Spacemacs 0.105.0 released - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/syl20bnr/spacemacs/releases/tag/v0.105.0 <comment><USER2> I've been using emacs for about 20yrs as my main coding editor and vi regularly as a fast command line editor. Can some one explain in clear terms why I would want to learn a new set of key bindings? What are the advantages of spacemacs other than a better configuration system and nifty graphics? Both the Github page and website do a terrible job of explaining this, IMO. Maybe the answer is that it was not made for me.

<comment><USER3> I feel like it's more for vim users who need a gentle introduction to emacs (me) and _really_ don't want to leave modal editing and more advanced vi features behind. It goes a _lot_ further in emulating the day-to-day vi experience than literally anything I've ever tried before. But it's also a pretty nicely managed set of extra packages that are all smacked around to play nicely with each other.

If you've been using emacs for 20 years and already know how to do stuff and maybe even write your own modes, then it's _proooobably_ not for you. (I mean, you coulda been using evil a long time ago).

<comment><USER4> How is this any better than e.g. viper mode?

<comment><USER5> The main feature of Spacemacs over just plain evil is that it has a number of "layers" for different languages, utilities and emacs things, which introduce consistent, vim-friendly keybindings. With plain evil-mode, you'd have to tinker with every package you wanted to use and come up with some good vim- style keybindings.

The Spacemacs layer setup does restrict you to what it supports, unless you want to do things manually.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Also a great addition is the new Spacemacs website which went live today: [http://spacemacs.org/](http://spacemacs.org/)

<comment><USER7> I love Spacemacs, but the old site looked better. Why all the animation? It's like the Web is devolving back to how it was when it was covered in animated gifs, marquee, and blink elements. Animation doesn't catch my attention -- it makes me want to close the page.

<comment><USER8> Perhaps you are not the intended audience, then?

<comment><USER7> Like I said, I love Spacemacs. I just don't like animation for animation's sake. It's the modern equivalent of blink and marquee elements. Just saying that I like the old site better.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> People like to say that emacs isn't an editor but a platform, or just a lisp interpreter that comes with text editing libraries. But is it? The emacs development team sees it as a text editor, I think. If it was just an interpreter, I can imagine many editors built on top of it, with spacemacs being just one. If it's an editor, than wouldn't you expect the good ideas from projects like spacemacs to make its way into the emacs core? I wonder if the emacs core team should go all in with the emacs-as-a-platform idea and focus on just the core features, letting projects like spacemacs to create an appealing editor.

<comment><USER10> well, that's kinda been the way emacs has been for a while now. They recently added a really easy package managing system which allows for emacs to look and behave drastically different from each other. About making its way into the core, the dev team won't really put anything into the core unless other things in the core require them.

Getting the dev email list to agree to a change of something that is easily added through packages or just init.el/emacs.d/ is difficult if not impossible. But this is a good thing: opinionated workflows are adaptable but not forced on seasoned veterans and newbies alike. Getting good packages into elpa or tasteful additions into core that augment emacs is always welcomed it seems.

Join the development list and just follow discussions. It's always fun to see really smart people talking about new code, extensions, opinions, and the new maintainer John seems to want to do a good job and produce some nice software. I've got it going to my gmail under a label and never filling my inbox so it gives a nice reading break every now and then at work.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> I love Spacemacs, I'm a total convert I barely ever use vim now -- best of both worlds.

<comment><USER12> Which both worlds?

<comment><USER13> The extensibility of Emacs, along with Vi[m] key bindings.

Although Spacemacs does have a "Holy mode" which will keep the Emacs bindings and won't use vim-like keys.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Slightly off-topic. I'm looking for a tutorial/article/project to create a toy (or even feature-full) emacs-like text editor from the ground up.

Using two languages: C and scheme (preferably R7RS-small).

I have quite a few resources to create a vi/vim like editor from scratch (vis, some python projects, etc) but non in the scheme+C arena along emacs lines.

Emacs project itself is a bad example of studying the architecture of such an editor because of its humongous codebase (~250 kloc C, ~1.2 Mloc e-lisp) unless someone has done a good write-up about how to get familiar with architecture and extensibility infrastructure.

<comment><USER13> I haven't seen any tutorials for writing an emacs-like editor, but I think studying the source of QEmacs [0] and mg [1] is a good starting point.

[0]: [http://bellard.org/qemacs/](http://bellard.org/qemacs/)

[1]: [http://homepage.boetes.org/software/mg/](http://homepage.boetes.org/software/mg/)

Also, you could take a look at these:

[http://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/EmacsImplementations](http://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/EmacsImplementations)

[https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Emacs/Emacs- like_editor...](https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Emacs/Emacs-like_editors)

[http://texteditors.org/cgi- bin/wiki.pl?EmacsFamily](http://texteditors.org/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?EmacsFamily)

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> Been using this for a few months now and this configuration of emacs has made coding and note taking a pleasure.

</comment><comment><USER16> Spacemacs is awesome! Anyone who still using Vim should at least try it.

</comment><comment><USER17> 1.2 What is the official pronunciation of Spacemacs?

As it is written, that is space then macs.

I was wrong this whole time. I always pronounced it like "space emacs" or "spacey-macs" if you will.

<comment><USER18> I pronounce it _spuh-CHEE-max_ , like the pronunciation of Dr. Spaceman's name on _30 Rock_.

<comment><USER19> First thing I thought of, took me too long to find the reference: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1wQbKAAfCCY](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1wQbKAAfCCY)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Easily the best editor going imo.

<comment><USER21> If it were just an editor I would agree, but the #1 killer app, org-mode, puts it in a different class of application.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> For me Spacemacs is perfect:

7~ years using vim 4 years using emacs

enjoyed modal editing in vim, got very good with it enjoyed how easy it was to program/debug emacs tried setting up evil, wasn't up to the task of configuring it

With both Emacs and Vim I had trouble having to upgrade my configs too often, but that's not necessarily their fault.

It could just be a coincidence of timing, but Spacemacs gives me most of what I want by default and makes it easy for me to customize.

I will say that the Emacs graphic rendering bug which causes pathologically bad performance on long lines has been biting me a lot using Spacemacs to do Golang development.

</comment><comment><USER23> A colleague is using it and I had a look, but it seems kind of weird because it doesn't seem like Emacs any more to the point where I couldn't easily do Emacs stuff with it.

I've been using regular old Emacs for about 20 years. For those more familiar with Spacemacs, how hard is it to accomplish some of what it does, or transition to a more normal Emacs setup once you get to like Emacs?

 _Edit_ \- this is just out of curiosity. I hope to use Emacs for another 20 years at least :-)

<comment><USER24> I think you can now configure it to run in "holy mode". In both modes you can still type meta-x (also via `<space>:`).

I think if you had a very customized emacs setup, you'd have to put some effort organizing it into custom "layers", which is how spacemacs organizes its config and making sure you don't have big conflicts in mapped keys.

<comment><USER25> IMHO, the layers are pretty easy to put together if you're comfortable with your Emacs configuration. The first one I coded up (for notmuch) was done inside an hour and that's when I was new to Spacemacs.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> How well does Spacemacs work in a terminal (e.g. iTerm)? I've been using iTerm+Tmux+vim and don't want to give up iTerm+tmux just yet.

<comment><USER27> It works great. I use the same setup, and was big into spacemacs and even contributed to it but ended up right back at iterm + tmux + vim again. Vim is faster, and suits my needs better.

<comment><USER3> When you say faster: Did you try starting emacs in daemon mode and connecting to it with emacsclient?

I still kinda miss vim -p (and I am not a huge fan of eyebrowse as a replacement for vim's tabs), but that very much solved the speed issue for me.

<comment><USER27> I don't think I ever did that. Maybe I'll give it a shot, thanks.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> I don't have any experience in neither Vim, nor Emacs. Should I try it? Looks awesome. Also - is there any way to add Go (golang) support?

<comment><USER29> I personally would find spacemacs very overwhelming if I didn't have prior experience with either vim or emacs. My recommendation is to pick one of the two, use it for a while and get some experience, and then consider spacemacs.

<comment><USER30> Just wanted to reiterate this. When I started with Spacemacs I had a few years of using and customizing Vim under my belt, yet I still found it very daunting at the beginning.

The main problem is customization. Even though Emacs Lisp and the Emacs ecosystem allows for a more organized and advanced setup, there are so many options to do any single thing.

Add to that the newbie-unfriendly documentation, you end up spending way too much time trying to understand how to customize things properly, or at all. Whereas with Vim, if I had a simple customization idea, I would just google it, find a solution in 2 minutes and slap a few more lines in my 1k LoC .vimrc.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> everyone talks about spacemacs=vim. this is nice, but what turned me off of spacemacs was the layers config abstractions. It breaks the normal configuration of emacs.

Just install evil mode and a few contrib packages.. that's spacemacs lite.

<comment><USER32> >Just install evil mode and a few contrib packages.. that's spacemacs lite.

Yes. However one of the most attractive features of spacemacs is... that somebody has selected the packages and installed them for you! You don't have to do anything!

<comment><USER31> .. and you're stuck forever in the spacemacs layers abstraction, per my comment above. (Try installing a package from Melpa)

<comment><USER33> It takes literally 5 minutes to add a layer that will install whatever package you want.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> I feel like the author missed a golden opportunity to call this Vimacs ...

<comment><USER18> That already exists. It's Emacs bindings for Vim.

[http://www.vim.org/scripts/script.php?script_id=300](http://www.vim.org/scripts/script.php?script_id=300)

<comment><USER35> whyyyy would you do that?? i say that as a devoted emacs addict!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> This is really cool, I've been using bbatsov's one and I'm going to try this. One thing I _really_ suggest is installing the seethru plugin here's a screenshot, it makes emacs transparent.

[http://imgur.com/DUCv2UK](http://imgur.com/DUCv2UK)

I also use webstorm 11 as my emacs skill is insufficient to graduate to apprentice neckbeard. my apologies.

<comment><USER37> Try `SPC T T`

<comment><USER36> What does SPC translate to in holy mode?

<comment><USER38> It is by default `M-m`.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> Come to the dark side of Emacs. We have cookies.

</comment><comment><USER39> I used spacemacs for a bit a few months ago but launch-times were really long. I use emacs as my default editor and I really hated the bootstrapping process when I fired up emacs to edit a config from the command line.

If someone has a simple fix to this problem I would gladly use it since they seemed to have the right ingredients for a top notch experience.

<comment><USER40> emacs --daemon and EDITOR='emacsclient'

<comment><USER30>
        alias emacs="emacsclient -nw -a ''"

is the best I've found.

 _-nw_ : Open a new frame in current terminal (otherwise it just opens the file in whatever other emacs window you already have launched).

 _-a_ : Start the daemon if it isn't running.

 _' '_: Little trick so you can launch it without a filename.

<comment><USER41>
        -a: Start the daemon if it isn't running.
        '': Little trick so you can launch it without a filename.

Ha, if only. From the bit on `-a` in [https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/manual/html_node/emacs/em...](https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/manual/html_node/emacs/emacsclient- Options.html) :

        Specify a command to run if emacsclient fails to contact Emacs. This is useful when running emacsclient in a script.
        As a special exception, if command is the empty string, then emacsclient starts Emacs in daemon mode (as emacs --daemon) and then tries connecting again.

`emacsclient -a vim` will run vim if it can't connect to a running daemon.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER42> All the links in the docs TOC are broken: [https://github.com/syl20bnr/spacemacs/blob/master/doc/DOCUME...](https://github.com/syl20bnr/spacemacs/blob/master/doc/DOCUMENTATION.org)

<comment><USER37> We know, we have a problem generating links that work both with our new online documentation system and github (syntax incompatibility). For now you have to use [http://spacemacs.org/doc/DOCUMENTATION.html](http://spacemacs.org/doc/DOCUMENTATION.html) :-)

</comment></comment><comment><USER43> I tried it for couple of weeks but returned back to emacs. It has some cool features but I couldn't get used to its keybindings. I'm sure they're customizable but I wasn't motivated enough to do so.

<comment><USER44> Same for me. Cool package if it floats your boat, but it's not what I look for in an editor, especially the "crowd configured" part.

</comment></comment><comment><USER45> Basically viper in sheep's clothing.</comment>


Tesla says supplier botched Falcon Wing door hydraulics for Model x - <AUTHOR> http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/01/tesla-says-supplier-botched-falcon-wing-door-hydraulics-for-model-x/ <comment><AUTHOR> _' The doors also did not open with the speed or symmetry that Tesla required, including when a prototype vehicle was parked at an incline or when the system was exposed to extreme temperatures. Hoerbiger's doors also "sagged" beyond Tesla's specified tolerance levels.'_ \- I wonder if the vehicle was parked at a longitudinal or lateral incline. I would understand if the problem was noticed in the latter.</comment>


ASk HN: Best schools for Human-Computer Interaction degrees? - <AUTHOR> I have no technical background, but I do have a design background as an Industrial Designer. I have a start up of my own that I work on during nights and weekends, but I've been considering going back to school.
I'm very interested with Human-Computer Interaction and was wondering what some of the best programs were out there? Also are technical skills required to enter these programs?
Thanks! <comment><USER2> I looked into this a while back, and here's what I still remember. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

* CMU has a good range of research, along with good aid.

* MIT (CSAIL or Media Lab) is good for novel interfaces.

* University of Washington also has a fairly well known program.

Those 3 are the top programs, from what I remember. Here's a list of the rest of the schools that have something relevant: Georgia Tech (UbiComp), University of Michigan (school of information), UCI (UbiComp at school of information), Univeristy of Toronto (graphics and HCI), Stanfard (HCI and tangible computing), Northwestern (InfoLab), Iowa State University, University of Waterloo, and Texas A&M.

This is not an exhaustive list, but I hope it's a good starting point for you. It also depends on what areas of HCI you're interested in. Hope this helps!

<comment><USER3> MIT is undergoing a dramatic change in their AI philosophy. They are dissatisfied with the state of AI today and the slow (near-zero) progress on fundamental problems of AI over the last 3 decades. They are about at the point of throwing everything out and starting over. So right now, CMU might be better if you want to see the state of the art in HCI, whereas MIT might be better if you want to get in on the ground floor of a potential revolution in HCI.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> From what I've heard from some people working in industry, a lot of human factors (the superset of HCI) jobs, like to see graduate level degrees. It's largely an artifact of most HF programs actually just being a specialization tacked onto something else (like systems engineering). I can't actually vouch for how accurate this information is though. (Currently at UofWaterloo System Design Eng, may be on track for a HF specialization...).

Though if you want to learn stuff for yourself, then it's a whole different ballgame (and don't get suckered into the programs which offer it as a specialization. just wasting time then).

</comment><comment><USER5> Not all of them may be good, but here is a comprehensive list: <http://www.humanfactors.com/downloads/degrees.asp>.

I was considering either Iowa State or Carnegie Mellon. CM is supposed to be really good but is also pretty expensive.

</comment><comment><USER6> You might also want to look at The Institute of Design at Illinois Institute of Technology in Chicago.

</comment><comment><USER7> Be self taught, or study psychology.

<comment><AUTHOR> any recommendations on the best way to become self taught? (books, tutorials, ect?)

<comment><USER7> [http://www.amazon.com/Psychology-Human-Computer- Interaction-...](http://www.amazon.com/Psychology-Human-Computer-Interaction- Stuart-Card/dp/0898598591)</comment></comment></comment>


Sweet Home Mississippi - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/08/opinion/sunday/sweet-home-mississippi.html?action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=opinion-c-col-top-region&region=opinion-c-col-top-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-top-region <comment><USER2> There's a wealth of eccentric but traditional culture that stretches from the rural south to the end of Appalachia. Unfortunately it's fairly unknown to most people, but it is kept alive mostly by collectors of 78 rpm discs of traditional American folk (most of which come from places Grant lives in). It is certainly very interesting.</comment>


Commerce Department Prohibits WeChat and TikTok Transactions - <AUTHOR> https://www.commerce.gov/news/press-releases/2020/09/commerce-department-prohibits-wechat-and-tiktok-transactions-protect <comment><USER3> This is disappointing yet expected from the executive.

What's more disappointing is watching the thunderous applause from technologists here and elsewhere as software is outlawed which is not otherwise illegal and is not being litigated as illegal. We should not cheer on the restriction of any software on nationalistic terms. Content is one thing, physical equipment another, but algorithms should be borderless. Most in the community disagree with encryption export restrictions, why can't they similarly disagree with software import restrictions? 2A groups recognize slippery slope precedents, why can't technologists?

If the content/data is being harvested and/or managed illegally, then make that illegal and/or prosecute under that pretense (even if the evidence is subject to national security non-disclosure). Otherwise, it's obvious this is political posturing at the cost of digital freedom. It should be as widely condemned as government surveillance has been.

(reposted from the now-buried [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24515461](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24515461))

<comment><USER4> Yet every time this is posted the default response is that China has done worse to US companies, so It's only fair! How do you reply to that? (not asking rhetorically)

<comment><USER5> US media companies are free to operate in China, provided they follow Chinese media laws that applies to other domestic platforms.

TikTok operates in US under US laws, that's technically fair and reciprocal. If people mean reciprocal in spirit, like joint venture, then TikTok partnering with Oracle and storing data in US server is reciprocal in spirit. You can apply this reciprocal state of exception for all Chinese companies in US, provided JV partners reciprocate in perks (i.e. in China JVs provide massive land and other subsidies). You can even legislate tech transfers for TikTok's algorithm. And for the purpose of trade and commercial entities operating to make a profit that's sufficient.

But I surmise the crux of these bad-faith reciprocal arguments is that US should be able to impose its values on foreign markets, and US companies should be able operate in those markets to spread US values like how Chinese platforms operating under US values can shape US opinions. That's valid, but an that's a conversation well past trade fairness which TikTok has already met.

But this isn't about trade fairness, this & Clean Network is about Chinese containment and US hegemony. And that's also valid. China's going to do what they do, the question people here needs to ask is should America also do what China does.

<comment><USER6> I think the US passing legislation that requires foreign companies to transfer their technology (or worse, copying brutally repressive CCP laws on media) would be far far far more damaging than surgically banning companies from specific countries under a reciprocal reaction.

<comment><USER5> Media laws would be progressive data protections, just evenly applied. But we know why that's not on the table. Tech transfer + JV only for countries that require it, i.e. reciprocal. Same with property, company, asset ownership which that bothers a lot of people. The point is there are reciprocal options for reciprocal advocates. But reading a lot of these reciprocal arguments, they look like a dogwhistle for containment, which is fine. Policy making circles discuss containment openly. Just be upfront about it and stop pretending it's about fairness. And try not to let reeeee China undermine longterm self-interests. Which this act seems to do.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> A telling quote comes to us from the Commerce Secretary, via reporting by the New York Times:

"""What they collect are data on locality, data on what you are streaming toward, what your preferences are, what you are referencing, every bit of behavior that the American side is indulging in becomes available to whoever is watching on the other side."""

Well, shit. If that's the concern, I hope nobody's told them about blogs, YouTube, or the Internet.

<comment><USER8> Of course, that's not the concern, the concern is that they don't get that data, somebody else does. It's pure hypocrisy. They could have done the right thing by passing sweeping privacy laws that every company would be subjected to, but in reality the goal is to maintain the monopoly of the USG on espionage.

<comment><USER9> I think the real concern is that social networks can be used for mass political opinion manipulation. Algorithmic recommendations and deplatforming have become political battlegrounds and the power of the social media companies is recognized more and more as being immense.

<comment><USER10> > I think the real concern is that social networks can be used for mass > political opinion manipulation

Again, the concern is not that that is happening, but that it's happening by people not under control of the US elite. The hyper-partisan news organisations of the US engage in "opinion manipulation" just fine, as does Facebook.

<comment><USER9> Correct. The difference between Facebook and Tiktok is who can apply pressure and in what ways. For example many people believe that Trump's antitrust moves against Google are also political, different situation different techniques but same goal, a battle over the control of social networks.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Can Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp, Telegram, Signal, Google Chat, Slack, Discord, and others operate freely in China?

If the answer to that question is no, then we should treat Chinese apps the exact same way that China treats American apps. Otherwise we're just getting hilariously abused.

Edit: It's called reciprocity. The US can operate a free market and trade with other countries that also operate free markets. We cannot, and should not, allow the US free market to be abused by foreign governments. If China does not want American companies to operate in China the US should reciprocate. Otherwise we're just being taken advantage of. It's not a violation of American free market principles. Just look at the whole fiasco with AirBus subsidies. The US should only engage with foreign governments that respect free trade.

<comment><USER12> Why should we emulate the policies of another country if we agree that those policies are wrong and/or harmful? That seems like the exact opposite of what we should do: lead by example by showing how a society without such restriction is better off.

<comment><USER13> Yes because 'leading by example' worked so well for Democracy in China and Hong Kong

<comment><USER14> See, this is part of the problem, constantly trying to change what things are outside of our borders.

Bringing Freedom to Iraq, and Democracy to Afghanistan, etc.

The first question to be asked should be 'How is this affecting Americans and their rights' and not how 'this didn't seem to work in China.' Especially seeing the ban applies only to the US.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> """While the threats posed by WeChat and TikTok are not identical, they are similar. Each collects vast swaths of data from users, including network activity, location data, and browsing and search histories. Each is an active participant in China's civil-military fusion and is subject to mandatory cooperation with the intelligence services of the CCP."""

It's funny that they're saying that like Room 641A isn't public knowledge.

Of course, when it's the NSA cloning data out of AT&T to spy for Uncle Sam, it's the _good_ spying. ;)

<comment><USER15> In the spectrum of "evil", I'd rather an NSA run by American citizens to have my data than the Chinese government. I can, in theory, at least elect representatives to change the policies of the NSA. I have no such power over China, and China is actively censoring and repressing citizens who even mildly criticize the state.

How are those the same?

<comment><USER16> I'm the opposite. I'd rather China have my data then the NSA.

China has less incentive to go after me, and what are they gonna do to me? It's not like the United States will extradite their own citizens to China or anything like that.

The United States could easily use my data to come after me at some point, if they decide to. They could make my political viewpoints illegal (like the McCarthy Era) and find evidence of my views from my data and throw me in jail or worse.

<comment><USER17> Look at it from a different angle of giving data to China gives them more power and reduces the power of the US. It may not matter a ton in your lifetime, but maybe your kids will see China as the world superpower, imposing its value system onto the world. I'd prefer the US remain the top dog because while not perfect, I like the value system of the US more than I do China.

<comment><USER18> Eh. There's a long list of moral bankruptcy even before trump. We operate literal concentration camps for children here and I don't see these breathless articles in the international press about that.

<comment><USER19> _We operate literal concentration camps for children here_

Holocaust survivors would find your hyperbole disgusting.

<comment><USER7> Some actual holocaust survivors do. ([https://www.foxnews.com/politics/aoc- holocaust-survivors-res...](https://www.foxnews.com/politics/aoc-holocaust- survivors-respond-to-aocs-concentration-camp-comments))

Some actual holocaust survivors do not, and consider it similar to their lived experience, not hyperbole. ([https://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/commentary/2018/06/19/a-d...](https://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/commentary/2018/06/19/a-dallas- holocaust-survivor-sees-his-reflection-in-the-faces-of-children-separated- from-their-parents/), [https://www.thedailybeast.com/holocaust-survivor-yes- the-bor...](https://www.thedailybeast.com/holocaust-survivor-yes-the-border- detention-centers-are-like-concentration-camps))

This is a point of record; no need to hypothesize.

<comment><USER18> Wait you're saying Jews aren't a monolith?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> I have conflicted feelings about this but I do think that the 'spin' is poor. China doesn't allow Google, Facebook, Twitter, etc. behind the great firewall. Why not just say we are blocking their pseudo-government social apps to be at economic/market access parity. It seems accurate and fair. Spinning it as national security, while potentially true (really don't know), seems like an unnecessary narrative.

<comment><USER21> Stooping to China's level by blocking foreign software seems like an admission that the US cannot produce a viable competitor with its much more free market, does it not? If the other side plays dirty, playing dirty ourselves in response seems like a very poor precedent. Restricting the freedom of American citizens to choose a social media app feels like the antithesis of the American free-market ideology, in my opinion.

I'm willing to entertain other ideas, of course, and I'd love to hear any flaws in my logic.

<comment><USER11> The US can, does, and should act reciprocally. In all markets where there are no restrictions in trade or commerce we treat foreign competitors fairly, as we should. In markets where US companies are not treated fairly, we should reciprocate.

In the case of China, American companies are not treated fairly. We should reciprocate. Otherwise it's a lopsided engagement that will eventually result in Chinese corporate dominance. We can't operate in China, but they can operate in the US? No way.

<comment><USER22> 100% this. It's insane to me that some people don't understand this when I discuss it with them.

Potential market share for chinese company: <population of world>

Potential market share for literally any other company: <population of world - population of china>.

Since <population of china> is ~1.4 Billion, and <population of world> is ~7.8 Billion, how does one not understand that a chinese company has an insane and unfair advantage.

<comment><USER23> > Potential market share for literally any other company: <population of world > - population of china>.

China is one of the largest markets for a very large number of Western companies. If you ever go to China, chances are that the taxi that picks you up will be a Volkswagen, and the planes that take you from one city to the next will be made by Boeing or Airbus. You'll see Starbucks, McDonald's and KFC everywhere, and it's likely you'll stay in a Marriott or Hilton. If you go to the mall, you'll see foreign clothing brands everywhere, and the electronics shops will be filled with devices powered by Intel, Micron, Qualcomm, AMD, Nvidia, etc.

> It's insane to me that some people don't understand this when I discuss it > with them.

What I don't get is how people believe that foreign companies don't operate in China. Have these people ever been to China?

<comment><USER21> Apple and Microsoft also operate in China.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> Salient points here:

\---

As of September 20, 2020, the following transactions are prohibited:

1\. Any provision of service to distribute or maintain the WeChat or TikTok mobile applications, constituent code, or application updates through an online mobile application store in the U.S.;

2\. Any provision of services through the WeChat mobile application for the purpose of transferring funds or processing payments within the U.S.

As of September 20, 2020, for WeChat and as of November 12, 2020, for TikTok, the following transactions are prohibited:

1\. Any provision of internet hosting services enabling the functioning or optimization of the mobile application in the U.S.;

2\. Any provision of content delivery network services enabling the functioning or optimization of the mobile application in the U.S.;

3\. Any provision directly contracted or arranged internet transit or peering services enabling the function or optimization of the mobile application within the U.S.;

4.Any utilization of the mobile application's constituent code, functions, or services in the functioning of software or services developed and/or accessible within the U.S.

\---

That last piece especially is quite concerning, and seems like a clear overreach of federal authority, no? Don't know that I've ever seen execution of software alone as an enforceable offense, and as written it seems to outlaw even opening up the app if you previously have it downloaded.

<comment><USER25> >> 2\. Any provision of content delivery network services enabling the functioning or optimization of the mobile application in the U.S.;

That's the big one. That would suggest blocking by ISPs, something that is technically not easy and legally troubling. Do ISPs now have to block the activities of Chinese phones traveling to the US? That will take effort.

<comment><USER26> They'll just use edge locations in Canada

<comment><USER25> Canada and the US are pretty integrated. Do US ISPs need to block WeChat traffic that is transiting the US, say coming from China to a user standing in Canada or the UK? That sort of blocking could have serious impacts beyond wechat/tiktok.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> From the related NYT article [1]:

> _The prohibitions raise the question of whether Google and Apple, the major > operators of American app stores, could sue the administration._

> _Tech companies have made clear that they don't like the idea of blocking > apps without a more organized policy process, and have suggested that they > see this as a First Amendment issue, said Adam Segal, a cybersecurity expert > at the Council on Foreign Relations._

> _Mr. Segal said it was not entirely clear why the administration had chosen > to go after these two Chinese services, and not other similar ones. "A lot > of it just feels to me to be improvisational," he said._

[1] [https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/18/business/trump-tik-tok- we...](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/18/business/trump-tik-tok-wechat- ban.html)

<comment><USER28> > Tech companies have made clear that they don't like the idea of blocking > apps without a more organized policy process, and have suggested that they > see this as a First Amendment issue, said Adam Segal, a cybersecurity expert > at the Council on Foreign Relations.

Yet they're both perfectly fine with blocking apps for arbitrary reasons citing "app store policy".

Lets be blunt here, whether you agree with the Tiktok issue or not, for Apple and Google this is purely a money issue. They are probably afraid this will increase support for third party app stores among the masses

<comment><USER29> > _Yet they 're both perfectly fine with blocking apps for arbitrary reasons > citing "app store policy"._

Phrased less disingenuously: Private companies are fine making decisions based on their own internal policies, as opposed to blocking certain apps based on nebulous requests/pseudo-demands from the government.

<comment><USER30> That doesn't quite capture it. I want to buy an app for my phone and a vendor wants to sell it to me. But because my phone is a walled garden, Apple and Google who are third parties to the transaction can step in and prevent it.

The Department of Commerce is saying that the Uniform Commercial Code is also a bit of a walled garden, and we can step in and prevent it.

<comment><USER29> There are many, many things that are totally legal for private companies to do but the government is implicitly or explicitly prohibited from doing. Freedom of speech (not saying this is an example of that) is probably the prime example.

A company can bar you from saying just about anything. You can be fired for wearing a tie your boss doesn't like (this never happens, but it's legal in 49 states). The government has very narrow parameters in which is can limit speech, or more accurately, punish you for given speech.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> It's not just a ban on import, but also a ban on execution! It's insane overreach.

The government should have the power to manage armies, fiscal policies, and so on, but giving the State the power to decide which algorithms I should be allowed to run on my own computer is insane.

<comment><USER31> Its not even that, Pompeo already talked about a quasi US version of the great firewall called the Clean network. Its kinda weird seeing the US being afraid of competition. Kinda had hoped that the scenario Kai Fu Lee wrote about in his book "AI superpowers" wouldn't happen that the tech world would bifurcate into the East vs the West.

<comment><USER32> Eh I don't think the US is afraid of competition, but what competition exactly? Chinese companies can freely operate in the US, but American companies can't freely operate in China? Obviously that isn't going to go on forever. None of this would be happening if Facebook, Twitter, Google, etc. we're allowed to operate in China like TikTok is/was allowed to operate in the US.

<comment><USER33> > American companies can't freely operate in China

McDonald's, Nike, Boeing, Microsoft, P&G, General Electric (to name just a few) all hold dominant market share in China. I have no idea why people constantly repeat this claim so easily debunked. US companies are everywhere in the country and making billions.

<comment><USER32> Because we're clearly talking about tech companies and social media companies.

<comment><USER23> The US trade relationship with China is much larger than social media companies (Apple, Micron, Qualcomm and plenty of other tech companies have no problem in China - what we're talking about here are _media_ companiesm not tech companies in general). By focusing only on media companies, people in this conversation are getting a very narrow and distorted view of the US-China trade relationship. The US does very well, business-wise, in China, contrary to what most Americans seem to believe.

<comment><USER32> Sure, how do you define does very well in China?

<comment><USER23> Many US companies have made huge returns on investment in China, and China is a major market for many American companies.

This is a tech forum, so we can go down a list of US tech companies, giving their 2017 revenue from China:

* Apple: $45 billion (20% of Apple's total)

* Intel: $15 billion (its largest market, 24% of total)

* Qualcomm: $15 billion (>60% of Qualcomm's total)

* Micron: $10 billion (>50% of Micron's total)

* Broadcom: $9 billion (>50 of Broadcom's total)

* Cisco: $8 billion (15% of Cisco's total)

The list goes on and on, but you get the picture.

The numbers come from here: [https://www.marketwatch.com/story/trade-war- watch-these-are-...](https://www.marketwatch.com/story/trade-war-watch-these- are-the-us-companies-with-the-most-at-stake-in-china-2018-03-29)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> To all the people pontificating about who they'd rather have spy on them:

This isn't about spying. This is about money and trade relations with china. The fact that the business in question has a side effect of spying is nice but it's not the primary motivator. TikTok is the first Chinese tech platform to strike it rich in the US and the administration sees itself as trying to give them a dose of their own medicine.

<comment><USER35> Bingo. ...and this point is made clear by the US demand that China fork over the TikTok source code - something China routinely demands of foreign companies.

</comment></comment><comment><USER36> The basis for this order is a statute that targets financial transactions, 50 USC 1702[1]. But the order claims to bar "provision of hosting services" and even "peering" after 9/20\. This seems to plainly contradict Section 1702(b) of the statute which says the president has no authority to restrict "personal communication...which does not involve a transfer of anything of value" or importing or exporting "whether commercial or otherwise, regardless of format or medium of transmission...any information or informational materials[.]"

Expect a quick legal challenge.

If I were a government lawyer working on this, I would like to think that I would honor my oath of office and tell the President "sir, you don't have the authority to do this" rather than "yes sir, let me scour the US code for something that can be stretched to fit this," but this administration seems to be systematically purging anyone that doesn't follow the party line.

[1]: [https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/50/1702](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/50/1702)

</comment><comment><USER37> > The President has provided until November 12 for the national security > concerns posed by TikTok to be resolved. If they are, the prohibitions in > this order may be lifted.

Not seeing this bit being discussed elsewhere. The whole Oracle deal may not be dead after all.

<comment><USER38> Anything less than a sale will not assuage concerns, and the Chinese government has prevented TikTok from being sold. So no, it's dead.

</comment></comment><comment><USER39> I'm really confused about why the adminstration is doing this right before the election, seems like annoying a bunch of young people is a great way to get out the democratic vote.

<comment><USER40> This is why. [https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/21/politics/tiktok-trump- tulsa-r...](https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/21/politics/tiktok-trump-tulsa- rally/index.html)

No other reason. It ties in neatly with the revenge track record and the timing of events ties in also.

(Just the facts, I have no political view towards either side)

<comment><USER41> > This is why

Nonsense, there is no proof that this is related.

<comment><USER40> In situations where definitive proof of any clear reason does not exist we are left with the facts presented to us and probabilities.

Again...this has nothing to do with politics. I am merely looking at things from the view of an outside observer.

There are many more valid reasons to limit Chinese influence and "data gathering" but they are largely (at this point) being ignored. This does not begin to dip into the actual "political" reasons both countries involved have going on.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER42> If this stick, it could be very bad for Apple. This is something that can make lots of people switch off of iPhones. Millions of Chinese abroad probably want to have sideloading WeChat as an option

<comment><USER43> It's easier to work around than you think, it didn't stop Chinese from installing banned VPN tools on iPhones afterall, all you need is shared or registered foreign Apple IDs.

</comment></comment><comment><USER44> I remember when I was laughing at countries like Kyrgyzstan or Kenya or wherever, which "shut down the internet" for students taking exams or because the president for life decided it was a danger to public order. The arbitrariness and 3rd world country-ness of it all.

Now I'm not laughing so much.

<comment><USER45> India might be a closer example to the western audience on HN

"How India became the world's leader in internet shutdowns"

[https://www.technologyreview.com/2020/08/19/1006359/india- in...](https://www.technologyreview.com/2020/08/19/1006359/india-internet- shutdowns-blackouts-pandemic-kashmir/)

<comment><USER46> By the way the shutdown on high speed mobile internet is still ongoing in one territory, it's now been over a year

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER47> ha people in the US have to VPN now, to bypass the Great Trump Wall of U.S.?

<comment><USER48> My thoughts exactly, the rest of the world will continue posting funny videos while Americans come up with creative ways to get around this.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> When the US imposes tariffs on other countries, like Canada, we expect Canada to reciprocate.

Reciprocal countermeasures are crucial for discouraging the original activity, whether it be tariffs or bans on foreign internet service companies.

Thus, in response to the CCP's effective ban on foreign companies, we should absolutely expect India, the US, and other countries to reciprocate.

Failing to reciprocate would only serve to encourage actors to engage more in the activity (whether it be tariffs or bans on internet services), and in this case lead to a more greatly fragmented internet.

Just as reciprocal tariffs protect the free flow of trade by discouraging further tariffs, here, the US reciprocating CCP bans protects the free flow of information on the internet.

</comment><comment><USER49> From a policy perspective, the states HAS to say this.

Wisdom of the particular policy aside, once a country makes a really bold demand - "do X or we'll do Y" \- they can't back down without losing a tremendous amount of credibility. If you don't follow through on your threats, they're meaningless; if your threats aren't meaningful, only action is. Action is more expensive, so it costs you more to accomplish a goal, so you can accomplish less.

I happen to think this particular policy is unwise (dude, you need allies, and you think Europe won't help you regulate tech? C'mon), but the US has committed. Barring judicial intervention, it would be more unwise to back down now.

<comment><USER50> Well I guess it's a good thing we didn't back down on building a wall and making Mexico pay for it by that logic. /s

I don't think this reasoning makes sense. Wouldn't it be better for the US to back down, showing that we are judicial and fair country that doesn't lash out in petty ways? Trump makes insane claims all the time; no one would take any notice if he didn't follow through on this one either.

</comment></comment><comment><USER51> Once again, we see "national security", which used to mean "public safety", being switched out to mean "state security": security of the government itself.

They'd like there to be a monopoly on bulk surveillance of US persons: only companies friendly (or who can be forced to be friendly) to the US military are allowed to do it.

Censoring people to further state security is abhorrent, and is yet another reason why businesses will increasingly choose to domicile outside of the US market. It's ridiculous that they can impose these sorts of heavyhanded restrictions on US companies.

</comment><comment><USER51> Once again we confront the terrible consequences of large corporate powers (e.g. App Store signing) being able to, in an instant upon legal demand or other state threat, function as a government censorship department.

[https://sneak.berlin/20200421/normalcy- bias/](https://sneak.berlin/20200421/normalcy-bias/)

This is a huge ticking time bomb: insofar as the government can order large, centralized corporations to block, censor, alter, or otherwise impede your person-to-person communications, it's only a matter of time before it's a direct issue for health and safety, whether it be disaster, unrest, or war.

Sure, it might be illegal, or might get unwound in court in the weeks or months or years to follow. But in the meantime, you're cut off from friends, family, and information, and your family might not survive the disaster or crisis that triggered the government demand long enough to have the wrong turned right in court, much later.

This is an existential threat to a free society. The state must not be able to pick up the phone and have your communications tools shut off in bulk.

What happens when there's a wildfire or a natural disaster or a war and the military demands that Facebook disable Messenger and WhatsApp and that Apple disable iMessage in a certain region, on national security grounds?

We built a network designed to survive a nuclear war, and then somehow recentralized all of the node-to-node communications edges in an overlay network, squandering that whole benefit.

</comment><comment><USER52> I'd much rather have strict privacy laws enforced with fines & bans than this type of ban by fiat.

It would also be much less of a geo-political issue if it had the weight of law instead of just policy behind it: Pointing to a specific violation of law is much easier to justify than a vague sense that something with the app & data collection is not right. (and statutes can be much more consistently applied than vaguely justified ad-hoc policies)

</comment><comment><USER53> Putting aside the politics of it all, crappy day to be a part of the Chinese American community with friends and family overseas.

<comment><USER54> Can't you still communicate with Whatsapp, Telegram or the myriad of other communication platforms?

<comment><USER55> Whatsapp is banned in China. I'm guessing Telegram is too. Facebook, Google hangouts, Twitter, Snapchat, Instagram all are too, blocked at the ISP level.

If you want to talk to someone in Mainland China, your option is pretty much only WeChat

<comment><USER54> Perhaps those apps can be unbanned in China to prevent all the inconvenience created by the WeChat ban in the US. I understand all those apps don't have the same set of features (payment, news, etc) but should suffice for basic communication needs, and I'm sure that's what is most important to friends and family abroad.

<comment><USER55> Well obviously that will never happen. It just sucks for those of us with friends in China where all we want to do is keep in contact. I blame China more than the US but this whole fight for control over communication platforms is so annoying and leaves most of us helpless.

<comment><USER54> That seems very unfortunate... I can't imagine what it must feel like to be technically cutoff from friends and family in the digital age.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER56> Banning WeChat especially affects how average Chinese citizens view the US, and the overall effect is worse relations with China. In terms of bad actors, this will just create more of a black market, causing people who must do business with China to use apps and methods that they are less familiar with, enabling scammers.

<comment><USER43> WeChat isn't at all successful in the US, and it's known for its censorship even inside China, average Chinese are more concerned about iPhones and WeChat inside China.

Tiktok on the other hand is a completely seperate product designed to obey foreign laws (not necessarily values), considered a spineless panderer back home, its disgraceful fall is what can be called a rude awakening.

<comment><USER57> In Chinese-American communities, WeChat is integral [https://www.yelp.com/search?find_desc=accepts+wechat](https://www.yelp.com/search?find_desc=accepts+wechat)

<comment><USER43> Foreign Chinese, usually rich and connected, are more often than not considered "traitors" by the masses, increasingly viewed with disdain, they are not even welcomed to visit China.

>Trapped Abroad, China's 'Little Pinks' Rethink Their Country >Young and patriotic, overseas students often defend their nation against its critics. But when many tried to return home during the pandemic, they became targets themselves. [https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/24/business/china- nationalis...](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/24/business/china-nationalist- students-coronavirus.html)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER58> And iPhones with TikTok pre-installed are already going up on eBay.

<comment><USER47> it's dumb. after nov 12, tiktok traffic will be ended as well

<comment><USER8> And then you'll just have to use a VPN, a proxy, or an alternate DNS depending on how it's made. Big deal.

<comment><USER59> How big an overlap do you think the TikTok market and the "willing and able to set up and pay for a VPN on their phone" market is?

<comment><USER8> Actually, quite big. And a VPN likely wouldn't be needed at all, it's a worst case scenario.

In any case, if people are willing to pay for an iPhone with TikTok pre- installed, they're willing to pay 2$ a month (or less) for a VPN.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER60> I wonder whether it is possible to build TikTok as a web application so US citizens can use TikTok web application instead of TikTok mobile application? You know, Netflix has a web app and a mobile app.

Of course, I'm aware that US could block the tiktok web URL.

<comment><USER61> Current act being put in place seems to include the scenario

<comment><USER62> So we would literally install a national firewall to enforce this policy? Regardless of the particulars, the big picture view of this is not pretty. Is there a legal group looking to challenge this yet, like the EFF?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER63> What good is temporarily banning TikTok if Oracle and Walmart are taking majority ownership?

The user base will see the headlines that it's being banned and then they'll move to a rival service again like they did during the first scare. Especially since Triller just poached TikTok's most popular creator, Charli D'Amelio, earlier this week. That coveted preteen demographic might never come back. It's poisoning the well for Oracle.

<comment><USER64> Why is preteen a coveted demographic for a business? Are you able to point me to something I can read that would explain why a business wants to court what to me seems like a financially handcuffed group? I understand that preteens can influence their guardians into making a purchase for a toy or some other small ticket item, but they're not going to influence big ticket purchases. Or do they?

<comment><USER65> Armchair perspective: They are an easily impressionable group who will eventually get access to money. Building brand loyalty now could pay dividends in their later years. Plus, children to have a certain influence in what their guardians buy for them in many cases ( consider how profitable Disney's merchandise is).

<comment><USER64> Yes I thought of that too, but the parent to my question stated that Tiller is already replacing TikTok. Clearly this demographic doesn't have brand loyalty. It's not difficult/costly for them to jump ship from an existing platform to another one. By the time preteens have access to Money TikTok, Tiller and their followers will be replaced at least twice over.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER66> So could I switch region on App Store and download it to my phone within US? Or that's physically blocked at the networking layer??

<comment><USER67> It's possible they may be forced to detect by IP, at which point using a VPN may be necessary.

<comment><USER66> Smells like an US version of GFW (but much benign, totally not Trying to make a comparison- don't judge/downvote me)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER68> Would be nice if we could turn this into an argument over data portability. If there was a service an app that migrated data out of TikTok to a clone service, I'd switch. Imagine if users could easily move their posts, photos, friends, etc. out of Facebook to another system.

</comment><comment><USER69> I'm reading a lot about reciprocity. I don't really know about international trade, does anyone have other examples where US reciprocity includes banning (specifically, not because they are breaking a law) certain goods? And are there examples of consumer goods amongst them?

</comment><comment><USER5> Is tiktok web getting the ban hammer as well, will US implement their own great firewall in response. Wonder if the future is more native web apps to circumvent app store layer, which erode US control over mobile ecosystem.

</comment><comment><USER70> I fear they honestly wont stop at app banning now that it has a precedent and apparently lots of people are cheering for it, like the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came_](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came_)... poem:

"First they came for chinese apps, but I didn't speak up for I didn't use chinese apps.[...] Then they came for E2E apps..."

Honestly this all could be mitigated if we had less dependency on app stores, if iOS could send notifications from mobile Safari, WeChat could just migrate to PWA and its most loyal users would follow.

It seems like yesterday (it was) that people on HN were supporting a digital boomer equivalency of not allowing notifications because the web apparently must always be a document serving thing just cause, and a UX problem of websites asking a lot for notification must be met with removal of the function.

</comment><comment><USER71> I wonder what European country TikTok international will move to?

</comment><comment><USER72> This is why, despite Apple's admirable record of OS updates, I refuse to buy a computer that's locked into a single source of software.

</comment><comment><USER73> Time to take services gradually off US companies. Why get caught in the crossfire? I for one am glad my servers are in Germany.

</comment><comment><USER74> Lets hope someone doesn't have a now unpatchable zero day or two laying around for these apps.

</comment><comment><USER48> The Great Wall of America

Freedom is slipping away...

</comment><comment><USER75> A lot of people in this thread are missing the important context behind all of this, which is that China has been declared an adversary to the US. It's not just your average case of data privacy issues. It's an issue of a hostile foreign adversary that is collecting data on users and utilizing these platforms as propaganda tools.

</comment><comment><USER44> By the way, how can ISPs shut down the traffic of WeChat? Is it using a specific port?

</comment><comment><USER76> So thinking beyond their stated reasoning - which doesn't make much sense unless they do something similar to facebook and co, which they won't - <USER2> me wonder.

With this administration everything is overtly political and typically defensive and/or misdirection.

* To ban something 'from China' appeals to his base. * Tiktok was used to 'humiliate' the president at his Tulsa 'comeback rally' * Trump is having 'issues' with Twitter and to a lesser extent Facebook and other social media. They are marking and removing posts for example.

[https://www.forbes.com/sites/abrambrown/2020/08/01/is- this-t...](https://www.forbes.com/sites/abrambrown/2020/08/01/is-this-the- real-reason-why-trump-wants-to-ban-tiktok/#3960f9a44aed)

Perhaps the larger theme here is to fire a warning shot at Twitter, Facebook and to a lesser extent Google. If you mess with us and don't do what we want - we can and will shut you down. Because 'national security'. Does that seem a leap? Not really because foreign entities (in particular Russia) actively and successfully use social media, against US interests.

Is this good? No. It's _really_ bad. This is classic Trump - distracting, destructive, coercing, nonsensical, abusive and chaotic. With even a small amount of thought it can be seen to be smoke and mirrors.

A strong argument can be made that social media is a big problem in the US, for a variety of reasons, including national security. That this step is _nothing_ to do with trying to fix that, and everything to do with the failing and flailing administration.

</comment><comment><USER77> So we have all weekend to find a security exploit.

That as of Monday can't be patched in the USA?

</comment><comment><USER78> another thread here: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24515461](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24515461)

</comment><comment><USER79> come on, all these discussions focus on privacy, but this ban is never about protecting privacy.

</comment><comment><USER80> Are Apple and Google going to fight this and leave the app up?

I hope they do, I dislike president having power to ban services and apps at will.

</comment><comment><USER81> TikTok's interim CEO Vanessa Pappas asks Facebook and Instagram to support their litigation against Trump's executive order:

[https://twitter.com/v_ness/status/1306956276761415681?s=21](https://twitter.com/v_ness/status/1306956276761415681?s=21)

</comment><comment><USER82> I have no doubt that had TikTok been a Russian app and its ultimate stakeholder were the Russian government, some of you here would have no problem with the ban. I am really tired of the double standard.

But most importantly, what the US is applying is plain and old-fashioned Reciprocity trade rules. It is a completely valid and accepted course of action. If China closes its market to US-based social network companies, then the US should do the same. It happens everywhere and you don't see people screaming bloody murder because of it.

In my opinion, it is about time. Not only we are creating a disadvantage to our local companies (FB, Whatsapp, etc), we are inviting a hostile agent to openly collect information on our citizens. I understand that some here want a more stringent policy concerning privacy and data collection. I think it is a fair point, but it is not mutually exclusive here.

</comment><comment><USER9> I've been suspicious of Trump's motivations on Tiktok ever since the story came out about teens using tiktok to disrupt a Trump rally in June [https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/21/politics/tiktok-trump- tulsa-r...](https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/21/politics/tiktok-trump-tulsa- rally/index.html)

</comment><comment><USER83> Chinese American relations should be reciprocal, we should treat them the way they treat us. If our apps and services cannot operate freely in their country, they should not be allowed to abuse our country to collect data for their intelligence operations. I'm very confused why so many on HN are so pro China, despite it being the poster child for genocide and human rights abuses.

<comment><USER75> > I'm very confused why so many on HN are so pro China, despite it being the > poster child for genocide and human rights abuses.

I go out of my way to comment on any posts related to China since it's a subject that I have studied immensely and am very interested in and I have noticed that anything I post that is slightly negative about China will get downvoted or flagged. I've chalked it up to the fact that HN is filled with people that are:

\- opposed to anything (and everything) Trump does including clamping down on China

\- opposed to anything (and everything) the US does. This includes US people and outsiders.

\- native Chinese HN users/bots downvoting any content that is negative about China

<comment><USER75> Looks like they've struck again ;). These people don't want discourse or facts, they just want to shape the narrative. Shame on them.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER84> > it will be illegal to host or transfer internet traffic associated with > WeChat".

I hope people realize how dangerous these developments are.

<comment><USER85> They don't. It's absolutely horrifying the extent to which posters even here want to treat this as a legitimate subject worthy of debate. The executive branch, with minimal warning, minimal justification, less than seven weeks out from an election, is just capriciously deciding to ban popular platforms for online interaction. There's no congressional oversight, there's no proposed legislation, it's not even a request to a court. It's just, "poof", you're banned. Of platforms that have hundreds of millions of users in the country!

If that doesn't scare you imagine what your "enemies" might do with that power.

I mean, it's true that I too don't personally don't see much value in these platforms and am genuinely confused by TikTok. But... yikes.

People: this is a disaster. And once that power is uncorked it's not going back in the bottle.

<comment><USER86> TikTok is one thing, but WeChat is essentially an operating system for everyone in China. I wonder if they will demand WeChat be removed from the App Store everywhere. Given you can't do any commerce, a US company (like Apple) likely cannot comply with this ruling without banning the whole app.

<comment><USER87> At which point I think China should ban iPhones. You cannot allow a company to sell to your country a product from which your country's most important applications are banned.

<comment><USER6> Yes, it would be great for the American people if China bans iPhones -- Apple would have less of an economic incentive to follow arbitrary and brutally repressive takedown demands from the CCP government like this: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19997188](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19997188)

Also, hope the US bans Xiaomi phones for the same reason, since applications like Facebook don't appear in the Mi Store.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER88> Shutting TikTok is a good thing for the society at large.

</comment><comment><USER89> I think there are legit issues with the CCP having access to massive amounts of US user data, particularly from WeChat.

But the Commerce order does not highlight the risks, moreover, they don't bother to give specific examples of concern.

The gov. should do a much, much better job at illustrating specific scenarios, cases, impacts, outcomes in order to legitimize the action.

<comment><USER90> I think there are legit issues with the US having access to a massive amount of US users' data, particularly from Facebook and Google.

<comment><USER89> That's also fair.

But there are laws, policies, judicial procedures regarding how the US gov. can access that data, specifically a warrant would be required for access to information. Moreover, information is accessed on the basis of some ostensible crime.

Aside from basic censorship of anything and everything, the CCP can use (and does) WeChat information for absolutely whatever purposes it chooses at any time.

If you say something about Hong Kong protests on WeChat - you will be flagged (and censored) and every one of your peers will be flagged as well. Your career, ability to move freely, future job prospects are in jeopardy, let alone the possibility of completely arbitrary imprisoned. There is no 'justice system' to speak of within that framework.

And of course, there are more basic issues of trade - there are zero foreign entities that would be able to operate in China on basic, civil terms. They all have to operate as organs of the state.

The CCP ensures compliance of it's authoritarian policies by having units within private organizations specifically for that purpose. Have a read [1]. It's not a 'conspiracy' it's just how they operate.

There's no way on earth we can allow those types of organizations to operate freely here.

So yes - just as TT and WeChat are banned or changed hands, there should be more action to at least have more transparency on who, what and how the US can access information from FB etc..

This is right at the core of the issue of the globalization of information and it has to be addressed, there's no way around it.

[1] [https://thediplomat.com/2019/12/politics-in-the-boardroom- th...](https://thediplomat.com/2019/12/politics-in-the-boardroom-the-role-of- chinese-communist-party-committees/)

<comment><USER90> The US government collects data which is arguably not legal to collect, and parallel construction schemes have allowed law enforcement to use data it would otherwise be unable to use.

I'm not defending the CCP's actions, but I think instead of banning specific acts, the US should change policy and guidelines to ban behavior, not specific actors.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER84> This is why app stores and locked platforms such as Apple's are dangerous. Users are going to have difficulty installing banned apps. Sure, wechat and tik tok are basically spyware but this is just the beginning. Pretty soon other apps are going to follow. One day signal might be on the list.

<comment> abc-xyz This is why I've been supporting Apple and their App Store. It's the most effective way to isolate an evil, authoritarian regime.

Right now there's zero reason to believe that the administration would target apps outside of China, and as long as that continue to be the case then we should cheer them on and be grateful we finally have a world leader willing and capable of standing up to China.

</comment></comment><comment><USER91> > Tencent is the world's largest video game vendor, as well as one of the most > financially valuable companies. It is among the largest social media, > venture capital, and investment corporations. Its services include social > network, music, web portals, e-commerce, mobile games, internet services, > payment systems, smartphones, and multiplayer online games.

Is it any wonder /at all/ why the US Federal government, and every single competitor in the US is worried about them?

Chinese Government is Tencent is Wechat, Fortnite, PubG along with many other Game&Tech companies.

Allowing more influence in our markets, by the Chinese government is a /horri- bad/ idea; period.

Blah blah blah, tech companies. Blah blah blah, open markets.

You DO realize how large a threat to open markets the Chinese State is, right?

[https://www.wired.com/story/chinese-hackers-taiwan- semicondu...](https://www.wired.com/story/chinese-hackers-taiwan- semiconductor-industry-skeleton-key/)

Right?!?!?</comment>


RethinkDB: More on alignment, ext2, and partitioning on SSDs - <AUTHOR> http://www.rethinkdb.com/blog/2009/10/more-on-alignment-ext2-and-partitioning-on-ssds/

<comment><USER2> Are these results different depending on what manufacturer you are using?

Or is the best block size or partitioning scheme for an ssd made by X also the best for one made by Y?</comment>


Elon Musk Downplays Covid-19 Danger in Email to Space-X Employees - <AUTHOR> https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a31562574/elon-musk-covid-19-coronavirus/ <comment><USER2> > "As a basis for comparison, the risk of death from C19 is _vastly_ less than > the risk of death from driving your car home." He pointed out that there > have been 36,000 automotive deaths.

Is he really comparing the absolute number of deaths rather than the mortality rate? Come on Elon, you can do better than this.

<comment><USER3> Also, the logical conclusion of that argument is we should do more about vehicle accidents, not ignore Covid-19!

<comment><USER4> No, the logical conclusion is that we take simple precautions every time we get in a car (which is an endemic disease), which is what keeps the fatality rate low, and we can take simple precautions to keep a pandemic from killing people.

Cars are in what … top three or so causes of death alongside heart disease and cancer?

Deaths from COVID-19 is the USA are only going to beat that number if the government truly screws the pooch in terms of testing, treatment and management.

Wash your hands.

<comment><USER5> Define what you mean by "screw the pooch."

Currently COVID-19 response is a finely tuned balance of economic impact to death-toll. React too early and you'll experience an unacceptable economic impact. React too late and you'll experience an unacceptable death-toll.

The reason this situation is so dire is not because of the lethality of the virus. It is because our medical infrastructure is not capable of treating patients in the capacity that this virus can infect them. The goal is not to prevent people from contracting COVID-19. The goal is to slow the spread of COVID-19 so that the number of cases which require hospitalization stays lower than the availability of hospital beds.

If everyone got sick all at once the fatality rate would increase because people would be dying faster than they could be treated. So long as we can treat our ill faster than people become ill we can manage this situation even if 100% of humans eventually become infected. The balancing act comes into play when you also need to consider the impact to the economy.

There is a saturation point that early responding countries will reach where even if they continue to increase their response they will only be increasing their economic impact without significantly decreasing the death-toll. Finding this balance is what governments are trying to do right now.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> From someone who praised Musk for pretty much everything he did (except that "pedo guy" comment), I'm starting to revise my opinion on him. Either he is incredibly ill informed about the thing or he is blatantly lying to the public for fears of Tesla stocks plummeting. Someone should ask him if a driver who had a car accident can "infect" people nearby so that they'll have accidents themselves too.

<comment><USER7> To be devils advocate

> Someone should ask him if a driver who had a car accident can "infect" > people nearby so that they'll have accidents themselves too.

That would be a pileup

<comment><USER8> Yes, but then the survivors of the accident don't go home and "infect" the rest of their family. Or go into work the next day and "infect" half their co- workers.

<comment><USER4> We already are infected by cars to the point that not having a car is considered special.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> The dictator-like control he exerts over his organizations is frankly disgusting. Part of the deal in signing up is to go along with practically any decision "EM" makes. There is a monoculture there that it seems most employees agree with. Elon overrode and reversed the decision making of his subordinates in keeping all orgs completely open.

</comment><comment><USER10> Musk usually says whatever is most beneficial to him and his companies.

<comment><USER11> All in the service of making human s a multiplanetary species. Did people think that would happen without some sacrifices along the way? Look at those astronauts. Their bone marrow is being zapped by ionizing radiation? Man-up, and keep building those rockets!

<comment><USER12> > _Did people think that would happen without some sacrifices along the way?_

There's a different between a sacrifice in service of a goal, and a sacrifice because you're too stupid to stay safe.

Humankind will not fail to become a multiplanetary species even if SpaceX were to shut down entirely for a year.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Buzzfeed quoting an internal email they do not provide verbatim.

Musk downplaying a risk is kind of his thing, so it's plausible, but without the full context this is just Musk-bashing bait.

<comment><USER14> Read Musk's tweets. The email is very plausible.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> If Musk keeps going this way it won't be long before we will equate him with Lex Luthor instead of Tony Stark.

<comment><USER15> Many of us already have.

Calling the hero diver a pedophile, bailing out his cousin's SolarCity company and allowing Autopilot to kill people are just a few of his many ethically questionable actions.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> Elon Musk and Jack Ma should have a round 2 debate on the coronavirus after their previous AI debate last year.

Let's see how the Internet will react this time.

</comment><comment><USER17> Elon Musk hasn't found a crisis yet that he did not use to put his foot in his mouth somehow. I've given up on believing that he will grow up at some point.

<comment><USER18> I've often wondered if he has high-functioning autism. His human-to-human interface is missing something.

<comment><USER17> Lack of empathy?

<comment><USER18> Yeah maybe. Certainly some kind of issue with feedback, self-awareness, or inappropriate expression and emotional response.

He also shows some striking abilities in focus, synthesis, organization, and what I perceive to be fearlessness. Put together, this all seems familiar to me from my experience with high-function autistics.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> > He pointed out that there have been 36,000 automotive deaths

Across the world governments spend billions on measures to curb these.

It would be significantly higher if we didn't have speed zones, cameras, police etc.

Maybe in Musk's world view we should cut this spending and not worry about preventible deaths.

<comment><USER4> Or maybe in Musk's view if we did at least as much for pandemics as we do for vehicle safety there wouldn't be an issue?

In a car you drive safely and wear a seatbelt. The government mandates certain standards for designs including braking capacity and passenger safety.

For diseases you can socially isolate and wash your hands. The government can properly fund disease research and control.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> It's dangerous when cult leaders take sides in these things. He is anti-public transportation with reasons including being dangerous since you might be traveling with a serial killer and people should use insulated pods that he wants to make but the same people should not be afraid of a virus and keep working together.

I admire Elon in many ways but I am terrified of his tendencies of psychopathy.

According to Musk, We should use individual cars because there's a risk to have a serial killer in the metro train but it's statistically safe to gather with people when a deadly virus is spreading. Cult follower would buy that and amplify the message.

It's scary stuff, let's hope the guy doesn't turn into an anti-vaxxer or something like that(because "we need as spicies to evolve through natural selection so we can live in exoplanets" maybe?).

<comment><USER20> I see him as someone who thinks in a 100% "for the benefit of mankind" kind of way, but then has to modify his comments to appeal to his audience.

The anti-public transport is exactly that. He realises public transport is exactly what the world needs, but his audience is car-addicted americans. Instead he proposes a tunnel cars can drive along on sleds... And later people pods, that look not-so-different from subway carriages... And later still suggests that people-pods will happen first before the car-sleds.

<comment><USER19> This sounds like the attempts of interpreting religious text to accommodate and to fit the world you think we live in.

I'm not comfortable with this way of thinking, in muslim countries after every big scientific discovery people advocate that "it's already written in the koran" since Allah must have known it and if you twist the text enough and ignore contradicting interpretations it can be understood this way.

I don't like that and don't believe that this is the case.

<comment><USER14> With the advent of atheism, some people seek refuge in cults of personality.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment> tuna-piano His point is like looking at grey skies and a weather radar of an approaching hurricane and saying "Just because the sun isn't out doesn't mean we should cancel our picnic on the beach!".

Coronavirus is not a disaster today, it is a looming disaster. Without human intervention, Coronavirus would be pretty sure to kill millions in the US in a short period of time (1+% fatality * 33+% of the population).

Yes, the chances of you or anyone you know dying today from Coronavirus is practically 0. Coronavirus is not a disaster in the US today. If a vaccine for Coronavirus was scheduled to be given to everyone tomorrow, it would not be a disaster, and we would not stop economic activity for it. But there isn't a vaccine tomorrow, so look at the virus forecast and take precautions.

<comment><USER21> Stop with the fear-mongering, it was not going to kill millions.

<comment><USER22> Without human intervention, it would infect 40-70% of population. Multiply by the death rate and the fact that most hospitals would be completely overwelmed and you do get millions of death.

<comment><USER21> The death rate is NOT 1%. Of victims in hospital, perhaps, but not out of the general population that gets it.

<comment><USER23> Mortality in South Korea is running around 0.6% to 0.7%. It's not likely due to missing lots of mild cases, because they're testing 10,000 people every day, most of them asymptomatic. They've managed to keep the rate low because they took early serious measures to control the spread and avoided overloading their hospitals.

Italy has overloaded its hospitals, and now their doctors are forced to choose who they will save and who they won't.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> It's just _bizniz_. Has to go on, otherwise the economical distortion field collapses. Riding the wave as long as possible.

</comment><comment><USER25> "Tesla CEO noted you're more likely to die driving a car home than from coronavirus."

Haha, so basically, don't drive home?

</comment><comment><USER26> He's not there psychologically.

</comment><comment><USER27> The sooner Musk buggers off to Mars the better

</comment><comment><USER28> His sentiment is correct. The source for what I'm saying is a veteran virologist with 40 years of experience dealing with these exact kinds of things. A two hour interview was linked from a previous HN thread.

Despite what ceejayoz might try to tell you, corona viruses do not mutate in the way that influenza does. Influenza mutates in a way that evades the immune system but retains other qualities. This is why new vaccines for the flu are always being developed. Despite the fact that corona virus family viruses are responsible for a very small amount of "common cold," they do not exhibit this behavior. They do mutate though, which is why we are seeing two "versions" of covid-19. The ultimate meaning of all this is that once a population gains collective immunity, the virus will basically disappear. In layman's terms, the virus will go away probably between 3 to 6 months from now in the United States. If anyone tries to refute this, post actual evidence or expert testimony showing that covid-19 mutates _in a similar way to influenza_.

Like Elon musk points out, only those with immune system problems are at risk. This includes _some people of advanced age_ , some people with diabetes and various other people.

The virus appears to kill people like many other similar illnesses: if the infection spreads to deeply within the lungs, gas transfer is interrupted and secondary bacterial infection sets in, commonly known as pneumonia. The treatment for which is antibiotics and an oxygen line. This is why you see Italy asking specifically for more oxygen equipment, in my non expert opinion. Both these treatments are widely available and do not require special skill to acquire or administer. Patients who do not benefit from these would require mechanical ventilation.

The fatality rate is massively skewed toward severity because of the lack of testing. If all the benign cases were taken into account, the facility rate would be much smaller although still high enough to take seriously.

Remote administration of oxygen and antibiotics, washing hands, and light self-quarantine, all very easy to do, will blunt the impact on hospitals significantly.

Overall, the threat that this virus poses to most people and society in general has been overblown by the for-profit media.

I would like to apologize for being so impolite in addressing this topic previously.

[https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S089684112...](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0896841120300469)

[https://youtu.be/WWNuDT4t-TM](https://youtu.be/WWNuDT4t-TM)

<comment><USER12> > _In layman 's terms, the virus will go away probably between 3 to 6 months > from now in the United States._

No one (serious) disputes this, and the number of cases in China and South Korea is already on the way down. The question is how many people it will kill along the way.

> _only those with immune system problems are at risk_

1\. What immune system problem did Wenliang Li have? (If you want to say "mostly," sure, but "only" is an unsubstantiated claim.)

2\. People can become asymptomatic carriers pretty easily. That's a good reason why someone with authority over groups of people that contain _some_ at-risk folks should attempt to prevent or reduce the frequency of such gatherings, at least until we develop collective immunity or a vaccine. (Such people include CEOs, pastors, concert organizers, politicians, etc.) Furthermore, asymptomatic carriers can pass the virus onto other asymptomatic carriers, so until we've started developing some immunity, it's a good idea for even groups of entirely not-at-risk people to limit gatherings, to reduce secondary transmission to at-risk people.

People with immune system problems aren't doomed to die immediately, and it's worth taking steps to prevent them from getting infected, if you can. (Yes, people with immune system problems, older people, etc. have some chance of dying soon anyway. But _everyone_ is going to die at some point. It is a widely-accepted moral principle that this doesn't excuse causing people to die early.)

> _secondary bacterial infection sets in, commonly known as pneumonia_

This is incorrect - SARS-CoV-2 is unusual in that it's capable of causing pneumonia on its own, without a secondary bacterial infection. Antibiotics won't help. See, for instance, [https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel- coronavirus-2...](https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel- coronavirus-2019/advice-for-public/myth-busters) .

> _Overall, the threat that this virus poses to most people and society in > general has been overblown by the for-profit media._

What's the profit angle here? What's the benefit to big media from people being unwilling to attend movies and concerts?

Meanwhile, how do you explain the absolute terror in the voices of medical professionals unaffiliated with the media, such as [https://twitter.com/tina_nguyen/status/1238879814863519744](https://twitter.com/tina_nguyen/status/1238879814863519744) or [https://left.it/2020/03/13/covid_19-open-letter-from- italy-t...](https://left.it/2020/03/13/covid_19-open-letter-from-italy-to-the- international-scientific-community/) (or, you know, Wenliang Li)?

<comment><AUTHOR> > No one (serious) disputes this

Spanish flu (second wave) was far more deadly. Mutation is a possibility. Not saying it will happen but I wouldn't rule it out 100% either.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_flu#Deadly_second_wave](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_flu#Deadly_second_wave)

<comment><USER12> Spanish flu (influenza A) was not a coronavirus. Our anonymous friend's assertion is that extrapolations from influenza A don't apply to SARS-CoV-2, which is a coronavirus (otherwise we'd expect e.g. an annual coronavirus flu season with new strains every so often, much the way there's an annual influenza A season). That much, at least, appears to be correct.

I don't disagree it's a possibility, but influenza A isn't particularly informative on how likely the possibility is.

<comment><USER29> The likelihood of a mutation that evades (or is more severe because of) immune response to previous infections is directly proportional to the number of cases, i.e. is growing exponentially.

There is some evidence that prior exposure to other coronavirus (including vaccination) is an additional risk factor for loss of lung function.

So, yes, the influenza A experience is relevant. In that instance, those with a strong immune response had a greater fatality rate.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> I'm going to get down voted but this is rational CEO speak.

<comment><USER31> Can you elaborate on how this is rational? I'm almost always strongly in agreement with Musk, but I think he's so far off here I can't even understand it. It's ridiculous to use the current fatality numbers, the question is the potential.

Does he really think cars are more dangerous in Northern Italy right now than COVID? COVID has killed about 1000 people in Lombardy (pop 10 million) in a week. That's twice the number of fatalities Lombardy generally sees from cars in a _year_ and it's getting worse daily, despite the aggressive countermeasures.

I don't see any reason why the rest of the world won't look like Lombardy unless measures are taken.

<comment><USER4> Current death toll in Italy is under 2000 nationwide (2020-03-15). Nationwide road fatalities are around 3,000pa.

Italy is an example of the worst case scenario of poor management and susceptible population.</comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: How do you do your RESTful API automated testing? - <AUTHOR>

Bonus points if your tool, advice, or method applies well to Hypermedia APIs as well as simpler CRUD APIs. <comment><AUTHOR> I found this approach to doing BDD for an API:

[https://bitbucket.org/tcorbettclark/rest-api- blueprint/wiki/...](https://bitbucket.org/tcorbettclark/rest-api- blueprint/wiki/AutomaticTesting)

</comment><comment><USER2> [https://www.runscope.com](https://www.runscope.com) (my company)

Can extract links to follow. We'll have more info soon specific to hypermedia.

<comment><AUTHOR> Interesting, thanks!

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> A related post: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8376813](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8376813)

</comment><comment><USER3> I just use asynchronous tests? Is there more to it?

<comment><AUTHOR> Well, do you just use something like requests to make an HTTP call (or a series of them) and examine JSON or XML results (which seems tedious to me), or do you have a higher level library that understands resources, links, etc.?

<comment><USER3> I just make requests:

[https://github.com/playtomic/gameapi- as3/blob/master/src/com...](https://github.com/playtomic/gameapi- as3/blob/master/src/com/playtomic/as3/TestLeaderboards.as)

plus complemented by tests on the server as well:

[https://github.com/playtomic/apiserver/blob/master/tests/lea...](https://github.com/playtomic/apiserver/blob/master/tests/leaderboards.js)

and generally test functionality + output format.</comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: Idea factory? - <AUTHOR> What is an idea worth?  If you are the best coder in the universe but you have zero useful ideas you will most likely be coding someone else's idea.  Is it worth 10% of your new company that yesterday had no ideas? <comment><USER2> What is an "idea"?

Is "social neworking" an "idea"? Is the language c an idea?

When you say that the c computer language is an idea, do you mean the idea of a higher order language or the "idea" of the syntax of c?

The question is ill-formed because the idea of "idea" is ill-formed.

<comment><AUTHOR> I think the syntax is a lot of ideas under the original idea of the C language. Without the original idea of C as a foundational language there would be no reason to create the syntax for C. So I'm really not sure where the value lies......Which is why I asked :))

<comment><AUTHOR> Are they equally weighted maybe? As one does not live without the other?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> An idea is worth next to nothing unless you're the first to come up with it AND execute it.

<comment><AUTHOR> Like shoes?

<comment><AUTHOR> I agree about execute but that would be for the company to do and not the idea factory.</comment></comment></comment>


Stop Using IsLoading Booleans - <AUTHOR> https://kentcdodds.com/blog/stop-using-isloading-booleans <comment><USER2> I have mixed feelings about this. In a language with proper enums like Rust this is certainly the way to go, because your entire data structure can be tied to which state you're in (Success would _only_ contain the position, Rejected would _only_ (and always) contain an error, Loading would _never_ contain redundant data). In Rust you would also get the benefit of having match { } make sure you always take care of every possible variant.

In JavaScript, on the other hand, code could just as easily set an error and forget to set the status as set an error and forget to clear the position. There's still some overlap between state info and there's not a singular, clear winner between the two patterns.

Here's what I would do for this case: first, move the error rendering clause above the position one. Erroring, like loading, is an exceptional status above the "normal" status. Therefore the position should be the "fallthrough" branch. This change alone would fix the actual problem demonstrated.

Then, to help avoid inconsistencies, I like to put my "isLoading: false" in a "finally" clause (if it's on a Promise), or some equivalent. Unfortunately watchPosition is a bespoke function with regular callbacks instead of a promise, but you could still centralize the loading flag clearing in some way. Or maybe "promisify" that function with a new Promise((res, rej) => {}).

Certainly if you have more than just these three statuses you start getting into territory where a status string makes more and more sense. However, these three (success, error, loading) are special, and in a large number of cases they're all you have, so they can be afforded some special treatment.

<comment><USER3> Is this something typescript could fix? I've written a fair few union types with discriminants that work in the same way as rust enums.

The trick though is to declare the redundant fields as undefined for every overlap case.

<comment><USER2> Possibly. I've had trouble getting TypeScript to discriminate object unions in the past without manually writing type guards, which are cumbersome. This is one of the few things Flow is actually better at.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> At this point I'm starting to think that every state framework should ship with something like Diode's Pot[0] (which this post also reimplements, though with more strings and without the clear state diagram).

[0]: [https://diode.suzaku.io/advanced/Pot.html](https://diode.suzaku.io/advanced/Pot.html)</comment>


ZenPayroll Launches Cloud-Based Payroll Service With $6.1M In Seed Funding - <AUTHOR> http://techcrunch.com/2012/12/11/zenpayroll-launches-cloud-based-payroll-service-with-6-1m-in-seed-funding-from-the-ceos-at-yammer-box-yelp-and-dropbox/

<comment><USER2> I setup payroll awhile ago and it took me a long time to find a provider. I remember looking at Intuit, ADP (for a second), and SurePayroll; I think I'm also on the ZenPayroll invite list.

After going through some of the threads on HN I decided to use BOA -- which is essentially Intuit -- and although it was a pain to setup, it does seem to be working. (Total cost: $30/month)

However, the Wave Accounting team reached out to me recently to let me know that they'll begin a full service payroll SAAS in January with pricing at $5/person. You can bet I'll be trying it out.

Sadly we're too small for ZenPayroll's pricing to make sense at this time.

<comment><USER3> I am not a business with employees owner yet, but for me their pricing does not look bad assuming it saves quite a lot of time. Spending ~$5 per employee a month will be something like 0.1% or even less of their salary. Even if you have 2 employees, it is still $35/month which might be something like may be 0.3% of their salary?

Am I missing something?

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I have been watching this startup closely since this industry does need to be disrupted. But maybe their pricing should be a little more disruptive. This would cost us exactly the same as ADP (our current and terrible provider).

<comment><USER4> Oh and congrats on the round. $6MM and not having a board is a dangerous combination... In a good way.

<comment><USER5> Thanks! If you don't mind sharing, what are you paying for payroll through ADP? ZenPayroll is just $25/month + $5/employee/month, and only $1/employee/month for each employee after your first 10. Everything is included in this price.

From talking with our current customers who've used ADB, we understand that ADP can get pretty expensive, especially when you add all the miscellaneous costs they tack on.

<comment><USER5> BTW, I just realized that TechCrunch incorrectly listed our prices initially. They've since updated the post to reflect the actual cost. Our goal is to be competitive on price and significantly less expensive than ADP and Paychex. You can view our full pricing at zenpayroll.com/#pricing

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Excited to see something like this. I've been going through the pain of setting up payroll for the first time and couldn't believe there wasn't a company providing quality services for such a necessary service sector.</comment>