Juliabox - <AUTHOR> http://juliabox.org/

<comment><USER2> This isn't ready for public consumption, it was posted to HN by someone unrelated to JuliaBox.

<comment><USER3> Yeah, it's a huge bummer that this leaked before it could be set up for a heavy load.

<comment><USER4> We'll bury this post if you'll post it again when it's ready. The thread is unable to be a meaningful discussion right now, so I think that's in everyone's interests.

<comment><USER5> We had 250 simultaneous connections when we were configured only for 20. We will certainly post it when we are ready.

<comment><USER4> Great! I'm pretty sure those 250 connections will be ready to go when you are. Good luck with the work.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> What is Juliabox? The landing page itself does not say anything about what the product actually is and what the benefits of signing up are.

<comment><USER7> Julia is a high-level, high-performance dynamic programming language for technical computing => [http://julialang.org/](http://julialang.org/)

From the front page => Run Julia from the Browser. No setup.

This means that you can run the programming language from the browser without having to install Julia and the various dependencies onto your system. You can just run it from the your browser.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> I clicked on "Sign in via Google" button. It asked me for permission to access some information. Then went back to the original homepage; the one that still asks me to sign in. Now, if I click on "Sign in via Google" nothing happens. Also, nothing else on the page is clickable. How do I try it out?

<comment><USER2> The site wasn't meant to be publicly released yet - it was online only for internal testing amongst a small set of users. Its under very heavy load now so is most likely unresponsive. You can get a similar experience by trying out IJulia on your own machine though, until its properly released.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> When I sign in I just get returned to the home page and invited to sign in again. Anyone know how to reach the good stuff?

Edit: from the JuliaBox README [0]:

\- Not recommended to host on the public internet just yet.

\- Security is mostly a TODO at this time.

\- Docker itself is undergoing changes in its API. Since we pull in the latest docker, changes in the docker API may break JuliaBox at any time.

So it seems this is not really ready for demo yet - perhaps prematurely posted to HN. Look forward to seeing it when it's ready.

[0] [https://github.com/JuliaLang/JuliaBox/blob/master/README.md](https://github.com/JuliaLang/JuliaBox/blob/master/README.md)

<comment><USER2> Yes it was posted by a third-party, not fully ready for primetime. Its running on AWS so at least no one's computer is likely to get owned due to any glitches! Thanks for your interest - it is a pretty fun tool.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Why must this require google login at all? It should not be mandatory. . .

<comment><AUTHOR> No idea, but Google groups are central to the Julia community. Guess they just like to use google. We could fork it and do another login if we wanted to escape google. [https://github.com/JuliaLang/JuliaBox](https://github.com/JuliaLang/JuliaBox)

<comment><USER5> Google was just for convenience and something to start with (and not worry about user management). We also want to be able to use the Google Drive Sync. Once we sort out other pressing issues, we will certainly add other methods to login before announcing again. Pull Requests are welcome too!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I clicked on the sign-in via google but then nothing else happened after authorizing identifying me..

No email, nothing. Maybe they are understandably experiencing some high loads or something. It'd be nice to quickly update web page to state that though if true.

UPDATE: Never mind, see [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8281116](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8281116)

<comment><USER2> Yes this wasn't meant to publicly available yet - was up for our own testing and internal use. The maintainer is working on scaling it a bit, but its not really ready to take on the full load of the internet.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> Reminds me of [http://forio.com/julia/repl/](http://forio.com/julia/repl/) except the addition of iJulia notebook makes it much more useful.

<comment><AUTHOR> I can also upload files and run them though the console. Or just write the code with vim in the console, in your browser.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> So I don't know what is Julia, and I still don't know what is it. It's a box for Julia, look greats.

</comment><comment><USER14> Looks like a landing page to gauge interest. Consider me interested.

<comment><USER2> Its actually functional, but wasn't meant to be released yet and can't scale to this kind of demand. When it is released, I'm sure you'll see it here!

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> What is it? Why would I sign in into something I know nothing about?

<comment><USER2> It is Julia running in a browser, allowing you to try it with no installs. Its not meant for public use yet.

And yes, you shouldn't sign into something you know nothing about - no one is asking you too :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> -1 -> Only sign in is with google.</comment>


Startups worship the young. But research shows older people are most innovative - <AUTHOR> https://qz.com/954368/startups-worship-the-young-but-research-shows-people-are-most-innovative-when-theyre-older/ <comment><USER2> Interesting research but I am not sure how many people actually believe that startups want younger employees because they are more innovative. The more obvious appeals are that they are childless so they can work longer hours, will work for less, and have less experience in business so are less likely to question the dubious strategies of leadership.</comment>


Life with Crypto Backdoors: Stingrays, Government Surveillance and Crime - <AUTHOR> https://david.newgas.net/life-with-crypto-backdoors-stingrays-government-surveillance-and-crime/ <comment><USER2> Reminder that organized crime uses the same techniques as 'non-criminal' investigators.

Cartels have billions in funds to purchase hardware and labor. They've put this to work to implement their own network. They also have incentives to harm and exploit normal everyday people.

Hell, if the small fries who attend Defcon can exploit telecommunication networks from the source, it doesn't even take a giant pile of money to make a large amounts of people's lives very difficult.

<comment><USER3> It seems, clearly, that your comfort and your security is a price the government is willing to pay for total surveillance.</comment></comment>


Named Data Networking - <AUTHOR> http://named-data.net/project/execsummary/ <comment><USER2> They've been working on this for a while.

It's awesome. It would be a wonderful world to live in.

And based on how we are dragging our feet with IPv6, migrating to NDN has a snowball's chance in hell of happening.

<comment><USER3> Can you explain a little more about what problem it's trying to solve and how it goes about doing that? I've read the architecture overview and it sounds a little bit like IPFS (ipfs.io). Is that correct?</comment></comment>


A White House Petition: should daylight savings time end permanently? - <AUTHOR> http://wh.gov/bEt

<comment><USER2> More importantly, Daylight Saving Time kills people every spring:

[http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/03/12/eveningnews/main62...](http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/03/12/eveningnews/main6293834.shtml)

That alone is enough reason to stop it.

<comment><USER3> On the other hand, that article points out that it proceeds to save lives (in the form of reduced traffic fatalities) during the rest of the time that it's in effect. And the springtime negative effects are due to the _change_ to DST, not DST itself.

The better goal, perhaps, would be end standard (winter) time, not daylight saving (summer) time.

<comment><USER2> I don't care which time we stick to, as long as we stop changing it.

<comment><AUTHOR> +5

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Let's add an hour every year. I like that idea!

</comment><comment><USER5> While there are many studies that have conflicting results on whether it reduces energy, it does affect the circadian rhythm

<comment><AUTHOR> That touches on my main point. I think relatively speaking it has outlived its usefulness, but twice a year its very disruptive to my family's daily schedule for a few days. My kids are too young to understand it and just know that their day is off somehow.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> You spelled the name of the thing you're trying to abolish incorrectly. :/

<comment><USER2> I'd contend the name of the thing is now actually "Daylight Savings Time" instead of "Daylight Saving Time" as it was originally put into law.

Language is descriptive. If everyone calls a thing X, it is, by definition, called X.

<comment><USER6> "Everybody" disagrees with you:

[https://www.google.com/search?sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&#...</a>

<comment><USER2> You're saying google's tendency to correct words spelling to ones it looks up in its entire database of text is conclusive evidence on modern usage of a word?

I'd say it's suggested search complete is probably more indicative about what "Everyone" is expecting when they type that term:

<http://i.imgur.com/LqsSS.png> <= Picture of what autocomplete shows you

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> it's arguably never been less disruptive to switch from DST to EST. the only clock in my life that doesn't auto-sync to some global standard is the timex on my wrist.

</comment><comment><USER8> While we're at it how about we just eliminate timezones completely and just use UTC.

<comment><USER9> I think we should also officially adopt yyyy.mm.dd.hh.mm and the 24hr clock. (I forget the official name of that formatting, and I'm on my phone, so I'm lazy.)

And the International Fixed Calendar, too.

Also, metric.

<comment><USER10> You're probably thinking of ISO 8601.

<comment><USER9> I was, thank you!</comment></comment></comment></comment>


GPS signals are surprisingly easy to disrupt - <AUTHOR> http://www.economist.com/news/international/21582288-satellite-positioning-data-are-vitalbut-signal-surprisingly-easy-disrupt-out <comment><USER4> As someone who was recently a delivery driver, the recent addition of GPS tracking is one of the most annoying things about a delivery job. Far worse than drug testing. Driving can be difficult and sometimes you need to park and stretch your legs. I was called into the office for this and queried about each of my stops. GPS is going to become more prevalent as people like me are highly motivated to defeat the system, especially working in teams with other drivers. Of course there are work-arounds. Park at a legit spot on an approved break and leave all your electronic devices in the vehicle and walk to where you want to be but don't want them to know about, etc...

However, it is highly doubtful this was done by a delivery driver. There is no point in jamming the signal for 10 minutes. What could it accomplish? If the purpose is to take an illegal detour (going against a one way street) the company has logs of all your trips and will soon figure why you have a 10 minute gap everyday.

<comment><USER5> > Driving can be difficult and sometimes you need to park and stretch your > legs.

If your employer doesn't allow legally required breaks you can use the GPS log in your suit against the company. Otherwise it sounds like you weren't doing your job.

<comment><USER6> Someone isn't doing their job when they are taking breaks more often than the legally requirement minimum?

Sounds a bit harsh to me.

<comment><USER5> Pulling over his delivery truck to go on a walk does indeed sound like not doing his job as a delivery driver. I don't see many UPS drivers going for jogs during the day...

<comment><USER7> > I don't see many UPS drivers going for jogs during the day...

What a horrible example. They actually get up and walk around probably dozens of times per day. That is completely different from long-haul trucking, where you may only get 2 stretch breaks in a 10 hour period.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> That reminds me of another Economist article about GPS jamming from 2011:

[http://www.economist.com/node/18304246](http://www.economist.com/node/18304246)

That article was inspired by a trucker who drove by Newark Airport every day, disrupting GPS service there.

<comment><USER9> I worked on that, but have not seen that particular article. There are actually a whole lot of them going by the Newark Airport even today.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> > surprisingly

GPS signals come from satellites. AFAIK there are about 20-40 GPS satellites. Let's say each covers at least 1/50 of the Earth's surface area, about 500 million km^2. That's 10 million km^2 per satellite.

What's the max power generation you can fit on reasonable-sized satellite that's going to be in orbit for decades? I'm guessing not more than 10 kW. So 10 kW / 10 million km^2 means you have .001 watt per km^2.

GPS signals being easy to jam isn't surprising. What's surprising is that you can detect them with equipment that's small and cheap enough to fit in a cellphone!

<comment><USER11> Where it really gets amazing is when you discover that the GPS signal is around 20-30dB _below_ the noise floor. That is to say, ambient noise drowns out the signal by a factor of 100-1000. Long-term correlation manages to pull out usable information from this extremely noisy signal.

An interesting consequence of this is that you don't need a very fancy receiver, hardware-wise, because your software already has to be extremely sophisticated. For example, you can use a 1-bit ADC rather than trying to be more sophisticated about exactly how strong the signal is at any given moment.

<comment><USER12> That's crazy... I think I'll contain my frustration more now when my GPS takes a few minutes for a cold lock. It's even more crazy because with the latest GPS systems in phones, I'm able to get a fix with only a very small portion or even no sky visible.

<comment><USER11> Interestingly, the cold lock acquisition time is usually gated by the time required to download the almanac from the satellites, rather than acquiring the actual GPS signal. The almanac (which is the stuff that basically tells you where the satellites are, so you can figure out where you are based on that) gets sent on a side channel at a very slow rate, something like 50bps, such that it takes about 30 seconds before you have all the data, and any interruption can mean it takes multiples of that. The main advantage cell phones have is the fact that they can download that data from the cell network rather than waiting for it to dribble in from the satellites directly.

The ability for GPS to (sometimes) work indoors these days is indeed pretty crazy. The signals are already incredibly weak, and you'd think having a roof and walls and pipes and wiring in the way would make it impossible to read them.

<comment><USER12> I guess when the signal is already that weak, some roofs etc doesn't make that much difference.

I'm excited for the new GPS satellites, GPS works well already but with modern technology in the satellites it should be much better.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> The article mentions North Korea's frequent GPS jamming, but doesn't mention that it's suspected as a cause of the fatal drone accident last May: [http://lemondronor.com/blog/index.php/2013/3/gps-loss- kicked...](http://lemondronor.com/blog/index.php/2013/3/gps-loss-kicked-off- fatal-drone-crash)

I haven't been able to find any more recent info about the incident.

<comment><USER14> Systems that rely on GPS are defective in their design. US military systems have never trusted GPS, since inception, because the Soviets had the ability to destroy the satellites and tinker with the RF.

US military systems are inertially guided only accepting GPS corrections within the error bounds of their extraordinarily tight inertial measurements. If the GPS is outside the error bounds, it is presumed to be compromised. There is no such thing as an intrinsically GPS-guided weapon; they are always inertially guided with GPS corrections. Modern US inertial systems are similar to GPS in terms of precision so GPS is increasingly superfluous.

As a consequence, the US military has never been significantly vulnerable to loss of GPS. Their systems were designed, from Soviet days, to assume that GPS could be compromised or lost since the Soviets had that ability. Knock out GPS and you still have to deal with ultra-precise solid-state optical gyros.

Many commercial systems take a cheap shortcut and rely on GPS but, contrary to popular mythology, US military systems never have.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> I love how it's just some dude running a delivery truck inadvertently doing this. It's like something out of a movie.

<comment><USER16> There is a legendary tale of a how a random delivery truck took down a whole popular MMO.

The MMO company had a issue with their own physical logistics, and had to put their login server across the street in another building.

They put special antennas between the two buildings, to keep the thing running, and it worked great, until one day, it didn't.

After a while trying to figure what was going on, they noticed that a huge delivery truck parked illegally (the place where it parked was illegal to anyone park), and the place he choose made the bulk of the truck metal stay right between the two antennas...

EDIT: Also when internet was still dial-up, one delivery truck ignoring height limits managed to cut all phone cables near my town biggest ISP, leaving the entire city without internet. I did not appreciated it...

<comment><USER17> I've heard of a similar issue with a wireless data link across a river that would cut out once or twice a day, but not everyday, and no one could figure out why. The answer only came after a few weeks of monitoring and an ametuer fisherman saying "hey, those are all high tide times!" at which point they realise that high tide was causing the mast of a docked boat to rise up enough to interfere, and that the boat was not always in its dock which is why some days were fine.

<comment><USER18> This is typically off-topic but you found that case interesting you might also enjoy reading "The case of the 500-mile e-mail":

[http://www.ibiblio.org/harris/500milemail.html](http://www.ibiblio.org/harris/500milemail.html)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Should it not be possible to track the vehicle (if it is only one) by installing GPS receivers in the area and noticing when the disruption begins and ends for each receiver?

That, coupled with license plate scanners at those locations, ought to find the culprit.

(And then they can launch an armed drone to take him/her out...)

<comment><USER20> The culprit is basically shining a very bright light (at invisible frequency) in all directions. Catching them should be even easier than your proposal.

(I suppose one could program a missile to follow the light...)

<comment><USER21>
      basically shining a very bright light

GPS satellites broadcast 500 watts from a 13dbi antenna.

But they're far away. Really really far away, to the tune of 21,000km. (The Earth is about 12,000km wide.)

By the time the signal makes it to the surface of the planet, the inverse square law has punched it down to -130 dBi, which is well below the thermal noise floor of room temp electronics. GPS receivers pull a useful signal out of a storm of random noise using deep information theory magic, which is vulnerable to several clever low power attacks.

Even a dumb jammer doesn't need much power, though.

      one could program a missile to follow the light...

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AGM-88_HARM](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AGM-88_HARM)

"The AGM-88 High-speed Anti-Radiation Missile (HARM) is a tactical, air-to- surface missile designed to home in on electronic transmissions coming from surface-to-air radar systems."

<comment><USER22> _> pull a useful signal out of a storm of random noise using deep information theory magic_

Any keywords I can look up as to how this is done?

<comment><USER23> [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GPS_signals#Demodulation_and_de...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GPS_signals#Demodulation_and_decoding), currently paragraph 4 describes pulling out the data.

Basically, even though the signal is below the noise floor, part of the signal is the output of a pseudo-random number generator with known properties, so by setting up your own PRN, and then trying different (time) alignments, the correct alignment will stick out, despite the noise (which all averages out). Once you have the time alignment, you can read the rest of the signal, and then you can tell how far you are from that satellite ((it's clock - <USER2> clock) / c). Repeat for other satellites and you're done.

Can't find any good references, but that's what our information theory lecturer said! Also, it explains why a hot start is quicker than a cold start (if you know where you are, and the accurate time, you know what alignments to try to start looking for the satellite signals.)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> GPS signals are _unsurprisingly_ easy to disrupt. It's a location mechanism that depends on one-way communications and triangulating an extremely precisely-timed signal between at least three far away satellites. Position fixes don't rain down like mana from heaven.

</comment><comment><USER25> Interestingly, Google's successor to BigTable -- Spanner -- utilizes GPS clocks and atomic clocks to maintain consistency of their data across globally-distributed data stores.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanner_(database)](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanner_\(database\))

<comment><USER26> Also, Google uses accurate atomic clocks in each of their datacenters, so when their GPS connectivity gets cutoff, they can still keep time. Almost everyone does.

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> A paper on GPS jamming countermeasures

[http://servv89pn0aj.sn.sourcedns.com/~gbpprorg/mil/gps4/GPS-...](http://servv89pn0aj.sn.sourcedns.com/~gbpprorg/mil/gps4/GPS- Vulnerability-LosAlamos.pdf)

Ultimiately, the lack of MAC and encryption makes civilian GPS MITMable.

(Discliaimer: I worked at Trimble.)

</comment><comment><USER28> Many many years ago I was a specialist in satellites for a major European broadcasting company. We had a problem with couriers who used radar speed trap jamming devices. They had really noisy oscillators which leaked huge quantities of out of band noise into the dished which were located near the courier drop off point.

We initially used an expensive spectrum analyser attached to a spare LNB (pointed at the parking area) but that needed you to notice the noise. So I used a USB enabled RF power meter interfaced to Excel (so sue me, it was a rush job and we weren't equipped for development). A script ran which fetched values, when there was a spike in received power it played an alarm and flashed the screen.

The next step was to ask security to hold anyone in the carpark while a large angry engineer went to give the courier a piece of his mind. It worked, courier companies were informed, people were shouted at and I believe it stopped.

There are probably better ways of doing this, but it was effective and built from spare parts.

</comment><comment><USER29> I didn't know GPS hammers were a thing but now I want one. Thanks, LSE.

<comment><USER29> Jammers. Thanks, iPhone.

<comment><USER30> Make sure it is legal to own/operate one in your jurisdiction before buying any sort of jammer.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> They seem to be taking it awfully casually, as if it's all some minor misunderstanding between gentlemen.

<comment><USER32> Well it is Britain.

</comment></comment><comment><USER33> Isn't GPS clock sometimes used to set up high-speed network connections? Maybe someone is jamming GPS to mess with a particular HFT application.

</comment><comment><USER34> As this becomes more annoying people will start watching for terrestrial GPS transmitters and start busting them.

</comment><comment><USER35> I guess we should migrate towards non GPS position tracking faster: [http://www.darpa.mil/NewsEvents/Releases/2013/04/10.aspx](http://www.darpa.mil/NewsEvents/Releases/2013/04/10.aspx)

</comment><comment><USER36> There's an Australian company who's got a land based positioning technology. It does not rely on satellites and I think it holds a lot of promises especially for airports.

<comment><USER37> Land-based, non-satellite radionavigation (particular for aircraft) is older than GPS (or satellites, or even jet engines.) (e.g., VOR, DME, TACAN, etc.)

<comment><USER38> Don't forget about LORAN.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER39> "The signals are weak. Mr Curry likens them to a 20-watt light bulb viewed from 12,000 miles (19,300 km)."

no, just no.

</comment><comment><USER40> Bane?

</comment><comment><USER41> In principle, GPS jammers are illegal, right? FCC regulations or some such?

<comment><USER42> In principle, you'd read the article before commenting.

<comment><USER4> What, you didn't read it for him?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER43> "receivers cost £2,000 per vessel"

Hmm, yes kind of like how a new GPS costs $5K, because the first .mil model did cost that much. Or all computers currently cost millions of dollars because the first ones did.

<comment><USER44> As somebody who's primary field of study is GPS / Navigation / Positioning, I'd like to remark that survey grade receivers such as in the eLoran stations can cost much, much more than £2,000.

Their price isn't so much the hardware itself, in fact, most of the receivers seen in cell phones today cost less than $1USD. However, when dealing with more accurate receivers, the receivers typically need extensive calibration and testing. I mean, it's possible to get measurements from GPS accurate to 1mm, but you need to have both a careful setup and very good knowledge about the errors associated with your receiver. So yeah, these receivers are actually quite expensive, and most of it is because the calibration on repeatability and stability of these sensors is of the utmost importance.

On a secondary note, survey-grade receivers are typically not as prone to jamming as consumer-grade receivers, mostly because they can use multiple GPS frequencies / can collect over a wider bandwidth. There's a lot more to it than that, but effectively the point I'm making is that the receivers spoken of in the article are not the same as everyday GPS receivers.

If you want to see how crazy the prices on these receivers can get, look no further than [http://www.surveyorsmart.com/product.sc?productId=548](http://www.surveyorsmart.com/product.sc?productId=548). I doubt many surveyors would go for that particular model by Leica, as it is definitely expensive, even for survey equipment standards, but it's not unreal in terms of pricing.

<comment><USER45> 1mm?

<comment><USER46> you can google the spec sheet for the receiver described. it can measure carrier phase to 0.2mm rms. that translates to an accuracy after post- processing of 3mm horizontal (with a fancy antenna).

the trick is to use the carrier itself, which is higher frequency than the signal modulated on it. also, relative offsets are easier that absolutes (removes many systematic errors).

i wrote (the software for part of) one of these (not for leica, for some geophysical survey company) back in the day (although it was not mm resolution!)

<comment><USER47> Current GPS receivers have a couple sources of error, including processing slowness and ionospheric delays. If you don't know what the ionosphere looks like, you can't be accurate to 0.2mm. There are ground stations that measure this (based on the fact that they aren't moving so any change in the GPS- calculated position means ionospheric changes) and transmit the correction data to other GPSes, but this doesn't get you to 0.2mm, at least not for a moving object.

<comment><USER48> TO be fair, Andrew wasn't claiming 0.2mm accuracy in position measurement - <USER3> was quoting the devices ability to resolve phase difference in the carrier wave (and noted that is an order of magnitude or so better than the resulting position accuracy).

Having said that, I wonder what the magnitude of ionospheric changes have on the phase difference of the carrier signals from satellites in different directions?

(Even though I know how it works, the idea of getting millimeter precision in measuring distances to something that's at least 20,000km away and traveling at almost 4km/sec seems like very black magic to me… Surely that can't actually _work_ in practice…)

<comment><USER46> i don't know what current state of the art is and even 3mm sounds crazy good when i think about it (i was just repeating the spec sheet). i wonder if it that also requires separate / multiple receivers to fully model the ionosphere?

<comment><USER48> As I understand it - once you can get the time-based position fix accurate enough, you add in the phase information from the 1.2GHz carrier wave - with a wavelength of ~200mm, resolving that to 0.2mm seems reasonable.

The problem of working out which of the peak/troughs in the carrier wave you're in almost certainly requires terrestrial DGPS assistance ([http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Differential_GPS](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Differential_GPS)). If you can use that to get ~100mm precision - that allows you to use the phase difference in the 200mm wave length to get sub mm measurements.

Like I said, I understand how it works – I just find it hard to believe it's actually practically possible… Deep magic…</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Show HN: OneBox.io – Sync Email Attachments to Dropbox, Box, GDrive, OneDrive - <AUTHOR> http://onebox.io

<comment><USER2> Email attachments are nicely organized and easily searchable. I'm using it to connect all my accounts and manage attachments in one place.

</comment><comment><USER3> There is an ifttt for this: [https://ifttt.com/recipes/98759-save-all-your- gmail-attachme...](https://ifttt.com/recipes/98759-save-all-your-gmail- attachments-to-dropbox)

What benefits does your service offer over this setup?

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for the feedback! This ifttt is only for Gmail --> Dropbox, my service supports any email client to any major cloud drive. Additionally, we automatically organize your attachments by filetype, so it's easy to find them later. And if you want to save on inbox space, we have the option of replacing attachments in incoming e-mails with the links to where they're stored on your cloud drive.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Once you know that a service like this exists you want it. I won't sign up, because I am unsure about giving another company access to my mail account. Do you know about a similar solution that can be run on an own server?

<comment><USER5> Writing something to pull out attachments from a set of Maildir directories isn't too difficult.

e.g. I wrote this quick hack recently [https://gist.github.com/skx/ba07ba7fbb0788c6ba68](https://gist.github.com/skx/ba07ba7fbb0788c6ba68)

If you're looking for more robust/common software take a look at the "mpack" package of tools.

Syncing to dropbox is left as an exercise, but presumably you'd just configure your attachments to be saved into the magic folder, perhaps on a per-suffix basis. (e.g. ~/shared/attachments/jpg/foo.jpg)

<comment><USER6> Writing a hack as you said is easy. Writing a usefull product is hard. Feel the difference...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> While it seems like a neat idea, do you really want so many companies to have your data? It seems like the risks of data theft is compounded.

<comment><AUTHOR> That's fair, if you don't trust any cloud storage drives with your data, this might not be for you. Not sure what would make a cloud drive less trustworthy than an email provider, though.

<comment><USER7> It's not necessarily that I am worried about any of them, but it is much more likely that at least one of them will have a security breach than it is with just one provider.

For instance, I use Dropbox. If Box has a breach, I am fine. I am fine unless Dropbox has a breach. If I use This service, then my data is compromised if any provider has a security breach.

<comment><AUTHOR> I'm not sure I follow. With OneBox.io, you only connect your email to one cloud drive, so you should be fine unless Dropbox has a breach.

<comment><USER7> Oh, I understand now. I originally thought that it saved it to multiple services. I apologize.

<comment><AUTHOR> No worries. I should have included "or" in the post title. Hope you give us a shot!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> It's not working for OneDrive. After I signed in, it redirected me to the homepage. GDrive works.

<comment><AUTHOR> Ah, thanks for letting me know! I'll take a look to see what could be wrong.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> Very cool idea but would never use it with my corporate account where the interesting attachments are.

<comment><AUTHOR> That's fair. Do you know what, if any, kinds of assurances or measures would make it viable for your corporate account?

<comment><USER9> Sorry, I really don't but our IT has pretty strict rules about what we can do with our email. I'm guessing you would have to work directly with the corporate IT departments to make sure they can audit security.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> i use it for all my accounting needs. Very handy when you have tons of attachments to go over.</comment>


Anonymous Donor Pays for College of Every Student in Kalamazoo - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/16/magazine/kalamazoo-mich-the-city-that-pays-for-college.html <comment><USER2> From Wikipedia:

"To receive a full scholarship, students must have attended Kalamazoo public schools since kindergarten. The program, unveiled at a November 10, 2005, Kalamazoo Board of Education meeting, is also viewed as an economic development tool for Kalamazoo. Since the Kalamazoo Promise was announced, enrollment in the school district has grown by 16%, test scores have improved, and a greater proportion of high-school graduates are attending college. In 2010 alone, the Kalamazoo Public School district saw enrollment rise 3% to 12,409."

Have to be there K-12 to get full tuition. There's a chart that shows the sliding scale based on your length of attendance. Most interesting part is that if you move in for the tail end of high school you get 0% covered to prevent people from temporarily joining the community just for the tuition.

      Attendance -> Proportion of full tuition
      K–12   100%
      1–12   95%
      2–12   95%
      3–12   95%
      4–12   90%
      5–12   85%
      6–12   80%
      7–12   75%
      8–12   70%
      9–12   65%
      10–12  None
      11–12  None
      12     None

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalamazoo_Promise>

EDIT: Added table.

</comment><comment><USER3> Wow. That's neat.

I once had a conversation with a state legislator where he argued it wasn't the responsibility of government to provide grant and loan opportunities for higher education, and that by doing so, the federal government was disincentivizing saving and investing. Instead, he argued universities should be more market driven (which I will concede might introduce more price competition in the face of rapidly rising tuition rates). He was a firm believer that a university education should be something one works and sacrifices for.

In my elected position with public education at the time, I disagreed (and still disagree) with some of his claims, believing a subsidized higher education experience for a expanded pool of people is a long-term net gain compared to crime/prison costs and the cost of government-funded social safety net programs. (Although, again, college-student families admittedly qualify for most government assistance programs already, but this is hopefully a short-term rather than lifetime dependence.)

I'd love to see the long-term effects on the quality of life, debt, and employment prospects of these students.

<comment><USER4> As a guy who grew up in an impoverished, rural family and received Pell grants and federal loans for my college costs, can someone explain to me why articles like this talk about students not being able to go to college without the donation? Has something changed since 1999 when I, with zero money or savings in my family, was able to go to college on government loans/grants based on the fact that I got in due to good grades/etc? (IF SOMETHING HAS CHANGED, AND POOR KIDS WITH GOOD GRADES ARE UNABLE TO GET FEDERAL LOANS AND GRANTS, THEN I AM GOING TO DO WHATEVER I, AS AN AVERAGE MIDDLE CLASS CITIZEN, CAN DO TO FIX THIS.) I realize that we've had an economic collapse, and I think this is a fantastic program, but statements like those in the article distract from the fact that poor areas of this nation fail not because students can't AFFORD college, but because they can't GET IN, due to substandard educations and (to some degree) bad parenting.

Regarding my comment on bad parenting, before people crucify me for blaming the victim, I assure you that a lot of poor, uneducated parents actively interfere (knowingly or not) with their children's educational chances. They do this mainly through ignorance (leaving TV on at night in child's room, never reading to them when they are young, not helping with homework, putting children to bed too late, etc.) I've watched this happen with most of my friend's growing up.

<comment><USER5> Ramit Sethi argues that the belief that you can't go to college due to a lack of money is largely misplaced, at least in the USA.

I'm sure there are edge cases where it really is impossible to get funding, but I know several people who went to very expensive schools and got it nearly all paid through various scholarships. NB: most of these scholarships were not granted by the college itself, but by an outside agency, whereas most people I know seem to only apply for scholarships through the college.

1: [http://www.iwillteachyoutoberich.com/blog/college-at- stanfor...](http://www.iwillteachyoutoberich.com/blog/college-at-stanford-is- now-effectively-free-so-whats-your-excuse/) 2: [http://www.iwillteachyoutoberich.com/blog/some-people- think-...](http://www.iwillteachyoutoberich.com/blog/some-people-think-theres- only-a-limited-amount-of-money/)

<comment><USER6> I wish someone would have told me about all this starting my freshman year of high school. Being from a poor rural family, I had no idea that these opportunities existed and the first thing I looked at was price of school over anything else. So, I only applied to one school which to be honest seemed unreasonably expensive at the time.

I think a huge part of the problem is not so much the resources, but the mentality that surrounds the poor. Having grown up poor, I was focused on being cheap, not on value. Of course, no one every said, "Hey, with your 3.3 GPA maybe you should apply somewhere else".

I also only took the ACT once after having been away at summer camp and only getting 3-4 hours of sleep each night for the past week, and no idea until later that people retook it.

The other aspect, is that in small rural towns it has been my experience, that the guidance counselors who do the college admissions have no idea what to do with a student who doesn't want to go to the traditional schools, which in my case were the 3 nearest community colleges, the University of Nebraska, University of Iowa, or Iowa State.

Ramit, would tell you that just because the information is out there, that isn't enough. In regard to this, it is absolutely true.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> "The Promise was created against a backdrop of recent economic thought that considers investment in education better than nearly every other kind of developmental effort when it comes to promoting economic growth."

That's the kind of thinking that turned east Asia from a place of wretched poverty to a place of wealth in my lifetime.

<comment><USER8> I want to believe your statement, but could you share some references for it?

I mean, some clue that education has been the driving force in the growth of east asian countries, rather than internal/external factors of other kinds.

<comment><USER9> Singapore.

<comment><USER8> this is an example rather than a reference. (Is it? when did singapore start to invest a lot on education? WolframAlpha believes that the country had high growth since 1965[0], which would be the year of the independence)

I was more looking to something like books, articles, researches that would explain how _investments in education_ in eastern countries have been the most effective on growth, rather than everything else.

Or the opposite, say, the last 20 years of low growth in japan are due to disinvestments in education.

[0] [http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=singapore+gdp+growth+ra...](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=singapore+gdp+growth+rate+1900-2012)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> What's fascinating to me is that because it prevented the surrounding communities from growing at the expense of Kalamazoo, those districts invested even more in their schools and education infrastructure to compete with the city with The Promise. I would have predicted the exact opposite. Super interesting.

</comment><comment><USER10> I went to college there and live one city over (25 minute drive). There are a lot of wealthy people living in the area, multimillionaires in the suburbs, but also a lot of poverty. A _lot_ of poverty. I'm glad to see someone trying something new, even on such a small scale. I was almost tempted to look for housing within the Kzoo city limits because of the Promise, but I don't plan on having children any time soon. We need more such experiments and resultant data.

</comment><comment><USER11> On the assumption this is a good thing, let's say every town/state rolls such a scheme out. Now every student in the nation is having their tuition paid. It's also costing about the same amount as if the government levied taxes and paid the costs.

A negative, compared to government funding, is that the economy has lost mobility of labour. Getting a full scholarship requires the child to be enrolled from K-12. Loss of mobility might be a good thing, in that it prompts people to improve their local economy, rather than run away. Alternatively, it could lock people into a form of serfdom, unable to move to better their situation.

I'd advocate that a voucher system, whereby the government gives each student a voucher for the degree of their choice, would be preferable to the widespread adoption of "the promise".

<comment><USER2> Lack of mobility is a key part of the experiment here. It's an economic growth strategy - attract families that value education, get them to set up roots, and the local economy will benefit.

If this were to roll out on a national level then it would be much similar to public school, but rather than K-12, it'd be K-BA. Maybe there'd be vouchers, maybe not.

The point is that this is an experimental model for economic growth and social benefit for the town, not _the_ model for the entire nation.

<comment><USER12> There's also a kind of inevitability here - that schemes with intended pay-off periods measured in decades are not going to interest politicians who's main (some say "only") job is to be re-elected on 3 or 4 year cycles…

Call me cynical, but if this had been my idea - I would have taken it to potential local wealthy benefactors, and probably would not have bothered pitching it to "the government"…

<comment><USER13> Politicians care about short term because voters often care about short term. Politicians have hacked the "get elected" game, we get what we deserve.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Only now as an adult, having grown up in southwest Michigan, do I appreciate how unusual the region is.

The amount of culture and philanthropy in area is very high considering the population. In Kalamazoo there's the Kalamazoo Area Math and Science Center (thank you Upjohn family), the Gilmore Keyboard Festival (thank you Gilmore family), the philanthropic work of the Stryker family, ... the list goes on and on.

About an hour north of Kalamazoo is Grand Rapids, another major Michigan metro area, which is also defined by philanthropy: Art Prize (thank you DeVos family) and the Fredrick Meijer sculpture park (thank you Meijer family), just to name a few.

Are all towns in the United States like this?

<comment><USER15> I grew up in Kalamazoo. Living in other places makes me wish everywhere was like Kalamazoo.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> What would be the unintended negative consequences of this?

It reminds me of the story of a West African king who went on a pilgrimage to Mecca. On his way to Arabia, the king gifted so much gold to all intervening communities that the price of gold crashed, taking with it the economies of North Africa and Arabia.

<comment><USER2> Unlike gold which is a scare resource, knowledge is non-rivalous. College tuition acts as an economic exclusion mechanism and thus only allows consumers/students with sufficient means to gain access to it.

By removing the exclusion mechanism for these students, it in effect turns college education into a public good.

As a country, we've deemed that this is so vastly in the public interest that we provide free K-12 education to all students regardless of how much (income/property tax) their family pays.

I'm not very familiar with studies of free college-level educations, but based on the thousands of studies that shows the incredible economic and social benefits to obtaining higher levels of education, I'd wager that any negative consequences will be vastly out weighed by the positive impacts.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rivalry_(economics)>

<comment><USER17> Knowledge is non-rivalrous, but it's not settled that the value of a college education comes mostly from added knowledge. If instead it comes from signaling, then it's no longer the case.

<comment><USER2> Agree with you on the signally aspect. As a nation we've become obsessed with college degrees and college may not be the right choice for everyone. But that's a whole other discussion thread.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Coming from a European country where we still have free university I think it's a good thing. Sadly things are changing. Now there are limitations, first universities where you have to pay and ever since this was introduced you can follow how the rankings fall and fall.

Note for people from the US: College/University is harder to attend to (graduating from high school is harder) and it's also harder to stay in there (or not take long), so it's still not like everyone can attend it which sucks, because the reason may besides personal problems may be the fact that you are not good at something you won't ever need again anyway. Also on personal experience stuff like math is completely different at college anyway, if you study CS.

</comment><comment><USER19> I'd say the kids of Kalamazoo could use a break given the kind of stuff they have to deal with.

[http://www.calgaryherald.com/opinion/letters/Nose+Hill+Park+...](http://www.calgaryherald.com/opinion/letters/Nose+Hill+Park+confrontation+makes+visitors+feel+unsafe/7050028/story.html)

Note: The above Kalamazoo sheriff is probably not quite as paranoid as the story suggests since Kalamzoo has a murder rate almost 7 times higher than Calgary despite being roughtly 1/14'th the size. If Kalamazoo is that dangerous, it's natural to assume a much bigger city would be even more dangerous. Still, that's one sheriff I wouldn't want to run into in a Kalamazoo park, let alone a dark alley!

<comment><USER20> Isn't murder rate per capita? I fail to see how size matters. Also this says the murder rate is half the Michigan average: <http://m.countyhealthrankings.org/node/1404/15>

The sheriff is apparently not very good at being off-duty, oh well.

<comment><USER21> I think a popular misconception is that small-towns are safer than big cities.

      Calgary
      </comment></comment></comment><comment>-
      2011 Population: 1,096,833
      2011 homicides: 10
      Rate: 0.91 per 100,000 people

      Kalamazoo
      </comment><comment>---
      2011 Population:  74,262
      2011 Homicides: 5
      Rate: 6.73 per 100,000

So the homicide _rate_ in Kalamazoo is 7.4 times higher. So much for small- town peace and quiet!

</comment><comment><USER22> And now. Whatever you do. No. Whatever. You. Do. Do. NOT. Turn back on this promise. Make it happen. No ifs, ands, or buts. Period.

And colleges. If somehow, something terrible happens, and the money stops coming in. Let those kids finish for free anyway. Anything less is the newest worst thing that could happen to these kids and then adults.

[edit: I am curious about the downvotes. From what I gathered, the people that these donors have chosen to help are the downtrodden of this area. Much of their life may have been spent in a world of people not fulfilling their world. Fathers leaving, etc. The last thing these kids need is for yet another promise to be left unfulfilled, be it by red-tape or just some series of unfortunate events. Despite that, these children need to have the results of the promise fulfilled.]

<comment><USER23> Re downvotes -- using periods like that for emphasis (in the first line of your post) is like typing your message in all caps for emphasis. It makes your argument harder to read, but it doesn't make it more persuasive. And it makes people not really want to talk with you -- you're signaling that you're not going to engage them intellectually, you're just going to get offended and shout at them if they disagree with you.

<comment><USER22> That's reasonable

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> I usually let out some man-tears on especially touching movie scenes, book passages, music verses and family occasions, but I'm pretty much sure this is the first time I couldn't hold it while reading an article. At least 5 times.

"The Promise" sounds like some utopian sci-fi plot, and the childrens' thank you notes for their unseen benefactors are more than heartwarming. These kind of investments that empower and multiply their effects are the farthest reaching long-term, and just brilliant.

Now I want to be a billionaire.

</comment><comment><USER20> _With every added student, the school district gets another $7,250 from the state._

That's per year, right? That's very close to the $4,200/semester number. So the college payments are almost equivalent to extending education from K12 to K16. That means that this could be done, even without donations, across the country.

<comment><USER25> There is a substantial difference: the $7,250 from the state doesn't come out of thin air, it comes out of the pockets of the Michigan taxpayers. The $8,400 per year for college comes out of the "Kalamazoo Promise" donation, not out of taxpayers' pockets.

I am not aware of any state that has been able to convince taxpayers to fund the additional four years[1]. The "Kalamazoo Promise" sidesteps that issue via private funding[2].

[1] States typically (heavily) subsidize college tuition for in-state students.

[2] The "Kalamazoo Promise" implicitly relies on Michigan state college tuition subsidies to achieve their tuition payment promise. [https://www.kalamazoopromise.com/ParticipatingCollegesUniver...](https://www.kalamazoopromise.com/ParticipatingCollegesUniversities)

<comment><USER20> Well of course it's different. I prefer the state paying because it actually scales to all students in the country. So your reminder that the state is already paying part of the bill makes this sound even better; they would only have to pay a small fraction more to provide full educational coverage!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> FYI Kalamazoo has three venture capital firms whereas to my knowledge Grand Rapids and Lansing have none. In fact until a few years ago there weren't any VC's in the Detroit city limits.

<comment><USER27> This is untrue.

I don't know about Lansing, but there is a ton of angel / venture activity in Grand Rapids. There is now an engineering school (<http://www.gvsu.edu/engineering/>), a medical school (<http://news.msu.edu/story/8262/>), a multi-billion dollar biotech research facility -- which grants PhDs (<http://vai.org/>) all in downtown GR.

VCs:

<http://www.bridgestreetcapital.com> | [http://www.mlive.com/business/west- michigan/index.ssf/2011/0...](http://www.mlive.com/business/west- michigan/index.ssf/2011/08/grand_rapids_venture_firm_hope.html) | <http://www.maf-1.com/>

Angels:

<http://www.grandangels.com/>

Coworking Spaces:

<http://workthefactory.com/> | <http://www.workcottage.com/>

Incubators:

<http://www.wmsti.org/about.htm> | <http://www.accelmich.org/default.aspx> | <http://www.gvsu.edu/marec/>

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> I am very jealous of these students, I entered my post college life in the hole like many other students. Luckily, the tech world is in a completely different state than the rest of the job world when it comes to looking for a place to practice your profession.

</comment><comment><USER29> Actually, it's donors (plural). They are collectively called the Kalamazoo Promise.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalamazoo_Promise>

<comment><USER30> The words "donors" in that wikipedia page have remained unchanged since the original page shell in May 2006. Considering also the NYT article explicitly discusses donor vs. donors, I view the wikipedia characterization more as editorial convenience than evidence.

That said, my common sense tends to agree with you. Is there evidence elsewhere?

<comment><USER31> The article uses "donors" several times. I think while it's amazing if one person is willing to sponsor, it's even more amazing if there are many out there who believe in a brighter future for them. That actually makes me happier, knowing that it's donors and not a donor.

"When asked how the conversations that led to the Promise unfolded, Brown demurs. "That, and the identity of the donors, are things I just will never talk about," she says. "

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> If I had to guess at a glance, I'd say maybe Chuck Feeney:

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chuck_Feeney#Education>

<comment><USER33> Oh come on, we know it's Derek Jeter. Jeter IS kalamazoo.

<comment><USER27> Jeter's net worth is something near $125mm, the Promise campaign has given out over $30mm so far. As nice of a guy as Jeter is, I don't think he's given up 1/4 of his wealth.

Smarter money is on the Stryker family ([http://www.mlive.com/business/west- michigan/index.ssf/2010/0...](http://www.mlive.com/business/west- michigan/index.ssf/2010/09/three_kalamazooans_with_stryke.html)) and the Upjohn family. The combined wealth of the two families is ~$10B and they have pretty strong Kalamazoo ties.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> Scott's Tots?

<comment><USER35> Let's hope it doesn't pan out that way...

</comment></comment><comment><USER36> Interesting how little effect they describe it as having on teen pregnancy and dropout rates.

</comment><comment><USER37> Anonymous? If memory serves me right it is the Stryker family that provides the scholarships.

<comment><USER38> Could be many... Upjohn, Stryker, Gilmore; there are many big names in Kalamazoo.

</comment></comment><comment><USER39> Having grown up in Michigan, this isn't anything particularly new. Kalamazoo has been at this for a while (perhaps the donor), and although it's phenomenal, I'm surprised it's at the top of HN.

</comment><comment><USER40> I wonder if Anonymous is taking credit for this.

</comment><comment><USER41> Scott's Tots

</comment><comment><USER42> It was batman!</comment>


Ask HN: What are the best technologies you've worked with this year? - <AUTHOR>

I've had a great year discovering some new technologies (for us) that we've never used before. We've fully moved over to Python, but I thought I'd try to create a thread that we can all find interesting with a list of the cool and useful technologies that people here have used. <comment><USER2> MongoDB, and CouchDB. Both very similar, very different databases. MongoDB is _fast_ (they say it's almost as fast as writing to /dev/null), has cool update features (i.e. increment count by 4, if count is less than 10), and great documentation, but it's dangerously unreliable by default.

CouchDB is rock solid, and has a very nice map-reduce setup (allowing your aggregations to update themselves quite quickly as underlying data changes), but the documentation is very bare, and it's not very fast (somewhere between 50 updates per second, to 3000 updates per second, depending on how you do things).

</comment><comment><USER3> The Microsoft Kinect is by far the most genuinely futuristic piece of technology I've used this year. It's something that didn't even exist last year at this time, and has clearly pushed technology, in general, into entirely new territory.

</comment><comment><USER4> I have been using Gaelyk for some of the projects. It's incredibly intuitive and simple enough for new developers to learn.

I have also played around with Sinatra for a hobby project but did not dig deep into it.

As most of the work I do is Java related, I have to say I'm impressed with Spring Roo it's got serious potential.

</comment><comment><USER5> <http://www.playframework.org/>

</comment><comment><USER6> Enyo. The HP Touchpad has an amazing JavaScript framework that's completely unlike jQuery Mobile or anything else I've seen in the space.

</comment><comment><USER7> CoffeeScript all day, errday. I actually started making fun of myself for being all giddy when writing some JSON day before yesterday.

</comment><comment><USER8> backbone.js <http://documentcloud.github.com/backbone>

</comment><comment><USER9> Scala and Play.</comment>


Ask HN: Should "delete" be renamed to "unlink" or "unreference"? - vezzy-fnord

So, everyone here should be aware that deleting (or removing/rm'ing) a file merely deindexes it from the file system along with its metadata, but the raw data still resides in the blocks. Thus, trivial measures like these which do not involve overwriting or any drive damage/malfunction are easily recoverable through various methods.
Yet despite data recovery being a prolific field both as an enterprise and having widespread software dedicated to it, a lot of users are still unaware and believe that a Shift+Delete is game over.
My question is: will renaming "delete" to something more accurate like "unlink" or "unreference" shift user perception as to the underlying remanence of their data? Then, in addition, an operating system should provide a "shred" or "secure remove" option to go alongside.
While this may obviously be problematic for intelligence agencies who do not want everyone to have a modicum of decent security practices, will a name change like that have any feasible paradigm shift in the way users think about file deletion? That, and it is more pedantic. <comment><AUTHOR> I think the terminology of "unlink" and "unreference" might be too esoteric for typical users - I'm thinking of my mother who can just about manage putting up pictures on facebook and email through Outlook Express.

Pairing "delete" with a "secure delete" option in some cases might work, but I don't think renaming the option is going to change behavior.

</comment><comment><USER2> OS X does have a "secure empty trash" feature.

"Unlink" is a scary meaningless word for an average Joe. Probably has something to do with those Internet links he keeps hearing about.

People won't care about securely deleting their files unless they get burnt or they see someone get burnt on Fox News.

</comment><comment><USER3> 1- the user command name is "rm". It is not a dictionary word, for several reasons. It is not the abbreviation of delete either. 2- the syscall is named unlink. What more do you want? Who is not aware of the semantics of this operation?

</comment><comment><USER4> What about just flipping operating system defaults to shred by default after emptying the trash [recycle bin]?

<comment> vezzy-fnord That would be uncalled for, however. A user might knowingly delete (unlink) their files as a sort of temporary hiding measure against a dumb adversary without forensic knowledge (say, family members), before restoring them.

Having two distinct options is a more preferable method. Certain files can have different deletion flags in the trash.

<comment><USER4> I think a user that uses deleted files to hide information could be classified as a power user: give them an option to enable unsecure file deletes if they really want to. That seems like a crazily tiny use case.

For the average user, though, I'd rather make them more secure by default.</comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: What kind of advertising have you tried that worked? - <AUTHOR> Our startup is looking to use banner advertising to help increase sales. So I have a few questions for the HN community:
1) We have ideas of what the theme of some of these banner ads will be, but we don't know the best wording that should be used. Should we get a copywriter? If so, where? How much should we expect to pay?
2) We can do the ads ourselves from a creative (art) perspective, but it may make more sense to have someone else do them for us if they are better. Where can we find a good designer for banner ads? Again, how much should we expect to pay?
3) Is there a resource online where we can gauge the potential success of these ads? We're interested in knowing what we can expect for CTR rates and/or CPC.
4) Any additional information that we should consider?
Thank you for responses ahead of time! <comment><USER2> We just ran a few campaigns. Here's what we found.

The Deck - <http://decknetwork.net/> We received roughly 4300 uniques across 2 weeks. We got about 9x the clicks from daringfireball than any of the other sites in the network (37signals, A List Apart, Kottke, FFFFound, etc.) If you email them they are open to negotiating.

Fusion Ads - <http://fusionads.net/> Very similar model as The Deck. We ran one of the $400 one-week "bursts" that they offer. Received about 1400 uniques.

Before we ran either of these campaigns we experimented on Facebook to see what sort of graphic/copy produced the greated CTR. We found that a very simple graphic, and simple copy always did the best.

After we ran the campaigns we also realized that Facebook advertising is a great deal. You can run really targeted ads on FB for cheap and get great results. I would definitely experiment here before spending big money on one of the larger networks.

Regarding art/copy, I would see what you can come up with on your own. Unless you're running a massive campaign, not sure a designer/copywriter is worth the expense.

Finally, it should be mentioned that a clever blog entry or two can generate far more traffic than a banner ad campaign.

<comment><AUTHOR> Did you run it for Actual Objects? We have a B2B product, wondering if this will have a similar return for us.

<comment><USER2> Yes, we ran this for AO, which is for the most part a B2B product (most of our customers are ad agencies and design firms). I'm not sure how this compares to your product.

<comment><AUTHOR> We have a B2B product focused on small businesses.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> Based on several years experience optimizing Internet ad campaigns, here are a few banner advertising tips:

1\. Test and track EVERYTHING. Every variation, headline,layout, domain ad is on, etc should have a unique ID, so you can see not just what gets the highest CTR but also which ad converts/backs out the best.

2\. Good design does not necessarily mean good ads. I've had the highest CTR and conversions come from the simplest, ugliest ads. See Plenty of Fish banner ads for an example of ugly,yet effective advertising.

3\. Regardless of the direction you take your design, have a clear, easy to see call to action ("click here!" button for example). Design the ad to draw the eye towards that button.

4\. There are two main strategies in banner ad design, blend or clash. Either blend in with the design of the site your banner appears on with similar colors and visual elements, or go the other direction and make an ad that clashes with it and stands out.

More specific banner media buying advice:

Taget smaller sites your customers are likely to visit. Ask to buy remnant inventory, and pay CPM. Don't pay more than $2-$3 CPM except in specialized cases. Don't go through ad ad network unless you have a big testing budget, instead go direct to webmasters. Use your own adserver and pay based on your adserver's numbers, not theirs. 1% CTR is fantastic for banner ads, but your EPC/conversion numbers will be the way to determine if an ad is succesful.

My email is in my profile, you(or anyone else here) can email me if you have other questions.

PS I don't think you need to hire a copywriter, you're obviously good enough at writing headlines based on how many upvotes this submission has!

<comment><USER4> I just want to second point #2. I spent 5 minutes creating some horribly ugly test ads in The Gimp, just so I could get our campaign started quickly. Afterwards I had our badass graphics guy create some beautiful banners. My ads performed 5x better than his over months.

<comment><USER5> I think sometimes pretty will sell better, sometimes ugly. It probably depends what you're selling. What were you selling?

(Side note for everyone: Please don't withhold useful information from your readers for fear of self-promotion. But if you must, at least fill out your profile.)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> My company was B2B, so it might be different for us then you. However, I'll still spell out what worked for us.

1\. Tradeshows. We went to industry tradeshows, and our sales guys really worked the shows. We didn't know anyone in the industry, either. They worked the shows, really got out there to know the people, and worked the people covering the shows (magazines, photographers, etc). Basically, it was all about networking.

2\. Advertising in print got us coverage. We bought ad space which came with a write up in the mag and online. Is good because it gave us presence.

3\. Presence is important. We'd go to trade shows all over the place, and really mingle. Tradeshows seemed to do well, and was the place for face to face meetings.

4\. Incentives to get word of mouth advertising. We would pay commissions to clients who would bring in other people. It wasn't merely a link to click on. Rather, it was direct referrals. "Hey, here's a guy who could use your services..." and we'd give him a fair cut.

But really, presence was the big thing. Being out there, being seen, being apart of the environment was big, and really allowed us to get out there. If you present yourself as a successful company, people assume you are. Obviously you need to back it up when they sign on, but it's getting them to call you back that is important.

Should also stress that most of this was between 2003 and 2006 when we started this and really pushed.

</comment><comment><USER7> 1\. Yes, get a copywriter. KNOW someone through contacts. I've got one, email is in my info, if you need one.

2\. Same as #1.

3\. There are SO many variables in what you're looking for. I recommend using some sort of tracking system (I use Omniture) to track as much information as you possibly can, so you can better target future advertisements.

4\. Depending upon what you're doing, you may not do very well with banner ads. I found that in my last business, being active in the "community" behind what it was based (posting on forums, showing up at events, etc.) was INCREDIBLY effective, and the banner ads didn't get me more than around 2-3K in sales (I was only making an average of 20% margin or so), which barely paid for having them in the first place.

<comment><AUTHOR> 1&2) Would definitely love the contact info! Unfortunately your email is not in your info. Could you leave it on here?

3) Wouldn't tracking it yourself be the best method? 4) What was your last business? Ours is a SaaS product targeted to small businesses. Would be very costly to attend events.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> In tests I was able to get new users for around $2 each using Facebook ads. I went into the details here:

[http://petewarden.typepad.com/searchbrowser/2009/11/get- new-...](http://petewarden.typepad.com/searchbrowser/2009/11/get-new-users- for-2-each-with-facebook-ads.html)

In my limited experience it's all about testing and iteration, lots of it. Or just find a feeble excuse to show a picture of a busty girl, judging from most of the ads I see on Facebook.

Also, be prepared for shockingly low CTRs on banner ads like Facebook's. Even highly targeted I was seeing 0.07% on my best ads, and from talking to others that's not uncommon. Even at that low of a rate the ads were cheap enough to be worth running.

</comment><comment><USER9> You might want to read Gabriel Weinberg's blog post on what worked for him. URL: [http://www.gabrielweinberg.com/blog/2010/03/my-duck-duck- go-...](http://www.gabrielweinberg.com/blog/2010/03/my-duck-duck-go-reddit-ad- by-the-numbers.html)

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks, just read through that.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Is anyone making Adwords convert these days? I haven't.

<comment><USER11> I still can't get AdWords on the search network to work in a scalable fashion, but the content network continues its years-long tradition of making my business viable.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> Gabriel Weinberg (Duck Duck Go founder) wrote a summary of his experience using Reddit Ads, which he found to be effective: [http://www.gabrielweinberg.com/blog/2010/03/my-duck-duck- go-...](http://www.gabrielweinberg.com/blog/2010/03/my-duck-duck-go-reddit-ad- by-the-numbers.html)

 _A couple of key points from the post:_

"My ad ran for 13 days, from 3/7 to 3/20. It cost $650, and I spent $50 per day. In total it had 1,288,378 impressions (282,732 uniques) and yielded 20,700 clicks (18,420 uniques)."

"Redditors actually try out your site. 3c per unique visitor is pretty good in and of itself, but it's all worthless unless they actually try out your site. For example, you can get 5c unique visitors from StumbleUpon (presumably in a similar demographic), but StumbleUpon visitors never would try out my sites. Reddit visitors did try out Duck Duck Go."

</comment><comment><USER13> Advertising on forums that are specific to what you're selling. I sell firearms, firearm accessories, and ammunition, so I spend a great deal of time on forums.

One of the best is SomethingAwful. They have a sub-forum dedicated to firearms, and a very close knit community. An ad on SA costs $30 for a month (which is insanely cheap) and I started a thread advertising my company. We've done incredibly well that way, have already sponsored a competitive shooting team and met a bunch of nice people.

What you don't get, of course, is in depth tracking. You can only see how many clicks you get (just wrap the link in your ad around bit.ly or another URL shortener). But it's just as well with me, I know my advertising is hitting it's target audience and it's worked out very well.

<comment><AUTHOR> You're absolutely right. Those just take a significant more time to do, which we will focus on as well, but would like to test out advertising waters first.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> Everyone here has been given some fantastic advice so I'll just add one little piece.

What I've seen from my own personal experience, is sites that sell advertising space have been tracking their advertising since they started because they need to know the value of their real estate.

Over time, this transfers to a fact that where ever you are doing your ad banners (a web site, a blog, a search engine), _the people you are buying from know how to reach their audience best._ Serious advertising firms have their own creative-content guys on the inside, and using them in those cases is way better than picking an external designer, freelancer, or using your own guys. This kind of comes down to this:

 _"If someone has a big yard, the kids that live there know how to play in it best."_

<comment><AUTHOR> Are there particular advertising firms that you would suggest to work with? Do you have an opinion on a firm such as Adroll?

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> 1\. Avoid copywriters. I know I'm contradicting someone else's comment, but copywriters don't help. What does help? Tracking software, split testing, and data. The copy writer could give you some copy that any logical person thinks would work, not knowing that statistically, it's not something people would ever click on. So, use the money you would spend on a copywriter and put it into more split testing.

So: -Split text your ads. -Use tracking software to do it. -Don't assume you know what will work. Let the data decide (not a copywriter).

<comment><AUTHOR> Are there any tips for word or character count for a banner ad that we should keep in mind?

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> Does anyone have any experience with low-cost TV ads?

<comment><USER17> I guess you need a product that fits well with the demographic that sees your TV ad to make that work well.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> We've only tried Facebook Ads so far and it hasn't shown good results. Maybe Adsense next?!

<comment><AUTHOR> May as well!

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> Give away free educational/teaching/useful content that targets your customer - e.g. for our time tracking software, we have a fun paper printable time tracker for the "hipster PDA" and have several articles planned on freelance foibles / common time mistakes.

I'm pseudo-famous on the back of my Rails tutorials and cheat sheets.

This is way better than any kind of advertising you can simply plunk down money and buy, for obvious reasons -- it gets people to really like you, to spend the most time looking at what you make, etc.

</comment><comment><USER20> what's worked best for my game Dead By Zombie:

1\. personal appearances at game conventions dressed as the mad scientist Dr. Heinrich von Hexenhammer --- NOTE: may not work for your project

2\. listings on niche sites

3\. astroturf forum comments on related sites

paid advertising? oh that actually hasn't worked too well in comparison. funny.

<comment><USER21> What are astroturf forum comments?

<comment><USER22> Astroturfing == posting fake "grassroots" testimonials about the product/idea/company in question to make it seem like a lot of people care about it. See <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astroturfing>

I'm sure it's pretty effective, especially if you only need to get a handful of people to notice your product. But it just feels so dirty...

<comment><USER23> >Astroturfing == posting fake "grassroots" testimonials about the product/idea/company in question to make it seem like a lot of people care about it.

This is actually illegal in the EU now under EU's Unfair Commercial Practices Directive; eg [http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/12/08/eu_consumer_protecti...](http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/12/08/eu_consumer_protection_laws/)

<comment><USER17> You might get away with just mentioning your product in these forums, but also mention that you are related with the product. If you are humble enough and the product really fits the audience of the forum, you might generate some interest. And you don't need to fear any backlash from somebody uncovering your astroturfing.

<comment><USER20> That's what I've done with Dead By Zombie. So I don't truly astroturf. But I do chime in. I believe the guy behind Balsamiq used this technique when he was just starting out. Making comments and doing mini-pitches in various web forums that had the demographic who might be interested in his new tool.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> a sale! just look at steam!

</comment><comment><USER25> I find flash-based ads extremely frustrating (and that's why I installed flashblock). Many of my friends did the same, so I guess that besides annoying, they are not effective.</comment>


You Don't Need a Co-Founder If You Simplify Your MVP Stack - <AUTHOR> https://dndemail.com/2018/01/30/how-to-simplify-your-app-platform-and-dump-the-co-founder/ <comment><USER2> Although that advice is useful. I would have assumed a co-founder is mostly focused on marketing.

<comment><AUTHOR> Point taken. For me, you don't market and code at the same time.

Pre-Launch of MVP: spend 90% coding, 10% some preliminary marketing.

After-Launch: Spend 90% of time marketing, 10% bug fixing.

In the Marketing phase, it is a mistake to keep adding features hoping those features will attract new customers. Your goal is to attract customers based on your existing feature set. You will either have customer demand or not. If you don't have demand, stop marketing and pivot.

If you do have demand, use marketing feedback to improve your product incrementally. Don't add new features. Instead, improve your conversion, test your UI, etc.

If you have to add features to get users, you are not ready to market.

<comment><USER2> I kind of took the opposite approach. I worked on a landing page with a hook first. only had one button on it. ran it on google. pivoted. pivoted. added more functionality. got my mortgage license(financial service is a good market for lead generation). generate leads for myself.</comment></comment></comment>


Coin-operated Borgocrat goes to Google, acquires whole new set of opinions - <AUTHOR> http://www.fakesteve.net/2009/11/hell-hath-no-fury-like-a-borgocrat-scorned.html

<comment><USER2> Clicking through to the cited posts:

1\. [http://dondodge.typepad.com/the_next_big_thing/2006/12/optio...](http://dondodge.typepad.com/the_next_big_thing/2006/12/options_on_goog.html) \- Most of this post is praising Google for their TSO program. Microsoft is mentioned almost as an afterthought, to show that they also have good employee benefits (not exactly a secret).

2\. [http://dondodge.typepad.com/the_next_big_thing/2005/11/googl...](http://dondodge.typepad.com/the_next_big_thing/2005/11/google_data_cen.html) \- This was written in 2005, and is pretty much exactly in line with the predominant sentiment of that time. It's hard to make the case even today that Google has yet really attacked MS directly (no desktop OS, a much lighter office suite, etc).

3\. [http://dondodge.typepad.com/the_next_big_thing/2006/10/offic...](http://dondodge.typepad.com/the_next_big_thing/2006/10/office_20_free_.html) \- Again, mostly in praise of Google, talking specifically about how online office suites are a potentially disruptive technology that MS is scrambling to get a slice of like everyone else. And, feature-for-feature, um, of course MS Office wins. But if you don't care about feature count, so what?

4\. [http://dondodge.typepad.com/the_next_big_thing/2007/12/googl...](http://dondodge.typepad.com/the_next_big_thing/2007/12/google- vs-micro.html) \- He specifically says Google is to today's MS as Toyota was to Ford or MS was to IBM 30 years ago. The whimper about MS having smart folks who have played disruptor themselves doesn't exactly equate to "Google won't disrupt MS".

5\. [http://dondodge.typepad.com/the_next_big_thing/2007/02/googl...](http://dondodge.typepad.com/the_next_big_thing/2007/02/google_apps_tak.html) \- Alright, Fake Steve has this one pretty spot on.

6\. [http://dondodge.typepad.com/the_next_big_thing/2007/05/windo...](http://dondodge.typepad.com/the_next_big_thing/2007/05/windows_live_ho.html) \- It's a product blurb, followed by the drooling endorsement of pointing out that people usually don't completely abandon their old email addresses even if they move on to something else.

<comment><USER3> It's worth noting that every single quote is from 2005, 2006 or 2007. A lot has changed in the past 2 to 4 years.

<comment><USER4> > Gmail is a reasonable alternative to Hotmail or Yahoo Mail, but it doesn't > compare to Microsoft Outlook

Gmail is pretty much the same, sans themes and offline access.

<comment><USER5> Adding themes; adding offline access; adding IMAP, POP, and SMTP support; allowing labels to be treated like folders; allowing forwarding; adding in- browser chat; adding keyboard shortcuts; adding online preview and viewing of many documents, including notably Microsoft Office formats; adding contact groups; adding muted conversations; adding to-do lists; integrating with calendaring (Gcal didn't even exist when he wrote that article, let alone integrate tightly); and adding synchronization with BlackBerrys. And that's off the top of my head.

Gmail's UI may be roughly the same as it was in 2005, in the same way that Outlook 2007 is basically the same as Outlook 2003, but the actual experience has markedly changed and improved--certainly enough that I think his claim could be reasonable then, but moot now.

<comment><USER4> I guess you're right.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I think this deserved pointing out. I'm not sure where this Don Dodge is great stuff comes from or what it's based on but these few posts about him do make him seem coin-operated. The best developer evangelists are able to be sincere, thoughtful and helpful. Without those qualities it's a job that tends to make you into a shill.

<comment><USER7> Agreed on all counts. Never heard of him until the news he was fired from MS, read his goodbye blog post that was pretty Microsoft-friendly, and threw up in my mouth a little when I saw this new one. I'm sure Don's done some good work, but based on the exposure I have to him (the two aforementioned blog posts) I find it hard to respect the guy.

<comment><USER8> I agree that it looks pretty bad, but for the sake of playing Devil's, er, Don's Advocate: maybe he was feeling down from being unexpectedly let go from MSFT, and is now having a rebound where everything about his new job looks extra rosy? Just saying there's a human/personal element at play here too.

<comment><USER7> I can understand feeling down after being fired. I can't understand magically having opinions opposite to those you held when employed by your new employer's competitor. The flippant and unprofessional tone just exacerbates the problem.

<comment><USER9> I don't think any of his opinions expressed are actually a turnaround from his previous statements. He used to talk about the good things at Microsoft and not mention the bad things. Now he is talking about the good things at Google (with comparison to bad things at Microsoft), and not mentioning the bad things at Google (which I won't attempt to enumerate, since I work at Yahoo).

I think he is just trying to remain upbeat about his sudden and clearly quite wrenching departure from a job he loved at a company he respected.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I don't see much in the way of inconsistencies. In _2006_, Don notes:

"Google knows that on a feature comparison basis there is no contest. Microsoft Office wins."

And, in the SAME blog posting also says:

"Feature comparisons aside, I think the real story is free online collaboration, which is the next battlefield."

Now that he's left MSFT, he says:

"I can't think of a single feature missing from what I need every day. There may be some edge cases, but I haven't bumped into any yet."

I haven't used Google Docs much, but haven't they improved significantly in the past three years? Furthermore, he noted while at MSFT that the killer feature is collaboration, not the number of unique word count statistics. I see little in the way of inconsistency here. Doesn't Ballmer change his arguments at least twice a year when it comes to dissing competitive offerings?

<comment><USER11> Many of those quotes are 2-3 years old. Google has been consistently improving their web offerings and the speed of web apps has been getting better and better.

I have changed my opinion of products and companies over a the span of years many times. I think we should agree that he can too.

<comment><USER10> Perhaps I wasn't sufficiently clear...I agree with you entirely. And, I don't see much evidence that he's actually changed his opinion much over time.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> 'Even Microsoft's online version of Outlook called Outlook Web Access is far better than Gmail'

Even according to the standards of marketers/evengelists, this is so overboard.

<comment><USER13> I am one of the unfortunate people that have to use Outlook Web Access at work. Unless you use IE, you lose a lot of features.

Since I use firefox, I find that even Hotmail is better than OWA.

<comment><USER14> You can actually use your gmail account to check your exchange accounts. If your work place allows that, go right ahead! I've been accessing my univ exchange account via gmail and never regretted it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> I guess he never really had to work with Office or Outlook, or otherwise he would have known their advantages.

Firing him was just a logical consequence, since he didn't seem to do an awful lot of work.

</comment><comment><USER16> I believe Scoble at least waited a few weeks to make his conversions seem organic.

I think this would have less of a bad taste if we thought of these guys as being particularly conniving salespeople rather than "evangelists".

After Goog prevented Jon Skeet from getting his MS MVP award, this post might also have been internall encouuraged by Google. Nothing would demoralize MS more than seeing its ex-girlfriend sleeping with its hated rival (even if they initiated the breakup).

</comment><comment><USER17> FSJ is the tech industry's court jester.

</comment><comment><USER18> The point should be that every platform company needs great developer evangelism, and a great developer evangelist should certainly be serving the developer community as much as they serve the company that writes their check. This is why the current situation is ultimately a win for Google and a loss for Microsoft.

Fake Steve misses the point on this one, which is a surprise considering how amazingly great Apple is doing with developer evangelism on the iPhone. No wonder he wouldn't want Don Dodge. What would he do with someone like that?

<comment><USER19> FSJ has a point here. The blind endorsment of Google technology within a week of switching jobs is fishy. Plain and simple.

<comment><USER20> As a tech evangelist, you could say he's just doing his job very well. (sarcasm.)

<comment><USER21> The fact that we're having this discussion means he probably failed. The evangelist needs to make with the awesome about products without raising suspicion.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> The point is to get well paid for publishing such blah-blah-blah. And he did.

</comment><comment><USER23> " _I sent a copy of this to Katie with a note asking how we missed out on this guy, because he's exactly the kind of coin-operated true believer we need around here._ "

LOL</comment>


Backbone.Rel: Backbone lightweight model relationship manager - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/masylum/Backbone.Rel

<comment><USER2> This looks neat! But obvious question, how does this compare to the Backbone- relational library? One useful feature in Backbone-relational is the includeInJSON option, which can be used to either include/ignore or select a single attribute from the related model to be included in the toJSON output of the parent model. Would you have to manually do that here?

<comment><USER3> That's what I was going to ask.

I am by no means an expert, but syntactically, I prefer how backbone- relational does things so that it looks and feels more like working with native Backbone objects, but I honestly don't know what's different about this otherwise.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Awesome. Does this simplify the whole retrieval and setting of relationship as they are loaded via the standard fetch mechanism?

A real pain point for us at with Backbone is transversing these relationships in JS. We end up doing redundant renders as related models finally come into memory.

<comment><USER5> It's a simple abstraction around filtering objects in a collection by an id. Your collection must be already fetched.</comment></comment>


By 2050 solar power could end U.S. dependence on foreign oil and slash greenhouse gas emissions - <AUTHOR> http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=a-solar-grand-plan&ec=su_solar <comment><USER2> By 2050, aliens could have taken over the earth and humans could have been turned into a fungus-eating quadruped. This is forty years from now, and there is no telling which way the technological development will take.

Scientific American is stupid. Just look at the predictions these magazines were making fifty years ago. I suppose the article's author is basing his predictions on available evidence? Well, based on available evidence, the authors of Scientific American make lousy predictions.

</comment><comment><USER3> yeah but by then the Singularity will already have happened so who cares</comment>