SoftBank has walked away from startups, months after submitting term sheets - <AUTHOR> https://www.axios.com/softbank-walk-away-startups-honor-creator-seismic-8d4adc0c-dcfb-42d3-982e-f422a9963be8.html <comment><USER2> ...duh? They just had WeWork blow up in their face and naturally they're going to pump the brakes. There were probably a lot of in-process deals going on.

Coming from someone who worked in a company that received Softbank investment, it's a huge hassle. The ONLY reason to take Softbank money is to get a huge sum of money at a huge valuation and reduce your "cost" of said money. But for me personally, the costs aren't worth it.

First, there's the inflated valuation. It's a great MO for Softbank - they get you by stroking your ego and flashing big (exaggerated) valuations. But does anyone ever think about the next round? No one else after is going to invest at that valuation + extra, unless you really knocked it out of the park, so you are stuck with them for future rounds. Or IPO (Hello Uber). Startups are hard - why are you making it more difficult for yourself to succeed?

Second, the ongoing effort. You don't have one or two guys at a VC firm you are working with, you have a bureaucracy you are working with, in a completely opposite timezone, with a very different working culture.

 _Maybe_ it makes sense for a company who is on their last round of funding before IPO, just needs one last cash push to get everything there, and can pay a bunch of people to deal with the BS. But that's not most startups.

<comment><USER3> So if I have two VC approaching, once offered me 1M for 20% and the other one offered 10M for 20%, I should take the first one?

<comment><USER4> Depends on the VC.

$10M from someone who built their wealth via blood diamonds is very different from $1M from a well-connected VC that can help your business in a tangible way

<comment><USER3> How can you tell which is which. Does the LP tell the VC where did they get the money from?

<comment><USER4> If you're giving a sizeable chunk of your company to an investor you better do your due diligence.

Whether it's contacting founders who previously received money from the VC, or plain old web research. It's really dumb to take money from someone who can make life difficult for you down the road

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> They're trying to make this a story about SoftBank being bad, but this just sounds like normal business. I have been "shafted" by VCs before, in similar ways, but none of them were SoftBank specifically. This is just an attempt to make a story (and drive clicks) out of the punching bag du jour.

<comment><USER6> > _this just sounds like normal business_

All except Creator. Getting a company to enter into "an exclusive, six-month term sheet" is unusual and shitty.

<comment> jagged-chisel Having read this, I'd think (as the startup) I'd insist on a clause that the contract isn't binding until at least $X or %Y have been received from the VC (defining "received" as "the money deposited and cleared.") And if we find another investor before you send the money, the contract is dead and we renegotiate a new one.

<comment><USER7> If you have the leverage for that, it could work. But you probably also wouldn't sign a 6mo exclusivity deal if you had that kind of leverage . . . so?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Term sheet isn't a deal. Same way an "accepted offer" on a house isn't a purchase contract until you have an actual contract.

Clearly SoftBanks is having its challenges but this just sounds like normal deals falling apart during pre-closing due diligence. You don't have a deal till you have a deal.

<comment><USER9> AFAIK, in contract law, an "accepted offer" _is_ an actual contract, even if there's no paper record of it (though it may be a bit hard to prove acceptance without one). However, when someone puts their house up for sale, they're usually not offering it to anyone yet, rather they're inviting others to offer to buy it.

I think a term sheet is also just an invitation, not a binding offer.

<comment><USER10> Likely depends on the country - in England, on a house sale, either party can back out after an offer is accepted, free of consequences, until contracts are exchanged.

<comment><USER11> And there are unwritten rules in the solicitors community, do that a few times and you are blacked out.

<comment><USER12> Does this work? For house buying, solicitors are often taking on first-time clients, and they don't have a lot of leverage against the client if the client decides to renege on the deal.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Funny that both Honor and Seismic seem like good deals from a quick skim. Both have established their products and markets clearly, pull on decent revenue, have been growing continuously, no scandals, no weird CEOs, nothing illegal, no "break it till you make it" attitude. They are both on sectors which are extremely profitable and whose customers' churn rate is relatively low.

SoftBank: Nah, I think I'll pass.

<comment><USER14> " Seismic ia San Diego-based maker of B2B sales software that's raised over $180 million in VC funding, most recently at a $1 billion valuation, from firms like General Atlantic, Jackson Square Ventures, Lightspeed Venture Partners, and JMI Equity., "

Who would be shafted if that deal went through ? Those valuations are just not credible anymore - it's more likely that SoftBank recent experience has made them shaft-averse.

<comment><USER15> That is a different Honor than the one stated in TFA:

 _Honor is a San Francisco home care company for older adults that 's raised over $100 million from firms like Andreessen Horowitz, Naspers, and Thrive Capital._

<comment><USER14> My bad, meant Seismic - corrected.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Term sheets are not binding. An expectation of a term sheet is more tenuous still. Little described in this article approaches "shafting". (Creator's 6-month exclusive term sheet being the exception. But, like, hamburger robots.)

> _Given we're a fiduciary and investing very large amounts of capital, our > investment process is more rigorous than unregulated investors and typical > VCs._

Hilarious. Rigorous process? SoftBank?

Also, who regulates the Vision Fund? Do they think they're unique in having a fiduciary duty to their LPs?

<comment><USER16> They are a registered investment advisor unlike most VCs who have a VC exemption. a16z also took this step to give them more flexibility.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> Remember folks you haven't raised anything until the check clears.

<comment><USER18> Right - the term sheet is the "price sheet". The buyer still has to buy.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> Even worse, SB now casts shade on the startups by claiming they do more rigorous diligence with the implication that if a deal doesn't close it was because something was wrong with the startup.

<comment><USER19> If their new diligence is so rigorous that they don't invest in anything it doesn't mean much.

<comment><USER20> Could mean there are few startups out there seeking SB types of money that are actually good startups

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> That term sheets are not binding is technically correct (the best kind of correct, I'm told). But it should be so reputationally bad that it should only happen among third tier players and wannabes who don't have reliable limiteds.

<comment><USER22> I've had a VC walk out on a signed terms sheet due to 9/11\. I didn't like it but totally understood their motivations and it's hard to enforce a terms sheet. Still, it was less than classy and I would not attempt to do business with them again.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> They really need to share more details of these term sheets that fell through so we can confirm they were either binding or signed.

"Term sheets are non-binding, and even though they should signify a VC has conviction in investing in you and is ready to move towards closing, they fall through more often than most founders may expect." \- [https://techcrunch.com/2015/05/22/three-reasons-your-term- sh...](https://techcrunch.com/2015/05/22/three-reasons-your-term-sheet-may- fall-through/)

If these were signed term sheets and the investor has done a few weeks of legal / financial due diligence - then yes - not common. If these are deal or talking point term sheets with no definitive agreement and little formal due diligence - then those do fall away more often.

</comment><comment><USER23> > our investment process is more rigorous than unregulated investors and > typical VCs

that would be easier to believe if the wework screw-up hadn't happened.

<comment><USER24> I'm a sample of one and this is anecdata, but in my experience with VCs, there is due diligence and then due diligence after that firm has a major disaster.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> I don't read anything here that isn't par for the course when it comes to fundraising. This is how it works with all VCs. Money isn't in the bank until it's in the bank. I get the frustration that it wastes time, but for better or worst, that's the game today. It might be a problem worth discussing, but if so, it's a venture capital problem, not a Softbank problem.

</comment><comment><USER26> This sounds like VC 101. Same tactics, or worse, occur at all VC firms across Silicon Valley.

<comment><USER27> This is definitely not true. It's extremely rare for a term sheet to be pulled.

<comment><USER26> A quick google search will educate you on how you are wrong. It's not extremely rare at all.

<comment><USER28> It's very rare for a major fund to be pulling multiple term sheets at once.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> "Time is one of a startup's most valuable assets, and several startups and their CEOs have been robbed of time by SoftBank's actions"

Oh boo hoo! The line up for getting someone's else money slows down sometimes? Or even stops! The nerve!

</comment><comment><USER30> Ok lets start the countdown for the "How softbank turned around" headline. VC investments are just that some go bad and some go well. Wework could eventually end up fine still. They go big or go home, for now its home and then there's dusk.

</comment><comment><USER31> This looks more like a bad painting of softbank, though deals can go either way and at best softbank should do better at their own due diligence before making interest/commitment by way of term sheet and All tha

</comment><comment><USER32> Two of those three startups are clear losers. Not surprising.

<comment><USER33> Which two? Why do you think that?

<comment><USER32> Honor and Creator.

Honor is trying to enter an established industry full of complex legal entanglements and where there are already tons of players. They aren't revolutionizing this space at all. I mean, it's fine as a traditional business goes as far as I can tell. Why is VC involved?

Creator is going the wrong direction for food imo. Fast food has been on the decline for several years. Assuming we have more good economy to come than bad, this will only continue. People want high quality products, healthier products, and customized products. And sometimes a human experience. What will happen to this machine and the food when the novelty wears off? They'll get neglected like vending machines, or start breaking down due to cut corners in maintenance. The burgers look pretty bad and the reviews seem to agree. Maybe I'm wrong about this one and this is the golden fast food standard of the future, but I'd want to see more of those problems handled.</comment></comment></comment>


Tesla Keeps Poaching Prius Buyers, and It's Not Slowing Down - <AUTHOR> http://www.wired.com/autopia/2014/03/tesla-model-s-toyota-prius/ <comment><USER2> It is obvious to some extent, Prius was the badge of honor for many "bleeding green", now the mantle has been taken by Tesla and rightfully so.

Electric cars have many advantages - because the fuel is now electricity which can be produced from multiple sources. If you are motivated customer, you can produce it on your roof (in limited amounts usual max is 10kW plant) and of course if you have land, you can add some small medium wind devices.

But most of the people have to remember a one very green option available to them, that is use your current car till it goes into the grave and while doing so drive sparingly and only on need basis. The biggest problem with carbon footprint reduction is life-style and behavior every thing else is a symptoms of it.

<comment><USER3> One might think that electric power-assist bicycles would be a greater prize for the greenhearted, but it turns out that the Tesla S is a _lot_ more fun to own, despite being far more wasteful of Earth's precious natural resources.

The perpetual pissing contest to decide who is the greenest often focuses too much on what is visible and demonstrable, rather than the things which are less noticeable but more effective.

Trading up from a Prius to a Tesla might earn you some green cred, but moving your home closer to your usual travel destinations and supporting commuter mass transit somehow doesn't generate the same prestige.

I'm happy for Tesla, and sad for Toyota, but given my budget, this contest for customers is a bit above my notice.

<comment><USER4> Owning a Tesla doesn't give you much green cred in my book.

<comment><USER3> Nor mine, but I don't get invited to those fancy carbon-neutral parties, either. It _might_ be because I still conform to the archaic and unfashionable practice of burning gasoline to get to work, but it might also be due to my excessive nerdliness.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> A bunch of rich people bought Priuses because it was the best environmental status symbol available even though it wasn't as luxurious as they would have preferred. Now those rich people are buying Teslas because it is both luxurious and a notch up as an environmental status symbol.

People that are not as rich but still want to have an environmental status symbol edge over Prius drivers are moving to the Nissan Leaf or Chevy Volt.

<comment><USER6> Also, it would seem that Toyota has sat back and done little to advance the Prius in the last 17 years (yes, they launched the Prius in Japan in 1997) in the eyes of the consumer or technically. I'm not a huge car guy, but I don't know of a significant change off the top of my head that has improved the Prius to inspire an owner of an older one to upgrade to a newer one.

In comparison, it seems that Tesla is really trying their hardest to make constant advancement and take risk.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Prius emissions: some value

Tesla emissions: 0.00

You could say that Tesla is just moving the problem to the power plants. Well, they solved the problem, now it is time for the power plants to do the same.

<comment><USER8> What about disposing of the batteries? and the rest of the car?

<comment><USER9> In the US, 60% of the battery can be recycled.

[http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/teslas-closed-loop- battery-r...](http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/teslas-closed-loop-battery- recycling-program)

</comment></comment></comment><comment> at-fates-hands I was talking to some folks at an environmental conference this weekend and they made a great point about people who buy electric cars.

"I wouldn't have been able to buy my Nissan Leaf if Bob here hadn't bought his Chevy Volt, and before that the people who bought their Prius models."

It's more important people are buying electric cars, then who they're buying them from. With increased demand, more people can see the benefits of going this route instead of the traditional gas vehicles. This will hopefully expand the market making it more attractive for other companies to develop add electric cars to their lineups.

I realize many car companies are dead set against electric, but you can only bottle up demand for so long.

<comment><USER10> > _" I realize many car companies are dead set against electric, but you can > only bottle up demand for so long."_

The large car companies are not against electric vehicles, they are suffering the innovator's dilemma, and will likely be disrupted.[1]

[1] [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Innovator's_Dilemma](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Innovator's_Dilemma)

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> It really surprises me that the rationale behind the switching from a Prius to a Tesla doesn't involve something along of the lines of "Tesla is an American company". I mean, I'm a foreigner and all, so there's nothing nationalist about that comment, but I would expect some form of economic pride and patriotism on the par of American buyers in these times of economic downturn.

Also, were I American, I'd be really proud of what Tesla pulled off with the Model S. It's American muscle car meet new economy meet green energy meet entrepreneurship. Seeing France struggle with their attempts at electric cars, I really envy America on this one.

<comment><USER12> IIRC, the vast majority of a Prius (and most other cars - I believe I've heard the same about at least some BMW models) is made by Americans in an American factory.

<comment><USER13> The Prius isn't assembled in America like many other models - it's still made in Japan [0]. I'm sure there are at least a few American components but it's actually one of the least American Toyota models.

Other Toyota models like the Sienna, Tundra, and Camry are indeed made in the USA.

As for BMW, X3s, X5s, and X6es (even for their own domestic market) are made in South Carolina, but their sedans and coupes are made in a variety of other sites (Germany, South Africa, Mexico, others).

So you're right that many foreign cars are more American than they'd seem, but in the case of the Prius, not so.

0: [http://www.autonews.com/article/20130610/OEM01/306109991/mad...](http://www.autonews.com/article/20130610/OEM01/306109991/made- in-america-prius-fades-into-the-future)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Tesla is a status symbol, Prius is not.

They have different goals it would seem, Toyota wants to make fuel efficient cars available to the everyman.

Tesla wants to make the fully electric car cool enough that people will aspire to own one.

<comment><USER15> Prius is definitely a status symbol. It's a symbol that says "I'm green". That's one of the major reasons it has sold better than other hybrids: it's visibly different. Other hybrids look like gasoline cars and don't work as well at telling the world that the owner is green.

Tesla is a symbol that says both "I'm green" and "I have money".

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> Yuppie Prius buyers got tired of slumming. With a Tesla, they can be self- satisfied and ego-satisfied at the same time.

</comment><comment><USER17> I don't see Prius and Tesla as comparable products. The Prius is a low- performance econobox but it does have unlimited range due to being a hybrid and is practical for most everyday transportation needs. The Tesla is a high performance, expensive, limited-range specialty vehicle, impractical for many uses.

<comment><USER18> On paper, they're not at all, but car buyers rarely buy after sitting down with a piece of paper and boxing out their options. The one key area of overlap is in the image portrayed by Prius and Model S ownership.

The study is pretty old (2004, I think), but J.D. Power found that the average income of a hybrid buyer was $100k/year versus $85k/year for the general market. They also found that 42% of hybrid owners make more than $100k per year. This means that a lot of Prius buyers have the means to own a Model S.

The context in which a Tesla Model S gets cross-shopped against a Prius is in that both cars showcase the owners commitment to being "green". While it's a sub-segment of a segment, it's still a real comparison that happens all the time.

<comment><USER19> 100k a year doesn't put you even close to the comfortable range for buying a Model S.

<comment><USER18> That depends on where you live. Where I live, it's plenty.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Why isn't there a Lexus version of the Prius yet? If people are buying someone else's car for $70k instead of yours for $30k then you need to make your car just a little bigger with a larger screen and sone nice wood trim PRONTO!

<comment><USER21> They have CT 200h, which is basically a rebadged Prius. Pretty common around SF at least.

<comment><USER20> I guess I had heard of the CT 200h, but it doesn't look green. Half of the point is to drive something that looks like you shop at Whole Foods, and the 200h just looks like a nice sporty hatch back.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> If only I could drive long distances (300+ miles) in a Tesla.

<comment><USER23> [http://www.teslamotors.com/supercharger](http://www.teslamotors.com/supercharger)

<comment><USER20> There may be some people who go on road trips looking for a reason to spend longer at the rest stop, but I am not one of them. I would get an electric car except I don't want my 8 hour drive to see the folks a second longer than it has to be.

<comment><USER24> When my coworkers said this 5 years ago, I asked this question: Would you drive your beater truck that you use for hauling mulch, lumber and the like every single day to work instead of the sedan you drive now? Different vehicles have different roles. Someone who can afford a $100k car can afford to rent, fly or take a train to cover the long distances. At the present prices the Model S isn't suitable for most middle class Americans. But, as the cost of the car goes down, the range of the car goes up, and the charge time goes down, it'll make more sense in the future for a middle class family to consider a Tesla or comparable electric car.

<comment><USER20> Good point. What I am actually more likely to do is replace my pickup with an electric version when there is a good option available. I only really need one gas car, and the truck would be a good candidate for going full electric. My next vehicle will probably be an electric truck with a roughly 100 mile range. I may have to wait a few years for a good option in my price range though.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Introducing MLFE: ML-Flavoured Erlang - <AUTHOR> http://noisycode.com/blog/2016/06/27/introducing-mlfe/ <comment><USER2> I think it could be a mistake to put this out there when it's still so early. The features are not there(0) yet and it's likely to be overhauled a lot.

It's an extremely exciting proposition and I both hope and think it will become a force to be reckoned with in the erlang community.

(The name is currently not well accepted on the erlang mailing list, by the way, but is yet to be commented on by j14159)

0 - [https://github.com/j14159/mlfe#whats- missing](https://github.com/j14159/mlfe#whats-missing)

<comment><USER3> It was rough but it worked out for Rust.

BTW, there have been at least two other ML on BEAM attempts before. One experimental in the open and another unpublished one.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Damn, I kind of wish Elixir had gone with a high quality type system... dialyzer is just so limited. Glad to see some experimentation on this front. Any idea whether it would be possible to interface with existing Erlang libraries?

<comment><USER5> If you're interested in a much richer type system, but also like the actor model, check out Pony ([http://www.ponylang.org/](http://www.ponylang.org/)), which has some pretty seriously great goals.

That said, I think the theory was that dialyzer's success typing was the most industrially pragmatically acceptable type system available at the time -- the one that you could actually get people to use -- and given all that, it's not half bad. Certainly better than nothing.

<comment><USER4> Yeah, Pony looks very cool. Unfortunately I don't think I could convince work to use it at this early stage, but I'm looking forward to see how it develops. Huge bonus points for being based on soundness proofs from the very start.

Yeah, Dialyzer is better than nothing. I guess I get saddened by the lack of parametric polymorphism due to being spoiled by Rust and Haskell, and have been sceptical due to noticing that type inference sometimes falls back to the top type without me realizing. Kind of hard to trust a type system to have your back after that.

<comment><USER6> Yeah, I gave up relying on type inferencing; at minimum I add type annotations to every exported function in a module, and every function that calls out to an external resource (i.e., a function that reads from an external database, I'd declare what is returned).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> an ML on the erlang vm seems very interesting. static typing woot!

(does one pronounce MLFE as "milfy"?)

<comment><USER8> I thought the whole point of not statically typing erlang was because upgrades are done on live systems.

<comment><USER9> You can also do live updates on strong typed systems.

The only thing needed is support for dynamic loading and unloading of modules.

The biggest problem, which dynamic systems also suffer from, is how to smoothly perform the updates with inflight requests.

<comment><USER10> Yeah, but what happens when the api surface of one of the modules changes? Erlang's dynamic typing, combined with its philosophy of treating crashed processes as normal, means that you can deploy the upgraded module on multiple machines without any kind of rigorous synchronization. If you want to do the same with a statically typed system you have to be able to handle the case of one module not being well typed against another. You might accomplish this by implementing transactional upgrades, but that's likely to cause a hiccup across the whole cluster, or else you could essentially define dynamically typed runtime semantics, which would lose a lot of the value of static typing.

<comment><USER9> You do it like in Mesa/Cedar for example.

Unload all the modules and reload them again.

In Cedar, or ETHZ Oberon for that matter, all executables are dynamically loaded and can be either used by other modules or exposed to the user as commands.

Loading a new version means unloading the module and its dependencies.

When it gets re-loaded it has a the new interface available.

Of course, there is the issue to solve any possible compilation errors before the module can be loaded again.

A similar approach can be done in Java and .NET via classloaders and app domains respectively.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Repository: [https://github.com/j14159/mlfe](https://github.com/j14159/mlfe)

</comment><comment><USER12> ML on BEAM - a combination from dream! If this gets any traction, I'm sold.

</comment><comment><USER13> Possibly also relevant: [http://www.ponylang.org/](http://www.ponylang.org/)

<comment><USER14> Pony is really cool but does not run on the Erlang VM which is pretty battle tested at this point.

<comment><USER13> Agreed. I just suspect it has similar goals (I've heard it described as "statically typed Erlang" in the past, and addresses concurrency at the type level in ways I suspect MLFE doesn't).

<comment><USER15> The idea of being able to mix MLFE, LFE and raw Erlang is an exciting proposition. Correctness, genericity, and being statically typed, I could see compiling MLFE into Rust and running it inside BEAM. So much gradual goodness.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Scala.js – Does anyone use it production or plan to use it production ? - <AUTHOR> Scala is an large investment in time for most programmers, but once you get the hang of it you become very productive. So when facing the task of writing for the frontend, I would like to utilize my investment by using scala.js<p>Have anyone here had any experience in using Scala.js for any production system or planing to use it in production ? <comment><USER2> I have used it for several projects.

I have written a Chrome extension[1] using it which has a thousand or so users.

I use it to make in house visualizations / web based user interfaces for commodities trading. In this use case being able to have statically checked rpcs (via autowire + some modifications) and share domain objects / business logic between client and server really helps keep things DRY & statically checked.

Currently, as a hobby project, I am using it to work on a video game built on top of phaser.js.

As a long time Scala programmer I would strongly recommend it. It's amazing being able to re-use all your domain objects between server and client, and get great performance on both sides.

1: [https://github.com/benjaminjackman/looty](https://github.com/benjaminjackman/looty)

<comment><AUTHOR> Do you use any packages as Angular or Polymer together with Scala.js ?

<comment><USER2> I haven't, I have used Facebook's React with it, which works fine.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> My product is completely built on it. Took some ramp-up and rearchitecture time (in particular, SJS is better for a single-page-application than lots of little webpages), but it has _enormously_ increased my productivity since then.

By now, I'm at the point where adding a whole new API and making use of it in the client can be done in minutes -- having Scala end-to-end is a huge win. And having static type checking for the client code means that there are far fewer bugs, so coding the client itself is much quicker and less frustrating. Really, it's the first time in 20+ years that I've _enjoyed_ web programming.

That's just a tiny startup ([https://www.querki.net/help/#What-is- Querki](https://www.querki.net/help/#What-is-Querki) \-- note that everything you see there is Scala.js), but I don't think it would have been possible without SJS...

<comment><AUTHOR> Is there anywhere you have felt that you have to work around anything compared to writing it in javascript ? ie. it pans out great when the project is small but when it grows more and more caveats turns up and the gain maid in the start is quickly lost

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I am planning to use it in production.

We are working on a system that monitors, analyzes and reacts to telemetry sent by industrial machines. Part of this project are very JS/Ajax rich interfaces (plural) that show graphs, telemetry updates and alerts in real- time, interfaces that have to be kept up and running in the same browser window for days without refresh. The problems we've experienced is that the client-side is not front-end work, where the people involved need to have UX skills and stuff like that. Oh no, this is about building a reliable UI that doesn't leak, that doesn't choke on too many updates sent by the server and that can recover after networking issues.

Scala.js is great because we can use Scala-related tooling, which are much, much saner than what you get in Javascript's ecosystem (e.g. IntelliJ IDEA, SBT, dependencies managed in Maven repositories, Google Closure tree-shaking your code by default, etc.), a statically typed programming language that can help prevent accidental errors, which is very important for us because the complexity of the business logic involved is very problematic, plus a very rich standard library. For example we don't have to wait for async/await because we already have it. The libraries you can work with are pretty cool as well. Facebook's React is a popular choice for usage in combination with an FP style and interoperability is great. Plus the ecosystem of Scala.js-specific libraries is very active. As a shameless plug, we've built our own library for dealing with reactive streams, cross-compiled to Scala and Scala.js: [https://github.com/monifu/monifu](https://github.com/monifu/monifu)

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for that insightful post, may I ask, beside React, do you use any widget library or do you do the design from scratch ?

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> I'm in the process of introducing Scala.js to the front-end of seventh sense. My navigation and several display components are in production already, with more coming all the time. Once you understand the interop rules and get a unified toolchain in place, it "just works", and as others have said, having access to scala typing and the same, typed, codebase on both front-end and back-end is awesome.

I'm currently using Angular, React and Moment.js on the scala side, so I can confirm JS library interop is possible.

<comment><AUTHOR> How would you describe the level of effort needed to deal with the interop ? "Is possible" can range from "Its possible" to "Very nice" :)

<comment><USER5> I'd say the language level interop is "very nice". Library level interop is still a work in progress. Many (most?) facades are incomplete, and the more complete ones often eschew compatibility with existing JS code in favor of optimizing for scala-js only. Typically figuring out exactly what the possible argument and return values are for a given js function takes a bit of trial and error, so you have to twiddle the facade a bit and be prepared to fork them and contribute changes back upstream.

That said, if you're familiar enough with both platforms to handle an app that has both, moving the interop from your head to the scala.js code isn't that big of a leap.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks, I have to dig in and see how much of an issue missing library integration in my case would cause.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I've been using it in production, albeit with a small and friendly audience that puts up with missing features very kindly (I use it for a critique tool in group project courses).

The reason for using it was that as I rarely have time to spend on the code, and often months apart (when the next term comes around), I wanted something where the compiler will catch more of my mistakes.

(Generally, I've been using scalajs-react on the client side)

</comment><comment><USER7> I am using the Scala.js for 1 year for commercial product. The quality is very good. All are very happy. The Scala.js and the React are integrate very nicely. I encourage you to try, you can never go back. You will not disappointing!

<comment><AUTHOR> Did you use any other framework beside react ?

<comment><USER7> Before this we tried the Angular.JS but we were not happy to do so. Luckily we later discovered the ScalaJS and since that time we are very happy. But we have not tried the ScalaJS and the Angular together. Maybe the integration is good? But I think Angular is not good. Sorry don't have more helpful informations.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Your current investment will be doubled (at least) in value if you use scala- js, and the extra effort is minuscule compared with learning Scala.

I have used it in closed-source production and its awesome!

</comment><comment><USER9> We are building a production app using Scala.js (with React as the underlying framework through [https://japgolly.github.io/scalajs- react](https://japgolly.github.io/scalajs-react)). It has been a marvelous and super-productive experience.

Here are the slides from my recent presentation at "Scala by the Bay" conference narrating our experience so far (video for the same will be released by the conference organizers soon): [http://www.slideshare.net/ramnivas2/full-stack- scala](http://www.slideshare.net/ramnivas2/full-stack-scala)

<comment><AUTHOR> How do the endresult code size look compared to handcrafted javascript ? 2x , magnitude ?

<comment><USER9> In our case, the production JS file produced by Scala.js is about 180KB (gzipped). This size does not include third-party code such as React and other assets.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> We also plan to use Scala.js in our next brand-new UI of ChatWork ([https://www.chatwork.com](https://www.chatwork.com)).

Please be noted that we won't use scala-react because Scala.js can communicate with React by postMessage.

disclosure: I work for chatwork as chief front-end engineer.

</comment><comment><USER11> Yes: for a small web app solution, using only scala libs (scalatags,autowire,scalarx)..98kb gzip and bootstrap css: [https://www.stofftante.ch](https://www.stofftante.ch). Had only two js debug sessions until now :-) cause auf type safety :-)

</comment><comment><USER12> Yup. Using in production for a rather large monitoring UI via the awesome [https://github.com/japgolly/scalajs- react](https://github.com/japgolly/scalajs-react) project. Nothing but good things to say about it.</comment>


Paul Graham's Participatory Narcissism (2008) - <AUTHOR> https://blog.codinghorror.com/paul-grahams-participatory-narcissism/ <comment><USER2> A [2008] tag may be appropriate here.

To me, this post didn't age well. From what I recall, entrepreneurship is at something like a 50 year low in the US. Even in tech, where startups are seemingly plentiful, large companies are buying up promising young startups just to eliminate competition. If one believes competition breads resiliency and creativity, more people need to be starting companies and seeing those companies through.

From a different angle, Paul Graham to me always has evangelized over much else the virtue of freedom over schedule. Zoo metaphors, terms like "wage slavery" are poignant terms used well before Paul Graham to refer to the troublesome aspects of working for another person. In many ways most careers working for others have very little freedom over schedule—one works when one's manager expects them to work. Freedom over schedule doesn't mean freedom from consequences either—when one has control over their own schedule, the real consequences of one's actions are much more visible.

<comment><USER3> _> To me, this post didn't age well._

I think it wasn't a very good criticism even at the time. I remember reading PG's post when it was posted and thinking that it did a good job of capturing what it was like to work in a large organization. Atwood didn't seem to grasp that. (He also didn't seem to grasp the point of PG's "How to Disagree" follow-up post.)

<comment><USER2> Oh, I meant Atwood's post didn't age well, sorry for the lack of specificity!

<comment><USER3> _> I meant Atwood's post didn't age well_

Yes, I understood that. I was saying that Atwood's post didn't seem to me to be a good criticism of PG's post even at the time.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> "But lately I've begun to wonder whether Mr. Graham, like Joel Spolsky before him, has devolved into self-absorption and irrelevance."

...six months later, Joel Spolsky and the author Jeff Atwood launched Stack Overflow together.

<comment><USER5> Which is neither here nor there as to the worth of their blogging at the period (or that which followed).

<comment><USER4> My point is that 2008 was a long time ago, and it's very likely he no longer feels this way about pg (as partially evidence by the footnote in this article).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> > Small businesses are the backbone of the American economy. And Mr. Graham is > absolutely right to encourage young people to take risks early in life, to > join small business startups with potentially limitless upside while they > have nothing to lose – no children, no mortgage, no significant other

Important to recognize that while 'startups' are typically 'small business' not all 'small business' are the types of startups that Paul (and the OP) are referring to. Most 'small business' are not angel, vc or even friends and family funded (at least with f&f not to any large 'lose money for years with runway' extent). They are businesses that people start and operate on a shoestring that they have to get right or they go out of business. And when they go out of business they don't land at some other 'startup' and aren't heralded as having their ticket punched and presented with great opportunities (like happens with people who fail in a way with a YC 'startup').

> Naturally, every young software programmer worth a damn forms a startup. > Because that's what Mr. Graham's company, Y Combinator, does. They fund > startups with young software programmers

This is another annoying thing about YC and HN. This idea that anyone that is good is working at a startup and not at a 'traditional' company I mean who would work (if they were good) at (insert legacy company that has been around for 100 or even 25 years filled with old timers)?

What's ironic is that Paul has actually burned out (from what I can tell and sure I could be wrong) from the startup ecosystem. He is doing writing and programming he is not running a company or trying to start a company and so on (he would say this is why you have to do your best work when you are young). But the truth is in traditional business there are plenty of 'older dudes' (older than Paul) that getup and enjoy running a business and they don't need the money and they don't need the aggravation but they enjoy business.

</comment><comment><USER7> While I understand that this crowd in particular might care more than the average audience about what Paul Graham says, the important thing is not to tie your self-worth to what others think or say.

<comment><USER8> Especially when they're just average people who happened to get lucky with money.

<comment><USER9> You need to meet some more "average people."

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Last time I saw a pg blog post on here there was a lengthy discussion about whether it belonged on HN. One of the comments was [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21894583](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21894583)

On one hand, you gotta hand it to pg (insert dril tweet about not having to "hand it" to anyone). According to his own writing, he knew he was in danger of sliding into something he didn't want to be.

On the other hand, he expressed in his own writing he knew he was in danger of sliding into something he didn't want to be, but he doesn't seem to have adapted.

For the record I don't have any feelings on pg as a person. Like everyone else his history is a mixed bag. Just saying: to me, his writing often seems to emanate from a place where his empathy for others & technocapitalist value system are having an argument he doesn't hear. Again, not a knock on pg's skill as a writer or worth as a person. We all have blind spots. I just think that's his, and we've entered an age where patience for people who dwell in that blind spot is running very thin.

</comment><comment><USER11> Ironically, I have always sensed a bit of nihilism in Jeff's writing (which shares many traits with narcissism), typically exemplified in the vein of most everything being repeated, common, or meaningless, which is present in the first paragraph of this essay.

</comment><comment><USER12> I didn't get his diss of Joel Spolsky... I thought Jeff Atwood and Joel worked together?

<comment><USER13> In the era it was kind of a thing to publicly and loudly disagree with other very public people. That beef fed attention to all parties.

In the end of that post Jeff got special treatment from PG, and we know he ended up starting StackOverflow with Spolsky. Love all around.

<comment><USER14> In 1884 Robert Louis Stevenson wrote _A Humble Remonstrance_ in Longman's Magazine, which explained to Henry James that James totally misunderstood the nature of fiction and art. James couldn't help admiring it, and they became very good friends.

[http://www.gutenberg.org/files/30598/30598-h/30598-h.htm#pag...](http://www.gutenberg.org/files/30598/30598-h/30598-h.htm#page148)

"The whole secret is that no art does "compete with life." Man's one method, whether he reasons or creates, is to half-shut his eyes against the dazzle and confusion of reality. The arts, like arithmetic and geometry, turn away their eyes from the gross, coloured and mobile nature at our feet, and regard instead a certain figmentary abstraction."

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> Did PG's post that is linked to here get edited? I don't see the anecdote that Atwood quotes anywhere in PG's post.

</comment><comment><USER15> I can only hope to one day write something so provocative that 12 years later people are still getting rankled by it.

I know Atwood's post is from 2008, but the fact that it's on the front page today in 2020 must mean people are still feeling sore about it.

<comment><USER5> > _I can only hope to one day write something so provocative that 12 years > later people are still getting rankled by it._

That's not something to admire and doesn't take much of an effort either.

A bigoted racist remark, for example, will do just as well...

<comment><USER15> Not really. Can you think of any bigoted racist remark from 12 years ago that people still talk about? Stuff like that gets a brief spurt of outrage and then gets forgotten when the next outrage comes along.

<comment><USER5> > _Can you think of any bigoted racist remark from 12 years ago that people > still talk about?_

Why "still"? It's not like PG's 2008 article is the talk of the town today itself and people write new "hating" responses to it. This is just a repost on HN of an existing 12 year old response to the article.

That said, yes, you can find write-ups and responses to remarks that actually were (or were/are considered as) bigoted/racist/etc being written many years after the fact as well, e.g. to various writers/politicians/pundits/etc anti- semitic remarks...

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> He wrote many very interesting and insightful things, but his ego has always been quite big.

</comment><comment><USER17> Paul Graham's professional stake with ycombinator requires that young programmers believe there is something special and superior about joining/founding startups. I'm not saying there aren't personality differences at work, but nearly _everyone_ , especially when young, wants to believe they are part of a select group, anointed as the select and superior to others. So it's no surprise that a person with a company that benefits from that mindset may actually believe it as well.

</comment><comment><USER18> Should be labeled "[2008]"

</comment><comment><USER19> As this was written 12 years ago and it would also be instructing to see if his perspective has evolved as he went on to found the StackExchange network.

</comment><comment><USER20> Shut up Paul, you're scaring off the W2s!</comment>


Google makes $550M strategic investment in Chinese e-commerce firm JD.com - <AUTHOR> https://techcrunch.com/2018/06/17/google-550-million-jd/ <comment><USER2> A castling move I believe - it is like a making a statement: i am at at your mercy, don't beat me, while they take JD as their "human shield" against Beijing. JD of course did not agree being a human shield for free</comment>


PHP 7 - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/ryantenney/php7

<comment><USER2> Going it alone probably doesn't help things much.

Sure, PHP (trunk) as it stands today is flawed, but it is constantly getting better. We've recently got finally for the try/except construct, we've recently obliterated Logo GUIDs (thanks to me), you can now iterate through an array of arrays and assign the values to multiple variables with the list() construct (a la Python), and it looks like we'll soon get Generators: <https://wiki.php.net/rfc/generators#vote>

Also, if we don't see a 5.5, then 6 would be next, and for that there are a lot of big changes you could make. NikiC is considering rewriting the PHP compiler to use an AST so we can have multiple-pass compilation, for instance.

PHP is slow to evolve, but in part that's a result of the PHP team trying hard to preserve backwards compatibility for well-written code.

</comment><comment><USER3> This has been dead for 2 years by the looks of it.

</comment><comment> B-Scan Last code change was 2 years ago.

</comment><comment><USER4> The guy probably learned quite a few things about how the project is structured simply by doing this, so even if it's not where it wanted to be, there was some value in doing it at least for the project initiator.

</comment><comment><USER5> Interesting project, but can anyone elaborate on this project? The site <http://code.10e.us/php7/is> not reachable.

Has anyone tried this? Is it stable?

<comment><USER6> seems to be dead. last commit 2 years ago.

<comment><USER5> Ah, missed that. Too bad.</comment></comment></comment>


CRUD: New, Minimalistic ORMish DB Library for Go - <AUTHOR> http://github.com/azer/crud <comment><USER2> Why name a database CRUD ? It reminds me of Microsoft calling its SQL database «SQL Server» …

<comment><USER3> It's an ORM, not a database. Also, Microsoft is not alone: Mysql, Postgresql, Sqlite...</comment></comment>


A Goldman Unit Is Said to Have Rejected Facebook  - <AUTHOR> http://finance.yahoo.com/news/A-Goldman-Unit-Is-Said-to-nytimes-3234310186.html?x=0&sec=topStories&pos=3&asset=&ccode= <comment><USER2> My biggest takeaways:

      - a goldman unit with a fiduciary duty to clients passed on the deal
      - a goldman unit without any such duty is doing the deal
      - goldman will make money on the deal at almost any valuation (with the ipo)
      - clients need another 20% appreciation to make money (break even at $60B)

<comment><USER3> As soon as I heard this GS buy-in to Facebook, what came to mind?

Pump and Dump.

We can all see that Facebook's earnings don't justify a $50b valuation any time soon, so to buy in at that valuation looks like a very brave long-term investment. Yet GS have got huge publicity from the deal and, as long as they can sell a good number of their shares, they make money regardless - they win, their investors carry the can.

This whole deal is no better than the spam stock tips I used to get every morning from some unknown address.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I thought this was going to be a puff piece before I opened it but the most interesting thing--and perhaps this is posted elsewhere and I merely missed it --is it has basic Facebook financials.

$2 billion revenue for $400 million profit gives a P/E ratio of 125. That is simply _nuts_.

Now I fully realize that the stockmarket is driven on the expectation of future value rather than the simpler view of the ability to produce income, which is why "growth" companies trade _much_ higher than their P/Es but 125? That's like the height of the dot.com era pricing.

Remember at 600 million users, if you exclude those who are illiterate, have no access to computers or the internet, are infirm or simply too young, there's only so much bigger Facebook can actually get (given ~6 billion people on Earth you'd exclude at least half of them).

The counterargument to that is that Facebook has only scratched the surface of monetizing those users and I guess that might be true but I'm also of the opinion that there isn't as much room to monetize as some seem to think.

The usual MO for a VC-backed company is to go all out to build scale. They'll burn through millions of dollars to do it without concern for how to generate money. Why? Because once you have scale many things become easier, even possible.

Facebook _has_ scale and can only generate $400 million in profit a year and only a 20% profit margin? That's less than impressive.

<comment><USER5> I said the same thing about Amazon in 1999 ("they won't even turn a _profit_ until 2003? How the hell does Wall Street think they're worth $40B when they lose money on each sale?") and ended up with egg on my face for it.

FaceBook's a bit too risky an investment for me now, but I can see how someone who really believed social networking will fundamentally change society and FaceBook is the horse to bet on would go for it.

<comment><USER2> If you bought amazon at the top in 1999, it took 10 years before you broke even on the investment.

Not really what I'd call egg on your face.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Does anyone remember the story yesterday about the phone that is YouTube only?

Facebook has a massive number of users who check it every day. Humans are social creatures, and looking at pictures of friends, etc., is like cocaine.

The net is moving toward non-neutrality. The biggest impact of this on the typical end user won't be pain from (say) the inability to watch Vimeo videos on their phone, it will eventually be the inability to access key infrastructure services (like Facebook) without sitting through interruption ads.

There won't be any need to worry about privacy b/c Facebook will be able to sell advertisers the right to hijack your computer or phone for 30-60 seconds multiple times each day.

If there's only one social network available on your phone, then you can't just use a different one if the commercials get too annoying. The same applies to search engines... imagine: "While we complete your search, see this message from Johnson and Johnson".

Once this transformation (which now even Google is unabashedly in favor of) happens, major "internet utility" companies will have legitimate _Trillion_ dollar valuations.

The only reason Goldman partners aren't buying is b/c they have safer, higher Yield alternatives.

<comment><USER7> I am already tired by "monetize everything with ads" mentality, and the moment your scenario comes true I won't be using FB anymore.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> "The S.E.C. had nothing substantial to say on the matter at the time"</comment>


Spore? Black & White? Meh. 'Creatures' creator working on new alife game? Nice. - <AUTHOR> http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1508284443/grandroids-real-artificial-life-on-your-pc

<comment><AUTHOR> If you missed Creatures, it was a series of games something like the Sims but with a much more advanced biological simulation running underneath. It's been over a decade and nothing since has even approached the ambition of these games. The old games are available on gog.com.

The author's blog: <http://stevegrand.wordpress.com/>

</comment><comment><USER2> Awesome submission title. I sir concur.</comment>


Why Other Countries Teach Better - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/18/opinion/why-students-do-better-overseas.html?hp&rref=opinion

<comment><USER2> A problem with this study ( which made a lot of noise in france as well), is that it doesn't show the result per child social / economical level. It's a typical case of hidden factor : i don't believe that rich neighbourhood high schools are worst in the us than an average finish one. The problem is how many you've got compared to the poor neighbourhood schools ( i don't think poor/rich is the only hidden factor but it's an example).

Some people here noticed that the top ranking countries have a much more homogeneous population. Which could explain why they're performing better "on average" ( school system is more easily adapted to a great number of people).

<comment><USER3> "Some people here noticed that the top ranking countries have a much more homogeneous population."

That is just a matter of perception, and a wrong perception at that. The old world is actually far more diverse than the USA, where a single language, culture, political system and economy dominates in all corners, and is continually more homogenized by the mass media and highway system.

It is just that you don't see the diversity in foreign cultures, or don't rate the diversity you do see as relevant, while your brain exaggerates the diversity within the culture you are familiar with. It's the same mechanism that makes 'all Chinese look alike' to white westerners, and 'all westerners look alike' to people in China.

<comment><USER2> That may be true, but i'm not sure hong kong, shangai or finland have the same melting pot culture and centuries of immigrants as usa or france..

<comment><USER3> Immigration has very little to do with a population being homogeneous or not. Take the few extremely diverse countries with extremely heterogeneous populations: Russia, India, Indonesia. These countries do not have a recent history of immigration at all.

Now take a few counter examples: The USA and Brazil. Despite the vast size of these countries, and the high immigration rate, they both have a population that is rather homogeneous compared to what you'll find in the old world. Economically, the USA is more homogeneous still.

I get the impression that to Americans the only measure for diversity is skin color, because you are used to everything else being the same.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


5 sites back to back MYSQL Dump assembla.com web2pc.com and many more - <AUTHOR> http://www.worldofhacker.com/forum/Forum-Hacking-Show-OFF

<comment><USER2> Apparently I need an account there to see the data in question.

So, to anyone who is more motivated than I am: Should I be worried? I have an Assembla account, though I haven't touched it since I discovered GitHub.</comment>


Show HN: Wikiclaim – an Encyclopedia for Claims - <AUTHOR> https://www.wikiclaim.org <comment><USER2> Cool! I wish tis is going to become popular. I always dreamed of a global collaborative think-tank where everybody can publish an idea and other people would submit constructive comments about why/how is it right or wrong.</comment>


Netherlands 'hosts most child sex abuse images' - <AUTHOR> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-48022950 <comment><USER2> They also seem to shield a lot of the "business directory" scam artists. Just about every single one I've received had an Amsterdam address on it.

</comment><comment><USER3> The age was not mentioned. This is of major importance, because a crime in one country isn't always a crime in another country.</comment>


Fresh Is Not Just for Milk; Filling Rails Potholes - <AUTHOR> http://blog.railsapps.org/post/41915143594/fresh-is-not-just-for-milk-filling-rails-potholes

<comment><USER2> I've found your stuff tremendously useful. Potholes aren't quite the metaphor for what your'e talking about. Potholes may mess up your suspension if you hit enough of them, or be a little uncomfortable. No, I'd use roadblocks as the metaphor here, or improvised explosive devices, because if you don't know about issues like the one you talked about with Factory Giral are there, they will waste your entire day.

</comment><comment><USER3> My path to learning ruby and later rails started off by working through the Mike Hartl rails tutorial and doing the codeschool courses. but then what? I had no where to go after that. Everyone told me to build my own app but there were still many questions that I needed answered. This is where the RailsApps really stepped in and helped me out. It was a great place to go for code inspiration and pointed me toward a solution to problems I had run into. It also gave me a gateway into open source work by contributing tests to a few of the projects. So kudos to Daniel for picking up the newbies that have worked through a few tutorials and books and guiding them through the transition into junior developers.

</comment><comment><USER4> I could be wrong, but I think you're going to have a hard time convincing rails newcomers to fork over the cash in a recurring model and as the post indicates, the experienced developers are familiar with the territory.

I'm sure there's money to be made keeping people up to date on these frustrating changes, but I don't know if this is how to do that most effectively.

</comment><comment><USER5> Wouldn't these sorts of issues be solved more easily if the Gemfile listed specific versions of the gem dependencies? I don't like the idea of allowing a Rails app to just download whatever is the most recent version of a gem for this exact reason.

<comment><AUTHOR> You can specify gem versions in a Gemfile. It's a good idea when you lock down an app and don't plan to update it regularly. This blog post is concerned with the larger issue of starting new projects and finding that certain integrations require specific tweaks that are often not well known and may be temporary. Rails and its gem ecosystem evolves constantly.

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> The RailsApps Tutorials site is here: <https://tutorials.railsapps.org/></comment>


Ask HN: Is an IP address sensitive data? - <AUTHOR>

When data is released it is usually scrubbed of PII. Information like names, birthdays, addresses, etc. I am wrestling with opening data from my startup but cannot make a decision on user IP address data. Are there precedents for or against providing this kind of information in an open dataset? <comment><USER2> IP Addresses are PII, you should generally scrub those. If you, for example, wanted to be in NAI, Network Advertising Initiative, you'd be required to delete IP addresses in log files.

Also, addresses can be tied to other actions across the web to build a profile.

</comment><comment><USER3> One can geolocate well enough with many IP addresses that, with a bit of additional data if not solely using the IP address, the request source is quite identifiable.

Even several years ago (i.e. in "less sophisticated" times), I had a few occasions to do this manually. The experience was eye-opening. (It's one thing to understand the concept. It's another to drill down and target someone in a matter of minutes, if not moments.)</comment>


For national security, Trump gets a new secure 'smartphone' - <AUTHOR> http://www.zdnet.com/article/for-national-security-trump-trades-in-phone-for-secret-service-approved-device/ <comment><USER2> Trump believes no computer is safe from hacking, so maybe he won't even use this, except for tweetings.

</comment><comment><USER3> Unlike the rest of us, he probably won't even have to root his phone to purge it of bloatware.

</comment><comment><USER4> I hope it can tweet.

<comment><USER5> Does Twitter still support tweeting over text? That's how I did it pre- smartphone.

<comment><USER6> It does indeed. Tumblr also lets you post via SMS.</comment></comment></comment>


Uber  has a  law firm  investigating me – Susan Fowler - <AUTHOR> https://twitter.com/susanthesquark/status/837339141520023552 <comment><USER2> The title of this submission is a strict paraphrasing (despite being in quotes) of an already short tweet, which is pretty meh.

The full tweet is: "Uber names/blames me for account deletes, and has a different law firm -not Holders - investigating me. I have hired"

"Uber names/blames me for account deletes" is a pretty bold claim, and doesn't feel like a routine investigation.

<comment><USER3> Fowler has probably received a letter from an Uber hired lawyer asking her to take down the blog and threatening to sue her for damages.

Why else would she hire a lawyer? I see no other reason why she would hire a lawyer except to respond to a scary letter on scary letterhead that was probably personally served to her doorstep. (Which alone is a horrible experience one wishes on no one.)

Everyone, buy that Microservices book! [https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1491965975/ref=as_li_tl?ie...](https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1491965975/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=1491965975&linkCode=as2&tag=susanfowler-20&linkId=8e434210b002d00be8507454a75c11ff)

(I grabbed the link directly from Fowler's blog in case it includes any affiliate juice for her.)

<comment><USER4> It includes an affiliate code ("tag=susanfowler-20"). I don't know how much that would pay out but I assume she'd end up with more if you just sent her $1. (I'm hoping she provides a way for others to contribute towards her legal costs.)

<comment><USER3> O'Reilly sends her royalty cheques, too, for every sale, so I'm sure it's worth more than $1 to her!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I had an extended exchange with an Uber employee the other day, in which he steadfastly refused to believe that Uber was going after Fowler after the initial reports of this. Despite countless examples of this kind of behavior in the past, he kept insisting that everything was only "alleged" or "unverified."

I'm not sure what kind of cargo cult they have going on over there, but it sure is effective at getting people to see past the most obvious examples of straight up awfulness. Explains a lot about what happened to Susan.

<comment><USER6> I steadfastly refused to _expect_ , pending more data, investigation with intent to discredit, disparage, or defame Susan Fowler.

This is still unclear but I certainly agree that it is very worrying. You can bet that we'll be asking tough questions about it on Tuesday.

As an aside, I believe you simply meant "cult" \- "cargo cult" is specifically to do with performing actions superficially resembling things that work elsewhere without understanding (or replicating) the why of it. Your accusation, of persisting in believing bizarre things in the face of evidence, is more general.

<comment><USER5> Hey, thanks for commenting on this. I respect that you'll stand up internally against any attempt to go after Susan. Apologies for not giving you more credit in my original comment.

I used cargo cult because I expect that a lot of the willingness to dismiss this behavior is out of expectation of a maybe-never-to-be-delivered gift from the "IPO Gods."

Just to be clear, I'm not ascribing this to you, but I've had other conversations with Uber employees who were explicitly cynical in their stance, after this fashion.

<comment><USER6> Thanks!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Umm, okay. I would fully expect this. Ms. Fowler seems to be a large liability for Uber. I don't find it unreasonable that "Uber has a law firm investigating <her>", if for no other reason than to find what she knew and when she knew it (or something along those lines), were she to sue what are the potential ramifications, et. al.

IOW, I'm not going to run in circles over a seven word tweet that could mean about anything.

<comment><USER8> The seven words in the HN title are not the tweet.

Part of the actual tweet is: "Uber names/blames me for account deletes" That's a much more aggressive approach than the defensive reasoning you're conjuring out of thin air.

<comment><USER9> By the way - what a stupid logic they apply.

Similarily it would be fine to say that I blame the cop for losing my job because he pulled me over drunk and now I cannot drive to my work with suspended DL.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Pro tip for whistleblowers: Hire an attorney before you blow the whistle, and listen to their advice. Preferably an attorney who has litigated against your employer in the past. If you simply must write a diatribe beforehand then stick the facts of the issue at-hand (eg. discrimination) and avoid the temptation to author a tell all. Even the best future employers will be given pause upon learning of your tell all blog post, regardless of the rock solid merits. In short: Don't let you feelings get in the way of your desired result.

<comment><USER11> And people were asking why these women just don't sue. It seems people need to be careful and think twice even when writing a blog post let alone sue.

<comment><USER12> If you are refering to me, I asked why she doesn't go to a lawyer... I had consulted lawyers many times in my life, but never sued.

<comment><USER11> No, I wasn't referring to that. I was referring to numerous comments on the original post of Susan Flower's blog on HN

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I may be missing something but why isn't the burden of proving those allegations on Susan Fowler? Why are we so quick to point fingers at Uber without even giving them the chance to defend themselves?

Many people hate Uber and what they do. There is a strong incentive to smear the company. Smearing Uber has been done in the past when the whole #deleteUber was started becaude Uber drivers were not force to participate in the airport boycotts.

<comment><USER14> This is not a court of law.

We as individuals can take a look at all of the evidence available about the illegal things that Uber does, and decide for ourselves if the allegations are credible.

This is not about 1 story by one woman who was harassed. This is a story about a dozen women who are already coming forward, and a toxic culture that anyone at Uber can confirm exists.

If Uber wants people to give them the benefit of the doubt, then maybe they should stop doing so many terrible things.

Similarly, if I had 10 separate female friends that I trust tell me about how this one guy had harassed them in different situations, I wouldn't bother going to each of them and demand that they give me video evidence. I would just stop talking to the guy, and warn my other friends about him. Doubly so if the guy just responded by saying, "I will not confirm or deny any allegations, but I would like to point out that nobody has any proof!".

If you are reduced to saying "No proof has been shown yet!", as opposed to actually making an argument, putting your reputation on the line, then you have already lost.

Or in otherwords, in order for me to give ANY weight to the "There are 2 sides to any story", then Uber needs to come out and claim that there are 2 side. Silence doesn't count. Silence in this case is admitting that they are in the wrong.

<comment><USER15> Also there's an overall pattern of behavior, its not just women in the company being harassed, its also the treatment of the drivers, all the things Lyft is suing them over doing, and even their sketchy "rides of glory" post show that their corporate culture just doesn't understand how to not be a complete asshole.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> I only regret that I have but one app to delete

<comment><USER17> Does anyone know if apps get a chance to phone home about their deletion?

Is the owner going to see a specific stat about this action?

<comment><USER18> iOS has no documented event for apps to be notified when an app is deleted. I assume it is the same in Android.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> i thought the harassment story was bad but did everyone miss the totally malfunctioning hr review process and awful culture in susan's story? I just thought that was the hidden part of the iceberg - that there is some kind of crazy lord of the flies thing going on there that is the root of all the harassment and the other bizarre behaviour between teams there. I just don't see it as a very nice place to work unless you thrive in these kind of lawless every-man-for-himself environment.

<comment><USER20> Same piece, right? Or was there a mini-series?

<comment><USER19> same piece! i guess everyone was caught up in the sexual harassment story, and the crazy story of her getting her review post hoc revised and transfers/scholarships cancelled became a side story? i found every single part of her story aggravating, the hr process, the backstabbing, the politicking, the sexual harassment, all of it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> It seems to me, that any decent Law firm would have told her not to tweet about it imho. /ianal

<comment><USER22> You are right. A lawyer's job is to minimize your legal risk. The least risky thing to do is to keep silent. That's what he'll reliably tell you to do.

It's _your_ job to decide how much risk you are willing to take to speak out. Some fights are worth fighting.

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> I'm pretty clueless about the law, but I don't really see what case Uber has against her. How could they prove that she's the one that resulted in account deletions?

Even if you suppose she's the one to blame, if what she claimed is true then wouldn't their point be moot?

<comment><USER24> [https://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2017/02/27/it-admin-was- aut...](https://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2017/02/27/it-admin-was-authorized- to-trash-employers-network-he-says/)

They are probably thinking they can go that route.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> I think going through the court system would be much better way to find out the truth and serve punishment if needed, but only if the ground is a bit more even between a major corporation and an individual.

Is there a way to support Fowler in some way, like contributing to a legal fund?

</comment><comment><USER26> Not surprising. Depressing, but not at all surprising.

<comment><USER27> Why is it depressing? The company needs to know where it stands. This tweet could mean anything from her being stalked to legal representatives taking pre-deposition interviews.

While it seems pretty cut and dried to me that Uber is in the wrong, don't they have the responsibility and the right to investigate for themselves?

<comment><USER28> Holder is supposedly investigating the situation for Uber.

A 2nd firm looking at Fowler specifically would imply a different (addl) strategy--like litigation against her personally, or a PR campaign to smear her.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> Well I had not yet deleted the Uber app, but now? Gonzo! And it's not just Susan's account, but all the revelations of how crappy their company culture is, the immaturity and general misbehavior of their CEO (who clearly doesn't understand how being a CEO of such a huge company means he needs to grow up super fast and act like a decent moral human being).

</comment><comment><USER30> First off, I empathize her horrendous experiences of being harassed at Uber and applaud her courage to speak out.

Susan runs a book club [1][2] and is a published author[3]. Her quick fame rising from the recent press and a 24k+ follower and the amount of product placements on her tweet feed has reminded that old saying: All Press is Good Press.

[1]: [https://twitter.com/susansbookclub](https://twitter.com/susansbookclub)

[2]: [http://www.susansbookclub.com/](http://www.susansbookclub.com/)

[3]: [https://www.amazon.com/Susan- Fowler/e/B01L8LPRWK](https://www.amazon.com/Susan-Fowler/e/B01L8LPRWK)

<comment><USER31> It seems unwise to trot out "all press is good press" given the onslaught of bad (and objectively damaging) press that has gone Uber's way in the past week, which is to say nothing of the rest of your comment.

<comment><USER32> Somehow, even at scale, "all press is good press" still rings true for Uber, as "bad press" has a way of reaching an unaware, untapped market for them. Uber would regularly experience their largest spurts of user growth during times of "bad press". Taxi protest in the UK? Record numbers across the board in Europe that week. Driver accidentally kill a child? Millions download the app to see what that's all about. Best yet is when a metro's city council poo- poo's Uber's model or regulations, you'll see record growth in that city based off of local news, and now Uber has a localized movement of riders they can lobby to campaign for Uber against the city council. There's a playbook for that.

The number of deletes rarely surpassed the number of signups during any given "PR crisis" or #delete campaign. Fowler wasn't the first time, and it won't be the last.</comment></comment></comment>


Reasons to turn down the transmit power of your Wi-Fi (2017) - <AUTHOR> https://metis.fi/en/2017/10/txpower/ <comment><USER2> This is what I did when running the WiFi at PyCon. For 5GHz we generally had enough channels that we could run higher power, but for 2.4GHz I would run it on the lowest power settings.

I'd also set the APs on the tables, rather than trying to elevate them, so that the bodies would limit propagation.

Whenever someone asked, which happened at least a couple times each conference, I explained it like this: Imagine you have 10 groups in the ballroom all trying to have discussions. Turning the power up is like giving each group a bullhorn: the whole room becomes a noisy mess. Lower power is like each group gathering close and talking at normal volume.

It worked well, mostly because the venue-provided wireless at the time were all trying the "few, big AP" solution.

More details are in a series of blog posts I did, starting with: [https://www.tummy.com/articles/pycon2007-network/](https://www.tummy.com/articles/pycon2007-network/)

<comment><USER3> Random question then. In your experience, do people who set up the conference halls the nation over understand physics (geometry and logic, really).

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I've heard at tech conferences like CCC instead of using a few big powerful AP's at central and high locations, they put lower power units in between the audience's seats. Humans, as water bags, are good at dampening signals. So you end up with a lot of small networks cells with high throughput, that don't interfere with each other. Compared to the few big central cells where thousands of devices are fighting for the same frequency slots.

<comment><USER5> Yep I think this is a very good idea too. It is a way of reusing existing spectrum space. Besides small cell networks use low powers and being portable they can deployed on demand.

In fact small cell networks might be how the networks are deployed in future. Website below has some interesting research on this topic

[https://www.smallcellforum.org/](https://www.smallcellforum.org/)

<comment><USER6> Very interesting work.

One unintended side effect of this is that tracking becomes incredibly precise.

Well, to be fair wifi tracking was already fairly precise but soon cellular tracking will have similar granularity:

[https://www.fastcompany.com/90314058/5g-means-youll-have- to-...](https://www.fastcompany.com/90314058/5g-means-youll-have-to-say- goodbye-to-your-location-privacy)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Best thing I did was wire my house with cat6, so my TV, computer, server, security cam, nas and printer are all wired. Its so worth the effort. Wifi is now for a rarely used laptop and phones.

<comment><USER8> Don't forget Ethernet over Power... works great on some houses and you don't need to lay out cables. But if you can nothing beats wiring the hole house.

<comment><USER9> In my experience this works worse in newer houses with modern (more complex, less transparent) electrical systems, and at best you get sub-WiFi speeds.

You have little to lose by _trying_ , but there's no guarantee it will work at all, even less work well.

<comment><USER10> I have a very old house and it works well for me.

I think you do best to have just two stations in a powerline network situation because the contention and overhead of contention control is much less. (Compare that to gigabit ethernet which is full duplex and switched so there is little or no contention)

You can connect a "distant" powerline NIC to an ethernet switch and plug multiple devices into that if they are close together, that works better than plugging in multiple powerline NICs.

Unfortunately new houses have circuit breakers that detect broadband noise caused by arcing. These are good for catching fires early, but will blow if you use powerline NICs.

<comment><USER11> I have an older house that has been expanded several times, with some rather amateurish wiring. One outlet works, the one next to it doesn't. Slow speed, interruptions that require resets...

Google wifi pucks work much better, in spite of the cinder block walls.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> What about all the wifi direct printers?

Inside my house, on 1/3 of an acre (so not up against neighbors), the strongest 2.4GHz signals I see are from 2-3 HP printers in houses around me. This includes my own 2 Ubiquity APs that are inside my house.

I even noticed that I have a device screaming on 5GHz .. an Nvidia Shield. AFAICT, I cannot turn that off, even if I disable wifi.

I hate wifi direct.

<comment><USER13> One of my clients has a Wemo light switch that is stuck blasting its wifi on what must be illegal levels of power, as I can pick it up through two brick walls, across the street, and in another home(!).

Also, none of the other devices that share the same room as the dimmer can use anything on the 2.4GHz spectrum. It's almost impressive how effective a jammer it is.

<comment><USER14> >Also, none of the other devices that share the same room as the dimmer can use anything on the 2.4GHz spectrum. It's almost impressive how effective a jammer it is.

If it's really as bad as you say it is, you need to report it to the FCC (or other local governing body)

<comment><USER13> I'll be ripping all of the wemo devices out next week. Then I'll be able to test if it's a one-off, or if they really are that far out of compliance.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Can't this be fixed with smarter software in the AP that can:

* Dynamically adjust the power level to match the furthest client

* Boost the power level on an interval to check if there are clients further away waiting to connect

Additionally, what do mesh Wi-Fi networks do when clients are holding onto a connection? Are they smart enough to know that another node has a stronger signal to the client and trigger a disconnect from the clients' current node so that the it can associate with the stronger node?

<comment><USER16> We can do better than that - beamforming. Better 802.11ac routers use a phased antenna array to change their radiation pattern, steering the RF energy in the desired direction.

[https://www.oreilly.com/library/view/80211ac-a- survival/9781...](https://www.oreilly.com/library/view/80211ac-a- survival/9781449357702/ch04.html)

<comment><USER17> Heh, eventually the tech changes enough that the "wifi router" misnomer might become correct.

<comment><USER18> To be fair a lot of people only have a cable box (one ethernet port) and plug everything into their wifi router, which is also the DHCP server, firewall, etc.

I'd guess this is the most common setup for residences, it requires next to no technical skill other then plugging in the cables. Should definitely count as a router here no?

<comment><USER19> That's also what I do.

Not that I lack the technical skills to do otherwise, but my ISP's router works remarkably well (biband 802.11ac, IPv6, no packet loss, 4 ethernet ports, ...), so it's all I need.

And if I have a weird issue, that's a single device that I need to reboot (and I can even do it remotely).

<comment><USER18> Same situation for me too. I've done a bunch of networking stuff before with pfsense and plan to again, but I just moved and wanted something working. And it works great!

To be honest it's all _most_ residences need, even if you're a technical person. Half of common home devices (xbox, printers, laptops, etc) have wifi, so for most people 4 ethernet ports is all you need(if any). It's almost 0 setup other then changing the passwords, and it works.

The only reason why it wouldn't work for you is if you have many wired devices, or want to get into the networking stuff.

<comment> frosted-flakes I'm going to go out on a limb and say that most people don't need _any_ ethernet ports. Most people just have a phone and maybe a laptop, tablet, printer, or smart television, all of which function perfectly adequately over wireless.

Even I don't bother with ethernet. There's no point; with <10 Mbps Internet speeds, too slow is too slow. The only thing plugged into the router is a second router for the detached garage/shop. Occasionally, there's need to transfer large files between two computers (games which can take multiple days to download), but temporarily stringing an ethernet cable directly between them does the trick.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> > The bidirectional connection is symmetrical. It doesn't matter if the AP has > a better antenna or is located higher up. The antennas and amplifiers work > symmetrically in both directions.

It does matter if antenna is located higher up. This will allow it to pickup weaker signal from clients. Better antenna is also probably more sensitive.

<comment><USER21> Yeah, that sticks out like a sore thumb in an otherwise accurate article. Antennas have a certain radiation pattern for transmitting, but there is also improved reception in the directions it radiates strongly in.

With wifi, there is usually little you can do since you probably want a spherical radiation pattern, which prevents you from getting any significant gain over a perfect isotropic radiator, but that's a different story.

<comment><USER22> Spherical -> Toroidal

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> While I generally agree with this article, and turned down the transmit power on my AP in my apartment to be neighborly, coordinating this across the many APs present in a residential area is tricky. In my experience, many of your neighbors are going to be running either the stock AP provided by the ISP, or some "gaming class" thing that advertises _very_ optimistic speeds. In either case, you're going to be fighting with stock firmware. And it seems to me that the stock firmware of most consumer-grade APs doesn't expose options like channel assignment or Tx power, not even behind a secret advanced settings page with a big scary "You will void your warranty" header. To compare the stock firmware on most consumer-grade APs to a dumpster fire is to commit a gross and unjustifiable insult to dumpster fires.

When I tried to coordinate better channel assignment and transmit power with my neighbors in my apartment complex, the effort very quickly died for the reasons above. Most neighbors didn't know or care about the settings on the magic box that made their Netflix or Xbox work, and even if they did, the config options simply weren't there.

I wish there were more I could do to change this situation. As it is, all I can do is vote with my wallet and buy less horrible brands like Ubquiti, where advanced options like channel assignment and Tx power are available to me if I want them.

<comment><USER24> I get a higher signal strength from my neighbor's Xfinity/Pegatron than my own access point on max power.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> The roaming point is very interesting - I do have a problem with devices 'hanging on' to the wrong AP in my home. I'm gonna try it!

<comment><USER26> Another few possibilities for this which were not mentioned in the article:

* Check that all your APs are broadcasting the same name. No devices I know of will naturally roam to an AP with a different name.

* Check that all your APs are broadcasting identical security features (e.g. WPA1, WPA2, WPA1 or WPA2 .. as well as the encryption methods like TKIP, AES/CCMP, etc). Many devices will check these too, and roam only to matching APs.

<comment><USER27> Some devices also have a AP priority list, it's worth checking out if they can be modified (e.g. like on macOS).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> Decades into the future I will be an old man screaming that wireless will never replace wired networking while some insane people have come up with real-world 10 Gbps wi-fi connections. The realities of wireless communications don't seem to have changed much since the early days of wi-fi at 802.11b and prior and while wired networking has somewhat hit a wall for consumers in the datacenter it's still kicking ass and taking names at 400 Gbps and software is among the bigger limitations than the hardware.

</comment><comment><USER5> 2.4ghz also has 3 non overlapping channels (iirc). Most people use the default channel of their WiFi so if you choose a different channel you can get a better signal at a lower power.

Edit

If you want low coverage area it would also not be such a bad idea to use the 5ghz frequency if your router supports it. Much less crowded shorter range by default and higher speeds

<comment><USER29> WiFi routers will hop to less congested channels automatically these days; the odds that your neighbourhood has lots of WiFi base stations you can see, but there is still a frequency that's almost entirely free is _very_ low.

<comment><USER30> There are effectively three 2.4 GHz channels and about six 5 GHz channels, but because the range of 5 GHz is so much smaller you should be able to find on open 5 GHz channel even in the densest, tech heavy, apartment building.

As the author said in the comment section: "I usually suggest turning 2.4 GHz off altogether so none of your users will ever connect to it by accident."

As for AP's sharing channels, this is great in concept but our (3 unit) building became so overcrowded in the 2.4 GHz spectrum that devices couldn't connect which caused people to add more routers and repeaters to "boost" the signal making it even worse. If you can't connect, you can't share.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> Another solution for the 2.4GHz range and if you have a slightly more advanced router: switch to channels 12 and 13 in low-powered mode. In the US you'll be operating on channels that I would suspect 99% of APs don't operate in by default. Channel 14 is only allowed in Japan - illegal in USA.

</comment><comment><USER32> I was just thinking about this. My idea was to have the power low enough so that WIFI is restricted to a very small area of the house. It would be like a smoking area, except it would be for WIFI usage. For personal application, I wanted to create a WIFI-free zone for the family in the living room and other common area, so that we're less distracted, while we have WIFI in the other parts of the house. Of course, we still get 4G signal, but it is very weak where I live, and we are also on pre-pay plan on Tracfone so we are discouraged from using data on 4G.

</comment><comment><USER33> The article proposes reasons such as interference and generally being nice to neighbours. I actually do this just to reduce RF radiation at microwave frequency in my environment due to potential long term health consequences. Research on this has lot of contradiction with most governments saying there is no impact but some saying there is adverse health effects due to long term RF exposure. Why to take chance when you don't have to?

</comment><comment><USER34> Someone should create an app that detects wifi APs that are transmitting at high power so you can track them down.

It would be super useful for someone like me where there are dozens of different APs in an apartment building all competing with each other. Then I could kindly go to my neighbor and ask/assist them in turning theirs down.

<comment><USER35> I've used this one before, and it does a good job: [https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.farproc.wi...](https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.farproc.wifi.analyzer&hl=en_US)

It's great for finding unused channels for your AP.

</comment></comment><comment> amiga-workbench I've got 4 Unifi AP's spread around the office and turning the transmit power down has solved the issue of clingy MacBooks not migrating to the closest AP as people move between rooms.

</comment><comment><USER36> I tried to explain to Battlemeshers that they should tune down their radios to 1dbm. They kept the settings to "auto" or to 18dbm.

</comment><comment><USER37> "It doesn't matter if the AP has a better antenna or is located higher up." Why is this?

</comment><comment><USER38> But my neighbor is a jackass that reports my garbage cans to the HOA all the time. I ain't turning down shiiiat.

<comment><USER39> You couldn't pay me enough to live in an HoA. They should be illegal. Land is scarce enough already without those mobs ruining so much of it. If my neighbor wants to cover their lawn in rusted cars and paint their house pink so be it.

I've heard if you install a giant ham radio tower they're not legally allowed to do anything about it. Any little bit of sticking it to those organizations is a good thing.

<comment><USER35> A good reason why, at least in Houston, is no zoning. I had a friend who had every area outside the HOA taken over and covered with office buildings, apartment complexes, etc. by stupid MetroNational. There's now a very abrupt line between the all residential pocket and the towers, mall, etc.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER40> Yes, please do this!

</comment><comment><USER41> Many of those depend on all of your neighbours doing the same thing. They won't, so you'll be the loser. I don't want to be the loser.

<comment><USER42> Exactly, and they all have the crappy Comcast combo which advertises the extra XFINITY AP that I don't think you can turn off. As a Comcast customer, I have _NEVER_ been able to connect to that and get data. 2.4 ghz is a sh!tshow and everyone is just spamming it with more and more noise.

<comment><USER30> Don't pay the $10 monthly fee to rent a Comcast cable modem and instead buy your own cable modem and router for $110. Side benefit: no extraneous Xfinity AP clogging up your precious wifi bandwidth.

<comment><USER42> Yeah, I don't but literally all the neighbors do.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER43> Just use 5G mode.

<comment><USER44> In a suburb sure but apartment 5 is often more crowded than suburb 2.4.I can't wait for 6 to open up...

<comment><USER43> I can't fathom the situation you described since 5.8GHz has far more unoverlapped channels instead of just 3.

<comment><USER30> He said "apartment 5 is often more crowded than suburb 2.4"

2.4 is unusable in an apartment building because the range is so great. I live in a 3 unit so I am happy with my 5 Ghz but in a very dense building I could see problems.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER45> Aren't there also possible health considerations with running 5G as well? I feel like there is some preliminary data that its not good to be sitting in a bath of 5G all day long. Can someone comment?

<comment><USER46> maybe?

but first I'd like to identify the mode of harm. How would this low-energy, non-ionising radiation present a biological impact?

The theories I've heard (induced currents in the dna base stack? magnetic stimulation of cryptochrome that modulates intracellular reactive oxygen species?) describe very rare, unlikely and low (negligible?) impact.

I am open to the theory of hypersensitivity, however I've never found anyone who suffers it.

<comment><USER47> [https://europaem.eu/attachments/article/131/2018-04_EU- EMF20...](https://europaem.eu/attachments/article/131/2018-04_EU- EMF2018-5US.pdf)

These studies indicate a mechanism of EMF stimulation on voltage-gated ca++ channels.

Personally, I've never noticed issues with RF-EMF until I tested my sleep using the oura ring. WiFi didn't seem to bother my sleep but shutting off the power to my bedroom at the breaker improved my sleep tremendously. Even if their effects on sleep are small, the negative, non-linear health impact of sleep loss is significant...to me.

Maybe in 20 years we'll view EMFs akin to cigarettes, maybe not. I'm not wearing a tinfoil hat just yet but it has changed the way I intreact with these non-native frequencies. It seems prudent to take simple precautions like avoiding microwave use, utilizing airplane mode and turning off/unplugging appliances, lights and WiFi when not in use.</comment></comment></comment>