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> I studied electrical engineering and I value my college experience and education. However, at the same time I think college, and school in general, instills a tunnel-vision mentality. I'm sure engineering students have heard it before from their professors and TAs, "Specialize, specialize, specialize!" I eventually enrolled in a PhD program, until I was able to take a step back and I realized that I didn't enjoy what I was studying, but rather I was still in school because while in school I believed I didn't have a choice.

I've always wanted to start my own business. It was at this point that I realized something: I don't want a PhD, I want to hire PhDs. :)

</comment><comment><USER19> This is the exact situation I'm in. I'm 18, a high school senior, and am absolutely certain that I want to found a web company. However, I know that were I just to thrust myself into the world right now, I'd always be kicking myself because I didn't have a basic liberal arts education. While a knowledge of philosophy or political history isn't critical to what I will be doing business-wise later in life, I have a feeling that it will be critical to letting me feel like a whole person.

<comment><USER20> Do what I did - go to college, and spend every free minute working on your project. If you find college doesn't work for you, you'll have a great thing to rebound with.

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> This is a tough one. I sometimes regret choosing to go to college, but it truly changed everything for me. I studied Materials Engineering, and now I'm doing a web startup, but I really believe the college experience, the connections I've made, and the failure in multiple ways in college (not in classes thankfully) has helped me prepare to take the leap to full time entrepreneur.

<comment><USER5> Yup... if I knew then what I knew now (a moot point, admittedly), I'd audit classes or do the cheapest possible thing to be associated with the university without paying for it, and simultaneously work on startups/projects.

<comment><USER21> I wouldn't say it is the classes though. College transformed me as a person and forced me to grow up. Maybe it helps that I go to Drexel where we have co- op (school for 6 months, work for 6 months, repeat). Anyway, I would not have been prepared to lead a start up right out of high school. Today, I think I'm ready.

<comment><USER5> Sure... I meant participate in a startup/project, not lead it right away.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> I think it really depends on what kind of university you get into. If you get into a university like MIT, Stanford, CalTech, etc, there's a good chance that you'll be surrounded by a lot of entrepreneurial engineers. Even if you don't get a lot out of classes there, you'll at least meet a lot of interesting people that you can found with, or at the very least, be friends with.

Now meeting hackers at other schools is also possible, and I'd say pretty probable, if you try hard enough.

Having a network of hackers is pretty useful, especially for founding, and I think people underrate the value of relationships developed in college. There's no other environment quite like college, and even if you don't agree that the relationships built in that environment aren't uniquely valuable, I think you can probably agree that they're unique.

</comment><comment><USER23> I'd agree you don't need a degree to be a successful entrepreneur. However, as an entrepreneur I believe (since I can't claim to be one, not yet) you take risks that may lead you into the situation where you have to get a regular job so that you can survive, even if temporarily.

If that ever happens to me, I'm betting my X number of years spent earning my college degree will help me find a better job with a higher wage than if I didn't have a degree.

That was one of my personal reasons to go to college. I positive I could do without it but I think I'll feel somewhat safer in life knowing I can still have a good career if everything else fails.

</comment><comment><USER24> Go to a state school if you live in the US. It's cheaper and you are more likely to encounter professors who are interested in teaching, rather than their classes being a distraction from research and getting published.

<comment><USER25> I'm not saying that professors aren't interested in teaching at state schools, but I have found that pressure is as high or higher for professors to publish.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> Small styling comment: the a:hover underline appears in between your border styling and the link itself, which looks a little odd.

</comment><comment><USER26> "Ultimately, university is supposed to train you for life, not for a job." -- wonderful

</comment><comment><USER27> If you choose not to go to college do everyone a favor and don't have a chip on your shoulder about it and bring it up at every opportunity and talk shit about people who do.

Nobody really cares that much.</comment>


The surprising rise of JavaScript - <AUTHOR> http://radar.oreilly.com/2012/05/051012-radar-script-javascript.html <comment><USER2> There's a theory that languages hitch a ride on platforms that do something useful, as a way of "scripting" (customizing or configuring) that platform. The obvious one for Javascript is the browser, but we can see others: C for unix; perl and PHP for the server-side; ruby for rails; objective-C for iOS; C#/VB for Windows/Office and so on. Though not all languages seem to fit this, e.g. Java.

I think it's actually an instance of the simple idea that products are only adopted when they meet a need - an "application" of that product. Hence the term "killer app" for a new technology. Platforms are often products that are needed in themselves; therefore, anything that improves them a bit, expanding their capabilities and usefulness, is also needed. It seems quite common that a language, in itself, doesn't meet a particular need; similar to the idea that code, in itself, doesn't solve problems; and pure mathematics, in itself, isn't of practical use. All these need to be applied to a problem. (Of course, _some_ people do adopt all these despite their "uselessness" - it's just that this is a tiny minority).

In addition, people need to know about it (you can't adopt a compelling solution to your urgent problem if you've never heard of it). A successful platform helps here too - its scripting language is right there, installed, ready to use even before you need it.

In the case of Java, it seems to be have been useful in itself, because it was safer and easier to use than C and C++; it rode the rise of "OOP"; had a reassuring industry backer (Sun) and complete toolchain, libraries, support; and was heavily promoted by Sun. At that time, python, ruby and javascript were slow (because of slow hardware and lack of optimization) and C# didn't exist.

BTW: A blog/essay introduced the term "scripting language" to describe C (which is striking because C is not one, by the usual definition), but I've not been able to find it since.

So people bend over backwards to make javascript workable, improving it, adding libraries, finding the good parts, writing front-ends for it, writing back-ends for it, because it is the scripting language of the browser. If you do all that, is it still javascript? Yes, in that it uses the adoption channel of javascript, and maintains compatibility with javascript as an interface. So Javascript is no longer a thing, but a conduit - a platform customized by other scripting languages.

</comment><comment><USER3> JavaScript is a strange beast. The semantics of the language are, in my opinion, awesome and awful in different ways. Awesome: prototypes, first-class functions, dynamic function scope (not sure if there's a proper name for this), jQuery. Awful: the _this_ keyword is confusing (but powerful once you learn it), type coercion, the API.

The standard API is the reason that people care about "the good parts" of JavaScript. jQuery is so popular is because it allows you to turn away from the _document.getElementById_ sort of operation (ugly code) and turn it into _$("#id").filter().each().etc()_.

People don't like JavaScript because of what it is, but what it can be. There are so many examples to choose from: jQuery (DOM API, data requests, standard library "extensions"), jPlayer (multimedia), Node.js (server, native API), Mustache (templating), Meteor (dynamic MVC). I am by no means an expert, but I can appreciate that JavaScript has turned into a serious language. JavaScript is not the holy grail of web programming languages, and I am sure that something greater will succeed it, but for now there is a lot we can do with it.

<comment><USER4> > Awesome: prototypes

Meh. I still have to write that rant, but javascript's "prototypes" are a boondoggle, they've got nothing to do with Self's prototypes[0] and don't provide anything more than classes do in nice dynamic languages (you can, in fact, do more fucking around with Python's types than with Javascript's prototypes). For all intents and purposes, Javascript's so-called prototypes are shitty single-inheritance classes without the sugar.

> dynamic function scope (not sure if there's a proper name for this)

Not sure what you mean by "dynamic function scope", since you don't seem to like `this` (which is indeed complete garbage, but is sorta dynamically scoped) I'm guessing you mean lexical closures? The part where a nested function has read/write access to bindings created in its outer functions/scopes?

> for now there is a lot we can do with it.

There's also a lot we could do with Fortran and Cobol. That's no bloody excuse.

[0] in Self, prototypes are just the thing you clone to get a basic object, they're just a template. They're not a unit of code reuse or inheritance: that's the job of mixins[1]

[1] which, again, are very different from what you get in JavaScript or Ruby (though Ruby is closer): in Self, a mixin is an object you link to your own via a "parent slot", a special type of slot used for message resolution. When a message is sent to an object, the runtime first checks all of the object's non-parent slots and if there's no match it follows the parent slots recursively to try and find a slot matching the message.

<comment><USER5> > don't provide anything more than classes do in nice dynamic languages

How would you do in-place method mutation in something like Python or Ruby?

<comment><USER6> In Ruby:

        foo = "Hello"
        def foo.to_s; "Hello world!" end

Because "def" introduces a new local variable scope, you'll have to use #define_singleton_method if you want to close over variables:

        foo = "Hello"
        old = foo.method(:to_s)
        foo.define_singleton_method(:to_s) { old.call + " world!" }

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> How is the rise of the (unfortunately) sole technology that the ubiquitous multimedia platform of the beginning of the 21st century understands "surprising"?

The fact that we still haven't found a way to use anything else easily after about 15 years and are still being somehow coerced into developing with it is what's surprising really :/

<comment><USER8> > How is the rise of the (unfortunately) sole technology that the ubiquitous > multimedia platform of the beginning of the 21st century understands > "surprising"?

I recall that 14 years ago DHTML was the all the rage and javascript was the key to DHTML. So I took up JS and bought books and went in head first.

Conclusion: it was impossible to take that language seriously. Javascript was a hack.

So for me, the rise of javascript as anything more than a browser helper language has been very surprising. I still have some prejudice towards it. Maybe others feel the same way and knowing how O'Reilly comes from the UNIX tradition, I'm sure that's what they meant with that title.

<comment><USER9> Similar story for me. Except that in 2010 I re-learnt JavaScript and discovered how beautiful, flexible and powerful it can be as a client side / server side language

<comment><USER10> I've been node'n it up a bit myself lately. The language is easy to write, pretty easy to get things done, and server-side node provides a lot of great libraries.

That said, the development ecosystem around Javascript is very immature. To really write decent amounts of server-side JS as a team, people often employ linters and other things to sanity check their code. Debugging? Mostly printf's (or equivalent). Scoping rules can also be pretty annoying.

It is useful for getting things done, but it generally isn't my first choice (at least server side).

<comment><USER11> Have you not seen [1] node-inspector? It allows you to debug your server side code with the chrome/safari web inspector.

[1] <https://github.com/dannycoates/node-inspector>

<comment><USER10> Adrian - I have and it is a very useful tool. I guess my main gripe is the fact that the tool set is there in some form, but each has its area and none of them are really connected/integrated.

I suspect the toolchain will eventually get there, but it is a big step back if one is used to more integrated ecosystems.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I remember back in high school, I think like 1998 or so, my friend told me, "You should really learn Javascript really well. It's going to be really big and around for a really long time." I laughed at him.

Funny thing is that ended up going into embedded hardware; he almost never touches Javascript, except for some personal stuff. I still find it mindboggling how right he was, but part of me still feels like he was just shooting in the dark.

</comment><comment><USER13> If Javascript is so great then why do we need Coffeescript?

<comment><USER14> Consider that in the browser, JavaScript is (with a few minor exceptions) the closest to a universal scripting runtime/VM that we can get. Targeting the browser, therefore, requires compiling down to JavaScript. So JavaScript (the language) and CoffeeScript can both be awesome in the way that Scala and Clojure have their different niches on the JVM.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> I wouldn't call it "surprising" to see the only client web language increasing in popularity.

</comment><comment><USER16> It isn't really all the surprising if you have the background Douglas Crockford provided in his yahoo series - <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2ifWcnQs6M> (part 1)

<comment><USER17> There was JavaScript (including the good parts) before Douglas Crockford started disseminating his ideas about the language and long before jQuery was released. So it was like a powerful and possibly quite elegant language all along, but it needed to be 'discovered' and 'evangelized'.

With respect to JavaScript, it's like front-end developers are all enlightened today, after living in the dark ages for about 10 years.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> As the title is ambiguous, my surprise is at _how long_ it took for JavaScript to gain the stature and position it has now, not in it actually making that rise.

</comment><comment><USER18> hasn't objective-c and java pretty much replaced all the demand for javascript?

<comment><USER9> Not even close. JavaScript is the closest thing we have today to a 'universal' programming language.

<comment><USER7> It's universal because it's the only language that runs in the browser, not on its merits though. That alone made it big and ubiquitous. If Python had been picked as the scripting language for the web, or even Lua or Ruby, they would be the "universal" languages.</comment></comment></comment>


Piracy: The Intellectual Property Wars from Gutenberg to Gates - <AUTHOR> http://www.thenational.ae/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100121/REVIEW/701219974/1008 <comment><AUTHOR> The eBook version is free today (Feb 1st): <http://www.press.uchicago.edu/ebooks/free_ebook.html>

<comment><USER2> If you agree to use Adobe DRM software:

        Further Notes: Downloading Your eBook

        Here's an overview of the download process:

        A. The big brown button first checks to see if
        your machine has Digital Editions already.
               If not, it will ask you if you want to
               install it.
               If you have an older version, it will ask
               if it can update your version.

        B. The first time Digital Editions is opened, it
        will ask you to "Authorize" your computer. It
        wants you to associate your machine with an Adobe
        ID. If you don't have an Adobe ID, you can choose
        the small "get an Adobe ID online" link to set one
        up. (It's free.) Some people already have Adobe
        IDs, from using Photoshop or other Adobe products.

        Here's why to authorize: If you authorize your
        computer with an Adobe ID, you will be able to
        open the same book file on up to five other
        computers or devices authorized to the same Adobe
        ID. If you choose "Don't Authorize," your book
        file will only be able to live on the first
        machine it opens on; it can't be moved elsewhere.

        C. The last step is book delivery--there's a very
        small file, called URLLink.acsm, that needs to be
        downloaded to your computer. When it opens in
        Digital Editions, it will launch your electronic
        book.</comment></comment>