Steam Controller - <AUTHOR> http://store.steampowered.com/livingroom/SteamController/ <comment><USER2> I got to hold one of these a few months ago. It's solid. The ergonomics are there. The same designer[1] was previously at {one of the other three very large gaming console manufacturers} and knows a thing or two about controllers. My understanding is it will be significantly more accurate than traditional joysticks and competitive with a mouse (with a mouse you have a single 'large' plane of motion, with this, you have two smaller independent planes for each thumb). For FPS's it will really shine, but keep in mind that Valve also makes DOTA2 so I'm sure they're more than aware of the need to make this work across genres.

For Valve to bring PC gaming to your TV/Couch, they really needed to nail the interface. I imagine they have spent many iterations on the problem, and I am very excited to see the fruits of their labor.

[1] Full disclosure, by some odd coincidence she happens to be my sister and also did the industrial design for Lockitron so I am wayy biased here.

<comment><USER3> I don't see how my right thumb could be as precise as moving the mouse, which I do with all 5 of my fingers (for tiny movements) or from my shoulder (for larger movements). If thumb touchpads were good for FPS games, how come nobody is playing them with their thumb on their laptop's touchpad? Maybe I'm just old, but I don't see myself ever being able to use this.

<comment><USER4> Long time users of trackball mice will disagree with you

[http://mobile.logitech.com/en-us/mice- pointers/trackballs](http://mobile.logitech.com/en-us/mice- pointers/trackballs)

<comment><USER5> Using Counter Strike as the flag ship FPS for Valve there currently aren't any professional players using a trackball: [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?key=0AkghPvIh7ZVwdGZ...](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?key=0AkghPvIh7ZVwdGZ3WXE0dDlTdk5rT1ZKZm91VXVzREE&output=html)

<comment><USER6> As a trackball heavy user (i use both thumb and index ones, with both hands) I avoid playing FPS without a mouse!

the thumbs trackball is more precise. But still not good. A good and cheap microsoft mouse is always with me when i'm playing FPSs.

Also, even if the control wasn't an issue, no trackball has more than 300DPI. EVER. The minimum for mouses is 400. I don't know why that is. But even the overly expensive Kensington ones are crappy even to click on a 10x10 button on regular usage, let alone to headshot in a FPS.

<comment><USER7> I wholeheartedly agree that trackballs suck for FPS games, but most pro FPS players advocate keeping the mouse at a fairly low DPI, so that deficiency isn't really the problem.

I have trouble believing that any device that relies on thumb-only input is going to be anywhere near as good as a mouse, but I hope I'm proven wrong.

<comment><USER8> Trackballs really aren't _that_ terrible for precision in FPS. Not pro level, but heckuva lot better than the joystick control consoles currently use. I found I had a harder time in StarCraft than I did in UT2K4, but both were quite playable.

I used a Logitech Trackman for seven years, and the biggest issue was that the force required to move the ball around wasn't constant; it would vary depending on how gunked up the little rollers inside had gotten. I had to clean mine out every day to keep it smooth.

<comment><USER7> If a person prefers using a trackball, that's great, but when the same tools used by the pros costs about $50, there isn't really any other reason to use anything else.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I'm actually pretty optimistic about this. It's a big divergence from current couch input schemes, and the open nature of it might mean that it'll be improved for ergonomics and whatnot. It's got some interesting promise.

Best of all, worst case, I can fall back to my trusty 360 controllers and use those without a hitch, so even if this is a disaster, it doesn't sink the platform (as can be the case with other platforms)

<comment><USER10> I would say I am optimistic as well because, having been a dedicated "Big Picture" user for the past few months, it is clear Valve has put a lot of thought into this transition. However, what bothered me about the controller is that it doesn't seem to actually be that different.

I don't see how this markedly improves over current controllers and their integration. The key genres for which the current controllers don't work, such as RTS, don't seem to be that much better off with this solution. Maybe its just a lack of imagination on my part, but I will have to see more to be convinced.

<comment><USER11> It sounds to me like you would be able to use the trackpad regions as either "joysticks" or "trackpads" which means for an RTS game you would be no worse off than using a trackpad over a mouse. Other games might be better using them as joysticks where the input re-centers if you lift up from the control surface. Seems like a pretty big improvement over traditional controllers without any significant downsides.

<comment><USER12> > which means for an RTS game you would be no worse off than using a trackpad > over a mouse.

Just about anyone who plays RTSs would agree that trackpads are completely unacceptable for input. For a game like SC2, you might as well not even play, because you would be lose so badly at against anyone at a similar skill level.

<comment><USER13> I figure they're trying to be optimistc about it... it might not measure up to a mouse, of course, but either way it's a huge improvement. This device will get you from "this is completely unplayable" to "hey I can get through the single-player campaign and maybe do some co-op comp-stomping with my buds"

<comment><USER14> Exactly. They could even allow an option for only matching you with people with similar control configs for some games.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> _" Steam gamers, who are used to the input associated with PCs, will appreciate that the Steam Controller's resolution approaches that of a desktop mouse."_

[...]

 _" The Steam Controller is built around a new generation of super-precise haptic feedback, employing dual linear resonant actuators. These small, strong, weighted electro-magnets are attached to each of the dual trackpads."_

Wow.

It sounds as though they have managed to combine mouse-like precision with the simulated, tactile feel of a physical, analog stick. I suspect that there will be user-defined settings, so that you can set the precision of the tracking, allowing you to achieve the perfect "free look" (a.k.a. mouse look) and standard character movement, based on how much pressure you tend to personally (and independently) apply to each surface.

That is _very_ compelling.

<comment><USER16> How would one play something like Street Fighter with this controller, the button placement seems like it wouldn't allow for a good experience with fighters or even platformers.

<comment><USER17> I'm not entirely sure it's been designed with games like that in mind. I imagine the expectation is you use another pad (e.g Xbox controller) for a game like Street Fighter - or in that case, ideally an arcade stick.

<comment><USER18> That is not true, it's designed for you to be able to modify the controls.

<comment><USER19> Just because you can modify the controls doesn't mean it's a good controller for all use cases.

For example, it would be very difficult to do an ultra move in Street Fighter IV on one of these pads -- i.e., quarter-circle-forward x 2 (LP + MP + HP). A standard d-pad with tactile buttons is much more precise.

<comment><USER20> How about mapping the triggers to LP/MP/HP and what you would normally have on the triggers to the right trackpad?

<comment><USER19> Might work for some people, but I'm personally used to using a fighting gamepad that has six face buttons in the standard 'Capcom' orientation.

People who learned Capcom fighting games on normal pads are usually OK with triggers, but I learned on a stick, so using the triggers goes against my muscle memory as I still use a stick regularly as well. My fighting pad, however, is much more portable than my stick.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> I'm skeptical that the trackpads will provide the same precision feel that a good analog stick can do, even with the haptics.

But I'm _not_ going to count it out. I'll reserve all judgement until I get to try it. And that's the only real sticking point for me on this announcement; everything else about this controller I love.

<comment><USER22> Laptops all moved from nipples to trackpads a long time ago, surely if analog sticks could provide higher resolution then that wouldn't have happened, or there would have been a move back?

<comment><USER23> Not _all_. Lenovo still provides eraser nub-style pointers on many models. I personally find them to be more accurate at high speeds than a touchpad.

I actually have no idea how people can use touchpads. You need a huge one to be able to go corner-to-corner in one swipe and still have reasonable accuracy.

<comment><USER24> I hate touchpads. I use an external mouse with my Macbook. I have a Dell D830 with the nub pointer and it was so much easier to use, especially considering that you don't have to remove your hands from the keyboard and your finger doesn't need to cross 3 inches of space to move across the screen.

<comment><USER25> I've always been confused by this argument. I can reach my trackpad with my right thumb without moving any of my other fingers off of the home row. Is this an unusual amount of flexibility?

<comment><USER26> I don't think most people use trackpads with their thumbs.

<comment><USER27> This is one of those use cases that I'd be interested in seeing some research on. Personally, it depends a great deal on what I am doing, but I often use my thumbs to do minor navigations when within a document. Particularly because I have some RSI issues and using my thumb seems to less of an aggravation. Milage, I'm sure, varies, but I suspect that there is a subset of folks that at least use their thumbs a bit.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> The bigger story for me is that Valve has managed to once again troll its fans with a "3" announcement. This is starting to have flavours of Stockholm Syndrome.

<comment><USER29> In their defense, while having 3 things to announce, they did "number" them "O", "[O ]" and "O+O", none of which look like a 3...

<comment><USER28> Nothing to defend; I think it's hilarious. Although I do think it would make sense to announce HL3 for the Steam Machine on launch day.

<comment><USER30> If they wanted a launch title that would drag in the biggest market, I reckon Left 4 Dead 3 or Portal 3 would pull in more people (both had large mass media marketing campaigns and are more recent). Or hey, all three ;)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> ... HN ate my post, I think.

I am super-excited for this. Finally a way to bring FPS (without aim-assist) and RTS games into the living room. I don't even care about the OS and the box itself, I crave this device. Even if it doesn't measure up to a mouse, it will still be a massive improvement over the traditional thumbstick for pointing- device-oriented games.

My only disappointment is that I wish they'd added a scrollwheel to the right shoulder. Then we'd have a full mouse control-set in your right hand. The scrollwheel is nice for zooming and panning in RTS games.

<comment><USER31> They could make the trackpads modal (without changing the hw). So you could hold down left bumper and track left to right (or up/down) to have fine grained control of zoom.

Only drawback of this is you couldn't control zoom and view at the same time (which I guess FPS pro's do, but mere mortals like me don't).

<comment><USER13> Yup. Especially since I just discovered on closer reading that they've got a hidden 3rd shoulder-button-set on the back. They could easily make "R3+Drag" as scroll.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> I've been waiting years for someone to build a controller like this.

Somehow, I never actually imagined two trackpads – my concept had always been a D-pad on the left and a trackpad on the right, mimicking the traditional mouse-and-keyboard setup of the PC first-person shooter, but this makes far more sense and allows for much more flexible repurposing of controls to different games (as well as letting left-handed gamers flip their controls).

This is, at last, the controller for FPS games, and more importantly, for the next generation of non-shooter first-person games. It's amazing to see the horrified backlash in the comments sections on gaming sites right now: People just don't get that this isn't for the button-heavy games they already play; it enables new interactions with new kinds of environment-based experiences.

I wasn't particularly interested in any of Valve's announcements earlier this week, but they certainly have my attention now.

</comment><comment><USER33>
        > The Steam Community can use the configuration tool to create and share bindings
        > for their favorite games. Players can choose from a list of the most popular
        > configurations.

Finally, some real innovation for the "default controls" experience in games after 10+ years. Very nice. Instead of hard-coded controls that the devs put in, you'll start with a community-upvoted scheme that can evolve and get better over time.

</comment><comment><USER34> I've played some FPS games with a trackpad for lack of having a mouse available, and on a larger, higher precision one (e.g., Macbook size) it was not a bad experience at all. You can move a finger a lot faster than a whole arm. Reflex high-res motion at the pro Counter-Strike level isn't likely, but for the casual gamer, trackpad FPS control absolutely seemed plausible. So I believe this kind of input will work for many games that need pointing, and I also believe it will solidly outpace analog sticks for FPS games.

The Halo two-analog-stick model that has taken over the genre was always awkward and imprecise compared to keyboard/mouse (probably most of the skill in Halo was simply getting used to the stick dead zones and the acceleration/deceleration of the look field). I will be happy to see it fade away.

<comment><USER35> > _You can move a finger a lot faster than a whole arm._

If you're moving your arm to move your mouse, there is probably something wrong with your mouse.

<comment><USER36> _If you 're moving your arm to move your mouse_

IIRC I've always been old that I _should_ move my whole arm with the mouse. The idea being that it's a small movement for your elbow/shoulder but a much larger movement for you wrist so you can avoid wrist injuries by moving your whole arm.

<comment><USER35> Ideally you move your fingers, not your arm or wrist. Realistically though, nobody is playing games by moving their arm, even if that is perhaps what you are suppose to do.

I mean, those same ergonomics guides also tell you to keep your back straight and your feet flat on the floor in front of you. How many people do that?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> Ok, that's it, if this controller works then I'm in. I played Portal with my wife, and she loved it, but she's too afraid of the whole mouse+keyboard control system so in the end she let me play while she just watched. I think she can more easily learn a controller like this.

Also, I frickin' hate analog sticks for controlling shooters. After having been a semi-serious CS player, I just can't bring my self to enjoying my severely crippled aiming on consoles, it just takes 50% of the fun out.

<comment><USER30> Have you checked out Portal 2? It has co-op and decent controller support, I played through the co-op campaign for a second time with a 360 controller last week (used keyboard + mouse the first time).

</comment></comment><comment><USER38> Are those buttons on the _back_ of the controller? I'd be ecstatic if that's the case. I've always suspected that having buttons on the back would allow for a more natural grip than shunting buttons onto the shoulders. It may have made sense for the SNES' flat bone controller, but not in the age of controllers with thick, ergonomic palm grips.

<comment><USER39> I'd say so. If you look at the sample Portal 2 Bindings [1] the labels on the bottom seem to pointing underneath the controller and in the disassembly image [2] there seems to be another button-looking piece in front of the bottom portion.

[1]: [http://cdn2.store.steampowered.com/public/images/promo/livin...](http://cdn2.store.steampowered.com/public/images/promo/livingroom/rljKewyz3M/controller_bindings.jpg?v=2) [2]: [http://cdn2.store.steampowered.com/public/images/promo/livin...](http://cdn2.store.steampowered.com/public/images/promo/livingroom/rljKewyz3M/controller_parts.jpg?v=2)

</comment></comment><comment><USER40> I think that it is obvious that this dual track pad solution could be a good move for any game style which currently uses dual analog sticks (FPS and 3rd person, etc).

As others have already mentioned, it is less obvious whether this will be a good solution for platformers and fighting games. But with a bit of quick pondering I suspect it could open up a huge range of options for any developer who wants to try and step outside the normal "the player will use combinations of button presses to trigger actions".

For example, a platformer which rather than using a "tap button to trigger a small jump" and "long press button for a larger jump" we could not only see a "small up scroll = small jump" and "long up scroll = large jump" input method, but also a "slow up scroll = slower jump" and "fast up scroll = faster, more explosive jump".

Fighting games could also open up a lot of depth based on the length and speed of right hand strokes, not to mention the variety of angles and rotations which could be made.

The more I ponder it, the more I'm hopeful.

<comment><USER13> Remember that the track-pads are clickable like a face button, and it sports 2 shoulders and a 3rd pseudo-shoulder in the back-button on each side. That means that for a fighting-game you've got a full suite of buttons available to you. That's 9 buttons available assuming you keep your left thumb glued to the trackpad. Buttons are not in short supply.

The real question is how well the track-pad works as a D-pad. For Mario-style games that primarily use left and right but don't do much up and down? Should work fine.

For a Capcom-style fighting game with its elaborate rolls and whatnot, or the hyper-precise of a shmup? That's the real question.

<comment><USER19> >> For a Capcom-style fighting game with its elaborate rolls and whatnot, or the hyper-precise of a shmup? That's the real question.

Fortunately there are gazillions of USB controllers out there that will probably work out of the box with the Steam Machine. Many of the BT controllers will probably work too.

I find the Steam Controller interesting because it's the first console-type controller I've seen that might actually do a good job satisfying people coming from the PC gaming world.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER41> Interesting. Game controllers are a fascinating user experience design challenge. While Playstation and Xbox controllers are fairly well-polished functional workhorses, I appreciate companies (like Nintendo and, now, Valve) pushing the envelope.

More than even the games (which, I suspect, will also mostly be available on other consoles or PCs), this intrigues me enough to want to get a Steam Machine. (Still, though -- that's a bit of a cumbersome name.)

<comment><USER42> Just call it a "Machine".

<comment><USER43> try to google the price for "Machine"

<comment><USER44> Valve has a high page-rank for "Steam", what makes you think that they can't also co-opt "Machine"?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER45> Call me impressed. I never thought that the biggest innovator and risk taker in the console market would be valve. All the other manufacturers have basically made their platforms "safe" and they're pretty much like the last generation, but this is pretty ballsy from valve.

<comment><USER24> Speaking on innovation, the Xbox 360 came out with a brand new controller, but the Xbox One has practically the same controller? It's like they didn't take any time to re-evaluate the controller with the new console.

For that matter, the PS4 controller is the same except with a small touchpad in the middle.

<comment><USER46> In their defense the 360's controller is considered an amazing controller already, so I understand them only making incremental improvements.

<comment><USER47> That's really the larger point here. The 360 controller is the standard now, trying to improve upon it when the market is already flooded with that style controller would be a losing battle for Valve. They decided to take a risk and innovate, but it was pretty much their only viable option if they wanted to enter the controller market.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER48> I love how Valve is making me say "I want a Steam machine!" in 2013.

<comment><USER49> So Steampunk.

</comment></comment><comment><USER50> This looks absolutely fantastic, but it's a bit of a shame that they will only be distributing them with the 300 beta kits. It would be nice if they could get more of them out into the wild so people can actually hold one and see how it feels. The only thing I cared about at E3 this year was seeing how the PS4 and Xbox One controllers actually felt in use.

It's interesting that they seem to have designed it largely to be used with existing game designs and input requirements in mind, but they've also made something that can create totally new input patterns and uses. The clickable joysticks on the playstation and xbox controllers were sadly never fully usable by designers because they don't work in a scenario where you want the player to click and hold but still be able to navigate with the stick. Obviously the haptic trackpad solves the click and drag to select mechanism that an RTS demands, but think of all of the other things that a click, hold and drag might be able to do in something like a boxing game, an FPS, a shmup (dual stick ikaruga on one pad with a game designed for it?) or even something like QWOP.

I really hope they make this available to more people.

</comment><comment><USER13> "Including two on the back"

Holy crap wait what? Not highlighted in any of the diagrams but visible in the teardown graphic, there's an extra pair of buttons on the back in ring-finger position too. They said 16 buttons, so it's two front touchpad/buttons, 1 front screen/button, 3 nav-buttons (the bars along the bottom) 4 face-buttons (a/b/x/y) 4 shoulder-buttons and 2 hidden back-side buttons.

<comment><USER51> 16 "buttons" is what we have on current gen console controllers. The 360 has four shoulder buttons, A, B, X, Y, D-pad, start, select and click functionality on both analogue sticks. Some games (GTA V) come close to using all of them.

<comment><USER13> Yeah. In the typical twin-stick usage, this thing is missing one button on each side - it's got an extra shoulder button on each side (the ones on the back) but in the place of the 4 right face buttons and the left D-pad it's got 2 face buttons on each side.

Realistically, the other 4 buttons (the 3 bars on the bottom and the touch- screen) don't map to normal gameplay buttons, whereas a Sony/XBox gamepad will only have two of those "non-gameplay" buttons.

So technically, this thing has 2 fewer "gameplay buttons" than a typical controller. But it has a touchscreen, and you can put a lot of the low- reflexes stuff in there.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER52> This is huge. Consider that first person shooters are the largest genre in the livingroom gaming space, and then consider this controller may change how these games are made and played. Other consoles are locked into a thumbstick system for the next 10 years. How big this is will come down to how the controller works and feels, obviously, but it could be just massive.

<comment><USER42> I think the reason that using mouse is more precise is not because of its shape, but because we use at least all of our palm to use it while with controllers you only have one thumb to connect the stick with your body.

<comment><USER53> I disagree. I think the reason is more fundamental: with a mouse, you're doing a direct translation (distance in pad → distance on screen), while with a gamepad you're doing an indirect translation (distance in stick → _velocity_ in screen).

This is harder, because you're essentially forced to calculate (in a low conscious way, of course) distance/speed to know for how much time you should turn the stick.

<comment><USER54> This isn't true. With a mouse you have acceleration settings that greatly change how distance works. Flick your mouse up quick vs slowly move it and measure how much distance you've moved your mouse relative to where your mouse moved to on the screen.

<comment><USER55> For any high-dpi mouse this is not useful and not used even in ordinary windows/mac mode (is it really turned on by default? ugh..); and I've never seen it used in games.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER56> I have to say, the biggest letdown for the next-gen consoles was the complete lack of haptic feedback. It's 2013, and while I welcome better graphics, they won't be enough to give immersion (still not even close to real life-like). Haptic feedback can be, in my opinion, a huge factor both in immersion and gameplay mechanics.

<comment><USER49> Hopefully this announcement will push Sony and Microsoft in the right direction, they can always come out with a controller redesign after the consoles are released.

</comment></comment><comment><USER57> "...gamers, who are used to the input associated with PCs, will appreciate that the Steam Controller's resolution approaches that of a desktop mouse."

Initially, I scoffed at this design ("Of course it's not as good as a mouse for FPS games!), but then I thought about it. Traditional gamepads aren't just a little bit worse than mice for FPS's. They're utter _shit_. You have to completely rebalance a FPS for gamepad users because they're so clumsy compared to a mouse&keyboard user. Still, gamepads are ergonomically fantastic for what they're designed for. Sitting on a couch, surrounded by buddies, they can't be beat for comfort and compactness.

Trackpads are a lot better than gamepads for precision control, but they're still inferior to mice. This is no surprise. A mouse is centered around a single (okay, sometimes two) point(s) of laser-powered high-precision optical sensing. A trackpad is a giant array of sensors that are trying to approximate your intent from where the center of a mushy blob of flesh is mashed up against it applying pressure. Multi-touch gesture commands can help compensate for this in many applications, but a FPS really demands a single, focused, high-quality stream of user input, and the mouse is still god, emperor, and _king_ when it comes to that!

This steam controller is intermediate between a joystick and a mouse, and Valve is being honest about it. It's not going to be as precise as a mouse, but it promises to be better than a joystick. Yeah, that sounds wishy-washy, but only until you consider just how long the joystick has been with us. We're talking about a method of input that hearkens back to the first automobiles ever built. It's a big honking lever for applying force to a mechanical steering apparatus! The joystick was not birthed out of the need for precision input, but rather, out of the necessity to amplify human strength. This controller, albeit an obvious evolution once you've seen it, is _genius_. If Valve succeeds in delivering it, all existing gamepads will be rendered obsolete. I don't know if the steambox will succeed because of this, but I know I'd rather use one of these than the XBox360 controller I (very) occasionally dust off to play console titles that have been (incompetently) ported to the PC!

Even if the steambox is an utter failure, I think this controller will be a runaway success. I know Gabe has a huge grudge against Microsoft over their app store, but both MS and Valve could benefit if steambox controller support was baked into the Xbox One. Ditto for Sony and the PS4. This controller could change the course of the console wars.

<comment><USER58> I don't understand the FPS debate. Do you know what's better for racing games?

[http://i.imgur.com/HYOmoQl.jpg](http://i.imgur.com/HYOmoQl.jpg) \- Racing Wheel and Pedals

Flying games?

[http://i.imgur.com/ejf4hPf.jpg](http://i.imgur.com/ejf4hPf.jpg) \- Joysticks

Fighting games?

[http://i.imgur.com/2lrevkG.jpg](http://i.imgur.com/2lrevkG.jpg) \- Arcade Sticks

There's one device that works best for every single game genre, and mouse and keyboard is that device for FPS games. Why do people expect one device to match the functionality of all of the above inputs. They're vastly different experiences, it's simply not going to happen. Controllers work great for action games, platformers, and overall, they're the best well rounded device. They're not designed to compete with the above controllers, they're a general input device, so they're not going to be as efficient as something built for a specific task.

If you're a hardcore FPS gamer, bring your mouse and keyboard into the living room, or play at your desk. This is no different than someone buying a wheel if they're into racing simulators.

I think Valve is achieving an even more well rounded device. By the sounds of things, it'll improve the FPS and RTS experience on a controller. It'll most likely make sacrifices to achieve that goal. For example, fighting games might work better on a more traditional controller. However, the Steam library has a much higher number of FPS and RTS games, so that trade off makes sense.

<comment><USER57> You forgot sword-play games, which could really benefit from a controller that hasn't hit market yet (see Clang and STEM).

All of these game genres exist on consoles, and all of them are most typically played with a game-pad. While specialist devices exist for most genres of games, the gamepad is the default generalist that plays them all. The steam controller promises to be a better generalist. Don't underestimate that.

<comment><USER59> What sword play games are there? The only ones I can think of off the top of my head are Red Steel, and Skyward Sword. And both were made in service of the wii.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER60> While I applaud Valve for marching in a new direction, I'll remain very skeptical until I've tried the controller myself. I doubt that the immediate feedback and precision of a traditional console controller can be emulated using trackpads, as advanced and "haptic" as they may be.

</comment><comment><USER61> This is very encouraging. There appears to be non-trivial innovation here and that has me excited. I too am interested in how the controller will handle fighting games. The haptic feedback seems particularly interesting because It seems possible that just maybe there could be an effect similar to the one described here: [http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2011-05/27/disney- tactil...](http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2011-05/27/disney-tactile- brush) that might allow fingers to "feel" as though there were buttons or edges or some similar effect. That might allow for a precise and traditionally intuitive fighting game experience as well as interesting new applications.

</comment><comment><USER62> Jesus. So I might finally end up playing the ridiculously huge Steam library I've accumulated over the years. Rad.

<comment><USER63> ^ this was my first thought when I saw the controller.

I'll probably build my own Steam box but I'll definitely be buying the Steam Controller. I think this is what they wanted us, the hardcore PC "gaming master race" to do, while at the same time offering it up to OEMs for consumption by the console folk.

<3 Gaben!

</comment></comment><comment><USER64> The trackpads look great. Hopefully they can deliver on the promise of making mouse and keyboard games more accessible on the tv console.

The Y and B buttons look difficult to press. Given the arc that your thumb travels on pivoting from the base of the controller handles, it may make sense to shift the buttons down and towards the center.

I would also consider removing the on-controller screen. It adds a big per- controller cost. Also, when have these been successful? Neither the Wii U nor the Dreamcast did this idea justice. Was it just bad implementation? I think its just a bad idea.

</comment><comment><USER65> >n order to avoid forcing players to divide their attention between screens, a critical feature of the Steam Controller comes from its deep integration with Steam. When a player touches the controller screen, its display is overlayed on top of the game they're playing, allowing the player to leave their attention squarely on the action, where it belongs.

OK, that solves that problem, so I agree with the decision, but why even have a screen on the controller then? Seems like an unnecessary added cost, when most players will never actually look at it.

</comment><comment><USER42> I don't know, this controller doesn't look like very comfortable for platforming/fighting/action games.

<comment><USER13> Realistically I think fans of those genres will be sticking to the current approach of using a PS3/XBox pad on their machine. Valve may have to sell a 1st-party knock-off of such a controller just for completeness.

This device is for Valve's massive library of PC games that need a keyboard and mouse that are normally unplayable in the living room (unless your living room includes a desk, in which case it's not really a living room now is it?)

</comment></comment><comment><USER66> While this might be a good replacement for console controllers, I seriously doubt that it will be successful in replacing keyboard and mouse for FPSes, RTSes, point-and-click adventures and other genres that currently make PC game market _interesting_. Which makes me sad. Valve is effectively turning its back on the games (and gamers) that allowed it succeed despite competition from consoles.

Personally, I am keenly interested in a better, more standardized and streamlined gaming PC, but I'm not at all interested in yet another game console with limited controls, centralized publisher model and locked down OS. (And please, don't insult your intelligence by saying something along the lines of "but you can always plug keyboard in". It's not a matter of what you plug into the system, it's a matter of what UI design the system encourages.)

<comment><USER13> wat?

That PC market is literally _the entire point of this device_. It's meant to get you mouse-like interactions on a handheld controller.

If you want to sit down on the sofa and play a PC-style game? It's this brand new gamepad concept or _nothing else_. There is nothing like this thing (well, except maybe that crazy alpha-grip thingy, but that's freaking weird).

<comment><USER66> _That PC market is literally the entire point of this device._ This controller will not help you play Dwarf Fortress or ArmA, and you won't be able to use it to comfortably play any complicated RTSes either (because those need keyboard shortcuts to be bearable).

<comment><USER13> So does TF2. So does DOTA2. Valve is going to be targeting that group, obviously. And unlike TF2, RTS games don't need the left touchpad to be a movement-stick - you could cram an assload of gesture-based stuff in there.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER67> The big star picture at [http://store.steampowered.com/livingroom/](http://store.steampowered.com/livingroom/) has gotten larger and brighter after every announcement. Some people on reddit are speculating that there will be a fourth announcement that comes out of the star.

<comment><USER68> Sadly, at the bottom of this announcement they say "What's next? We're done with our announcements." Which seems pretty definitive.

</comment></comment><comment><USER69> It seems like it would be hard to play fighting games where you have to hit combinations of buttons quickly.

<comment><USER70> Yep. Those kind of games were designed to map very closely to the physical nature of gamepads so they will be harder to use the further you diverge from a typical Playstation style controller.

</comment></comment><comment><USER71> I have some RSI problems in my left hand that prevent me from holding down WASD for movement in games. For the most part now I just play controller-based games, but there's plenty of PC games that don't support (or don't work well with) controllers.

I had thought for a long time that it'd be nice to have a one-handed analog stick controller for my left hand, covered in buttons on the back, coupled with a mouse. It would actually give me finer control over movement than a keyboard, but with the aiming capability of a mouse.

This device isn't exactly that, but I'm really interested in this device to see how it helps with my RSI when gaming. I'm also curious as to how the haptic feedback will work. Maybe I should sign up for that beta after all!

</comment><comment><USER72> I think it's great that Valve is innovating on controllers.

Personally, I won't buy one -- I don't intend on getting a steam machine so I'd only be using it with my computer anyway, and I don't think this will ever beat a keyboard/mouse in terms of practicality and ease of use.

But that aside, I'm glad they are at least trying to make a next-generation controller -- gives me hope there might one day be a controller I actually like. Though I'm not particularly hyped about the controller-specific features via API. For a game system that usually ranks accessibility very highly, the idea of device-tied game features strikes me as a somewhat regressive move, even if the features themselves are progressive.

<comment><USER73> Keyboard and mouse is terrible for sitting in front of a tv, so in that regard, this is compelling enough for me to play games while not sitting in a secluded office room desk hah

<comment><USER72> Yeah, I agree with you. I should have qualified what I said. I meant to say, "I'd only be using it with my computer anyway, and I don't think this will ever beat a keyboard/mouse in terms of practicality and ease of use _with a computer_ ". Agree that for a tv in the living room, or any environment where a large flat surface in front of you is impractical, that a keyboard/mouse is not so good.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER74> Suddenly, I see absolutely no reason to buy an XBox One (and I'm a traditional XBox fan boy)

</comment><comment><USER75> At first I thought Gabe should have said something earlier in the week stating "hardware announcements"

Then I realized how much mindshare the gaming community is giving a game that doesn't even exist a week after a game launches to the tune of a billion dollars.

The man is smart.

</comment><comment><USER76> It looks like it could work. I think I'd accidentally press the buttons on the back, though. Does anyone remember the SpaceOrb 360 [1]? I had one for a little while but returned it because it just didn't work as well for me as did a keyb/mouse combo. If microsoft won't match console gamers against PC gamers [2], how will steam pull it off?

[1] [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpaceOrb_360](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpaceOrb_360) [2] [http://www.rahulsood.com/2010/07/console-gamers-get- killed-a...](http://www.rahulsood.com/2010/07/console-gamers-get-killed- against-pc.html)

</comment><comment><USER77> Does anyone have further information on the "dual linear resonant actuators"?

</comment><comment><USER78> Multiple dual axis haptics is interesting. Also an absolute position touchpad for looking around could actually be the fastest way to look at a particular position. Plus an LCD. Very interesting. Definitely not just an also ran.

</comment><comment><USER42> [http://cdn3.store.steampowered.com/public/images/promo/livin...](http://cdn3.store.steampowered.com/public/images/promo/livingroom/rljKewyz3M/prototypes.jpg)

Looks effing comfy.

</comment><comment><USER79> Just wow. Awesome controller. count me in.

Compared with the traditional mouse-keyboard controller for FPS games, it easily surpasses the keyboard part as the movement controller. It may or may not have the precision of a mouse as pointing device. But with the haptics feedback, and the comfort of playing from the couch, I can see myself preferring it over a mouse.

The most interesting part, is that with this fresh, even innovative design, it looks capable of opening new gameplay styles. I can't wait to try it, and even design software for it.

</comment><comment><USER80> I can't wait for it. Oddly enough, it seems like valve used the earlier patent as flak.

I just hope the Linux drivers are open source, if they're not piggybacking off bluetooth or something.

</comment><comment><USER81> Wow, the announcements are coming at a fast clip and each more impressive than the last. I wonder if the final announcement in this round will be that Half Life 3 is a launch title?

<comment><USER13> No, this was the final announcement. Valve clusters their announcements, always.

</comment></comment><comment><USER82> Given that it's pretty much symmetrical, I wonder if it would've been possible to split it into two parts (each the same) and move the touchscreen elsewhere. The future, if you believe Sixense/etc is in controllers held by each hand with each arm free to move independently. Allows for less space for electronics and duplication I guess.

Just find it funny that the future in late 2013 is still something requiring that our hands are held so closely together.

</comment><comment><USER62> Imagine this sucker paired with the Oculus. Interesting times.

<comment><USER83> My thoughts exactly!

</comment></comment><comment><USER84> Love it already. Just look at those face buttons.

</comment><comment><USER85> I'm skeptical and I'm going to stay that way until I actually get to try it because of the haptic feedback, but..

The face button layout also gets to me. That's going to require some serious mental gymnastics to re-wire 20+ years of face button layout muscle memory to use this in some games (edit: especially platformers).

<comment><USER13> I'm thinking Valve basically wrote off retrogaming with this device - it's after the modern genres that are completely split between the PC-style mouse- and-keyboard and the console-style thumbsticks-and-shoulders.

A retrogaming pad would be nice as an additional peripheral to sell, but realistically you can use any existing bluetooth gamepad with Steam.

<comment><USER14> Good point: Since it works w/ any gamepad, in theory, you should be able to get a nice bluetooth version of your SNES pad and have it Just Work. If you're already playing those kinds of games, you might already have one for your computer anyway.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER86> The key to this is the haptic feedback technology that makes it more than two weird touch surfaces. Sounds awesome.

</comment><comment><USER87> I still have doubts about this controller being worthwhile but Valve has never led me astray before. I am willing to reserve judgement. Steam needs to release Source Engine 2 with multi-platform support baked in before they can ever hope to make a dent in the console market with living room gaming though.

</comment><comment><USER88> My biggest concern is the possibility of touching the screen in the middle while trying to hit the A,B,X,Y buttons. I know it specifically says you have to physically press the screen down to confirm your choice, but it would be distracting to be inadvertently interacting with the screen.

</comment><comment><USER89> I need to use it to have a better opinion but the lack of joysticks is not looking good to me.

</comment><comment><USER90> "You can't make a sentence into a question by just putting a question-mark at the end."

err "You can't make a sentence into a question by just putting a question-mark at the end?" <\--- it's a question now.

<comment><USER49> That's just a sentence with a question mark?

<comment><USER91> It is?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER92> It looks like yet another controller with some special, device-specific features (advanced haptic feedback) that will only be supported by their first-party games and a few novelty ones.

I wouldn't buy one before trying it.

<comment><USER93> > Even the older titles in the catalog and the ones which were not built with > controller support. (We've fooled those older games into thinking they're > being played with a keyboard and mouse, but we've designed a gamepad that's > nothing like either one of those devices.

</comment></comment><comment><USER94> Why not just use a mouse+kb?

I've been living room gaming w/wireless mouse+kb for years and years now. No problems at all doing this from the couch. Kb in your lap, mouse by your side with a hard metal mousepad.

</comment><comment><USER95> Plus, it looks like an owl.

</comment><comment><USER96> I'm a bit miffed regarding all of the hype for what is essentially, at this point, vapour-ware.

Also, why have Valve bothered to spread the announcement over 5 days? Surely this whole deal would've been more beneficial to be a keynote style announcement with some actual demos of the tech in question?

As great a product as it may be, in my opinion there's an awful lot of excitement surrounding the announcement that Valve will _eventually_ announce something ... next year ... probably.

I think I'll reserve my judgement on all of this until I can actually use it, or at least see it in use.

<comment><USER25> Sign up for the hardware beta then. This isn't vaporware.

</comment></comment><comment><USER97> How long before the Thinkpad Nub/pointing stick guys are demanding a nub version rather than a trackpad version? Think of the size reduction!

</comment><comment><USER98> Did I miss any sort of guidance for the cost?

<comment><USER58> First born.

</comment></comment><comment><USER99> IMHO, controllers will not work well enough for FPS for a foreseeable future.

Trying to play sniper with a controller is just hopeless.

</comment><comment><USER100> Ay dios mio, this is going to rock!

Heck, as someone who doesn't own a console, this might finally get me to play games on my TV.

</comment><comment><USER101> Eat that SONY!

This is how you really make a Game Controller.

</comment><comment><USER102> I highly doubt you can play dota without a keyboard and mouse, but it surely can work for other games :)

<comment><USER13> Dota 2 will likely be one of the flagships of this thing. I don't know how well it will work - likely you won't make it to the top of the league with this. But you can be damned well sure that Valve had Dota 2 in mind when they made this, and they will do everything possible to make Dota 2 play nicely on it.

<comment><USER103> I can last hit OK with a trackball (after some getting used to, thanks to RSI), but edge scrolling is difficult.

With two trackballs, perhaps one of the wheels can be used for moving the screen, and the other for moving the mouse.

They've implemented a "chat-wheel" with common in-game phrases to help with communications as well, which seems to be a perfect fit for controller play.

I just can't wait for the day where I can invite people over, buy an 80" TV, and play Dota 2 split screened on controllers!

<comment><USER13> On an 80" screen I'd want to see a DOTA-like game that zooms out and shows all the action in a single-screen, Super Smash Bros style.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER104> i'm rooting for this thing so hard. i have hundreds of games sans controller support that i never play because i run big picture mode in the living room with an xbox controller for the few games that do have controller support.

</comment><comment><USER105> Nice concept! would be interesting to play this with 0 A.D or Age of Empires.

</comment><comment><USER106> Is that an Xfce panel on the top, in the image? Looks like Steam on Xubuntu.

</comment><comment><USER107> Very impressive train of release and innovation from Valve. Joy inducing.

</comment><comment><USER108> Steam is a company that should be feared by the big players.

</comment><comment><USER109> mouse > track pad > analog stick

<comment><USER110> ? > mouse.

Do you really think that the mouse which was invented in the 60s (mother of all demos) is the pinnacle of technology regarding input? It is for now (I do agree with your premise for my own personal reasons) but such a bold expression seems a little, how should I put this, _small_ minded.

I feel this is an interesting direction to experiment on.

<comment><USER111> > _Do you really think that the mouse which was invented in the 60s (mother of > all demos) is the pinnacle of technology regarding input?_

You're kind of pushing what he said. He's referring to gaming, and probably shooter games. A mouse is definitely the most precise input device for shooters, or else you'd see professional eSport FPS players using laptop trackpads.

<comment><USER112> And Valve kinda says it:

"the Steam Controller's resolution approaches that of a desktop mouse"

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER113> I just want to say ^:)^ to steam

</comment><comment><USER114> bravo.</comment>


How to display and detect browser support for SVG images - <AUTHOR> http://voormedia.com/blog/2012/10/displaying-and-detecting-support-for-svg-images

<comment><USER2> Good article! It's a simple technique but seems to work well. Cheers</comment>


Australian universities are accused of trading free speech for cash - <AUTHOR> https://www.economist.com/asia/2019/09/19/australian-universities-are-accused-of-trading-free-speech-for-cash <comment><USER2> They didn't just trade free speech for cash. They traded their academic integrity.

Talk to anyone who teaches at ANU/Monash/Melbourne and they'll tell you the same thing: most international Chinese students should fail by every metric there is, but there is tremendous pressure from the faculty to 'find marks' to get those students to scrape through and look the other way at their plagiarism and cheating.

It's like there are two sets of standards now. One for Chinese students, and one for everyone else.

<comment><USER3> I TAed a compulsory "Introduction to Engineering" class at USyd. The class itself was dead easy, the equivalent of the fizzbuzz interview question.

The single assessment was "review an engineering article" where I caught 7 students (all international) plagiarizing. Not just borrowing a sentence or two, but lifting entire paragraphs and gluing them together with broken English. In one case a student had gone as far as submitting Stephen Hawking's "Space and Time Warps", verbatim.

I raised all of these to the professor. Despite all students signing the "I know what plagiarism is, I won't do it and understand there I will be kicked out if I do" \- the professor knocked back all of my claims and all students passed.

It was a huge disappointment to realize that this is how the "education system" works.

<comment><USER4> > It was a huge disappointment to realize that this is how the "education > system" works.

Is there any man made system that isn't eventually run or at least strongly by financial interest? Genuine question.

<comment><USER5> It's not clear that low standards actually are in the long term interest of the universities because it devalues the degree.

Thus it is important to expose this corruption far and wide so that people, e.g. employers, can be aware.

<comment><USER4> I totally agree. The cynic in me was just surprised at the disappointment, not the reaction of outing them for what they do.

And to your first point, fewer and fewer people think for the long term. Perhaps because in an age where you want results _now_ they will be judged by short term performance.

Also I noticed I'm missing an "influenced" in the comment above. Strongly influenced.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Similar stuff is going on in NZ. A university in Auckland recently halted a pro-Democracy protest organised by HK students after a university official was summoned to the Chinese embassy. There were of course no issues when mainland students organised a pro-Beijing rally.

<comment><USER7> Pretty sad state of affairs when students will halt a protest on the orders of the university administration.

<comment><USER8> Clearly they weren't Maori. They could learn a lot from them.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Throwaway account.

Local. TAed (USA nomenclature) 6 instances of 4 courses at top 5 AU Comp. Sci. university. Can confirm professorss of 3 courses wanted to fail at leats 1 student (one wanted to fail half a summer school class: approximately 75 students) and not a single student was ever failed because politics. Very few if any candidates for failure were local students.

Have many contacts, some with Ph.Ds, some who are lecturers in charge of courses now who at least reluctantly admit to this pattern.

Universities have indirect policies that penalise LiCs for failing students. Classic example: every failing students requires a report to management. Why did they fail? What is your proposal to prevent this type of failure from happening in the future?

When the reason is: how the hell did they get through the prerequisite course (presumably because of the same political pressure) you are met with: they met the prerequsites; you are applying unreasonable expetations on your students.

The entire reputation of the univiersity is for sale. How long can it last? If recent history is any guide, a long time. Let's find out.

<comment><USER10> LiC ?-

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> While at university here in Australia I was given the opportunity to spend a few weeks in China sponsored by Huawei.

I was naive back then. It was just one massive brain washing exercise where we were taken on a propaganda tour and taught how stupid the Australian government was to not contract Huawei to build the NBN.

<comment><USER11> I'm a uni student in aus right now and I'm not a fan of Chinese propaganda but I wouldn't mind a free trip to China. Do you have any links/tips on how I could get myself on one of these trips? I'm at UNSW btw.

<comment><USER8> Google Huawei seeds of the future and apply.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> When I went back to school I found out about a thing called CourseHero. How? A classmate lab partner submitted the report we submitted for our work. He submitted it verbatim with his name, my name, a third person in our group and even the instructor's name.

The only reason I knew of it was a fellow classmate got a new phone and for kicks looked up his name and found the report at CourseHero.

By the looks of that website I'd say cheating is rampant. Being drawn into something you're not aware of then nearly expelled is maddening.</comment>


JavaOne 2012: Scala Tricks - <AUTHOR>

<comment><USER2> I tried to find a video of Venkat's talk. So far the best I've come up with is a blog post about the talk: [http://marxsoftware.blogspot.com.ar/2012/10/javaone-2012-sca...](http://marxsoftware.blogspot.com.ar/2012/10/javaone-2012-scala- tricks.html)

I hope that a video of this talk will be posted.</comment>


Capillary-driven desalination in a synthetic mangrove - <AUTHOR> https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/6/8/eaax5253 <comment><USER2> This is an innovative application of existing membrane technology that is cool to see! It's great to see people thinking outside the box on these problems and emulating nature in smart ways.

Some people are possibly misinterpreting the potential impact of this, as mentioned in the article:

"For this reason, capillary-driven desalination is likely not a feasible alternative for large-scale desalination applications. Instead, we envision that synthetic mangrove devices could be integrated into urban infrastructure for passive stormwater management."

</comment><comment><USER3> I've always found natures ability to make selective membranes incredibly interesting. There are numerous applications where cheap selective membranes could make a significant difference. For example oxygen enriched combustion in power plants is a great way of reducing NOx and increasing efficiency.

</comment><comment><USER4> Nature is the ultimate super-human technology available to us for free. We only have to formulate the right questions, and the answer is often there, ready to be reverse-engineered.</comment>


AWS Speed Test: These Are the Fastest EC2 and S3 Regions - <AUTHOR> http://blog.codeship.io/2014/09/30/aws-speed-test-fastest-ec2-and-s3-regions.html#.VCrXxmMqxRs.hackernews <comment><USER2> Are there any good comparisons of other AWS services and how their speeds compare in different Regions?

<comment><USER3> Recently there was a good blogpost by cloudharmony comparing different Cloud providers:

[http://blog.cloudharmony.com/2014/07/comparing-cloud- compute...](http://blog.cloudharmony.com/2014/07/comparing-cloud-compute- services.html)

Basically as long as the equipment is the same it should probably be comparable on all regions, but you can use those numbers and benchmarks to compare them for specific workloads that you have</comment></comment>


1/3-Beginners guide to React Renderers.How to build a renderer from scratch? - <AUTHOR> https://blog.atulr.com/react-custom-renderer-1/ <comment><USER2> Neat! I've been looking around for a comprehensive guide in how to write a custom React renderer for an upcoming project of mine. It's unfortunate that Facebook hasn't had the time to document the process, often leaving folks to have to poke around at how other libraries do it. I'm starting to really appreciate how React can be used to incremental render complex state configurations to mediums other than the DOM.

OP: thanks for taking the time to write this series! It'll definitely help me out with some work I'm interested in doing.</comment>


Why Broken Sleep Is a Golden Time for Creativity - <AUTHOR> http://aeon.co/magazine/psychology/why-broken-sleep-is-a-golden-time-for-creativity/ <comment><USER2> Kind of a tenuous argument. Yes, some famous people do it now - but you could as well argue from, say, the Paris Review interviews that because so many great writers write first thing in the morning, you want block sleep so you don't get up late. It may also be natural, but lots of things are natural and don't cause greater creativity. And one may be able to cite personal anecdotes, but the causation could very easily be the other way: someone gets up _because_ they have a burning idea, not because they got up and then also had a breakthrough. I think it would be much more compelling if they could point to even basic experimental verification; for example, showing greater solution rates to 'insight problems' in a segmented condition.

</comment><comment><USER3> Ideally, when I wake up at 5am and my head is racing with ideas, I head to my whiteboard in my home office. I write and sketch it all down and three hours later I fall asleep again, waking up at 10 refreshed. Most of such work has really been my best, with proposals that were refined and made it straight to top-management. In some interviews when the question came 'what do you need to work effectively' I have tentatively asked about this - no early meetings, etc... but there was always pushback. My last company, a standalone Vodafone Group R&D lab allowed all of us researchers these luxuries, but was later consolidated and streamlined.

Is there any company that allows people to work this way? What are the best flexibilities that people have encountered? I'd be curious to know....

<comment><USER4> Yes. On my team, we have (a) one person who drops their kids off at school, comes in late, leaves early to pick them up again, and works in the evening/night (b) one person who comes in before everyone else and leaves before four (c) several people who come in towards lunchtime and leave late (d) a couple of us who take the shuttles and have a thoroughly normal (8:30-5:30) schedule, and (e) one person whose sleep schedule drifts unpredictably, unmoored from normal daylight rhythms.

In other words, nobody cares as long as you're getting stuff done.

Also, in other words, you should come work here, at YouTube :-)

<comment><USER5> e) totally sounds like me...

I'm working on a very tight deadline for the next couple months, so most of my time and thoughts are dedicated to the project I am working on...

I'm spending less time simply vegging and more actually thinking about what I am working on... as I'm now transitioning from the planning to development phase, my thoughts start to race when I come across an issue to resolve.

This week, I was up until 4-6a a couple days, and a few others crashed when I got home at 5-7p, then up again around 3-4a. Just this morning, I'd woken up around 2a to work through a problem then back to sleep about an hour and a half later...

I'd done a bunch of reading about MVI (Model-View-Intent) as an alternative to the React.js workflow and had some ideas on how to work around a) reusable models, and b) injection and dependency declaration with a system similar to React/Flux's... though it's too late to apply this to the project I'm on, it was an interesting thought exercise.

When left to "just work" instead of being expected to be "in the office" 9-6 it's harder.. usually I'm not "really" awake until after lunch... then I can get some work done, usually pretty productive (staying late a lot till 7-8 or so), and go home to do it again... still not nearly as much as when I'm left to sleep/work as needed/ready.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I used to have a pretty irregular sleep pattern, and one thing I definitely noticed was the feeling of euphoria that comes with sleep-deprivation. If I stayed up deep into the night, I would feel _great_ : energetic and ready to get things done. Such a state was also creatively useful: I did a lot of pretty good work in the deep of night. Somewhat paradoxically, I found it easier to focus at that hour.

However, these benefits were only the case for light or mild sleep deprivation. If I was more sleep-deprived, e.g. 4 hours a night for a few days, then the pendulum would swing the other way and I would feel pretty useless and slow.

I should also note that the sleep-deprived, energetic creative state was only useful for projects that I could do in a single push. If I could do some project from start to finish in a single creative burst, then an all-nighter wouldn't be a terrible way of getting it done. There would be few distractions, it'd be easy to get "flow" going, and I suspect that the euphoric, sleep-deprived state marginally reduce inhibitions, which can lead to better work.

On the other hand, it's not that great for tackling a section of a larger project, which I think are better crafted slowly during the day, over the course of a few days.

<comment><USER7> Sleep deprivation increases dopamine, it's almost like taking amphetamine (Adderall). [http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/08/080819213033.ht...](http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/08/080819213033.htm)

<comment><USER8> Sleep deprivation causes dramatic deficits in the ability to attend to task, working memory, and mood stability. It is the exact opposite of adderall. More like coming off adderrall.

<comment><USER9> Maybe both in succession?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I'm regularly up at 4AM.

At that time, I need to make a decision: Do I produce, or do I consume?

If I produce, I write English or code. I can get in a couple hours of this before I need to wake up the rest of the house, and it's great.

If I consume, I watch a movie or surf or something, and I don't feel all that great in the end. Where did that time go? Doing reading is better, especially if I'm gronking down technical stuff that I've been meaning to read for a while.

In any event, early morning "alone and quiet" time is pretty neat.

<comment><USER11> I've started to use one of those sleep tracking apps several weeks ago and I noticed that I invariably wake up around 4 as well, however only for what looks like around half an hour and without me having any recollection about it the next morning.

I wonder if anyone else observed the same, in other words if this is "normal".

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> It totally blows my mind people still fall for this bullshit split sleep meme made up by an historian.

So we take medical advice from historians now?

I do know in the world of science that shift workers get a lot of cancer. Which is not split sleep exactly but close enough for me to not be forcing myself against nature to split sleep.

Some creative people work all hours and some bodies are weird but don't buy into this is 'common and natural thing' meme.

<comment><USER13> How is shift working similar to split sleep? One is working arbitrary schedules, the other could be seen as "I go to bed at 8pm with the sun, and happen to wake up every night at like midnight to work for a few hours and then pass out again". They're entirely different shapes.

Yes, it's reasonable to say we shouldn't take medical advice from historians; but, finding your most creative times of the day isn't really a medical thing, it's a "what works for me" or "what I've noticed about myself" sort of perspective.

How do we measure creativity anyway?

<comment><USER12> Shift work is not necessarily about differing sleep cycles there evidence it's about working at night and lighting.

But other than that I don't disagree. My beef is about broken sleep existing.

1.5 billion people currently live without electricity and so did their parents and their parents parents.

But broken sleeps evidence is a historian basically cold reading 200 year old fiction books. And even people like gwern are not saying, this is BS where is the evidence broken sleep is a thing?

It might be great for creativity, so is LSD, go for it, I definitely want a more creative world.

I'm just saying know where you stand and quit on the BS that everyone used to do it, unless you have real proof.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I really wonder what this says about children who wake up in the middle of the night, and the effect on parents. If you follow through with "everyone did segmented sleep", then at least the parents of children might be somewhat mismatched. Children wake up earlier, or take longer to wind back down to sleep. Is that still segmented sleep in the same vein? Maybe it was at one time natural for everyone to wake up at the same time basically, because they were so close together.

Either way, the explicit no children "rule" for experimenting with segmented sleep is an interesting thing to think about.

Of course, 9-5 jobs make it practically impossible anyway, which are assumed to go along with children in many cases

</comment><comment><USER15> I noticed when I push myself a bit deeper into the night (I normally go sleeping at ~10pm), then at around midnight when I am already tired I have the best ideas for composing electronic music. If I stay awake, I often continue until 2-3am with an outline of a song and while very very tired, I often finish something surprisingly good and balanced so that I just need to refine/add "candy" around to finish the song. Basically I trade enhanced creativity for discomfort and feeling awful the next day, and it works surprisingly well.

<comment><USER16> fellow electronic music producer here. For me it's not so much about being tired. It's rather that late in the evening I finally managed to mentally "recover" from work.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> Reminds me of Psalm 63:6 -

      On my bed I remember you;
      I think of you through the watches of the night.

<comment><USER18> Interesting find

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> This is a wonderful reflection on the joys and productivity of getting up when you wake up, and running with your naturally wakeful energy while it lasts.

My job is the only thing keeping me on a set schedule. When I retire, or if I make a move to freelancing full-time, I'm really curious to see what becomes of my schedule. I'll stay grounded in time somehow, but I'll also lose myself in time on a regular basis.

<comment><USER20> The article actually sounds a lot like my sleep schedule.

I retire quite early (9-10PM) compared to my roommates who will game, drink, and socialize into the wee hours of the night.

I have to be up around 6:30AM to do my morning routine. I often find myself waking up around 3:00 or 4:00 though.

I just can't bring myself to "run with my naturally wakeful energy," though. Those next few hours until my alarm goes off are the most precious thing in the world. I bundle up, and try to get back to sleep.

Usually I'm in an odd state of creative reflection, an almost "wakeful dreaming."

It's more like wishful thinking, or a daydream, than an actual dream.

My mind is too busy to sleep, but I can't let it run wild, I have to work in two hours.

\---

Then, just as I'm dozing off, my (sleep cycle aware) alarm clock goes off and tells me it's time to get up.

Then I feel lethargic all day; spending my entire day anxious to get home so I can do the same thing all over again.

\---

My sleep cycle app tells me I'm a pretty decent sleeper (unless I've had a drink).

Perhaps I'm just naturally a segmented sleeper; but what's a part-time student/full-time employee to do?

<comment><USER21> It honestly sounds like you have some anxiety issues that are interfering with your sleep. It may even be that you feel anxious about not sleeping (and therefore having a lethargic day), which keeps you up.

You should certainly look into "sleep hygiene". If you religiously practice it, you may have better luck. Some of the recommendations are: no caffeine, no alcohol, get out of bed if you can't sleep, don't work in your bedroom, wake up at the same time every day. I can't remember the rest.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> You cannot wake up in the middle of the night feeling full of ideas if you've not been sleeping weel (and probably getting more hours of sleep than you really needed).

When I'm on vacations, sleeping my ass off, I routinely wake up in the middle of the night, or 2-3 hours before my regular wake up time and I'm well prepared to think.

Going back to traditional 8-5 work week, I'm glad I have a full night of sleep.

</comment><comment><USER23> He's made a reasonable historical case for the commonness of a split cycle sleep.

However, I wanted more evidence, so I looked to an ancestor: research on chimpanzees in wild seems to indicate that they start their days at dawn, and sleep mainly uninterrupted through the night...

Did humans really diverge that much? I suppose further studies will tell. (After all, the creative differences seem undeniable, anecdotally...)

</comment><comment><USER24> I have been changing routine to get some more exercise recently... I've started sailing again. The general routine is work the morning, sail the afternoon, sleep damn early (8:30PM?), wake up 2AM, work awhile, sleep again about 5AM, wake again about 8AM, eat, rinse, repeat.

Yesterday I woke up early for a cancelled meeting, which broke my pattern. As a result, I sailed too early and too long .. and slept right through. This morning three dogs woke me up, apparently they were having sex. I have no doubt they will sleep again :)

</comment><comment><USER25> [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Segmented_sleep](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Segmented_sleep)

</comment><comment><USER26> I dunno, I haven't slept four hours straight since my baby was born, and this may be the least creative I've ever felt.

<comment><USER27> I think being woken up rather than naturally reaching the end of a sleep cycle is very very different. When our baby was waking up a lot we were lucky to function much less do anything super creative.

Article tries to make the case that historically people would have a period of wakefulness in the night based on historical writing. I'd like to see some more actual research before modifying my life and sleep habits as I'm not sure that this says anything more than sleep requirements are personal.

My sense from working/living/traveling with lots of different folks is that sleep is just as personal as the types of foods you like to eat. Some people like napping, some don't. Some people like waking up early, some people like staying up early. The only real constants I see is that you absolutely have to get some and that the "experts" don't really know why...

<comment><USER28> I don't know that you, personally ought to be modifying your sleep schedule any. If you're doing something that works, that's fine.

However, if you do go to sleep early (like 9pm), and wake up in the middle of the night, maybe it's not necessary to stress about that too much. If you can get something useful done, then you can do that, and then go back to sleep in a couple hours.

I think the point is if you're feeling awake in the middle of the night, that isn't necessarily insomnia, and it isn't necessarily a problem. Maybe you can make it work and also get enough sleep to function well during the day.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> Anyone else here never have dreams?

I can't remember having a dream for at least 18 years now. So even if I have the flexibility to sleep once at dusk and then work for a couple of hours, I'm not convinced I'll see any benefit.

<comment><USER30> After a dermatologist prescription I suddenly dreamed every night very detailed and surreal dreams for three weeks. Weird brains are weird.

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> The wikipedia article for Polyphasic sleep is very interesting - apparently it it possible to reduce the required sleep to 2h per day, split into six 20-minute naps.

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

<comment><USER32> I think this article was probably written by people who haven't actually tried it.

I experimented with the Uberman sleep schedule myself as a student (i.e. 2 hours sleep a day, split into 20 minute naps). I stuck rigidly to the schedule over the course of three weeks but despite near-perfect discipline, it only got harder and harder.

The hours between 1am to 5am were the hardest. I would stay awake because the program required it (and supposedly it gets easier as your body 'adjusts') but between these hours I was totally useless. I couldn't read because my eyes would unfocus, I had blackouts where I couldn't remember anything. Usually I would just sit and stare catatonically at a wall.

I started breaking things and falling over due to malcoordination from the sleep deprivation and finally gave up after spending a night hallucinating that strange figures were appearing out of the wood patterns on my desk.

I slept for 24 hours and felt like a completely different person after I woke up.

So I encourage you to actually try this yourself, and see if it works. Just don't drive, operate heavy machinery or in fact do anything remotely risky during the experiment. Sleep deprivation can be dangerous.

Personally, I think the 2 hours is enough theory is garbage.

<comment><USER18> The concept was tested by Tim ferris in the book 4 hour body. He noted that its a hard thing to keep up with because you have to keep exactly on schedule or you will mess everything up and then you just end up sleeping for a day.

<comment><USER33> _He noted that its a hard thing to keep up with because you have to keep exactly on schedule or you will mess everything up and then you just end up sleeping for a day._

That sounds like one of those excuses people make for something that doesn't really work.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: How do startups attract graphic designers? - <AUTHOR>

Like many developers, I suck at graphics and visual design.<p>How do I make my project / startup attractive to a designer, other than just the paycheck? How can I make it stand out as something that will really engage a designer and get them interested? <comment><USER2> <\-- Designer. How can I help?

<comment><AUTHOR> I'm working on a small game for Windows Phone 7 that I need some help generating sprites and graphic content for. I have a rough spec of the gameplay mechanics and the assets that I'd like to include.

If you're interested I would love to give you the details - my Twitter handle is @Aaronontheweb - DM me and I'll give you the full story.</comment></comment>


Geo-Scalable (Big Data or IoT) Architectures? - <AUTHOR> Can you share your experiences building an application that has to be : - geo scalable : allows for ingestion of data from nodes that are spread across the globe (possibly like IoT).
- semi-structured data : data that is not all sorted out. scope for new devices to send data that is not yet known - has an single-pane/portal/api that allows for querying aggregated data from different locations. <comment><AUTHOR> Since posting this question, I have been reading through a few presentation and youtube videos. So far I have gathered the following:

Option 1: Use a customized solution stack from a cloud vendor like Amazon, Azure. To quickly bootstrap, there are also consulting firms that specialize in one of these cloud solutions.

Option 2: Build using open-source stacks. Couple of interesting architectures are : SMACK , Lambda.

Any help that you could provide in pointing to the right links or just notes from which I could derive an reference architecture will be greatly appreciated.</comment>


25 Years of the Week in Chess - <AUTHOR> https://theweekinchess.com/chessnews/general/25-years-of-the-week-in-chess <comment><AUTHOR> One of the ways in which the Internet has changed chess is that games played all over the world are now posted online, and players of all levels can keep their databases updated.

That is almost entirely the result of the work of Mark Crowther, who started The Week In Chess in 1994 and _hasn 't missed a single weekly update since._ Each issue contains a file with all tournament games he was able to find online played that week; these days usually some 5000 or so per issue (up to 9400 games in the busy summer season), error checked, names standardized by mr Crowther, all ad-supported on his own web page.</comment>


Twitter Will Show Who Pays for Ads and How Much They Spend - <AUTHOR> https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-06-28/twitter-will-show-who-pays-for-ads-and-how-much-they-spend <comment><USER2> I dislike both Twitter & Facebook, and am on the verge of closing both accounts, however I give them kudos for this - increasing transparency instead of censorship. While I understand our desire and pursuit for truth, I would like to leave the interpretation of any ultimate truths and meaning to rest with the end user, and not with any corporation or even government.

<comment><USER3> This is about financial transparency, nothing blocks them from increasing censorship and shadow-banning accounts and advertisers.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> What I'd like is a "Twitter made $x from you in the last year through showing you ads. Click here to pay us $2x and not see any for the next year."

<comment><USER5> It's been tried. Most directly by Google, but almost any publisher on the internet has tested various forms of subscription model.

While some high-quality publications (the New York Times, Economist, etc.) have seen some success in recent years, the overwhelming evidence is that the economics just don't work out among the general public.

Most people also underestimate the costs. IIRC, Google needs about $100/pa to supplant advertising revenue.

Yes, you may be willing to pay, so why aren't more services willing to take your money? Apart from the administrative hassle of such a program, the $100 (or whatever) are also an average. People willing to pay as much for an ad- free experience just happen to be at the top end of the value distribution for advertisers as well.

In other words: If you're willing to give me 2bucks, it's gonna cost you 5!

<comment><USER6> Google is currently selling this service for youtube, branded "youtube red." It costs $10/mo and as part of that they also offer to repair some of the crippleware in the youtube app.

It doesn't seem worth it, to me. I need ad blockers anyway for other ad services and annoyances so I end up just avoiding their built-in ad-riddled apps and going through a browser for things like youtube. It's a poor experience but better than dealing with ads.

I understand the value prop for shipping crippleware apps in a low cost android phone, but they ship the same stuff on flagship $1k phones like the pixel. It's a bizarre choice.

<comment><USER7> I've been paying for YouTube Red (now Premium) ever since they started it. It's very much worth it. Between Netflix and Youtube you can replace cable.

It's frustrating how people complain about ad supported models while at the same time aren't willing to pay for it. So much entitlement. There's also the option of not consuming their resources.

<comment><USER6> I already don't have cable, there's nothing to replace. I don't use youtube very often and if Google wants to paywall youtube entirely that's fine by me. Don't disingenuously introduce some silly entitlement canard - I never made a suggestion of entitlement.

What I did point out is that they're making a mockery out of their premium phone brand by shipping it with crippleware. Check back and see what that decision costs them in a decade.

Google is absurdly bad at product.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Considering that right now Twitter has a link to give you the reason you're seeing an ad, that almost always doesn't give the answer. Are they afraid to show what they've deducted of my profile directly ? I don't care how much an advertiser spend, but I want to know who they wanted to target, or at least what they decided to target that led Twitter to show me the ad. We're not there yet.

</comment><comment><USER9> I'd love to see a "how much did you loading this page make the site owner"

Perhaps a "with adblocker" and "without adblocker"

The average facebook account nets them something like $2 a month in the US, or under a dollar a month in europe, that's a tiny amount.

When people realise how little their personal data and time is being sold for, perhaps there will be more of a backlash against advertising.

<comment><USER8> I think Facebook's monthly ARPU is closer to $7 in the US in 2017, which is absurdly high (vs the rest of the world). Source: [https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/31/facebook- earnings-q4-2017-ar...](https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/31/facebook- earnings-q4-2017-arpu.html)

<comment><USER9> Ahh yes, the figures I saw were the same $26, but implied it was yearly rather than quarterly.

I wonder why USians are so much more valuable to advertisers than Europeans.

<comment><USER10> Probably because (and this is personal opinion, not researched facts) the US is in a huge advertising bubble. We have found out just how effective advertising is at selling products and we have numbers to back it up so and decent sized business is throwing money to advertisers like mad to drive sales. If sales start to drop though, they double down and throw more money for more advertising; but what they top level administrators aren't considering is the non-linear nature of advertising and exposure and eventually advertisee fatigue enough. By time the sales numbers come back for your second or third round you already paid for the advertising and just burned through tons of your initial profits for minor gains. At the end of it all though you likely still have positive overall numbers from advertising, they don't show how badly advertising performed per cost near the end because the big initial exposure brings up the average. Rinse and repeat!

Also, there aren't much of any protections for consumers against false and deceptive advertising unless you have a million dollar legal team to take on the business's multi-million dollar legal team.

<comment><USER9> I do wonder who is paying that $7. Is is companies trying to get you to buy their product (that you need) rather than a competitor. Is it companies selling you tat you don't need. Is it companies trying to scam you. Is it companies trying to get your vote?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Won't this just lead to "laundering" platforms like what happened with Whois?

<comment><USER12> Not necessarily. Twitter has the power to deny anyone they want from purchasing ads from them. WHOIS is not centrally controlled in the same way. Twitter could easily block "laundering" platforms from functioning simply by not allowing them to purchase advertisements.

<comment><USER13> The laundering will work the opposite way. Instead of hiding behind one big entity, political advertiser's will hide behind a multitude of smaller entities to make themselves look like grassroots organizations.

You won't see "promoted by [Koch|Soros], who spent $8.5m on ads this year", you'll see things promoted by "milualkee citizens for freedom, who spent $1500 this year". But the money will be coming from the same place.

If you give advertisers more space, they'll figure out a way to use it effectively. Even if the point of that space was to try and keep them honest.

<comment><USER14> Right, but those groups also have to disclose their donors.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> This is going to make blocking promoted tweets even more fun than it already is.

<comment><USER16> You mean easier, yes.

<comment><USER15> I block everything promoted and it never stops feeling good.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> I wonder how much of their business is political advertising, if it was small enough I'd be inclined to ban it all and save a lot of hassle.

<comment><USER18> I would imagine quite a bit these days, considering in 2014 they released this handbook:

[https://blog.twitter.com/official/en_us/a/2014/the-all- new-t...](https://blog.twitter.com/official/en_us/a/2014/the-all-new-twitter- government-and-elections-handbook.html)

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> This is possibly a bad move business wise as it possibly exposes business intelligence information that a company may not want competitors to have.

<comment><USER20> I thought that as well but closer reading of the article indicates it's specifically for political advertisements, not generic ad spend by corporations.

<comment><USER21> It seems that we will be able to see all the ads related to an advertiser account. [1]

[1] [https://ads.twitter.com/transparency](https://ads.twitter.com/transparency)

<comment><USER22> I went to twitter.com/spotify, where is the link to see all their ads? Am I missing something?

<comment><USER23> Go to [https://ads.twitter.com/transparency/Spotify](https://ads.twitter.com/transparency/Spotify).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> This is going to give away a huge competitive advantage for good marketers.

If I know my political ads are most effective with Women, 45-65, who are Hispanic, and that's where I'm focusing my spend....

Is it fair for the opponent to have that information? If they give that level of detail for political ads, I hope they at least spare startup businesses who are still researching to find their ideal audience.

<comment><USER25> > _Is it fair for the opponent to have that information?_

I'm parsing "fair" in the form of: imagine two societies, one where such information is private the other where it's public. Who outperforms?

Would the number of start-ups which cave because an incumbent snipes their marketing outweigh the number who could piggyback on an incumbent's revealed slicing? (The latter, by marketing to the same customers better or noticing who is being left out.) Will consumers see more advertising or less? If more, will they respond to the deluge by defaulting to the incumbent or trying new options more frequently?

I don't know. But we have an opportunity to find out. If this drives innovation, I'd say a case is to be made to open up these data across advertising platforms. Who knows. Maybe it's the tool to pry apart Facebook and Google's stranglehold.

<comment><USER26> You realize though that at least a Facebook has the same features, right?

In fact FB went much farther in that for example they let you go back 7 YEARS in a pages ad history and not just 7 days like Twitter does

<comment><USER25> > _FB went much farther in that for example they let you go back 7 YEARS in a > pages ad history_

I am not completely familiar with Facebook's ad platform. Does it really let anyone see, for example, which demographics Procter & Gamble is targeting with a particular Gilette ad? (Or its Gilette brand, generally?)

<comment><USER26> Yep it does. They tell you exactly why you are seeing a ad.

For political ads you can also go to a page and look up all the ad campaigns they are running, how much money was spend, who was target, what the ad creative was, etc

<comment><USER25> > _They tell you exactly why you are seeing a ad_

Pardon me, I meant that anyone should be able to see who anyone else is targeting. Currently, when Terrible Kale Bar® shows me an ad, I can see it's because I liked a post of my Portland friend's. But I can't look at Terrible Kale Bar®'s page and see a list of whom they're targeting.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> This is smart. It can help move the responsibility away from Twitter's issues with policing it's own platform and onto the people paying for the advertising. Without transparency the blame stops at the platform. With this people can scrutinize the actual content and sources of the content.

</comment><comment><USER28> Thumbs up from me! This is the kind of transparency I like to see when it comes to politics.

</comment><comment><USER29> This and Facebook's equivalent are great. But what about Google/YouTube...?

</comment><comment><USER30> Yes, this should be a requirement for all ad platforms.

</comment><comment> at-fates-hands The funny part about this is when I do see ads from companies like Apple, Google, or other news sources, the comments thread is like pure gold.

</comment><comment><USER31> Unless they're publishing KYC data, I call bullshit.

</comment><comment><USER32> I hope this sounds the alarm on how shockingly cheap it is to promote political extremism on these platforms. Donald Trump saw much cheaper effective ad rates than Clinton on social media by crafting viral outrage memes as ads.

It will be interesting to look at the effective CPM rates of various candidates on Twitter using this data. I'm hoping they don't just show how many people were shown the Tweet as an ad, but also those who saw it from organic distribution via retweet.

I think you'll find that outrageous, incendiary politicians pay a lot less per view than reasonable ones.

</comment><comment><USER33> The amount of blatant paid advertising going unmarked in Twitter Moments is ridiculous.

<comment><USER34> I assumed they were all paid for to begin with honestly.

</comment></comment><comment><USER35> This is an awesome step in the right direction.

</comment><comment><USER36> This only applies to overt ads which are hardly the problem. It does nothing to mitigate the armies of astroturfers influencing public opinion.

<comment><USER37> Still, it's certainly a welcome change, and a step in the right direction.

I wonder what the best way to combat large-scale astroturfing on a platform like twitter would be; My first thought would be a rep system akin to those of StackOverflow or HN, but I'm not sure how you would implement it such that there's not a large impact on legitimate new users - there's no system like upvotes Twitter could use to stratify.

<comment><USER38> I believe Reddit does have a problem with advertisers purchasing (or renting) accounts from established users who have enough karma/longevity to post in the various subreddits that block new users to avoid spam.

<comment><USER39> I think that is still an ongoing problem but you can use reddit sort of like a company forum where you don't have to pay reddit a dime by having a community manager and learning the platform.

<comment><USER9> > where you don't have to pay reddit a dime

So you, and your company's data, are the product that reddit monetizes.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: Why Microsoft peripherals are so kinda expensive? - <AUTHOR> So that's the question. There doesn't seem to be anything special about them, yet they come with rather high price tag. Why? <comment><USER2> There is something special about them. The quality is generally good and the customer service is outstanding.

</comment><comment><USER3> Same reason most name-brand things cost more than shitty knock-offs.</comment>