Chaos Makes the Multiverse Unnecessary - <AUTHOR> http://nautil.us/issue/66/clockwork/chaos-makes-the-multiverse-unnecessary-rp <comment><USER2> What is the _productive_ meaning of this article? Evidently, the universe does not upload her laws into ArXiv for us to read and link on HN and for that reason people have poured their lives into certain perceptions and publish their findings in hope it carries some productive weight.

The idea that our established views in math and physics are all selective and narrow is certainly correct but I'd like to see where the alternative is. Feels like nihilist rambling.

<comment><USER3> We miss the planet for the forest and the trees?

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> > _Noson S. Yanofsky has a Ph.D. in mathematics from The Graduate Center of > The City University of New York. He is a professor of computer science at > Brooklyn College of The City University of New York._

Remember the old stereotype[0] of physicists that thought that because they understood physics, they were automatically experts in every field - and so began dispensing "wisdom" to all of the actual experts?

I guess physicists aren't the only ones who are susceptible to this.

[0] [http://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/2012-03-21](http://www.smbc- comics.com/comic/2012-03-21)

<comment><USER5> Thanks for sharing this cartoon! This phenomenon is not limited to physicists either, it is pretty much true for all professionals and famous people. But also, physicists claim that they do not deal in philosophy, yet the main subject matter of theoretical physics is a collection of old philosophical subjects such as time, space, the cosmos and absolute beginnings of things. There is a confusion here.

This article makes important points about the relation of physics and mathematics. I agree that physicists pick and choose "smooth" and solvable system and then claim to reveal the secrets of the universe.

<comment><USER4> > _But also, physicists claim that they do not deal in philosophy, yet the > main subject matter of theoretical physics is a collection of old > philosophical subjects such as time, space, the cosmos and absolute > beginnings of things._

Geometry used to be studied exclusively by philosophers, but after a long string of successes the group of people who specialized in it got renamed to "mathematicians." Likewise at one point natural science was called "natural philosophy." Philosophy is the mother of the sciences but once the kids get established they move out of the house.

> _physicists pick and choose "smooth" and solvable system and then claim to > reveal the secrets of the universe._

If you are looking for knowledge about the universe, one hundred percent of it will be found in the form of "ideas comprehensible to humans." All of the secrets of the universe that we know are obviously going to be the knowable ones. If you spend time studying things that aren't knowable then by definition you are wasting your time, even if there _is_ an ontological category of "unknowable but true."

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I rationize the multiverse theory this way: There may be events that are purely chaotic. If you could rewind the universe, the outcome would change following a probability. If our universe started, then it is possible for a different universe to start. The initial conditions for any universe may be a set of chaotic events. If it was possible for an infinite number of universes to start, then maybe there is at least one universe for every possible chaotic event that could have occurred in our universe, and infinitely more that could not have occurred in our universe.

<comment><USER4> > _There may be events that are purely chaotic. If you could rewind the > universe, the outcome would change following a probability._

Chaos is not the same thing as randomness. Chaos is defined as "completely deterministic, but a small change in the state at one time will produce a large and rapidly growing change in the state at later times," which implies that if you knew today perfectly you could predict the future forever, but if you are even a little bit wrong it will be magnified, eventually, in to being totally wrong.

<comment><USER7> So chaos is like a cryptographic hash function where a given input always produces the same output, but even a slight change in the input produces massive changes in the output?

<comment><USER4> That sounds right to me. Many things computers do are chaotic because one little bit flip can flip a whole lot of other bits down the line...

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I found this article incredibly thought provoking, particularly the jettisoning of axioms necessary to understand more and more phenomena.

</comment><comment><USER9> Chaos is just a word, created by humans to provide a human expression to another and for me it describes a system that is too complicated at the current moment in time to unravel into a deterministic system.

I enjoy the multiverse theory because of how it makes infinity more imaginable for me and how time does not need to align between universes to recreate the current moment in one universe. The current moment in this universe can even theoretically happen again in the exact same universe when understanding infinity with all the variables aligning again.

Fatalism is how I view reality. If there is a deity, that being is deterministic as well and could effect our lives but still would make it fatalism for us. Although, I fundamentally think Spinoza is correct on the logic & philosophy of god and thus I think there is no deity(s).

<comment><USER4> > _Chaos is just a word, created by humans to provide a human expression to > another and for me it describes a system that is too complicated at the > current moment in time to unravel into a deterministic system._

For what it's worth, chaos is defined to mean something specific in physics: a system that is deterministic, but where a small change in today will grow in to a very big change in tomorrow, to the point where any error in your knowledge will eventually grow in to being completely wrong. To reiterate, chaotic systems are all deterministic.

If you're not talking about the world but are instead talking about your experience of the world then chaos means whatever it means in that field of study, I guess. But if you want to understand the universe then physicists are the people you'll want to listen to, so you should know what chaos means.

<comment><USER9> I find your last paragraph an attempt at dismissing what I wrote? The interpretation I gave is based on how physicists interpret chaos.

<comment><USER4> Chaos isn't interpreted in physics, it's defined in physics, and it happens to be deterministic by definition. Many chaotic systems have already been "unraveled in to deterministic systems," including the double pendulum and weather models.

<comment><USER9> My philosophy is everything is deterministic and how I wrote the above illustrates that with my expression of the word chaos. I don't understand your point?

<comment><USER10> In this context, a non-deterministic system is stochastic. That means there's an inherent random probability in the behavior. Chaos has no "chance"; you get the same result with the same initial conditions.

<comment><USER9> I agree with all that and I'm still confused to why the original commenter suggests my interpretation is incorrect to how I phrased chaos.

<comment><USER4> To break down the original sentence, "it describes a system that is too complicated at the current moment in time to unravel into a deterministic system," it implies that chaotic systems are not already "unraveled" into deterministic ones. The reality is that chaotic systems are all already deterministic by definition, and in fact many of them are completely "unravelled" (insofar as the equations that govern them are known.)

<comment><USER9> No, I never once implied chaos systems are not already unraveled into a deterministic one.

Me writing, "it describes a system that is too complicated at the current moment in time to unravel into a deterministic system" uses the word "unravel" as how humans are incapable of understanding all the cause & effects in the current moment of time; when they define it as chaos but may eventually be able to understand all the cause & effects.

I have no understanding to why you wrote your last paragraph in the original comment to me and how the comments transpired from then to now; other than you have a fragile ego to how I prefer to use my expression of the word chaos.

<comment><USER11> As you said, "it's just a word," and words can have several meanings. This is just one example: you gave a _definition_ of chaos "in your philosophy," but arguing about definitions (and philosophies) is usually pointless.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> > "Symmetry of time means that the outcomes of experiments should not depend > on when the experiment took place."

I don't think that this is correct.

<comment><USER13> On the contrary, it is a pretty fundamental assumption in all of our fundamental theories (with some bows and whistles).

A point of confusion might be that the surroundings of the experiment might influence it and the surroundings would depend on whether it is a workday or a weekend, etc. But this is a bad experiment. The correct interpretation is "if my experiment is isolated so that external events do not influence it (like all good experiments), then I will get the same results no matter whether I do it today or wait until tomorrow". Another way to phrase it is "there is no dependence on the variable 't' in the fundamental laws".

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> _" These laws of nature appear fine-tuned to bring about life, and in particular, intelligent life."_

The "to" implies purpose, and there's no evidence of this. That fact that we exist could only happen in a universe that we can exist in, but this says nothing about why the universe is like that.

 _" One answer to some of these questions is Platonism (or its cousin Realism). This is the belief that the laws of nature are objective and have always existed"_

Platonism is a type of Realism ([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_realism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_realism))

And the idea that the laws of nature are objective and have always existed does not equate to Platonism. It doesn't mean they are therefore Platonic Forms [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Platonism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Platonism)

 _" The multiverse is another answer that has recently become quite fashionable. This theory is an attempt to explain why our universe has the life-giving laws that it does"_

It's really misleading to present the multiverse notion as an attempt to explain a universe suitable for life.

There are many other reasons people have proposed it. For example, in the Many-worlds interpretation of Quantum Mechanics [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Many- worlds_interpretation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Many- worlds_interpretation)

 _"...while the multiverse would answer some of the questions we posed if it existed, who says it actually exists? Since most believe that we have no contact with possible other universes, the question of the existence of the multiverse is essentially metaphysics."_

I think that's misleading - there are stronger theoretical grounds for hypothesising it than what this suggests. I'm not saying there's evidence for it, I'm saying that the quoted statement misleadingly makes it out be an empty speculation.

 _" Some people say that science studies all physical phenomena. This is simply not true. Who will win the next presidential election and move into the White House is a physical question that no hard scientists would venture to give an absolute prediction. Whether or not a computer will halt for a given input can be seen as a physical question and yet we learned from Alan Turing that this question cannot be answered. Scientists have classified the general textures and heights of different types of clouds, but, in general, are not at all interested in the exact shape of a cloud. Although the shape is a physical phenomenon, scientists don't even attempt to study it. Science does not study all physical phenomena. Rather, science studies predictable physical phenomena. It is almost a tautology: science predicts predictable phenomena."_

I don't agree with that characterisation. Just because it can't give complete predictions of phenomena does not justify saying it doesn't study those phenomena. Just because we can't predict halting doesn't mean we don't study halting at all. The fact that we know for certain that we can't predict halting demonstrates that we study, and have a certain level of understanding of, that phenomenon.

...and I've run out of time to read more of the article.

<comment><USER15> The multiverse and the many worlds have nothing to do with each other.

Multiverse postulates multiple universes with _different_ laws of physics, while many worlds postulates worlds with the _same_ laws, just different results for quantum events.

You could even have many-worlds _inside_ multiverse. And some multiverse's with and without many worlds.

<comment><USER14> > _The multiverse and the many worlds have nothing to do with each other._

Some examples

"The theory is also referred to as MWI, the relative state formulation, ... multiverse theory or just many-worlds. [...] MWI is one of many multiverse hypotheses in physics and philosophy." [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Many- worlds_interpretation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Many- worlds_interpretation)

For those who don't know, the Everett mentioned in the following is the person who came up with the Many Worlds view.

"The Multiverse Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics", by Raphael Boussoa and Leonard Susskind Abstract: We argue that the many-worlds of quantum mechanics and the many worlds of the multiverse are the same thing, and that the multiverse is necessary to give exact operational meaning to probabilistic predictions from quantum mechanics. [https://arxiv.org/pdf/1105.3796.pdf](https://arxiv.org/pdf/1105.3796.pdf)

"Identity and probability in Everett's multiverse", by P Tappenden. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, Volume 51, Issue 1, 1 March 2000, Pages 99–114 [https://doi.org/10.1093/bjps/51.1.99](https://doi.org/10.1093/bjps/51.1.99)

"The Structure of the Multiverse", by David Deutsch 1\. Introduction The idea that quantum theory is a true description of physical reality led Everett (1957) and many subsequent investigators (e.g. DeWitt and Graham 1973, Deutsch 1985, 1997) to explain quantum-mechanical phenomena in terms of the simultaneous existence of parallel universes or histories. [https://xxx.lanl.gov/pdf/quant-ph/0104033](https://xxx.lanl.gov/pdf/quant- ph/0104033)

<comment><USER4> > _The multiverse and the many worlds have nothing to do with each other._

> (paraphrasing) The terms "multiverse" and "many worlds" are used > interchangeably by many.

You two aren't really disagreeing. The parent commenter was just highlighting that there are two totally separate concepts that are associated in public vernacular with a single word.

<comment><USER14> I take "The multiverse and the many worlds have nothing to do with each other" to mean there does not exist _any_ notion of multiverse that has to do with many-worlds.

<comment><USER15> Did you actually read [https://arxiv.org/pdf/1105.3796.pdf](https://arxiv.org/pdf/1105.3796.pdf) ?

As best as I can tell the multiverse he describes is not the type with varying laws of physics. He's using yet another definition of the term.

<comment><USER14> You said it has nothing to do with multiverse, not "it has nothing to do with one particular notion of the multiverse". The examples are countering the former. And what about the other examples?

<comment><USER15> You are overdoing it.

I specifically defined what I meant by multiverse in my first message. You can't nit pick my words by giving them a new definition, then argue that my words don't work for that new definition.

<comment><USER14> You defined it and treated it as the only meaning the word has, making the blanket statement that MW has nothing at all to do with the notion of the multiverse. So you accept that it does have something to do with how many people use the term?

<comment><USER15> Did you forget that there is an actual article we are discussing here? And it uses the term? And it has a specific definition of it? The same one I used?

I mean you did object to _this_ article right? Not some other one, that used a completely different definition of the word?

<comment><USER14> The article is not sacrosanct -- a number of people here, including myself, have made criticisms of it -- and you seem to be forgetting that my point started with a criticism of the article, not of your comment. It, like you, talks of _the_ multiverse in one specific way, and I was pointing out a problem with that. It said:

 _" The multiverse is another answer that has recently become quite fashionable. This theory is an attempt to explain why our universe has the life-giving laws that it does. One who believes in a multiverse maintains that our universe is just one of many universes. Each universe has its own set of rules and its own possible structures that come along with those rules."_

See where it says "The multiverse is" and "This theory is", as if the multiverse notion is only that?

and the full text of my response to that point was

> _It 's really misleading to present the multiverse notion as an attempt to > explain a universe suitable for life.

>

> There are many other reasons people have proposed it. For example, in the > Many-worlds interpretation of Quantum Mechanics > [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Many- > worlds_interpretation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Many- > worlds_interpretation) _

<comment><USER15> Yes, but we are not talking about that theory. It's about as relevant as complaining about epicycles.

That theory simply has nothing whatsoever to do with this article, other than the name.

Why are you bringing up a random theory that has nothing to do with article at hand? Is it just because the name reminded you of it?

It is unfortunate that two completely different theories both have the same name, but there's nothing I can do about that. You simply have to pay attention to which one is being discussed.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> This reads more like a mad man's ramble "hear me out for a minute" than an interesting point of view.

</comment><comment><USER17> Sure, unnecessary. Just like life.</comment>


The High Hopes of the Low-Tech Phone - <AUTHOR> https://www.theverge.com/2019/9/4/20847717/light-phone-2-minimalist-features-design-keyboard-crowdfunding <comment><AUTHOR> I wonder if people will pair these with LTE-enabled Apple Watches. That way you get Apple's Messages, maps (very important for some), calendar/to-do management, and Siri. Of course, you'd have to pay an extra 10 bucks monthly for the watch's LTE, and I'm not sure you could have both phones hooked to the phone number.

Actually, the more I think about this, perhaps people will just move to going watch-only. (I say this as someone who loves his Pebble but will probably get an Apple Watch 4 or 5 soon, as my battery is worsening and the feature gap is widening.)</comment>


Trent Reznor says YouTube is "built on the backs of free, stolen content" - <AUTHOR> http://www.factmag.com/2016/06/15/trent-reznoryoutube-built-on-the-backs-of-free-stolen-content/ <comment><USER3> I agree with Gabe Newell's stance on piracy.

"We think there is a fundamental misconception about piracy. Piracy is almost always a service problem and not a pricing problem," he said. "If a pirate offers a product anywhere in the world, 24 x 7, purchasable from the convenience of your personal computer, and the legal provider says the product is region-locked, will come to your country 3 months after the US release, and can only be purchased at a brick and mortar store, then the pirate's service is more valuable."

[http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/114391-Valves- Gabe...](http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/114391-Valves-Gabe-Newell- Says-Piracy-Is-a-Service-Problem)

<comment><USER4> This is exactly right. Steam single-handedly revived the entire PC gaming market. A simple to use interface, that has your entire collection / achievements / whatever, that can be accessed from anywhere, without screwing around with keys. That's why it works.

<comment><USER5> Is there anything that iTunes could learn from Steam?

<comment><USER6> Support Linux.

I want an iPhone, but I can't even sync music libraries with my Linux desktop.

So I'm stuck with Android.

<comment><USER7> Probably not worth it. By Valve's measure [0], 0.84% of Steam users are on Linux. They have made the investment into Linux support toward the promotion of their own Linux based hardware. Apple has no such incentive.

Does iTunes not run well enough in Wine [1]?

I say this all as a frequent user of Steam on Linux and a nonuser of iTunes.

[0] - [http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey](http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey)

[1] - [https://appdb.winehq.org/objectManager.php?sClass=applicatio...](https://appdb.winehq.org/objectManager.php?sClass=application&iId=1347)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I wonder what has changed his mind since he was a member of Oink, a UK torrent site aimed at music. The (very brief) article mentions it. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oink%27s_Pink_Palace#Notable_u...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oink%27s_Pink_Palace#Notable_users)

<comment><USER9> Oink was not a business. Oink was an invitation-only BitTorrent community. Reznor even has a relevant quote in the Wikipedia article you linked:

"they're not stealing it because they're going to make money off of it; they're stealing it because they love the band"

Meanwhile, YouTube is a business, it displays ads for stolen content and everyone has easy access to it.

<comment><USER10> Thanks for posting this, it's easy to forget the distinction between the two. I was just thinking that it's awful inconsiderate to have a stance against piracy given that he himself literally asked people to pirate his music, but there is a difference between people sharing information vs. a platform monetizing it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Is it, though? In my experience YouTube (or is it the copyright owners?) are quite aggressive about scanning for unauthorised music and removing it - <USER2> the point where you actually have to be careful about things like having the radio on in the background during a video.

In fact, they even provide tools to help you fix videos that have audio copyright claims against them...

[https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/2902117?hl=en](https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/2902117?hl=en)

<comment><USER12> That's relatively recent. The early popularity of Youtube was built on offering streaming access to other peoples' content for free.

<comment><USER13> > _That 's relatively recent_

It's at least 7 years old[1] and the system itself (if not the name) is almost 9 years old[2]. That's not recent relative to just about anything.

[1] [https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/01/youtubes-january- fair-...](https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/01/youtubes-january-fair-use- massacre)

[2] [https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2007/10/youtubes-copyright- fil...](https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2007/10/youtubes-copyright-filter-new- hurdle-fair-use)

<comment><USER14> Would Youtube even exist if it had to have something like Content ID when it first launched? Its existence definitely took advantage of the relative lawlessness of the web back then. Don't see much difference between how Youtube established vs Uber/AirBnB as far as break shit and pay for it later goes.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> > It's a markedly different opinion from when a 2007 pre-Apple Reznor said the > iTunes store made him feel "uncool" ("[it] feels like Sam Goody to me") and > admitted he was a frequent user of the file sharing website OiNK.

Whatever your views on his statements are, this comparison is fallacious. He's called YouTube disingenuous for building a business on the back of stolen content. OiNK can neither be accused of disingenuity, nor of building a business.

<comment><USER16> Thats easy to say if your business model fails (generally).

<comment><USER15> Perhaps in some cases, but since OiNK was a donation-funded community, administered by an unincorporated individual (Alan Ellis), I can't think that this is particularly relevant here.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Laws that try to stop people from getting what they want in what they perceive as victimless are doomed to fail, no matter how punitive the enforcement. Examples:

prostitution, gambling, drugs, books, music, video

<comment><USER18> > prostitution, gambling, drugs, books, music, video

Prostitution and drugs are hardly victim-less.

<comment><USER19> Both can absolutely be victimless. I would argue that the biggest reason they aren't victimless more often is because they're both crimes in most countries.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> So was the iPod. Products are built on the back of what people want and its a very tough row if you want to go against that.

<comment><USER21> Funny you mention the iPod. Back when music companies were getting eaten alive by mp3s and napster, Apple didn't seem to care as much. Their slogan was Rip Mix Burn.

"And the electronics industry's attitude toward the labels is summed up by an Apple slogan: Rip. Mix. Burn. Which, a music executive once told me, translates into "Fuck you, record labels."

[http://www.wired.com/2003/02/dirge/](http://www.wired.com/2003/02/dirge/)

<comment><USER22> Rip meant taking physical audio CD's you own and migrating them to mp3.

The slogan wasn't Download Mix Burn. Apple has always been strong on the IP end of things.

<comment><USER23> Right but after "Rip" is "Mix," i.e. create a playlist of different tracks, then "Burn," burn them to a disc (as an Audio CD or a data disc with MP3 or AAC files). Since it's the the 00's version of making a mix tape, that burnt disc is probably going to someone who didn't buy the CDs in the first place, i.e. copyright infringement by distributing works without permission.

The British record industry in the Eighties had a "home taping is killing music" campaign, the could've updated it to "home burning is killing music."

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Well yeh, I thought this was pretty common knowledge at this point.

<comment><USER24> And not at all isolated to youtube

<comment><USER4> No, but the early success of YouTube was due entirely to pirated movies/videos.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> _Apple employee_ Trent Reznor...

<comment><USER26> Doesn't make it any less true

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> I'm sure then that he paid for and licensed all his NBK samples, Star Wars samples, Prince samples, and Queen, and David Bowie, and Kiss, and and and.

<comment> k-mcgrady If these are samples he used in commercial tracks I'm sure he licensed them because if he didn't he'd have been sued out of existence by now.

<comment><USER28> Things were different in the eighties. I think the precedent-setting anti- sampling lawsuits came about in the early nineties. The Beastie Boys album Paul's Boutique was famously built from hundreds of unlicensed samples, and was one of the last albums that could be made that way, because shortly thereafter it became necessary to license samples.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> As if he should criticize about being built from stolen content. Watch "young gods envoye" from the 80's then watch Reznor's "broken", which was produced many years later... and I recommend using youtube to do it.

<comment><USER30> If he copy-pasted audio or video from Envoye you'd have an argument. There's no copyright on style.

<comment><USER29> You are correct. Perhaps this is OT, but I have 100% respect for youtube as a useful service that I use every day even if its due to something illegal. In contrast, I have very little respect for any artist that bites their style wholesale from another artist esp if they have a successful career from it...even if it is legal to do so.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> Much of the internet is built from free things. If we really want to talk about inequity of rewards for effort expended[1], I think content producers need to get in a long line...

[1] The difference, of course, is that many of the free resources were given away by license. However, at the end of the day, very little compensation has gone to many people who have built critical, foundational parts of the infrastructure that has fueled billions of dollars in revenue for companies world wide. On some level, hearing a musician who _has_ been compensated, significantly, for their work complain about inequities kind of makes me laugh.

</comment><comment><USER32> Yeah, and it kicks the shit out of every offering the RIAA and their pals come up with. Funny how that works.

</comment><comment><USER33> Personally, I find it not at all obvious that artists "deserve" to be paid for any use of their "intellectual property".

Hell, I don't even find the concept of physical property to be straightforward. Almost every single physical object we have in our lives today is built off the work and ideas of countless millions and billions of people before us. So the objects in our lives that we "own" and have "earned", in reality, were earned and produced by large swaths of humanity over thousands of years.

Now, how do we reconcile this with the fact that I'm still standing here, holding the object in my hand, and "no, I definitely would not like to give it to you, thank you very much". That seems incredibly tricky. And then of course there is the fact the concept of property ownership does incentive huge amounts of innovation and productivity. So we don't want to ruin that. I'll have to continue thinking about this another day...

</comment><comment><USER34> I thought YouTube was built on the backs of videos of cats and stupid human tricks.

</comment><comment><USER35> Well, which video site is not? Youtube's DMCA responses are really good, compared to FB or any other video platform.

<comment> k-mcgrady >> "Youtube's DMCA responses are really good, compared to FB or any other video platform."

Yes but they only started doing that after they became the go-to site for videos. If they didn't allow copyrighted materials from the beginning it never would have become the behemoth it is and more than likely would've died before it had a big enough audience to entice copyright owners to strike deals with it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER36> Most video sites are. From eBaumsWorld to Facebook Video.

</comment><comment><USER37> Another irrelevant 90s musician making bombastic comments about copyright, another day.

<comment><USER38> Yeah but this musician provides free downloads of his music and high quality garage band files for a low price. That makes it somewhat different..

From his site: as a thank you to our fans for your continued support, we are giving away the new nine inch nails album one hundred percent free, exclusively via nin.com.

the music is available in a variety of formats including high-quality MP3, FLAC or M4A lossless at CD quality and even higher-than-CD quality 24/96 WAVE. your link will include all options - all free. all downloads include a PDF with artwork and credits.

<comment><USER18> > Yeah but this musician provides free downloads of his music and high quality > garage band files for a low price. That makes it somewhat different..

After making loads of money in the 90s from the very music industry he despises now. It's easy to give stuff for free when you are already rich.

<comment> k-mcgrady Ok so he has lots of money, has given a lot of his stuff away for free but is complaining about businesses being built from stolen content. Why? I guess he's standing up for the musicians without a loud enough voice to complain about this stuff then.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER39> How many record labels are making massive profit (via bogus DMCA/Content Aware disputes) off of the backs of YouTube creators? I've had multiple videos get their adsense dollars removed because there was 5 seconds of pop music emanating from a storefront I walked by in my video.

With views and adsense revenue being heavily front loaded against the upload time of the video I have no method of recovery of those lost dollars.</comment>


Of the top 6 results for "Real World Haskell" on Amazon, 2 are Haskell books... - <AUTHOR> http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_gw?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=real+world+haskell&x=0&y=0 asdf <comment><USER2> Presumably this is based in large part on buying behavior of previous customers who have done that search.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> ... others are "Erlang Programming", "Programming Erlang", "Anathem" (!?), and "JavaScript, The Good Parts".

Curiouser and curiouser, Amazon gets...</comment>


Show HN: A modernized and annotated code companion to Paul Graham's "On Lisp" - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/DalekBaldwin/on-lisp

<comment><AUTHOR> The original nonprofit software license isn't suitable for distributing the code through Quicklisp, but I thought I'd put this here for everybody who's wanted to work through the book before and has run into snags. Enjoy!

</comment><comment><USER2> This is great! As someone who has been learning Racket lately, this looks like something I'd certainly like to take on sometime in the future. Thanks a bunch for your hard work!</comment>


Please review my startup, a cool Adsense alternative that you have control over - <AUTHOR>

Is the message about what we do clear ? i would like to know if the HN community thinks that 'normal people' and not hackers will understand the site. Any feedback is greatly appreciated. Thanks a lot! http://adwizzy.com <comment><USER2> Hi Alberto, it is very very cool. would like to try out soon when I am launching my app contest site AppsToWin <http://appstowin.com></comment>


Taking his own path: The world's leading maze designer - <AUTHOR> http://www.bbc.com/news/business-39998551 <comment><USER2> Someone must have had a lot of fun with that title!

</comment><comment><USER3> Amazing.</comment>


Ask HN: What reliable SMTP service to use for low volume emails (~500 p/m) - <AUTHOR> I am currently using SendGrid, but the deliverability of messages is around 85%.  It seems that if you use their free plan, the IP addresses used are shared between other free users and that opens up the possibility of abuse that affects all other free users.<p>Is there an alternative solution that gives close to 100% deliverability?  (paid or free). <comment><USER2> Amazon SES works well for me, you could probably use gmail SMTP as well (seems limited to 99 emails / day).

[https://www.digitalocean.com/community/tutorials/how-to- use-...](https://www.digitalocean.com/community/tutorials/how-to-use-google-s- smtp-server)</comment>


Show HN: SQueaLy – Fast track analytics for business - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/hashedin/squealy <comment><USER3> Good work with the README, actually explains exactly what the project is, with a very clear outline and screenshots.

Well done.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks Josh. Hope to get more feedbacks from you.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Looks cool but unless I can run this locally it's a non-starter for our business. I opened an issue for clarification on how best to do that.

<comment><AUTHOR> Hey, I have replied to your issue on github

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Very nice -- looks like an open source Klipfolio alternative. Which would be great because Klipfolio has some serious limitations.

<comment><USER6> Yes, also with contrast to klipfolio, squealy lets you deploy the application within your own heroku account which eliminates the need to share database credentials with any third-party product.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> If I read the docs correctly on JinjaSQL, it essentially allows you parameterize your queries, but doesn't let you build them dynamically like SQLAlchemy would.

Can someone comment on what's the benefit of this, as opposed to using parameterization and SQL-injection protections offered by say SQLAlchemy or other similar tools?

<comment><USER8> Author of jinjasql. The whole point of jinjasql is to dynamically build queries.

There comes a time when you need the power of sql, and an ORM gets in the way. Think unions, sql functions, group by, more complex sql. Think dynamically generated sql queries based on some data structure.

In such cases, you have to keep track of how many variables you are capturing in the query, and then manually bind them.

Jinjasql is just a query generator. At the end of the day, it doesn't actually execute the query. You take the query it generates, and the array of parameters it gives - and then execute it using traditional means using bind parameters.

This approach gives you the power of a template language to generate the query. You can create reusable macros, conditionals and other features that a template language provides.

<comment><USER7> Thank you for your response! Very interested to understand if JinjaSQL could have made the following easier?

I just prototyped a very expressive reporting API that takes database driven configurations for the reporting columns (dimensions and metrics), validates inputs and allows very expressive filtering (including partial string matches, etc.) in Flask and SQLAlchemy.

Did not use the ORM part, but rather the query API: [http://docs.sqlalchemy.org/en/latest/orm/query.html](http://docs.sqlalchemy.org/en/latest/orm/query.html)

Queries included a with statement, the main query had 4 nested subqueries (4 level cascade basically) for ranking, filtering and ordering.

The prototype supports queries like this: Give me best performing shows and their stats in my top 5 countries by the number of viewers I have in each of these top countries, but I want shows not broken down by country, but instead by season and episode, including counts of uniques at each level. (Sorry don't have a copy of the resulting SQL on this computer, but it's fairly long.)

Queries I designed up front, and reverse engineered into being dynamically generated by SQLAlchemy query API. However, by not having a fixed template, I can simply update my reporting table configurations and not have to worry about updating the templates or the query structure.

When the user requests something that does not have top dimension and topN results, I can just omit that part of the query and build valid syntax without it.

All-in-all, the entire API is less than 1k lines of python.

<comment><USER8> Jinjasql is meant for reporting use cases, so yes - it should be able to help you. However, when we made JinjaSQL, we didn't want to build a super- expressive reporting API. Instead, for every report/chart we wanted to make, we wrote a comparatively simpler query and used jinjasql to get it working.

If you have a single complex query that is generating all your reports based on database configuration - I'm guessing you need the full power of python. So while JinjaSQL could have save some effort, I'm not sure it'd save you a lot.

Hope that helps!

<comment><USER7> Thanks!

The reports are all API driven. User specifies dimensions and metrics, as well as filters, etc. The API returns the JSON response.

I can't predict what users will want to visualize in the future, so dedicated templates for each of the visualizations are not practical for my use case.

The goal is to minimize dev work on the API and let front end config dictate what columns the API returns.

<comment><USER8> Let's assume you have a python object "userquery" that has the user specifications - including dimensions, metrics, filters and the cube to query. I'm also assuming you have whitelisted all the parameters in this object per your database model, otherwise you are open to security issues.

Here's how you could write that in jinjasql. I'm writing this out of memory, and it has errors/issues - but I hope you get the idea.

        SELECT
        {% for metric in userquery.metrics %}
            {{ metric.id }} as '{{metric.description}}'
        {% endfor %}
        FROM {{ userquery.cube }}
        WHERE
        {% for filter in userquery.filters %}
            {{ filter.key }} {{ filter.operator }} {{ filter.value }}
        {% endfor %}
        GROUP BY
        {% for dimension in userquery.dimensions %}
            {{ dimension }}
        {% endfor %}

This way, your template doesn't have to map to exactly one visualization.

Now, another interesting this in the security aspect. You can also pass the logged in user data model, and then append a where clause that restricts the rows based on the logged in user id or his role or whatever else is your application security model.

I'm not sure how much effort it would have saved you, but it does help us a lot - mostly because we don't have to translate between SQL and the way SQL ALchemy / ORM works.

<comment><USER9> Is that safe from sqli prospective? It would inject table name and all, which I believe you can't bind...

<comment><USER8> You're right. That's why I said upfront - whitelist values in the userquery object.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Are you guys planning to give support to Athena? In general to other databases also.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes SQueaLy does support Athena. As of now we support Athena, Redshift, Mysql, Postgres and sqlite

Soon we will be adding support for Mssql and Cassandra also

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> Pretty cool! We've been using Periscope Data at work and I've found the SQL -> Charts way pretty amazing, but the cost of that program makes it impossible for individuals to use. I'm psyched to try this out for my personal projects.

<comment><USER6> > One of the co-developers here:

Thanks kyyd, Periscope Data was definitely on our minds while planning this project. Please share your feedback when you use it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> Interesting stuff . Is there any demo site available to play around with the tool ?

<comment><USER6> No there isn't one yet, but we are planning to have a marketing site which will include the demo as well.

For now, all you need is a publicly accessible database and a free heroku account. Squealy supports one-click deploy to heroku. You can deploy within minutes and play around with the tool.

Please share your feedback with us once you use it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> I'm working on something a bit similar, it's generating around 200 different recurring reports at the moment.

Did you do anything to make it work with large datasets? Is the web-frontend still responsive if a query returns 1 million rows for example?

<comment><AUTHOR> On the web frontend, we paginate the reports and so it is supposed to be responsive with large datasets. We tested this with around 10K rows, we'll surely scale-up our tests for this.

BTW which charting library are you using for your reports?

<comment><USER13> On the few places in the frontend where charts are use I am using chart.js, which I'm happy with so far.

Most of the recurring reports simply spits out excel or csv files with no graphs.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> How does it compare to metabase ?

<comment><USER15> This was my question as well. Metabase is continuously getting better - <USER2> would one divest themselves from metabase for this? What are the primary advantages?

<comment><AUTHOR> \- Fine-grained authorized REST APIs

\- Cron based scheduled emails embedded with reports

\- Auto-generated documentation for all the REST APIs using swagger

\- More than just SQL - SQueaLy uses JinjaSQL behind the scenes which gives you power to use JINJA inside the SQL query.

You can refer the readme for more details

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Interesting. If someone here have used [https://openbouquet.io/](https://openbouquet.io/) before - how is SQeaLy different for Boquet?

<comment><AUTHOR> I have not used Boquet but going through their documentation it looks like they help developers to get rid of SQL by providing some Javascript plugin in order to filter the reporting data from the database.

SQueaLy's approach is a bit different. It is rather focused on writing powerful and dynamic SQL queries. SQueaLy uses JinjaSQL behind the scenes which gives you the power to use JINJA inside the SQL query. For more details, check out JinjaSQL here - [https://github.com/hashedin/jinjasql](https://github.com/hashedin/jinjasql)

With JinjaSQL in the scene, you can access real-time variables related to

\- A logged-in user

\- Web session

\- URL query parameters

inside your SQL queries.

You can then use Jinja templating inside the SQL query to handle conditional statements or create macros based on these real time variables

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> Interesting, lots of solutions popping up in this space. We're using re:dash at the moment, quite happy though this looks to have a bigger focus on APIs rather than built in visualization

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes you got it right. The focus of SQueaLy is on providing fine grained authorized REST APIs with auto generated documentation for all the REST APIs using swagger.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> nice software are you planning to support mssql ?

<comment><USER8> We hadn't thought about it honestly, mostly because we don't use MSSQL as much with Python. However, it shouldn't be too difficult to add support if we have the right drivers. I've created a ticket here to keep track of it - [https://github.com/hashedin/squealy/issues/223](https://github.com/hashedin/squealy/issues/223).

<comment><USER18> there are several MSSQL drivers, but i could not understand from the project file structure support should be added to jinjasql or SQuealy ?

<comment><USER8> You'd add that to Squealy.

JinjaSQL simply generates a SQL query with an associated array of parameters. It isn't even aware of the SQL query that's written. JinjaSQL would work just fine with any database.

Squealy is a django project, so if you can get the right database driver configured and installed - in theory, squealy would just work fine with MSSQL. After all, the user is writing the query, so squealy doesn't care much about the underlying differences in the way SQL is written.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Real-time browser-based modelling of 1- and 2D waves - <AUTHOR> http://ttsiodras.github.io/physics.html

<comment><USER2> Cool! That's the math we used in 1994 for the watery stuff in the beginning and end of our demo Heartquake.

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q9_VUDz_tuM](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q9_VUDz_tuM)

For the oldschool among us, the source code for the end credits, in venerable Turbo Pascal, can be found at ftp://ftp.scene.org/mirrors/hornet/code/effects/water/hq_water.zip (it may be detected as a virus threat because executables inside were compressed - don't try to run them). Arturo wrote an in depth explanation of the physics and math behind it (he was wrapping up his MS in Physics) but I have no idea where to find that anymore.

</comment><comment><USER3> UI thoughts:

I don't have a good intuition of what the multiple strings are supposed to mean. Perhaps I'm seeing a bug because the initial "pull" seems to come from the bottom of the screen instead of the middle.

The 2D water wave should be displayed with more contrast. I can see a vague movement, but the peaks and troughs mostly just blend in with the rest of the water.

<comment><USER4> It's not a bug; it's a feature :-)

The code "pulls" the middle sample down, to the bottom of the window, and then the simulation runs.

As for the 2D simulation, you were right - I just pushed a version with more contrast.

Thanks for the feedback!

<comment><USER3> Still, what do the multiple strings mean? I was expecting a single string with a complex waveform, with additional pulls changing that waveform. Instead I have a new string every time I pull.

<comment><USER4> > I was expecting a single string with a complex waveform, with additional > pulls changing that waveform

Actually, that's exactly what you are seeing - by pulling the middle sample down to the bottom every time you click, the "spring-like" pull of the sample to the left and the sample to the right (see the Theory section) trigger additional waves that propagate, reflect on the walls, and interfere with the original one.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


'The Whole System Collapsed': The Music Industry's Ongoing Distribution Crisis - <AUTHOR> https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-features/cd-vinyl-distribution-crisis-950327/ <comment><USER2> This sounds familiar. I am reminded of KFC in the UK switching to a cheaper supplier of logistics (DHL) and promptly having almost half its stores close for lack of chicken.

</comment><comment><USER3> Logistics is obviously a solved problem by this point, but I'm guessing the underlying cause here may have to do with a talent drain during the preceding overall contraction of the music industry. I'd figure physical distribution is a lagging industry and will hopefully catch up to the changes we've been seeing elsewhere in music.

An article I read a few years ago (wish I could locate a link) covered how independent record pressing companies are emerging to meet the growing vinyl trend. I think demand for physical music will stick around and therefore the opportunity to get decent logistics in order for their distribution.

</comment><comment><USER4> That's disturbing. I buy a lot of music, and I only buy it on CDs. I hope that this doesn't impact my ability to get new music very much or for very long.</comment>


Ask HN: What are the noprocrast, maxvisit and minaway settings? - <AUTHOR> Without fiddling with each of these to figure out what they do; what do they do? <comment><USER2> <http://ycombinator.com/newsnews.html>

_Like email, social news sites can be dangerously addictive. So the latest version of Hacker News has a feature to let you limit your use of the site. There are three new fields in your profile, noprocrast, maxvisit, and minaway. (You can edit your profile by clicking on your username.) Noprocrast is turned off by default. If you turn it on by setting it to "yes," you'll only be allowed to visit the site for maxvisit minutes at a time, with gaps of minaway minutes in between. The defaults are 20 and 180, which would let you view the site for 20 minutes at a time, and then not allow you back in for 3 hours. You can override noprocrast if you want, in which case your visit clock starts over at zero._</comment>


Ask HN: Do you meditate? At work? How? - <AUTHOR>

In college I attended regular meditation sessions (called mindfulness, or mindful sitting sessions) and I found them very enjoyable, if not as spiritually rewarding as I'd hoped.
At work, I find myself sometimes wanting to take a half hour or so and just recapture that sense of amiable focus that I had before.
So, do you meditate? Do you do it at work? What benefits do you feel you derive from it, and what methodology/ies do you follow? Are there resources you'd recommend (I sometimes visit calm.com, for instance)? <comment><USER2> Myself: I meditate at least once a day, for about 15 mins. I tried few guided meditations and then learnt a technique that requires no external guidance/input. Along with breathing techniques and a bit of Yoga, I found the combination to be deeply relaxing and energizing.

Few times a year, I volunteer in high schools and teach these techniques (Yoga, breathing and meditation) to teenagers. It's mostly in schools that are low income and a bit rough neighborhoods. I have personally seen kids get a lot out of meditation.

Method: There are many meditation methods (mindfulness being one). The one that I practice loosely follows these principles: 1) The art of not _doing_ anything is meditation. There is no control over which thought enters our mind. But we can choose not to chase those thoughts. Catch ourselves if we do and drop it. 2) There is continuous input to the mind (through senses) throughout the day. This has happened, may be, since we were a kid. Meditation is giving rest to all these senses. That in itself saves lot of energy. Initially, it not easy. Hence, a guided meditation helps. But after some practice, one can learn a technique.

Benefits: 1) Meditation is deeply relaxing experience. After a long day and tiring day, 10-15 mins of meditation makes me fresh and ready for next set of tasks. 2) Minor health niggles (headaches, body pains etc) have all reduced or gone after 15 mins meditation. When body gets deep rest, it has capacity to recover/heal.

Time/Location: \- I did meditation in airport lounge, in my car (parked), city bus and almost all places where I can sit upright.

Resources: \- If you live in SF Bay Area, I recommend this: [http://calmeditates.org/](http://calmeditates.org/) \- Try this app. My friends highly recommend it: [http://www.sattva.life/](http://www.sattva.life/)

</comment><comment><USER3> I imagine you know from your previous sessions, but mindfulness can (and should, according to some) be practiced anywhere, anytime, while eating, walking, etc.

And not only in a perfectly tranquil environment--like other skills, a little resistance while practicing can lead to greater proficiency. I think even five minutes would be beneficial (for companies, too, who ultimately benefit from a calmer, more focused contributor).

</comment><comment><USER4> Hot Yoga- time to relfect on your self. Be in the exact moment. ELiminate all the stress in your life and thoughts and only focus on the pose, position and your intention. It gives you a sense of clarity and purpose. Doing hot yoga once a week is great for meditation</comment>


Unexpected Marketing (or The Power of Enjoy your Workplace) - <AUTHOR> http://blog.fastcompany.com/experts/rweston/2007/07/careers_if_only_you_could_work.html

<comment><USER2> Sheesh, I'm getting old:-( I watched the video and wondered if any grownups work there.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> _Look ma, no cubicles!_</comment>


Movidius launches a $79 deep-learning USB stick - <AUTHOR> https://techcrunch.com/2017/07/20/movidius-launches-a-79-deep-learning-usb-stick/ <comment><USER2> It took me a while to find how it interfaces with the system (driver? dedicated application? just drop model and data in a directory which appeared on mounted key?), so I'll post it here.

To access the device, you need to install a sdk which contains python scripts that allow to manipulate it (so, it seems like it's a driver embedded in utilities programs). Source: [https://developer.movidius.com/getting- started](https://developer.movidius.com/getting-started)

</comment><comment><USER3> > Movidius's NCS is powered by their Myriad 2 vision processing unit (VPU), > and, according to the company, can reach over 100 GFLOPs of performance > within an nominal 1W of power consumption. Under the hood, the Movidius NCS > works by translating a standard, trained Caffe-based convolutional neural > network (CNN) into an embedded neural network that then runs on the VPU.

This is sure to save me money on my power bill after marathon sessions of "Not Hotdog."

<comment><USER4> Ignoring the price tag this is about half the performance of the Jetson TX2 which can manage around 1.5TFLOPS on 7.5W.

Interesting that you could use this to accelerate systems like the Raspberry Pi. The Jetson is a pain in the backside to deploy (at a production level) because you need to make your own breakout board, or buy an overpriced carrier.

EDIT: I use the Pi as an example because it's readily available and cheap. There are lots of other embedded platforms, but the Pi wins on ecosystem.

<comment><USER5> 1.5TFLOPS would have made the supercomputer top500 12 years ago. That's amazing.

<comment><USER6> Keep in mind that supercomputers are a lot less specialized than circuits for running neural nets.

12 years ago you could have gotten a stack of 5-8 7800 GTX cards and had 1.5TFLOPS of single precision. 11 years ago you could have had a stack of 5 cards with unified shaders. It's not fair to compare against the significantly more complicated route of getting 100 CPU cores working together with only 1-4 per chip.

<comment><USER7> But can't you configure the device to do e.g. fast matrix-vector multiplications instead of inference? I can be wrong, but I suspect that's what people do mostly on supercomputers anyway.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> So what can you do with a deep-learning stick of truth?

EDIT: Looks like the explanation is in a linked article: [https://techcrunch.com/2016/04/28/plug-the-fathom-neural- com...](https://techcrunch.com/2016/04/28/plug-the-fathom-neural-compute- stick-into-any-usb-device-to-make-it-smarter/)

 _How the Fathom Neural Compute Stick figures into this is that the algorithmic computing power of the learning system can be optimized and output (using the Fathom software framework) into a binary that can run on the Fathom stick itself. In this way, any device that the Fathom is plugged into can have instant access to complete neural network because a version of that network is running locally on the Fathom and thus the device._

This reminds me of Physics co-processors. Anyone remember AGEIA? They were touting "physics cards" similar to video cards. Had they not been acquired by Nvidia, they would've been steamrolled by consumer GPUs / CPUs since they were essentially designing their own.

The $79 price point is attractive. I wonder how much power can be packed into such a small form factor? It's surprising that a lot of power isn't necessary for deep learning applications.

<comment><USER3> > The $79 price point is attractive. I wonder how much power can be packed > into such a small form factor? It's surprising that a lot of power isn't > necessary for deep learning applications.

It runs pretrained NN, which is the cheap part. So this is a chip optimized to preform floating point multiplication and that's it.

<comment><USER9> Yeah I can run pretrained models on my pi3, that's not that exciting, its more exciting that 2nd handle graphics cards are dumping onto the market.

<comment><USER9> If you can use a set of say 3 of these running in paralell on a pi3 with tensorflow to train models from scratch then this is more interesting.

<comment><USER10> No training, only evaluation: [https://ncsforum.movidius.com/discussion/104/can-i-use- this-...](https://ncsforum.movidius.com/discussion/104/can-i-use-this-for- training-of-neural-network-with-tensorflow)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> It's surprising how much attention this has had over the last few days, without any discussion of the downside: it's slow.

It's true that it is fast for the power it consumes, but it is way (way!) to slow to use for any form of training, which seems to be what many people think they can use it for.

According to Anandtech[1], it will do 10 GoogLeNet inferences per second. By _very_ rough comparison, Inception in TensorFlow on a Raspberry Pi does about 2 inferences per second[2], and I think I saw AlexNet on an i7 doing about 60/second. Any desktop GPU will do orders of magnitude more.

[1] [http://www.anandtech.com/show/11649/intel-launches- movidius-...](http://www.anandtech.com/show/11649/intel-launches-movidius- neural-compute-stick)

[2] [https://github.com/samjabrahams/tensorflow-on-raspberry- pi/t...](https://github.com/samjabrahams/tensorflow-on-raspberry- pi/tree/master/benchmarks/inceptionv3) ("Running the TensorFlow benchmark tool shows sub-second (~500-600ms) average run times for the Raspberry Pi")

<comment><USER12> But all those other solutions will consume orders of magnitude more power, especially the GPU. It's actually impressive what can be achieved on 1W of power.

<comment><USER13> Yep. I think the niche here is battery-powered AI. Train on the desktop, deploy to the field on a USB stick.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Interesting applications for drones and robots. The small form factor and low energy requirements are the key.

</comment><comment><USER15> Really disappointing there doesn't appear to be a USB-C option

<comment><USER16> Or a blue bike shed option, for that matter.

<comment><USER17> I know it may be surprising, but bandwidth is a really important factor for speed in deep learning, and USB-C would help with that.

<comment><USER18> USB-C is a connector, and has no effect on speed.

I think you're referring to USB 3.1 gen2, which would double the theoretical bandwidth to 10Gbps.

<comment><USER6> If so I'm amazed, because I have never seen someone conflate those two before. I've seen plenty of people conflate USB-C and USB 3 in general, but not specifically thinking USB-C implies the 10gbps mode.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Currently out of stock as best I can tell.</comment>


Apple Bringing Full-Screen Video iAds to Mobile - <AUTHOR> http://adage.com/article/digital/apple-bringing-full-screen-video-iads-mobile-apps/291985/ <comment><USER3> Unless I'm missing something, only apps that specifically include iAds will result in a user being subjected to these full-screen video ads ... right?

Presumably this will only occur for free apps?

I don't see why (a) people have the right to complain about what they are subjected to when they are using a "free" app, or (b) how this is somehow "Apple's fault".

Don't want ads? Pay for your product!

(it also increases the likelihood of getting real customer support if you pay)

<comment><USER4> Android user here, so forgive me for being unfamiliar with the iOS app ecosystem.

Is it common for free apps to offer paid, ad free versions on iOS?

<comment><USER5> Yes, and it is quite annoying when they don't.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I'm already mad at apple because allows the NSA to spy my phone, but when it got stolen I was left with a baby-level _find-my-phone_ idiocy, for a mobile device that costs a month's salary where I live. So basically it's okay to use technology to spy on me, but to help find my phone it's a no-no.

Now the ads thing? I think I'm going to ditch all my apple hardware at once.

</comment><comment><USER7> The moment full screen video ad is forced on me on iOS is the moment I completely abandon Apple ecosystem and start behaving like they don't exist (just like Microsoft before them, albeit for different reasons).

</comment><comment><USER8> I don't understand why people are surprised or upset by this. There are dozens of ad networks that already serve full-screen video ad content. People who want free and ad-supported apps will continue to watch video ads, people who don't will continue to purchase ad-free apps. I don't see anything changing in the iOS ecosystem.

<comment><USER9> What are the ad units and what are typical CPMs?

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Android has 79 percent market share. I wonder if full screen video ads on Apple devices will change that.

<comment><USER5> Android has 97 percent of mobile malware. I wonder if full screen video ads on Apple devices will change that.

[http://thenextweb.com/google/2014/03/04/f-secure-android- acc...](http://thenextweb.com/google/2014/03/04/f-secure-android- accounted-97-mobile-malware-2013-0-1-google-play/#!yw3cx)

<comment><USER11> And all that malware is outside the play store. So no need to paint the sky all dark when things are mostly rosy.

<comment><USER5> Yes, Google's walled garden is fairly safe.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> This is brilliant. Essentially the entire line of iOS devices up to this point have been loss leaders for building an entrenched advertising system - <USER2> without the loss!

I can see it going a lot of ways.

"iPhone 6: $400.00. iPhone 6 with no ads $600.00."

"Pay only pennies a day to skip ads."

"Apple: Pay up advertiser, we showed your ad 1 gajillion times. Advertiser: Show me the numbers! Apple: Here's some we made up." Works for Facebook.

"Put yourself in an ad for your favorite product. Take a selfie with this app!" iAds + JibJab.

Of course, you could always just install an app that disables... Ahhh, Apple owns the app store, too.

<comment><USER13> You missed an opportunity to suggest that full screen video ads would play before the device would allow you to send a text or place a phone call.

<comment><USER12> That's a good idea, although, it might annoy people in a hurry.

I like the idea of making it contextual. Calling you grandson? Ad for LifeCall! Calling your buddy to get together for football (and you use a Fantasy Football app on your phone)? Ad for Budweiser! Calling 911? Ad for MetLife!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Cool, more reasons not to use apple products.

</comment><comment><USER15> Are these unskippable? Maybe people will finally put down their iDevices more frequently and do something else when they realise they're being fed adverts like what they would do with the TV. I hope.

</comment><comment><USER16> Why does everything, including their ad program, have to start with an 'i'? Maybe I can understand the marketing side for consumer electronics, but ads? Really?

<comment><USER17> iOS and iCloud are strategically important non-electronics products.

"i" is still the most succinct way of saying "This is an elegantly made Apple product". To the point where any "i" product made by another company feels imposter-ish, and any below-par Apple "i" product feels like a letdown from a high standard.

<comment><USER11> And now it has full screen intrusive ads. I mean iAds.

<comment><USER17> "Intrusive" implies that you have some knowledge about the context in which these ads would be displayed, which would certainly add to this story. What's your source?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Sound pretty annoying if you can't even skip them and they suddenly show up and interrupt you.

</comment><comment><USER19> What does the second sentence here even mean?

"A handful of marketers wrote checks for up to $10 million to become iTunes Radio launch sponsors last year. Those advertisers are already familiar with Apple-run full-screen video ads -- albeit ones limited to the company's streaming music service."

<comment><USER20> Looks pretty straight-forward to me. What are you struggling to understand?

<comment><USER19> AFAIK, iTunes Radio is audio ads, not full-screen video ads. Or does the desktop iTunes client show video ads? Apple TV and iOS devices definitely don't.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> This might be good... maybe these ads will be annoying enough to make people pay for products. Right now ads are out of the way enough to be completely ignored and apple and/or advertisers may be realizing they aren't worth much.

<comment><USER22> This might be good... maybe these ads will be annoying enough to make people choose free software instead.

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> iAds coming to AppleTV

<comment><USER24> Guess who has two thumbs and is never updating his appletv again... This guy</comment></comment>


Karate Club: A Python library for unsupervised machine learning on graphs - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/benedekrozemberczki/KarateCluB <comment><AUTHOR> Documentation: [https://karateclub.readthedocs.io/en/latest/](https://karateclub.readthedocs.io/en/latest/)

Karate Club is an unsupervised machine learning extension library for NetworkX.

Karate Club consists of state-of-the-art methods to do unsupervised learning on graph structured data. To put it simply it is a Swiss Army knife for small- scale graph mining research. First, it provides network embedding techniques at the node and graph level. Second, it includes a variety of overlapping and non-overlapping community detection methods. Implemented methods cover a wide range of network science (NetSci, Complenet), data mining (ICDM, CIKM, KDD), artificial intelligence (AAAI, IJCAI) and machine learning (NeurIPS, ICML, ICLR) conferences, workshops, and pieces from prominent journals.</comment>


Unexpected Thoughts Regarding Classical Music - <AUTHOR> http://rinich.com/post/302316074/unexpected-thoughts-regarding-classical-music <comment><USER2> Something that strikes me - whenever I've seen pieces like this before, they often seem to ignore that people still write classical music. It's nearly always Mozart, Beethoven, Bach but no mention of any modern or contemporary composers... I wonder why that is. Sure some contemporary classical music is a bit more esoteric and even less likely to appeal to the average listener, but it's certainly not all like that.

Maybe I'm slightly unusual in that most of the classical music I enjoy comes from the late romantic period onwards, but I do find it slightly disappointing that often when people "discover" classical music they seem to think it mostly stopped in the 1700s.

<comment><USER3> So what? Classical music will never have the same level of prominence that it did before the 1900's. That's his point.

<comment><USER4> Actually, my point was that if we look at classical music and say "So what?" we're losing a vast treasure.

<comment><USER3> What I was trying to say in my reply was that "he is ignoring the fact that people still write classical music" is not a valid point. There are 6.7 billion people on this planet; if there are a couple of people with a hobby, that does not prove anything.

<comment><USER4> Gotcha. But what if those "people with a hobby" are capable of doing incredible things with music? They'd benefit from being in a field of music that's _not_ neglected for being thought of as centuries-old.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> The reason classical music is less popular among the masses is not that it does not appeal to emotions - a lot of people would argue with that. Half of the story is indeed in the conservative nature of it (my father is a musician and I know how he goes about interpretation of classical compositions, stage appearance and all these rules).

But there's also another half of the story which is simply lack of education in listeners. I only started to listen to different kinds of music (including jazz and classical) after I played an instrument for a year. It takes understanding and practice and since classical music is not really about any social group (like, say, punk-rock or classical rock are to some extent) it's hard for it to get this attention from people seeking for just emotional satisfaction. Over time, when a person gets more musically educated (and I mean doing music, not listening) his emotions require more intellectual sources, which is the structure of the composition (harmony and melody) and skills of the performers. That you can only appreciate when you try something yourself.

<comment><USER6> _another half of the story which is simply lack of education in listeners._

A lot of people just don't have the wherewithal to appreciate melodic music. Melody just escapes them. They want chords and riffs to wash over them while moving with a strong beat. The kind of lyric dance implied by other musical forms escapes them, and they have no hope of appreciating anything that wasn't once based on some kind of dance.

What really frightens me, though, are all these young people killing their fine cochlear structures with headphones. The wispy nuances of acoustic music don't even exist for them. They don't even exist in the same aural universe.

<comment><USER4> That's an utterly biased and thoroughly wrong accusation. Name one of those songs lacking melody and I'll point out exactly what line could get stuck in my head. Even songs that use chords as a hook don't get the entire chord stuck: There's a single line that catches you.

The real problem is a little bit more complex: We instinctively set up divides between us and things we don't know, so that we may more readily dismiss them. I'm actually in the middle of writing a New Year's post about that now.

<comment><USER6> _That's an utterly biased and thoroughly wrong accusation._

I think not. If you are one of those people who can relate to snippets of melody, then you are, _by definition_ , not one of those people devoid of melodic perception. Or, are you assuming that your particular perceptions represent the _entire spectrum_ of listeners of electronic music. I doubt that's warranted.

What you do is fundamental to the human experience -- having a bit of music stuck in one's head. Most of us are born with some ability like this. There are entire musical traditions where this facility has been expanded and developed to a very high degree, however. I can pay something like 350 distinct tunes from memory off the top of my head, well enough to perform in front of a festival crowd. I probably have the "stuck in my head" impression of another 700 or so tunes. I am not a prodigious talent in this way, however. I know of traditional musicians who know something like 10,000 tunes, and 2 or 3 distinct versions of many of those.

I posit that musicians like _that_ have a better appreciation of melody than I do. Their brains are very good at processing that kind of information, and have processed much more of it. I also suspect that I have a slightly more developed sense of melody than someone who can recall some catchy hooks.

<comment><USER4> I look at it another way. When I play classical music, I find that I develop an appreciation for its nuances that I don't initially have. I start liking every individual line for its melody, whereas at first I only hear one or two things. And the more I listen to music, the more quickly I'm able to break down new music that I listen to.

 _Most of us are born with some ability like this._

Exactly why I'm confused as to your initial point:

 _A lot of people just don't have the wherewithal to appreciate melodic music. Melody just escapes them._

Now, in modern music there _is_ a branch that focuses on rhythm more than it does on melody (in classical music as well as in pop). However, that branch is still _exceedingly_ rare compared to the rest of what's coming out. People who listen to Lady Gaga, the Jonas Brothers, and J-Lo are all listening to music for its melodies. So it's not the fact that classical music is melodic that turns them off.

My suspicion is that a part of it is an inability to really sympathize with the music. Pulsating beats are more instantly relatable than a complex sonata, which can be more readily dismissed as "tinkly classical nonsense" if a listener's apathetic.

<comment><USER6> _> Most of us are born with some ability like this.

Exactly why I'm confused as to your initial point_

My point is about degrees of development. Also, note that I leave room for _some_ people to be devoid of melodic sense. I've taught music, and I'll tell you there are a few out there.

Heck, we're mostly all born with some degree of hand-eye coordination. That doesn't all make us star outfielders or professional jugglers. Someone won't develop a sophisticated appreciation of baseball just because they were born with the baseline set of neuromuscular resources.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> "When I listened to Mozart last year, I thought classical music was all about the composer. Today I realized the performer matters just as much"

That's certainly true to an extent. But some performers won't suit your taste, and if you judge the music because you picked a poor performance (like you might get on the cheap imports), you might miss some incredible music. I can't stand Karajan's Beethoven, good thing I didn't start listening with him.

I can't tell someone exactly why I like Mozart best when Marriner's conducting, or why Serkin just does the Emperor better. But once you know you like a composer's work, then you'll start to prefer some performances over others.

The great part is that this slowly changes all your life, and that really great music _never gets old_ and you can repeat the same chills you got when you were 20. It's a lot like Sherlock Holmes that way!

</comment><comment><USER8> Education: One thing that strikes me in looking at Loony Tunes from (I suppose) that 1950s is how many allusions to classical and folk music they could slip in. I'm guessing that something has been lost in music education in the schools over the half century.

Stodginess: as aristoxenus says, the classical stations do figure on an older, more conservative audience. I used to get a kick out of a Washington, DC station, since defunct. It wasn't unusual to hear a commercial with a relaxed, folksy voice telling one how important the F-15 was too our national defense.

</comment><comment><USER9> The author does not have a place for comments on his blog ... so I will use this space to suggest that:

1\. anyone interested classical music should use Pandora.com to find out what they like: I ended up with a lot of Telemann and Corelli as performed by Manze and Egarr

2\. if you have space in your apartment/house, go on Craigslist and get a decent set of speakers and a CD player and tuner/amp. Listening to classical on headphones is good but listening in open air is better.

<comment><USER4> I never thought to use Pandora for classical music! Upvote for a marvelous suggestion.

<comment><USER10> It took Pandora a long time to get classical music into their system because they weren't sure how to classify individual pieces. I mean, once you have a dozen versions of the same song by different orchestras with different conductors, the "What's your favorite song?" interface kind of breaks down.

<comment><USER11> The crappy thing about classical music in Pandora is that if your piece spans multiple tracks (a good 80% of classical music falls into this category - multiple movements) you never get to hear the entire piece at once.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> The main buyers and patrons of "classical" music turn out to be a pretty conservative bunch. Have you ever listened to radio stations or concert promoters try to be humorous or hip? It's generally pretty puritan and sad, like something you'd find on the Disney Channel.

Until a new generation really takes ownership of this stuff, selling it to new listeners will remain an endeavor with dwindling returns.

</comment><comment><USER3> OK, so he said that classical music and the community around it is more rigid than most newer forms of music and their communities, and that it's dying, and the former might cause the latter. What is so unexpected, I wonder

<comment><USER4> Unexpected not perhaps for a vast audience, but for me. What you didn't mention was perhaps the core of the post: Classical music isn't dead, it's living and breathing and subject to interpretation. Then the points you mentioned carry with them certain implications, namely that classical music could benefit from irreverence and innovation, and that _modern_ music would benefit from classical music's being made more accessible.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> as a classical musician, this was inspiring and makes me feel happy :)</comment>


A Perfect DNS Storm (2018) - <AUTHOR> https://www.adammargherio.com/a-perfect-dns-storm/ <comment><USER2> is it practical to use fully-qualified domain-names everywhere, which means no search path or ndots entries are needed.

it can be interesting looking in nameserver logs for hosts making successive queries for variations of FQDNs based on their search paths, and/or A vs AAAA lookups.</comment>


Log-structured storage - <AUTHOR> https://jvns.ca/blog/2017/06/11/log-structured-storage/ <comment><USER2>
      > grep "^$1," database | sed -e "s/^$1,//" | tail -n 1

FWIW.

Shell pipelines are very useful, but sometimes, you don't need them.

Case in point: \- sed can do the matching:

      sed -n -e "/^$1,/s/^$1,//p" | tail -1

\- sed can just take the last match:

      sed -n -e "/^$1,/h;\${g;s/^$1,//p}"

\- sed can be cryptic, so you might prefer awk:

      awk -F, '$1 == "'"$1"'" { val=$2 } END { print val }'

although the fact that it's in a shell function makes the "'"$1"'" thing kind of confusing. It would be less confusing if using a named environment variable...

maybe less bad with explicit escapes...

      awk -F, "\$1 == \"$1\" { val=\$2 } END { print val }"

</comment><comment><USER3> > I seriously thought atomicity in databases was the same idea as atomicity in > concurrent programs like an "atomic instruction" and it's a TOTALLY > DIFFERENT THING

I don't see how it's a totally different thing.

When a change to a database is atomic, it can never be observed to be in progress by others. Either it has occurred or it hasn't. To the observer this means it appears to happen instantly.

When an instruction in a concurrent program is atomic, it can never be observed to be in progress by others. Either it has occurred or it hasn't. To the observer this means it appears to happen instantly.

Is either of these descriptions wrong?

<comment><USER4> Yes, your description of database atomicity is wrong (i think!).

In ACID, atomicity doesn't mean that a set of writes in one transaction become visible to other transactions all at the same time; it means that after the writing transaction is finished, they are either all applied, or none are applied.

In practice, that means if you successfully commit, all your data is saved, and if you successfully roll back, none of your data is saved. EDIT: I'm not sure what the guarantees are if either fail.

The property that the writes don't become visible to other transactions is isolation. This is where the infamous transaction isolation levels come in; with a weak level of isolation, writes in one transaction may be visible to others before they are committed.

<comment><USER3> Alright, so the non-database definition of atomicity combines the Atomicity and Isolation of ACID. Thanks for helping clear that up.

I don't think that makes it a "TOTALLY DIFFERENT THING", but it's definitely important to understand the difference.</comment></comment></comment>


EMC plans layoffs - <AUTHOR> http://www.cnbc.com/2016/01/01/emc-plans-layoffs-as-it-cuts-annual-costs-by-850m.html <comment><USER2> Why of course. What else would you do after a giant M&A deal?

<comment><USER3> The interesting thing to watch will be _who_ they lay off. Back-office support (accounting, marketing, etc) is pretty much expected. But if they kill product lines, that'll be an indication where Dell intends to take it.

(I hope the people all land somewhere quickly)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> More casualties of the Cloud.

[http://www.wired.com/2015/10/meet-walking-dead-hp-cisco- dell...](http://www.wired.com/2015/10/meet-walking-dead-hp-cisco-dell-emc-ibm- oracle/)

</comment><comment><USER5> Could this be related to the unexpected tax bill that may happen because of the acquisition?</comment>


How to Turn On Hand-Off in OS X Yosemite and iOS 8 - <AUTHOR> http://blog.mikekhristo.com/how-to-turn-on-hand-off-in-osx-yosemite-and-ios-8/

<comment><USER2> Setting> General> Turn on Handoff and make sure both iOS8 and Yosemite Bluetooth has ON.

</comment><comment><USER3> No one know?</comment>


A Simple Electric Train (2014) - <AUTHOR> https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=J9b0J29OzAU <comment><USER2> Strange question, how energy efficient is this? What exactly is the battery doing and how much energy does it take to do it?

<comment><USER3> Energy efficiency is not very high, there is quite a bit of friction.

The battery powers a short section of the coil, the magnets do double duty, they're commutators carrying the current from the battery to the coil and provide the static magnetic field that is one half of the field causing the forward movement, the other half is provided by the magnetic field induced by the current through the coil.

The coil being wound one way (right hand) or the other (left hand) coupled with the direction the magnets are pointed in determines whether it is going forward or backward. If you turned the 'carriage' around it would go the other way.

Elegant.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I prefer this video[0] where they go through different iterations to try and improve the speed (by reducing friction and weight).

0.[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rwt9K9PWMcU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rwt9K9PWMcU)

</comment><comment><USER5> It's a hyperloop!</comment>


Show HN: Hacker Uses This - <AUTHOR> https://hackerusesthis.com/?hn2

<comment><AUTHOR> I submitted this site some time ago: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9058624](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9058624). It reached front page for a short time, but was flagged by users. The changes I've made:

\- no sign up required for listing tools and getting recommendations

\- unwanted recommendations can be removed, to make place for other recommendations

\- a plan for a newsletter is announced</comment>


"Open source software authors have no respect for users" - <AUTHOR> https://twitter.com/Jonathan_Blow/status/817444963076034560 <comment><USER2> "Authors of graphviz" doesn't really map well to "Open source software authors". Which is petty, picking-on-illogic type of criticism.

graphviz wasn't originally open source - it came from AT&T Research in the 90s, didn't it? AT&T kind of open-sourced it in the early 2000s. I personally have used it a lot over the years because there's nothing else like it, as near as I can tell. If you want to draw a nodes-and-edges type graph, it works well.

Also, there's that annoying tools-vs-appliances dichotomy. Tools are general purpose, and don't often come with very specific "do exactly my thing" features. Think of drill presses, or radial saws or even screwdrivers. Then think about appliance-type tools, Radio Shack metal detectors, maybe. Some people need tools, others need appliances. Some people need minivans, others need pickups. Why try to force an appliance mindset on a tool?

</comment><comment><USER3> I hear that if you have problems, open source authors are glad to issue you a full refund of what you paid for their work - no questions asked!

</comment><comment><USER4> Classic case of somebody using the universal quantifier when they should be using the existential quantifier.

<comment><USER5> Unless it's a used in the sense of "in general" or "the average", (which it is) and mean, median and mode averages all confirm the statement. They don't care enormously about UX, but UX is hard and expensive and not solo.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Non-productive blather. Posting this Twitter conversation disrespects HN readers.

<comment><USER7> Well of course it's not going to be popular here, where open source is considered holy and perfect, but he _is_ 100% right.

For the record, I'm a HN reader and I don't feel disrespected.</comment></comment>


Followformation - Alltop for Twitter - <AUTHOR> http://www.examiner.com/x-11216-Twitter-Examiner~y2009m7d16-Alltop-model-for-Twitter-from-Followformation Follow dozens of categorized Twitter users - on the "Alltop for Twitter" <comment><USER2> I don't see how this is any different from Kevin Rose's wefollow (www.wefollow.com)

<comment><USER3> I believe this one follows it to you by batch.

I didn't try it mainly because it's asking for a password instead of using OAuth.</comment></comment>


Are unit tests really that useful? - <AUTHOR> http://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/158052/are-unit-tests-really-that-useful <comment><USER2> In my opinion, it's better to sit down and go over your code and analyze logically its outcomes than to write "tests" that may or may not catch some bugs.</comment>


Washington health officials: Gunshot victims counted as Covid-19 deaths - <AUTHOR> https://www.freedomfoundation.com/washington/washington-health-officials-gunshot-victims-counted-as-covid-19-deaths/ <comment><USER2> This article ([https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle- news/health/washington-...](https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle- news/health/washington-states-actual-coronavirus-death-toll-may-be-higher- than-current-tallies-health-officials-say/)) claims "about five" deaths from gunshot wounds to people who tested positive for COVID-19. That's of the 1,055 total the state is claiming, or ~0.5%.

The headline seems to imply that Washington is inflating its COVID death statistics, but the article seems more interested in proving that point than examining the data in good faith, which isn't surprising given that this is a conservative think tank founded by someone who publicly warned during the Obama administration that Americans are on the verge of losing their liberties to the government.

<comment><USER3> Well considering the spying on US citizens that was expanded during Obama's tenure, perhaps he was right?

<comment><USER4> Uh, did you forget Darth Cheney?

You don't blame the kid who picked up the hammer for the destruction caused by the first kid who forged the hammer in Mount Doom, painstakingly carried it into the china store from Mordor, and waited for an excuse to start smashing china.

But yeah, that hammer is totally on Obama.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> [http://whatisthefreedomfoundation.org/](http://whatisthefreedomfoundation.org/)

[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_Foundation_(Washingt...](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_Foundation_\(Washington\))

[http://freedomfoundationfacts.com/](http://freedomfoundationfacts.com/)</comment>