Uber and Lyft offered to bail out taxi drivers; New York said no - <AUTHOR> https://www.theverge.com/2018/8/1/17639656/uber-lyft-bailout-nyc-taxi-drivers-cap <comment><USER2> > The offer to bail out taxi drivers is an unforeseen twist in the years-long > struggle by New York City regulators to contain the explosion of ride- > hailing app drivers. City Council members have said they were partly > motivated by the plight of taxi medallion owners, who have seen the value of > their licenses plummet in recent years in direct correlation to the rise of > ride-hailing apps. Six taxi drivers have committed suicide in the last six > months, a grim reminder of the human costs of technological disruption.

This is such an upsetting characterization of the situation.

The city government sold a bunch of medallions to investors/"speculators" (depending on your politics). Those medallions declined in value. Who should bear that loss?

The entire situation was created by a government monopoly that never needed to exist in the first place. Now that someone's figured out how to go around it, all the investors in the manufactured, useless regulation are losing their shirts.

It's really hard to feel bad for these guys. They were willing participants in a system designed to line their pockets by fleecing ordinary people, choking supply to ensure their prices were kept artificially high. They're basically the OPEC of transportation. Do we feel bad because electric cars are disrupting OPEC?

Lyft and Uber really aren't the bad guys here, at all.

<comment><USER3> I think you're being a bit harsh to the individual drivers here. My dad was a yellow cab driver in NYC, lots of drivers, like my dad, were immigrants and owning / renting out a medallion was seen as the equivalent to owning your own home as a nest egg. I totally agree that taxi companies were colluding with government to create regulatory capture that was deservedly busted by innovation, but lots of families have been hurt by the drop in medallion prices. Many drivers have committed suicide. I'm disappointed that NYC didn't take the deal.

<comment><USER4> >"I totally agree that taxi companies were colluding with government to create regulatory capture that was deservedly busted by innovation, but lots of families have been hurt by the drop in medallion prices."

Why should investing upwards of a million dollars or more in a taxi medallion be treated differently than any other large investment with real risks involved? So when were profits from these medallions those were private but now that there's risk it should be socialized?

<comment><USER5> Because we can be better human beings by helping each other. Those private medallion holders made a mistake by putting all their eggs in that one nest, sure. But should the result of it be their lives ruined because "you lost the game, screw you"?

I realize a reply to this can be that bail outs lead to increased risk taking. I would still argue that it's better to risk the system and help those who can not recover from this kind of loss.

<comment><USER4> >"Because we can be better human beings by helping each other."

There have been 3 restaurants on my block that have opened and failed inn the last 18 months. Shouldn't we help them too by your logic? Should the city council pass legislation?

>"But should the result of it be their lives ruined because "you lost the game, screw you"?

Yeah that's a false equivalence. Empathy and bailouts are not the same things at all. I can have empathy and be against a bailout and that doesn't amount to me saying "screw you" to anyone.

<comment><USER6> No, of course not. Most restaurants fail. This is expected. There is a difference between a restaurant failing and an industry going under. It really isn't that ridiculous to help folks when their entire industry falls out from under them.

If the restaurant industry collapsed next year I'd say the same thing for them too. But there is a qualitative difference between ad hoc business failures and a systematic change.

But I agree that bailouts != empathy. Still, bailouts aren't the only option, and as a society it is in our interest to help a sector when it goes under. It may happen to you or me next.

EDIT: I should specify that I'm speaking about owner-operated cabs.

<comment><USER4> >" There is a difference between a restaurant failing and an industry going under. It really isn't that ridiculous to help folks when their entire industry falls out from under them."

The "industry" is not failing. There are still 13,586 yellow taxis on the streets in NYC[1] picking up and dropping off fares. And there no shortage of New Yorkers on the street raising their right hand and intently scanning for the "on duty" lights of yellow cars.

The "industry" is not the valuation of metal medallions bolted to the hood of the cars. You seem to be conflating the too.

[1] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxicabs_of_New_York_City](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxicabs_of_New_York_City)

<comment><USER6> Semantics. What I _should_ have said is "when the valuation of a wide percentage of peoples earnings and assets who belong to an industry suddenly decreases from unforeseen outside forces caused by rapid technological advances..."

Or how about "when about 18% of taxi drivers nest egg devaluates and their retirement evaporates..."

To claim there is no difference between a restaurant failing and all independent taxi cab drivers in NYC simultaneously taking a giant hit that they did not see coming based on an (admittedly bad) policy of protectionism, is intentionally missing the point and I would say is intellectually dishonest.

Is a bailout the best way to fix this? I have no idea, seems like a relatively low cost way to fix what the city did but these things are complicated. I'm open to that discussion.

Are failure rates of the restaurant industry totally incomparable to this singular situation? Most definitely, and any argument based on this is flawed IMO.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I still don't understand the fight with Taxi companies (aside from pure greed and a desire to maintain a monopoly). The very first Uber I took was in a Taxi in Chicago, which at the time had partnered with Uber. At the time I thought Uber partnering with Taxi companies was brilliant. (I can't find any history of why that came to an end - so if someone has a resource, that would be great reading)

</comment><comment><USER8> > The company has been calling Uber customers directly, asking them to send > messages of support for Uber to their council members, according to > BuzzFeed. Lyft has been emailing customers with its own appeal to "speak up > for ridesharing."

If some company ever called me up to rally political support, that'd be the immediate end of any business. Ever.

<comment><USER9> Anecdotally Lyft did this years ago in Denver. My friend was called because she was a top 10% Lyft user and was asked to come protest because Colorado was thinking regulating ride sharing services in a way they didn't like.

<comment><USER10> Did your friend go?

<comment><USER9> No. She felt it was weird and invasive.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Taxi medallion owners not NOT drivers. Most drivers would pay a fee to the owner and rent the medallion for the day.

<comment><USER6> Correction: Most taxi medallions are not owned by drivers. There are certainly drivers who own their own medallions (18% as of 2012). This is a non-trivial sector

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> Uber and Lyft solved the issue for rides to and from the outer boroughs, full stop. Lets have the Taxi drivers solve that issue and then there would be no need for Uber and Lyft.

<comment><USER13> Or, hear me out, let's have ride sharing companies continue to solve those problems while abiding by some, at least I think, basic regulations to make sure drivers aren't stuck in poverty. I do think it's silly to cap the number of drivers when a wage floor is a more direct way to achieve the gov't's goal.

This isn't an all or nothing thing.

<comment><USER14> If medallion renters had to do the same thing, we wouldn't be having this discussion, because they would capitulate.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Sigh... stupid politics... caps (or equivalent) are a mathematical necessity in NYC: the city streets can only handle a very limited number of vehicles. After that, congestion becomes a classic tragedy of the commons.

<comment><USER16> Your comment made me think about the tragedy of the commons in a different light....

Looked at another way, smaller buildings are a necessity. From that point of view, the NYC politicians allowed people to cram too many buildings in too small of a space.

Or, maybe there are not enough roads. NYC could go double or triple-deck roads. It would be ugly as heck, but would ease the problem.

Not disagreeing with you, just pointing out that the root cause of the tragedy of the commons is that each person is fine with such a small space. If we made a minimum amount of space that people could own/rent/live in, then the problem would never exist. (for instance, Kansas doesn't have this issue)

<comment><USER17> Or, maybe you could drop the expectation that urban life involves riding around in 4000 pound climate-controlled personal vehicles, and use public transportation/get a goddamn bike.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> It's a bit of a misleading headline: they weren't offering a bailout, they were offering to exchange money for services from the city. In any other world that would be a bribe. Lyft said "it's a bit astonishing to us" because I guess they're used to their bribes being accepted.

If anyone thinks "bribe" is too strong of a word, they were offering $100m "to help medallion owners" in exchange for the city dropping a proposal that would limit the number of Lyft/Uber drivers and set a minimum wage for the drivers. Again, in any other world this would be called a bribe in exchange for making favorable laws. In this world I guess it would be called lobbying.

<comment><AUTHOR> > _they were offering $100m "to help medallion owners" in exchange for the > city dropping a proposal that would limit the number of Lyft/Uber drivers > and set a minimum wage for the drivers_

The purported problem is taxi drivers bought medallions. The medallions then dropped in value. (Put aside, for a moment, that most NYC medallions are owned by large corporations.)

Uber and Lyft are saying "instead of capping our numbers to help the taxis, we'll help you buy back the taxis from underwater medallion owners." That is good policy. Extending the medallion system to ride sharing freezes market shares. That's a handout to Uber, who have recently been bleeding share to Lyft and Juno. It's also stupid in the midst of a broken subway system and ahead of the L train shutdown.

Of course, none of this matters. This bill's purpose is to hand out cash. Our mayor is in the medallion owners' pockets [1]. And apparently they've also been doling out money to this bill's sponsors on the City Council. The hope is this passes in August while nobody is looking. From ground level, it seems they're right.

[1] [https://nypost.com/2014/05/17/taxi-industry-gave-de- blasio-o...](https://nypost.com/2014/05/17/taxi-industry-gave-de-blasio- over-550000-for-campaign/)

<comment><USER19> The wage issue is a bigger problem. If Uber and Lyft control the taxi industry in NYC, and it's impossible for their drivers to earn minimum wage, that's something the government needs to fix.

<comment><AUTHOR> > _The wage issue is a bigger problem_

It's a _huge_ problem. And the minimum-wage proposal is a good idea. (I'd go further and extend it to taxi drivers.)

There is no need--apart from paying off the mayor and Speaker's cronies--for it to be tied to the cap. (I even believe they're presented as separate bills, though someone might have later combined them.)

<comment><USER20> Why is the minimum-wage proposal a good idea?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> <parody> Horse and carriage drivers offered jobs in Ford factory, Horseback Union said no!

Six horse carriage drivers committed suicide in the past year. </parody>

Most taxis are horrendous. They barely speak English or have some sort of hygiene issue or try and take me on some wacky route like I don't live here,

With uber starting to do stuff like upfront fares and uber pool, it's pretty much over with. I've seen a LOT of new yorker trends over the past two decades, and I can safely claim that Uber has reached an indispensable point for the average upper class new yorker.

The last linchpin imo for uber will be something like uber pool with better dedicated routes. Like a bus, but without all the people that ride the bus. That will be awesome.

<comment><USER22> >The last linchpin imo for uber will be something like uber pool with better dedicated routes.

They already launched a feature called Express Pool in some areas (at least the Bay Area) which does something like that: it's like Pool, but you might need to walk a little bit from/to your final destination. The routes aren't fixed, but the spirit of the idea is the same.

<comment><USER21> I haven't seen express pool here yet. Maybe I wasn't selected or maybe it's not here yet.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> Url changed from [https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.theverge.com/platform/amp/2...](https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.theverge.com/platform/amp/2018/8/1/17639656/uber- lyft-bailout-nyc-taxi-drivers-cap), which points to this.

Please don't post urls that redirect; it's important that HN show the real domain.

<comment><AUTHOR> > _Please don 't post urls that redirect; it's important that HN show the real > domain_

Sorry–shall do.</comment></comment>


Show HN: Quake by id Software Chrome packaged app - <AUTHOR> https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/ibkbfanmkmadbbgggonficloplenbefh

<comment><AUTHOR> It even runs on my ARM Samsung chromebook pretty well. Props to SiPlus ([https://github.com/SiPlus/WebQuake](https://github.com/SiPlus/WebQuake)) who ported pretty much line-for-line netquake from the original id source code release.</comment>


What are your thoughts on reinventing the wheel - <AUTHOR> I want to create something very similar to Todoist but people keep telling me not to. <comment><USER2> I say go ahead. If you want to improve an existing product nothing is stopping you. Go for it!

[https://github.com/remkop/picocli/wiki/FAQ#aren-t-you- just-r...](https://github.com/remkop/picocli/wiki/FAQ#aren-t-you-just- reinventing-the-wheel)</comment>


I Am Not a Blank Page - <AUTHOR> https://quillette.com/2018/11/25/i-am-not-a-blank-page/ <comment><USER2> I call this the American religion "You can be anything you want to be" \- it is an concept threaded through much American media from children's books to pop songs and self help books.

There is some truth to it, but as the writer says, we blame people when they fail and even worse they blame themselves.</comment>


Ask HN: Have any of you switched to Bash on Windows? - <AUTHOR> I've owned a Mac for about a year now, and it's worked very well. I do however miss being able to game on my laptop, and with the announcement of Bash on Windows I'm thinking of making Windows my sole environment.<p>Those of you who have tried this: What's your experience been like? Is it inferior in any significant way to your workflow? <comment><USER2> 1) It's super cool that it works.

2) It's not ready yet. Lots of stuff doesn't work, though much does.

3) It's oddly separate from Windows, which makes perfect sense, but the unix is so much less integrated than mac (or obviously linux) systems are.

3a) Not being able to launch windows binaries from Bash makes scripting hybrid stuff hard. I think this will be fixed at some point.

3b) I'm not sure if the windows file explorer can see the ubuntu root fs. Could be wrong here.

It seems that once it goes 1.0, it will have some advantages over a VM with shared files, but also a few disadvantages.

<comment><USER3> 3b) it does. The Linux files are just regular files in ntfs under some obscure path.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> So I got all excited and bought a Dell xps 13. I originally just wanted a laptop that would work great with linux but of course it turned out to be more work than it was worth so I switched to win10. I joined the windows insider program and messed with bash on Windows for a few hours but found that it's definitely not ready yet. It's a great idea and I'm glad they are working on it but simple thing like hitting ctrl+x to exit nano would crash the whole terminal. Anyways I switched to the git sdk with pacman and that actually was a very decent substitute. Unfortunately, the bottom half of my xps's screen went out after owning it for 3 months, and Dell support has had the thing in the shop for almost a month now. I vividly remember now why I left the windows scene and recently got a retina MacBook pro. I know I'm a little off topic but put bettertouchtool on it with Windows style window snapping and it's a far superior experience in my opinion.

<comment><USER5> If you are still looking for a way to get into Linux I'd strongly recommend trying Manjaro [0] XFCE (Not any of the other versions).

I've yet to have a computer that was made in the past 5 years that I haven't been able to get it running on. It's amazing.

If you start it with the non-free (as in libre) installer, you'll definitely get near perfect hardware support. You'll need to install two packages if you want good battery life (TLP and thermald).

After that, it's ready for production use on almost every system I've tried.

If you like it/try it I'd like to see how it works out for you so try and contact me and tell me how it went. I might try starting to recommend this for some family I know who get viruses but don't do much else but Youtube and Facebook.

[0] - [https://manjaro.github.io/](https://manjaro.github.io/)

<comment><USER6> I really wish people would stop pushing manjaro quite so hard for newbies to linux I honestly don't think its an optimal choice.

<comment><USER5> It really does just work. I'm fairly stupid, and I've not had any problems with it.

I have a rule of thumb: I try to NEVER touch the console for my non- development OS. Manjaro allows me to accomplish that and it also works on most hardware I've tested it on.

<comment><USER6> Why would never touching console be a goal I use the console for basic tasks and find it effective and useful.

<comment><USER5> You and I will have a very easy time navigating the world of a command prompt, the average user will not.

There is a reason GUIs won out over terminals, and that is because no one in the main stream wants to touch one.

A good OS should allow you to do every necessary task via a GUI. If there is a Linux DE/WM that can provide an experience like that, I feel like GNU/Linux will have its break through in the consumer market.

I use my "I never need to do something in the terminal" as a basic user acceptance test.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I've been using it for a while now. There are lots of small annoyances, like every file appearing with a green highlight because it doesn't know how to deal with NTFS (for some reason it thinks everything is other-writable).

Also, if you use the ext2 volume manager to access EXT3 or EXT4 drives, they don't show up in bash at all. I haven't figured out why yet.

I was able to install ZSH after some fiddling with ZSH and compiling a custom version. That was a month or two ago, though. I don't know if that's necessary anymore or if they fixed the issue. But, everytime I run bash.exe I have to switch to ZSH manually. For whatever reason, chsh thinks zsh is an invalid shell.

A bigger issue, for me, is it runs as root by default. I was able to create another user and manually switch over using 'su', but it's an annoyance. I haven't figured out how to automatically start a session as a non-root user using zsh. Actually, scratch that... I just added /bin/zsh to the bottom of my .bashrc file and it works.

Another downside is the linux subsystem has no awareness of the rest of windows and vice versa. I imagine that kind of integration is going to take some time, but I look forward to being able to automate my windows programs with bash!

All the things I need it to do work, though. I use vim and grep and search and all those lovely features that I call my "zsh ide".

So, on the whole... I wouldn't use it as my primary daily driver yet, especially considering you have to sign up for the windows 10 dev updates in order to get it. Every morning when I wake up it's a coin flip whether the machine will work or decide not to render drop down menus (just as an example...).

But, when they finally get it working and release it as standard, it'll be marvelous. Much, much faster and easier than running a VM or Cygwin.

<comment><USER8> > I don't know if that's necessary anymore or if they fixed the issue

Definitely worked with just apt-get for me.

>A bigger issue, for me, is it runs as root by default. I was able to create another user and manually switch over using 'su', but it's an annoyance. I haven't figured out how to automatically start a session as a non-root user using zsh.

Huh? It does not run as root by default.

<comment><USER7> > Definitely worked with just apt-get for me.

The install worked, but running it was a different story. It would spit out an error after every command. Like I said, this was a while back. It's probably fixed now.

> Huh? It does not run as root by default.

When I run bash.exe, I'm greeted with this prompt

      root@DESKTOP-F7NGQJX:~# pwd
      /root

What do you see?

<comment><USER3> The first version only run as root. From the second release they added user creation when installing.

<comment><USER7> Great! Maybe I should remove it and re-install and see if I can trigger that.

<comment><USER9> No need, you can use lxrun /setdefaultuser to change it.

[https://msdn.microsoft.com/en- us/commandline/wsl/user_suppor...](https://msdn.microsoft.com/en- us/commandline/wsl/user_support)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Usually I use Cygwin. Have for many years. If I ever hear Bash on Windows gets a feature that doesn't have, maybe I'll check it out!

<comment><USER11> You can apt-get anything you find on Ubuntu.

There is no need to run setup.exe each time and hope somebody ported it to Cygwin.

<comment><USER12> I don't think you can install anything X.

<comment><USER13> Yes you can, I just tested xclock.

<comment><USER14> Sorry, xclock is not good enough. I need at least xeyes to work.

<comment><USER13> [https://www.dropbox.com/s/d3jg06sr0tfaclc/Captura%20de%20pan...](https://www.dropbox.com/s/d3jg06sr0tfaclc/Captura%20de%20pantalla%202016-05-30%2020.12.50.png?dl=0)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> My experience so far: Installed Ruby in bash. Fetched some PDFs online by using a basic script. Didn't get any errors. As others may say, it's still buggy. It can't replace your work environment just yet. But it's constantly getting updated.

<comment><USER16> So silly question, is your Ruby installed in Bash accessible from normal Windows? And how?

<comment><USER15> You can access Linux files without bash. They are hidden under \AppData\Local\lxss\rootfs. But you can't run them without Bash. Also, you can use files in Windows right away too. So have both file structures for your disposal.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> The thing that annoys me the most about is the fact that it is absolutely impossible to get useful google results regarding it. (Desperately needs a common acronym or more googleable name)

Otherwise it's been pretty awesome, despite some incompatibilities.

And oh, get ConEmu to fix the garbage cmd.exe [https://conemu.github.io/](https://conemu.github.io/)

</comment><comment><USER17> Msys2 fills the need you seem to be having for me: [https://msys2.github.io/](https://msys2.github.io/) it uses pacman for a package manager and has everything I've needed. The only thing windows + msys2 missed for me was xcode for writing iOS apps, but if you already have a mac, then it's not really a problem.

</comment><comment><USER18> I find it hard to believe anyone was/is using OS X instead of Windows just for Bash.

Every Mac since the switch to Intel processors has built in support for dual- booting Windows. If you want to play games that don't run on OS X, boot into Windows and play your game.

I am struggling to understand the concept of compromising your working environment so much, just for the ability to _play games_ without a reboot.

I would imagine the productivity losses in a _single hour_ of working would be more time than is required for two full reboots - into Windows and back to OS X.

<comment><USER19> I couldn't agree more! An OS is so much more than just the bash shell. There are countless annoyances on Windows that constantly get in the way.

Some flaws you have to witness to actually believe. As an example, I'd go as far as saying that Windows doesn't support high DPI (retina) displays. It does, but it's broken to a degree that I considered switching the hardware. If you're running a setup with both high DPI and regular DPI screens, be prepared to constantly manage your windows because Windows fucks them up all the time. The bad support for multiple displays doesn't help there either.

In theory the OS might be able to support these setups well, but dozens of included programs fail to comply. Even major ones like the password prompt. For programs not included, I have yet to see any to scale properly.

This thing where the included programs serve as examples of how a decent program should look and feel like, I think this just never existed on Windows.

Any Mac user considering using Windows more I'd suggest to try it for some time. Even if it's just to appreciate Mac OS again. OS X is getting worse, but they're still worlds apart.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> I just had to switch from mac to windows upon losing my only mac workstation. I really hated the transition at first and bash on windows was my savior. It actually has apt-get and even though it's only on the preview builds for now it will become legit soon and be almost as useful as normal bash on any other nix system.

One of the most glaring issues is that it's contained in a windows-like terminal and the fonts are broken for non-standard characters.

<comment><USER3> Try it with conemu instead of the regular command prompt.

<comment><USER21> +1

ConEmu is amazing. Right now I have it set such that each time I launch it, it opens a Cygwin tab and a regular Windows command prompt tab. Customization options are endless as well.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> When I'm stuck on Windows I install Cygwin and live in the Cygwin shell. It's almost like home.

I found it very useful for monitoring - instead of waiting for someone to write e.g. a Nagios script for the thing you want to keep an eye on, you can just write a bash script.

I have yet to have to try the official Microsoft bash. The question is whether it is competitive with Cygwin for these purposes. i.e., does it carry all the other GNU tools with it.

I gave up using Windows when the Windows rot got too bad after about a year and I couldn't be bothered reinstalling. YMMV.

<comment><USER23> > _does it carry all the other GNU tools with it_

That's the wrong question. Microsoft doesn't bundle toolsets with the Windows Subsystem for Linux. It provides a binary-compatible platform, and _Ubuntu_ provides the toolsets. Or Fedora, people having already run Fedora on the Windows Subsystem for Linux.

So the right question is _Does Ubuntu /Fedora carry all of the GNU tools?_, subordinated by _Do they require any of pseudo-terminals, framebuffers, signals to Win32 processes, or a proper daemon branch of the process tree?_

* [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11581935](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11581935)

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> The only irritating thing for me so far is not being able to set the default shell to something other than bash. I love zsh (with oh-my-zsh installed). That works but I have to open a command prompt, type 'bash', and then type 'zsh'. Even doing a 'chsh -s /usr/bin/zsh' doesn't work.

</comment><comment><USER25> There's still many bugs on Windows Bash. You couldn't 100% rely on it.

</comment><comment><USER26> While in "bash on Windows" I happened to upgrade or uninstall packages and that caused the package manager to get into a cyclical dependency issue and could not install or update anything further. Could not do any sort of cleanup and the entire thing is now useless and don't know how to restore it to the initial state

<comment><USER27> lxrun is the command you need (from powershell/cmd)

[https://github.com/Microsoft/BashOnWindows/issues/4](https://github.com/Microsoft/BashOnWindows/issues/4)

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> I've made the switch to Bash, and the full Linux kernel and userland, a few years ago, and I've been loving it.

As for gaming, I have one HD on my machine with Windows, and I boot from it to play.

This has the added bonus of completely separating my "work" environment from my "play" environment.

</comment><comment><USER29> I don't use Windows much these days and haven't tried "Bash on Windows" but for many years I regularly used bash in cygwin on Windows. At the time I used PuTTYcyg ([https://code.google.com/archive/p/puttycyg/](https://code.google.com/archive/p/puttycyg/)) for my terminal emulator (apparenlty no longer maintained).

I remember it all working very nicely with little perceptible difference from working on Linux.

</comment><comment><USER14> This Bash on Windows is not created to replace Ubuntu desktop. It's created for running Ubuntu in the Windows-based cloud, Azure. You can already run Linux services in Azure with Docker, but the performance is sub-par, because Docker for Windows currently relies on VirtualBox. But once the new Docker is available (that uses HyperV) with better performance, Bash on Windows will be instantly obsolete.

</comment><comment><USER30> I haven't tried it yet (still running 7) but I use the git bash shell all the time. Can anyone chime in on what the bash in Windows 10 gives you that git bash doesnt? Not that I've really fully explored but git bash seems to have a lot of the common utilities (it has grep and vim).

<comment><USER31> Git bash is just a subset of the minimum tools to get git working. Windows 10 bash can run apt-get, ssh, and a full python/ruby *nix environment

<comment><USER32> fyi windows git bash does ssh fine.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> For anyone interested in a lightweight partial solution, the Ch suite of tools (that runs on Windows) from SoftIntegration.com includes many common Unix command line tools. I first got it for the C interpreter, then found the other features, and use some of them.

</comment><comment><USER34> Is there a decent Windows equivalent to homebrew? I've read of scoop, but have no experience with it.

<comment><USER35> I think you're looking for [https://chocolatey.org/](https://chocolatey.org/) maybe?

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> The issue will be that they need to ship a whole new version of Windows for major (syscall-side) improvements - this isn't a problem with the Insider program, but you _really_ don't want to be running Insider builds on your primary dev machine.

</comment><comment><USER36> I've had it since it first came out, it's miles better now than it was at first and I'm sure once it hits 1.0 it'll be usable for some dev work. Still going to stick with my Ubuntu book for full stack at the moment though.

</comment><comment><USER37> I tried, but it got bogged down with bugs in the installation / setup process. Seems like it just isn't quite ready for prime time yet, which is fair because Microsoft hasn't really claimed it is yet.

</comment><comment><USER38> The true question here would be: When should we expect Fish for Windows?

<comment><USER11> It's a Linux subsystem with apt-get access to Ubuntu packages.

# apt-get install fish

# fish

Welcome to fish, the friendly interactive shell Type help for instructions on how to use fish

There you go :)

<comment><USER13> I think the name confuses people; it is not just bash, it is the entire Ubuntu user space!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER39> There is this thing called 'virtual machines' and you can run a linux one in windows.

<comment><USER40> I use vagrant and it's great. I connect to it through ssh with puttytray and it's like the real thing.</comment></comment>


Webcam Mesh - <AUTHOR> http://www.chromeexperiments.com/detail/webcam-mesh/

<comment><USER2> That's cool! A had similar idea some time ago, but instead of using the pixel brightness it analyzes the edges in the image and tries to rebuild as mesh, giving a funny "Tron" effect.

It's written in Processing [1] and there's a sample video [2].

[1] <https://github.com/hcarvalhoalves/processing-cammesh> [2] <http://vimeo.com/8297993>

</comment><comment><USER3> This is awesome! Just been playing my guitar with it. When the strings are vibrating you can see spikes where they cross over the frets. What's great is that when you change chords the pattern of the spikes changes.

</comment><comment><USER4> This is pretty cool, but seems to be a bit broken under linux. At least in my instance the camera was not reading correctly, was getting green and pink lines.

</comment><comment><USER5> This is great fun, especially if you have a torch you can shine on your face.

</comment><comment><USER6> This is fantastic! Thanks!</comment>


IBM Tops Microsoft to Become Second-Most Valuable in Technology - <AUTHOR> http://www.businessweek.com/news/2011-09-30/ibm-tops-microsoft-to-become-second-most-valuable-in-technology.html <comment><USER2> Microsoft still has the better P/E ratio. 9.4 for MSFT vs 14.5 for IBM. I can't say I understand why investors would value IBM's growth potential higher then Microsoft's.

The next big milestone is when Apple is worth two Microsofts. Heh.

<comment><USER3> Personally I see it as MSFT having no future growth potential other than the size of their main market. They can't innovate and they have little chance of doing anything in the mobile space.

That is not to say that it is a bad investment, because they can milk the clients in their space for a very long time.

<comment><USER4> In the short term this is probably true. As long as the top execs stay in place, I'd agree. I seem to remember people having written off IBM as not having much of a future beyond milking clients, but they seem to have done some radical restructuring in the past 10 years or so, and seem somewhat rejuvenated.

MS _could_ undergo a big shakeup/transformation and reemerge as more innovative and profitable. I just don't foresee that happening in the near term. "Never say never" :)

<comment><USER5> Your 'could' may be the difference between MS continuing its dominance or falling into obscurity. Right now they're heading down the wrong path. They're not lacking quality engineers but leadership. Some leaders are great as innovators and some are good at keeping the ship afloat. Ballmer is obviously the latter.

The engineers at MS have shown their talent. Metro is absolutely stunning. What they need is the proper leadership to push this company in the right direction and deliver the right message.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> How does IBM make money?

<comment><USER7> Enterprise sales, consulting, services. Mainframes still make up a large chunk of their revenue. Perhaps research/patents? They aren't really that consumer facing anymore, I guess that explains their ads on TV to keep their name out there.

<comment><USER8> They also sell Enterprise Software (DB2, FileNet, Lotus, Rational, and a lot more).

The ads may be for their stock (indirectly) as much as for their products

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Yes it occurred few months ago again I guess.</comment>


App for rich and famous to admire each other is a waste - <AUTHOR> https://www.twitter.com/sdut/status/1267442532130029568 <comment><AUTHOR> The url was too long so I submitted the link via Twitter from the San Diego Union Tribune account.</comment>


What do you think about Notion Ink's Adam? #TabletPC - <AUTHOR> http://www.notionink.com/

<comment><USER2> I think the CAD renderings are of a very high quality.</comment>


Peering into neural networks - <AUTHOR> http://news.mit.edu/2017/inner-workings-neural-networks-visual-data-0630 <comment><USER2> 1.) For the umpteenth time, they're not black boxes. We can inspect _everything_ in the structure.

2.) "a team of computer-vision researchers from MIT's Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory (CSAIL)" may have "described a method for peering into" the not-black box of a convnet two years ago, but Oxford researchers published on in in 2013.

3.) Gushing about how understanding convolutional networks can help confirm the grandmother cell hypothesis in real brains is embarrassing under all circumstances but should be particularly so when thorough examinations from real brains just came out to the considerable detriment of said hypothesis. [http://www.cell.com/cell/fulltext/S0092-8674(17)30538-X](http://www.cell.com/cell/fulltext/S0092-8674\(17\)30538-X)

Nothing wrong with making visualizations of your nets, but I'm less than impressed by the reporting.

<comment><USER3> Few things are black boxes in absolute terms. It's the _difficulty_ of understanding NN's that makes them black boxes. Personally I think the black box analogy is accurate for any net of appreciable size.

<comment><USER2> I think your point about the frequently gradual nature of the concept is a very good one, and I'll buy that there may be appropriate _analogies_ to a black box in this context, especially if some sort of poetic or metaphoric description is what one is aiming for. I see no indication of that in the article. What the present journalists, and many others, are doing in this respect is not analogy but rather destructive appropriation of terminology.

I get that they mean something like 'is difficult to understand' too, which is in many ways completely uncontroversial. ( _I 'm_ certainly not going to claim it's a solved problem to quickly and effectively come understand intellectually how an arbitrary ANN does what it does. I doubt there are many people who would.) If that's what they mean, then they can say that, or make up their own picture language that isn't already busy meaning the polar opposite of the situation they're alluding to. A black box is characterized by observability only at the edges and unknown inner workings. It is by definition an inappropriate term for a convolutional network where every single weight and operation and intermediate result is trivially inspectable and you can do things like follow the effects of an experimental perturbation along every step of every path through the network. 'But it's really hard to get an intuitive understanding of what that means in the big picture' is a perfectly legitimately concern for something to improve on, but it isn't remotely good enough as an excuse for effectively claiming we have no observability or control where both are clearly abundant.

Abusing the term like this detracts from its established role in engineering, systems theory, etcetera and in my opinion also from communicating the actual problems of understanding how ANN:s do their thing. I really wish they'd stop making that claim.

Now I'm going to leave my computer before I get started on the ######s talking about steep learning curves as if they were an obstacle.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> There are two things that ML/AI developers are going to have to deal with once the technologies become widespread in things like self-driving cars, hiring/firing decisions, and the criminal justice system:

"Why did it do that?"

and

"Make it stop doing that!"

The first time a self-driving car accident results in a court case, these things are going to come up. I very much doubt that people are going to be satisfied without clear explanations, and they shouldn't be. When these systems take on roles of increasing importance to society, some level of accountability is going to be necessary.

</comment><comment><USER3> If I'm reading this correctly, it's old news. They're just tracing the activation of kernels. You can see examples in this wikipedia article: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kernel_(image_processing)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kernel_\(image_processing\))

This one's cool too: [http://scs.ryerson.ca/~aharley/vis/conv/](http://scs.ryerson.ca/~aharley/vis/conv/)

</comment><comment><USER5> I like it. I've seen experiments that break out eigenvectors of a neural network, which is like being given a dictionary in a foreign language. It's precise, but you still have to figure out what each eigenvector means. This technique is like having a translating dictionary. It's less precise but it lets you reason about the network with a familiar visual vocabulary.

<comment><USER6> How are eigenvectors/values defined for nonlinear systems, and are their properties as useful as in the linear case?

<comment><USER5> I was thinking of [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eigenface](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eigenface) (I like slide 66 of [https://www.slideshare.net/MostafaGMMostafa/neural- networks-...](https://www.slideshare.net/MostafaGMMostafa/neural-networks- principal-component-analysis-pca) "Not magic: Can only capture linear variations".) But you can do things like Google's Deep Dream, where you pick the classification first and feed it backward to see what aspects of the image are important to a class. You can even do it for different layers to see what each layer is looking for. [https://research.googleblog.com/2015/06/inceptionism- going-d...](https://research.googleblog.com/2015/06/inceptionism-going-deeper- into-neural.html)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Question to the community. Where can i follow research on this area understanding decision making and reasoning of neural networks?

<comment><USER7> Well, I think the research is more ad-hoc than being it's own field at this point.

I just scan papers that come up in the Reddit group[1]. I've seen:

"Chains of Reasoning over Entities, Relations, and Text using Recurrent Neural Networks" by Rajarshi Das, Arvind Neelakantan, David Belanger, Andrew McCallum

"Rationalizing Neural Predictions" by Tao Lei, Regina Barzilay and Tommi Jaakkola

"'Why Should I Trust You?' Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifier by Marco Tulio Ribeiro, Sameer Singh, Carlos Guestrin

You might be able to chase down the works of these various authors to find more.

[1] [https://www.reddit.com/r/MachineLearning/](https://www.reddit.com/r/MachineLearning/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> I wonder if our understanding of neural networks will help us understand the human brain.

<comment><USER9> If THAT happens, then we can - after some further research - loose the last bits of our privacy - our mind...

<comment><USER8> Maybe one day. From my understanding we're not even close. We don't even have the computing power available to simulate a human brain. But yeah, scary applications. Minority Report anyone?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Pretty but how does this provide insight?

<comment><USER5> When the computer is putting things into categories, you can see what aspects of the images are important to the decision.</comment></comment>


Tell HN: Article titled 'The Viral Me' on YC and startups in GQ magazine - <AUTHOR>

No link to the article in the latest issue of GQ (men's magazine), but if you find yourself by a newsstand, check it out. Some of the startups mentioned include: Teevox, DailyBooth, Rapportive, Swipely and Blippy. It's the best analysis of YC and Silicon Valley startup culture I've read in recent weeks. <comment><AUTHOR> The article is now available at:

(Article) [http://www.gq.com/news-politics/big-issues/201012/viral- me-s...](http://www.gq.com/news-politics/big-issues/201012/viral-me-silicon- valley-social-networking-devin-friedman)

(Single-page/printable version): [http://www.gq.com/news-politics/big- issues/201012/viral-me-s...](http://www.gq.com/news-politics/big- issues/201012/viral-me-silicon-valley-social-networking-devin- friedman?printable=true)</comment>


Excite rejected offer to buy Google for $1 million (in 1999) - <AUTHOR> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excite#1999:_Offer_by_Google_to_sell_itself_rejected_by_Excite

<comment><USER2> And if they had bought it, it would probably we worthless now. So really, it was a good decision!</comment>


"I had three requirements for seeking a great job; All glory, Top pay, No work." - <AUTHOR> http://www.legacy.com/obituaries/saltlaketribune/obituary.aspx?n=val-patterson&pid=158526785

<comment><USER2> Like Mark Twain famously taught us... "only the dead can tell the truth in this country."</comment>


The Power of Now - <AUTHOR> http://www.stevepavlina.com/blog/2006/05/the-power-of-now/

<comment><USER2> "The Power of Now taught me that there is no line segment. The point is all there is. The past and the future are illusions. They only exist to the degree we focus our attention on them right now. We create the past and the future by imagining them in the present. But we don't even exist outside the Now."

What? I feel like I've suddenly been dropped into the Time Cube and people keep telling me how "insightful" and "empowering" it is. Maybe it's just me but I come to Hacker News for intelligent conversation on important issues - usually technical. Feel-good self-important life guides should be filed in a different section. Maybe that's just me, though.

<comment><USER3> Please flag the post and move on. We don't come to here to read rants about posts either.</comment></comment>


Stanford Scientists Put Free Text-Analysis Tool on the Web - <AUTHOR> http://engineering.stanford.edu/research-profile/stanford-scientists-put-free-text-analysis-tool-web

<comment><USER2> The tool itself is hosted here: [http://www.etcml.com/](http://www.etcml.com/)

The paper is here: [http://hci.stanford.edu/publications/paper.php?id=279](http://hci.stanford.edu/publications/paper.php?id=279)

<comment><USER3> Um, hey, I'm the author of the paper. I'll check this thread again in a few hours, in case you have questions about it.

<comment><USER4> Neat project.

Will there be an API available? Or will I have to get creative with Form POSTs :).

<comment><USER3> There might eventually be an API available. Right now, we're focused on getting the actual grading interactions for the peers right. Richard's etcml already has an API.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER2> That's pretty cool — I had the exact same goals (help professors grade essays faster) with my bookshrink project [0]. Of course, it was the first python code I ever wrote and it uses an extremely naïve algorithm, but the results aren't too bad if you want to try it yourself [1].

[0]: [https://github.com/peterldowns/bookshrink](https://github.com/peterldowns/bookshrink) [1]: [http://www.bookshrink.com/](http://www.bookshrink.com/)

<comment><USER5> Regarding stuff like:

""" SPLIT INPUT INTO SENTENCES"""

god_awful_regex = r'''(?<!\d)(?<![A-Z]\\.)(?<!\\.[a-z]\\.)(?<!\\.\\.\\.)(?<!etc\\.)(?<![Mm]r\\.)(?<![Pp]rof\\.)(?<![Dd]r\\.)(?<![Mm]rs\\.)(?<![Mm]s\\.)(?<![Mm]z\\.)(?<![Mm]me\\.)(?:(?<=[.!?])|(?<=[.!?]['"]))[\s]+?(?=[\S])'''

Be advised that one of the nice things about python reg-exes is that they allow in-line comments (and naming of groups), if compiled with the verbose- flag:

        """ SPLIT INPUT INTO SENTENCES"""
        verbose_regex = r'''(?<!\d)  # I can't actually tell
          (?<![A-Z]\.)(?<!\.[a-z]\.) # what you're doing here...
          (?<!\.\.\.)(?<!etc\.)      # Is this one big group, or is
          (?<![Mm]r\.)(?<![Pp]rof\.) # it several groups, with
          (?<![Dd]r\.)(?<![Mm]rs\.)  # different prefixes?
          (?<![Mm]s\.)(?<![Mm]z\.)(?<![Mm]me\.) # Clearly, it's got something to do
          (?:(?<=[.!?])|(?<=[.!?]['"]))[\s]+?(?=[\S])''' # with
                     # not matching the dot at the end of Dr.
                     # or as part of an ellipsis as the end of a
                     # sentence? But my point was that if such a
                     # regex is built-up and tested with comments
                     # it can be quite readable

          god_awful_regex = re.compile(verbose_regex,
                                         re.VERBOSE)
          # continue here...

[http://www.diveintopython.net/regular_expressions/verbose.ht...](http://www.diveintopython.net/regular_expressions/verbose.html)

<comment><USER2> Yeah, I've since learned that feature of Python :) Like I said, this is some of the first Python code I ever wrote; it definitely does not reflect my current knowledge.

<comment><USER5> Oh, to be clear, it wasn't meant as critique -- I just saw the aptly named variable, and thought it might be useful to highlight this aspect of python to others that might be new to the language. It's one of the few "special" parts of python I have personal experience with, as I worked on a small program that dealt with parsing emails, and being able to fully comment the reg-exp over several lines as I tweaked both it and the groups was very helpful :-)

<comment><USER2> You're absolutely right, and what I forgot to say in my earlier comment was "thank you!"

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I did a short blog post on this service here: [http://bicortex.com/twitter- data-sentiment-analysis-using-et...](http://bicortex.com/twitter-data- sentiment-analysis-using-etcml-and-python/)

It pretty good for what it does.

<comment><USER5> While the tool was still up, I did a quick search for #NSA -- and if I understood it correctly -- that the search field was tuned to give sensible sentiment analysis for tweets with the given hash-tag -- it didn't do a very good job. I can't verify now (as the site is down) but it seemed like it got about 50% wrong on that one...

Perhaps it does better with different hash-tags (there's a lot of bitter irony associated with #nsa -- possibly more than average for other tags) ?

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Other good text analysis tools from Stanford: [http://nlp.stanford.edu/software/index.shtml](http://nlp.stanford.edu/software/index.shtml)

</comment><comment><USER8> Don't forget [http://gate.ac.uk](http://gate.ac.uk)

</comment><comment><USER9> I'm looking forward to the day that this technology is used for censorship; since everything political will need to sound positive, satire will rise again!

<comment><USER10> "Censorship is the mother of metaphor" \- Borges

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> I don't see any source that I can download and run. Is this a web service? Aren't there other web services already that do this as a service?

</comment><comment><USER12> Link appears to be down... :(

<comment><USER13> yep...

<comment><USER14> Worst possible time - and no Google cache. By tomorrow, 90% of the people who are interested would have forgotten the site, especially that they got some interest going on today. It seems to be an offshoot from Andrew Ng's team, which is trustworthy.

<comment><USER15> Lesson learned - ensure that your infrastructure can handle your times of peak interest _before_ launching your product.

<comment><USER12> I heard this analogy when I was at Amazon: the internet is like a party where your worst fear is not that nobody will show up, but that EVERYBODY will show up.

They used it as a marketing pitch for AWS/EC2

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Dude, this is awesome! Thanks kulkarnic.

Username response was here: [http://www.etcml.com/jobs/8188](http://www.etcml.com/jobs/8188) The only thing I would add is an overall score for how positive/negative/neutral a text is.

</comment><comment><USER17> Apparently this is done with Ruby/Rails... any chance this is going to find its way onto Github?

</comment><comment><USER18> It has a hard time with phrases like "I want to do X so bad"...

[http://www.etcml.com/jobs/8354](http://www.etcml.com/jobs/8354)</comment>


Debt Collectors Are Transforming the Business of State Courts - <AUTHOR> https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/reports/2020/05/how-debt-collectors-are-transforming-the-business-of-state-courts <comment><USER2> There have been journalists & researchers who covered these debt collectors at court. When defendants showed up, organised, they usually won.

The debt collectors' lawyers didn't arrive prepared to win, because most people didn't show up. If you can win 85% of cases just by showing up, why bother.

A court system that allows these dynamics to dominate isn't serving well.

<comment><USER3> And it only gets to court after harassment hasn't worked. Anecdata: guy I know had a common name. Debt collector fastened on him because he'd lived in the same town as a deadbeat with that name too. Guy would call day and night demanding payment.

<comment><USER4> Is it necessary to call someone with debt a "deadbeat"? Often the people who are being hounded by debt collectors are victims of predatory lending and a system designed to punish them with fees for being poor.

<comment><USER5> The name/title doesn't always apply, true. But sometimes it really does.

Most blanket statements have flaws in them...

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I took a company to small claims court about 10 years ago. In my state at that time, the max you could sue for was a few thousand dollars (now it's $7k, [https://www.mass.gov/service-details/small-claims- court](https://www.mass.gov/service-details/small-claims-court)). It was run by a magistrate, not a judge, and AFAIK no ordinary citizens who had brought cases (including myself) had a lawyer to represent us. No surprise there ... the small claims courts are designed to work this way, so ordinary people can bring cases if relatively small sums are involved.

Most of the defendants (which were small or large companies, some local and some national) in these citizen-brought cases didn't even show, but those who did typically brought a lawyer to deny the charges, and were usually asked by the magistrate to work out a settlement in the hallway.

Excluding the local small claims plaintiffs such as myself, about half the docket consisted of national credit card companies suing local debtors. The lawyer for say BOA would come in with a list of 10 local people being sued for amounts under the small claims threshhold. Maybe 1 in 4 defendants in these cases did show up, and were asked to work out a settlement in the hallway. If the local person being sued didn't show, the default judgement was for the credit card company with treble damages, putting these people further in the hole.

<comment><USER7> Wow, it's the Court of Chancery all over again.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Many debt collection cases will disappear if the alleged debtor files an answer (in court) to a debt collection complaint.

Filing answers is relatively simple and doesn't cost anything.

Depending on the jurisdiction, filing an answer basically puts the brakes on the case because it is not worth it for the debt collector to pursue it any further. Their business model is based on default judgments.

Eventually, after a year or so, if no action has been taken, the court is likely to dismiss the case (or you can ask them to).

Also, debt collection law has a lot of federal consumer protections and often more protections at the state level. Thus, it is not uncommon to run into debt collectors that are violating fed or state laws. Raising such issues also makes the case go away.

Of course, your mileage may vary depending on local laws and the nature of the debt or contract breach. But when I practiced little people law (before I sold out and went into IP law) I did this a few times and it worked without issue.

Thinking about it now, I guess a debtor-side lawyer should be involved, but defending such cases require hardly any effort on the part of the lawyer, so again I wonder why there are not debt relief orgs doing this. I believe fighting back just a little would significantly reduce the predatory practices of the volume debt collectors.

I imagine debt relief agencies don't fight because I think many are funded by the credit industry. So they direct debtors into payment plans rather than trying to shut down the predators.

<comment><USER9> > I imagine debt relief agencies don't fight because I think many are funded > by the credit industry. So they direct debtors into payment plans rather > than trying to shut down the predators.

Or they require money up front to help you. They already know you are (likely) a default risk, so "cash in advance, please". And as you allude to, a lot of times the "real" value in services like this is relief from the stress of the calls and letters. They're not passionately involved or connected, they just have the calls directed to them and put up with it and give you a settlement offer that you could have reached in the first place.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> The single largest thing we can do is undo the changes to bankruptcy law signed in 2005, it removed bankruptcy as a tool of the poor to discharge excess debt. It's caused there to be very little downside to lending, and lead to an explosion of debt.

<comment><USER11> The outcome of that will be that lending standards go up substantially. Significantly higher interest rates and required collateral. The eventual end result is fewer people able to qualify to buy a car, buy a house, get a credit card, or go to college. These are significant drivers of economic activity.

It's hard to put the genie back in the bottle.

<comment><USER12> Offering debt as a way to finance regular life activities like school and housing is also a good way to paper over the other, equally serious problems we currently have in the US, an explosion in the cost of school and housing, compared to what people earn.

If people didn't have debt as a way to access these things, there might be more energy for addressing the income inequality and lack of class mobility we have, that's being obscured by the access to debt.

<comment><USER11> Neither side is necessarily wrong here but we changed the law to address the problems you describe.

I see this as similar to the payday lending debate. Payday lenders aren't creating demand, they are responding to it. What happens when we eradicate that form of lending? Most things start from good intentions.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment> WD-42 Imagine working for a company that buys up poor people's debt in order to sue them.

<comment><USER13> Okay, I'm imagining it. So what? There is a debate to be had about what sorts of protections we want to provide to debtors. But that's separate and apart from the existence of companies that specialize in debt collection. The latter is simply an example of economic specialization.

The problem everyone has getting their mind around debt collection is that they focus on the after-the-fact situation, instead of the whole picture. If companies cannot collect on debt, they will be less willing to extend credit. When you "help" one person who can't pay their debt, you're hurting several people in the future who won't be extended credit.

Student loans are a good illustration of this. People clamor to make student loans dischargeable in bankruptcy--citing examples of people with hundreds of thousands of dollars in crippling debt. But the median American doesn't have any student debt, and the median debt for people who do is just $30,000. Now as a practical matter, student loan forgiveness would just impact taxpayers, since almost all student debt is owed to the federal government. But if it was a normal debt market, making student loans--which are offered without any security--dischargeable in bankruptcy would cause student loans to dry up for everyone, even the vast majority of people who take on modest, manageable debt.

<comment><USER14> If student loans were suddenly unavailable then universities would have to rein in out of control costs and Maybe get rid of sports and bs admin staff.

The only reason they change that much is due to the ability of loans.

<comment><USER15> Same goes for books. Your prices for textbooks over there are hilarious. They're priced purely based on just how much you can milk the students, or rather whoever finances them.

<comment><USER16> Yeah and to a captive market too. College textbook sales is one of the most insane rackets I've ever witnessed... "milking the students" is no exaggeration.

<comment><USER14> I absolutely agree. The whole "college experience" from overpriced textbooks to overpriced dorms is a huge racket. The covid pandemic might really shake things up though if there's no school starting in the fall though.

<comment><USER16> I've advised a couple of people looking to go to school to take a gap-year to hedge risk of the schools having their stuff together.

If there's anything I've noticed about higher education after working in/with it, its that they're constantly behind the curve in just about everything that's not sports/research related.

I would be very scared of having a second-rate experience due to a college (and professors) not being prepared for this to the point I would sit a year out and crank out gen-eds at home in already established online programs.

Take this all with a grain of salt... Maybe I'm paranoid, but I just don't see schools being ready for this and having a solid experience ready for new students by fall unless they've already practiced remote learning/class programs.

<comment><USER14> When I was a sophomore in my undergrad degree one of the professors was habitually late. As we were only meeting 2-3 times a week I calculated the dollar value of that lateness as a part of our tuition. People were not happy.

Hopefully at the end of all this we realize that community colleges can teach the majority of a 4yr degree and even have labs already set up.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> I do commercial collections (B2B). The article states, "Unlike most court rulings, these judgments are issued, as the name indicates, by default and without consideration of the facts of the complaint—and instead are issued in cases where the defendant does not show up to court or respond to the suit." I am licensed in California and Texas, and in both states one must "prove-up" a default before judgment is entered by presenting a "prima facie" case. In other words, you must prove your case before a judgment is entered, even if the defendant does not show up.

<comment><USER18> I was under the impression that a well-plead complaint was sufficient if the defendant doesn't show up. What rule says you have to actually put on a case to get a default judgment?

<comment><USER17> In California, it's CCP 585.

[https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySectio...](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=CCP&sectionNum=585).

It's a two step process. First your get the default entered if they don't respond, then you ask for judgment for damages. Maybe that's where the confusion lies. The default is entered by request almost automatically if they don't respond. Getting your judgment for damages requires evidence to prove your case.

<comment><USER8> Don't forget the third step, collecting on the judgment. This is often the hardest part.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> "Civil caseloads dropped more than 18 percent from 2009 to 2017. Although no research to date has identified the factors that led to this decline, "

I might make a guess that the efforts of our corporate overlords to force everyone into nonjuducial arbitration has something to do with it.

</comment><comment><USER20> It's not surprising that the percentage of debt claims has doubled when, as the article notes, consumer debt levels tripled over the same period.

<comment><USER21> It's not surprising when you think about it, but it's still an important problem to think about. It has the potential to cause some problems if state courts become seen as a vehicle for debt collectors more than an authority for righting wrongs.

<comment><USER22> I think we all agree you should be able to collect on a debt. (if you can't it's not a debt)

And I imagine most of us agree collection should be pursuant to due process.

I don't really see any other options.

<comment><USER21> I actually don't agree. Many debts in the US are effectively non-collectible, because all the property from which they could be collected is exempted. (This is especially true in Texas, where wages can't be garnished for most debts.)

<comment><USER22> I just meant a debt that is inherently non-collectible (and thus does not need to go to court) is not a debt.

For instance determining whether or not a house is a homestead and whether or not the debt is therefor effectively non-collectible or not is something that requires a court.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> What a depressing topic. Since one is responsible for his own debt and just forgiving it is unfair to those pulling their own weight perhaps the small amounts the article talks about should play part in setting the height of an initial basic income. If the income is guaranteed it can at least pay the interest over debt. It could become more interesting to get payments rather than sell peoples property and ruin their lives (and potentially their income) with all the burdens on society it brings.

<comment><USER24> How is it unfair to forgive debt? What? Other people don't affect you.

<comment><USER25> Um, they literally do? In aggregate, it's a similar effect as a VC-backed company burning capital to push out competitors. You're spending money you don't have, which drives the economy, raising demand and prices. The people who don't do the same can now afford less. Then the balloon pops, and your debt is forgiven, while you've reaped all the benefits from having the extra capital that your peers didn't.

Even in a simple terms, it hurts people's sense ethical and societal obligations. Why should I deprive myself of consumption and be a responsible economic participant, when I can spend money I don't have and then have my debt forgiven?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> I'd be interested to understand how this works in practice, especially small claims court (which is probably where many credit card debts end up at). From my understanding, small claims judgments are very tough to actually enforce, no longer show up on your credit report, and the court system does nothing to help you collect. Without getting into moralizing and just from a pure P&L perspective- how can it make financial sense for a big company to have one of its attorneys spend the day in court, when you're probably not going to collect on the debt....?

</comment><comment><USER27> I actually think the current system works well. The only people having a bad time are people who borrow AND don't repay AND refuse to work with their lender AND refuse to come to court.

And remember, there is no free lunch here. Making life easier for borrowers who can pay but won't just means the rest of us have to pay more for out legitimate borrowing.

</comment><comment><USER28> Seems like there are some money left on the table.

Should someone build a small company to defend all those people solely based on some contingency fee (well a tiny percentage of what they owe or would pay if they lose).

If I owe $5,000, a lawyer takes the case, and prevent me to pay the $5,000 for a $500 fee, and I never hear again about the debt collector, that seems a win- win.

Those debt collector would start to think twice before going to court, and if really working, debt collector would start to think twice before buying debts at the first place.

It could be automated, with a single website, where I enter few details about my case (or the website contacts me based on scrawling the dockets), give me free advices to fight it myself (e.g. ask debt collector for all communication to only be done by mail, as allow by law, ask them for proof of debt, etc.). And if it escalate to court, then a lawyer would be assigned to represent me.

Looks like some software could fight this court scaling issue, by fighting before it goes to court, and then making it less predictable for debt collector to go the court route.

<comment><USER29> You seem to misunderstand something. Debt collectors aren't winning cases of illegitimate debt. They are winning legitimate court cases that the defendant simply ignored. Even if you bring a lawyer to court that doesn't mean that you won't have to pay the debt. That $5000 debt was probably bought for less than $500 by the debt collector and the debt collector is willing to settle for something like $1000 which is still significantly less than the original debt.

<comment><USER30> If people don't know about the debt and it goes to court and a default judgment is issued, well, we don't know if the original debt is real or not because it didn't get tested in the court.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> It bums me out that people who need the most help in life receive the least

<comment><USER32> What do you mean "receive the least"? Pretty much all the social programs we have target the poor, not the rich. The poor are the ones that receive the most.

<comment><USER33> Programs that benefit richer people aren't framed as "social programs" and generally aren't saddled by Kafkaesque bureaucracy and scrutiny.

Compare the sheer toil of using food stamps vs using the mortgage tax deduction.

<comment><USER34> Forget mortgage interest deductions. Take a look at cash back rewards cards. Cash-using households ultimately end up transferring money to card-using households this way, because merchants don't usually set higher prices for card users to compensate for fees. See [https://www.bostonfed.org/publications/public-policy- discuss...](https://www.bostonfed.org/publications/public-policy-discussion- paper/2010/who-gains-and-who-loses-from-credit-card-payments-theory-and- calibrations.aspx)

I get an average of 1-2% off of almost everything I buy simply because I can use a cash back rewards card to do it. It's sickening.

<comment><USER32> Is there something stopping poor people from getting these cards? I mean sure, if they have bad credit they can't, but I know plenty of poor people with good credit.

<comment><USER34> Click the link. Read the abstract, at least.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> > Texas is the only state that reports on all types of cases, including > outcomes, across all courts.

Texas leads the USA in judicial transparency! Sacramento, you got some 'splainin to do.

</comment><comment><USER36> It would be hilarious if it wasn't so tragic. Taking someone to court for not paying a debt and then (if severe enough) sending them to prison ends up costing the state, and tax payer, a lot more than just writing off the debt. It's a vicious circle where (on average) only the debt collector wins. It's one of many scenarios (another being healthcare) that point towards a social (not communist) solution being the only way. Civil War usually starts when a significant portion of a population can no longer feed itself...</comment>


Enhancing and Experiencing Spacetime Resolution with Videos and Stills - <AUTHOR> http://vimeo.com/2937785?pg=embed&sec=2937785

<comment><USER2> Dup. <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=448676>

Washington.edu version of this dup: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=449041></comment>


Boeing waited until after Lion Air crash to tell Southwest safety alert was off - <AUTHOR> https://www.cnbc.com/2019/04/28/boeing-didnt-tell-southwest-that-safety-feature-on-737-max-was-turned-off-wsj.html <comment><USER2> For anyone interested in an insider's perspective on recent quality issues at Boeing, check out this short New York Times podcast wherein they interview whistleblowers.

[https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/23/podcasts/the- daily/boeing...](https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/23/podcasts/the-daily/boeing- dreamliner-charleston.html)

The excerpt that stands out to me the most related the story of one of the whistleblowers finding pieces of debris within a 787 aircraft (between the passenger compartment and the skin), telling his supervisor, and then being told not to worry about it. In another case, a whistleblower in charge of defective inventory found that some of the items marked defective were going missing and ending up installed on aircraft to meet production goals rather than wait for a proper replacement, the red paint marking them defective having been clumsily rubbed off.

<comment><USER3> These stories are from an acquired factory - it seems like they acquired a lot of problems when they bought Embraer.

<comment><USER4> Who knows. Maybe the problems where imposed on those factories.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> As I commented in previous articles here on HN, the chance that there are other subsystems that were rushed and self-approved by Boeing is not zero, people thinking that fixing the MCAS is enough are forgetting to consider that other components had to be updated for the new design.

</comment><comment><USER6> And it's recently emerged that the AoA sensor misread itself may have been Boeing's fault, and due to foreign object damage to wiring:

[https://interestingengineering.com/boeing-whistleblowers- rep...](https://interestingengineering.com/boeing-whistleblowers-report- more-737-max-8-problems-to-faa)

Boeing also has foreign object damage problems on the 787 and on the KC46 tankers. Looks like this story still has a long way to run.

[https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/20/business/boeing- dreamline...](https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/20/business/boeing-dreamliner- production-problems.html)

[https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing- aerospace/u-s-a...](https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing- aerospace/u-s-air-force-again-halts-delivery-of-boeings-tanker-over-debris/)

<comment><USER2> Wow, I'm surprised that's not more well-known (that the USAF halted all deliveries of the KC-46 after finding loose material and debris in delivered planes). Amazingly bad.

I wonder what the odds are that the Dreamliner gets grounded (again) soon to have them all gone over with a fine-tooth comb.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> I've recently contacted all of the major airlines that fly the 737 Max as well as my congressional representatives and the FAA to let them know I have serious reservations about a software fix to the aircraft.

If this issue is concerning to you I'd recommend you do the same. To make it easier, I've put the links to all the contact sites below.

United Airlines [https://www.united.com/ual/en/us/customer/customercare](https://www.united.com/ual/en/us/customer/customercare)

Southwest Airlines [https://www.southwest.com/contact-us/contact- us.html](https://www.southwest.com/contact-us/contact-us.html)

American Airlines [https://www.aa.com/contact/forms?topic=CR#/](https://www.aa.com/contact/forms?topic=CR#/)

Find your Congressional representatives [https://www.house.gov/representatives/find-your- representati...](https://www.house.gov/representatives/find-your- representative)

FAA [https://hotline.faa.gov/](https://hotline.faa.gov/)

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> I always had great respect for aerospace and thought they'd put safety above all else but seeing all this, Boeing seems like a fucking travesty.

<comment><USER8> Boeing opened its South Carolina plant to avoid a unionized workforce, and that plant has been responsible for producing these horrific excuses they call airplanes. They had the benefit of a doubt before, but now it's clear that Boeing's leadership, like that of other public companies, values cheap labor over safety.

<comment><USER9> I'm not sure how unions have any relations to this. They exist as a mediator between management and workers for pay and rights; customer satisfaction or safety is completely outside their domain

<comment><USER8> Unions give employees the knowledge and leverage to push back against unrealistic demands, deadlines, and cost-cutting measures without retaliation. These kinds of rushed solutions causing more problems down the line are caused by a culture that rewards employees who put up with managers breathing down their neck.

<comment><USER10> Irrelevant in this case, though. While concerns have indeed been raised about SC production quality, this particular story involves an engineering failure, not a production issue. Boeing engineers are unionized through SPEEA. They can bring the company to its knees at contract negotiation time, and they have done so in the past.

<comment><USER11> I disagree, it is _also_ a production issue because:

"One whistleblower reported to the FAA that they had seen damage to the electrical wiring connected to the plane's angle of attack sensor from a foreign object, which feeds data to the MCAS system so it can determine whether it needs to engage to prevent the plane from stalling. This wouldn't be the first time Boeing's manufacturing process reportedly had problems guarding plane components against foreign object debris produced by the fabrication process."

<comment><USER10> Stuff happens. The fact that damage to a single AOA sensor -- whether in the factory or in the field -- could cause this sort of event is strictly an engineering issue.

<comment><USER11> It is most definitely not "strictly" an engineering issue.

By that logic you can say it is a quality control, FAA or management issue (and not an engineering issue) - because the engineering problem was not caught by other systems.

Also "engineering" created the AoA disagree alert. Whoever decided to make that an optional feature should be "strictly" at fault? Maybe it is the fault of the airlines that decided not to have that feature installed?

Engineering is just one part of a complex system so why do you think engineering should be blamed 100% for failures that occurred due to the whole system?

<comment><USER10> _Engineering is just one part of a complex system so why do you think engineering should be blamed 100% for failures that occurred due to the whole system?_

Because that's the only way something this complicated can possibly work. Fault tolerance is optional only if failure is considered to be a valid option.

Getting back to what happened in _this_ case: at some point, a Boeing engineer was asked to make MCAS work with input from only one AoA sensor. That person could have made all the difference by saying, "Lol no," and SPEEA would have had their back.

<comment><USER11> You should be rebutting my points. To rebut your new points:

I think failure is _always_ acceptable engineering: a defining feature of engineering is finding compromises because we don't have infinite resources, infinite ability, or perfect materials.

> a Boeing engineer was asked to make MCAS work

That sounds like you are just making stuff up about a team of engineers. So your opinion is this is all the fault of a single engineer? Not engineering after all?

<comment><USER10> 1\. Add MCAS system to artificially make airplane fly as if it were a different airplane.

2\. Drive MCAS with only one AOA sensor.

3\. Don't tell MCAS to look for (or even think about) bad AOA data or AOA disagreements.

4\. Equip airplane with two AOA sensors as usual, but make the AOA disagree warning light a "value added option" that customers have to pay extra for.

5\. Don't actually bother to tell pilots that they don't have AOA disagree warning lights.

6\. Don't bother to tell pilots that MCAS exists at all.

7\. Don't test MCAS subsystem to see what it actually does with bad AOA data.

8\. Give MCAS a ridiculous amount of control authority, operating cumulatively over repeated applications to exceed what the pilot can manually override.

Now, exactly _what_ items on this list are the responsibility of non-union labor in a South Carolina assembly plant, or whatever other mistuned horn you're tooting? Once again, in the absence of gross engineering malpractice, a broken AOA sensor is no big deal.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> If I recall from earlier reporting, this is the safety light that Southwest paid extra to have installed, right?

</comment><comment><USER13> I don't fly very often, but being in the midst of booking flights I'm very thankful for websites having filters by airplane type. I'll be paying the additional 10-20% to not set foot on a Boeing this time.

</comment><comment><USER14> Wow, I'd be surprised if some young congressperson doesn't make their career by publicly eviscerating Boeing soon.

<comment><USER15> I hope you don't think it's going to be a US congresscritter.

"Why do you hate American jobs!"

<comment><USER16> You can turn that logic around real quick since Boeing also makes planes and other equipment for the US military:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_Defense,_Space_%26_Secu...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_Defense,_Space_%26_Security)

You don't hate the troops after all, _do_ you?

<comment><USER17> yep, "think of the troops" is just as emotive (and patronizing) as "think of the children". Unbelievable that people repeatedly fall for it.

<comment><USER16> I think it's valid to think about both. I just think sometimes people try to reduce risk to zero with no regard for the fact a zero risk society is one without civil liberties.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> "If it's boeing I ain't going"

<comment><USER19> I wonder how many serious problems Airbus have that we simply don't know about because they haven't been caught.

<comment> village-idiot Well, they designed their airframe to handle the larger engines properly, rather than patching it with software. So I'm going to wager that the answer is "a lot less".

<comment><USER20> Boeing shot themselves in the foot after the awful outsourced supply chain [0] and battery problems on the 787 which meant that they had less financial resources available to go clean sheet and instead they adapted an old design.

[0] [https://www.consultancy.uk/news/297/outsourcing-main- cause-f...](https://www.consultancy.uk/news/297/outsourcing-main-cause-for- boeing-787-dreamliner-problems)

<comment> village-idiot I call these strategies "bonuses today, bankruptcy tomorrow".

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> This is pretty disturbing and makes me far more confident in my decision to never set foot on a Boeing airplane again.

I thought the American airlines had all opted for the AoA disagree light, but now it sounds like Southwest didn't have it because Boeing lied to them and said it was standard.

</comment><comment><USER22> very timely, AvE just made a teardown of an AOAS [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NhZ0D-JRtz0](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NhZ0D-JRtz0)</comment>


SpaceX: "Landing confirmed" - <AUTHOR> https://twitter.com/spacex/status/728457165606780928 <comment><USER2> Comments moved to [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11642855](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11642855). We don't usually merge an older thread into a newer one, but people obviously want to keep discussing this, so it seems like the best way to avoid more duplicate posts.</comment>


coveman: your online personal organizer - <AUTHOR> http://www.coveman.com <comment><AUTHOR> the site is the next big thing as it combines the two most important facets of the internet, convenience and information availability. it tries to provide ts users with a platform which satisfies all their official needs. its services include: resume building, networking, contact lists, business cards, news, mail, horoscopes, stocks, diaries etc. its definitely a must try

<comment><USER2> _'... the site is the next big thing as it combines the two most important facets of the internet, convenience and information availability ..._ '

does it work on an iPhone? (or any phone?)</comment></comment>


WithoutABox vs. FilmFreeway: How AMZN used patents to dominate indie film distro - <AUTHOR> https://www.indiewire.com/2018/10/film-festival-submission-filmfreeway-withoutabox-amazon-1202014229/ <comment><AUTHOR> Just posting this as a follow-up. This is a 2018 article, but what surprised me is (at least according to the article) how Amazon used the threat of patent litigation to defend their market position with WithoutABox.

It really leaves a bad taste in my mouth and does a fine job of illustrating how patents can stifle innovation and create monopolies.</comment>


Announcing new features  and a premium version of N1 open-source email client - <AUTHOR> https://nylas.com/blog/nylas-pro/ <comment><USER2> Related: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11553738](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11553738)</comment>


Say good bye to endless Symfony classes - <AUTHOR> https://email@example.com/symbok-dbc77f1d8ff8 <comment><USER2> Awesome! I work with Java developers who always talk about the benefits of Lombok. Now, I can tell them that such thing exists un PHP. I'll try it as soon as possible!</comment>


Slowly, Slowly: Growing From Side-Project to Funded Startup - <AUTHOR> http://natgordon.com/slowly-slowly-growing-from-side-project-to-fu

<comment><USER2> Could you expand on what your bad contracting experience was? And did you end up funding this project with contracting income over the last (almost) 2 years?

Congrats on keeping it going!

<comment><AUTHOR> The bad contracting experience was as a developer with an early-stage start- up. I was living in Canada and they were in the Valley.

That money, plus money saved during my time at Amazon, plus money my husband made contracting, was what we lived on. During 2011 my husband was a student and I stayed at home with my son (which is what most professionals do for the first year in Canada).

BabyList has been paying me a salary for the past year (which is awesome).

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Congrats on the follow-through! It's great to hear about niches that everyone might assume are all locked-up being wide open to good ideas, well-executed.

</comment><comment><USER4> Welcome to the 500 family! Lots of great resources and mentors to help continue to accelerate the growth of Baby List.

</comment><comment><USER5> I'm curious, what is the revenue model for babylist?

<comment><AUTHOR> Currently we make money through affiliate programs.

<comment><USER5> Thanks for the reply!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> good advice, and congrats on 500 startups! one small mistake: in the last paragraph, "excepted" should be "accepted".

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks! fixed.</comment></comment>


Show HN: Palx – Automatic UI Color Palette Generator - <AUTHOR> https://palx.jxnblk.com/ <comment><USER2> Pretty cool.

I would move the download buttons up to the top though. I missed them my first few times.</comment>


FDIC relaxes key Volcker Rule restrictions - <AUTHOR> https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/25/investing/fdic-volcker-rule-banks/index.html <comment><USER2> Makes sense to let banks take more risk at an arm's length away from ATHs.

Obviously now they'll help invest in growing, and distressed companies, and won't take outright net short positions against pressured industries.

\s

</comment><comment><USER3> This worked out so well in 2007 - 2008 that we just had to try it again, huh?

Why is this administration an such incredible engine for useless ideas?</comment>


DeLoreans Coming Back to Production - <AUTHOR> http://money.cnn.com/2016/01/27/luxury/delorean-coming-back-to-the-future/ <comment><USER2> > new regulations are going into effect later this year that will allow the > production of replica cars without requiring them to meet safety guidelines > involving air bags and crash tests.

This regulation may need some tweaking to stop abuse.

<comment><USER3> According to this, the new regulations limit such replicas to 325 cars per year per company:

[http://www.autoblog.com/2015/12/08/new-law-vintage- cars/](http://www.autoblog.com/2015/12/08/new-law-vintage-cars/)

Doesn't sound like much room for abuse.

<comment><USER4> So you set up a factory that "leases" it's manufacturing capacity to any paying company then start 10-100 corps that are all just coincidently making replicas of the same car and all "leasing" the factory in sequence.

I mean I don't know why you'd do that but it is the obvious work around

<comment><USER3> I doubt the law is that stupid, and judges tend to frown on shenanigans like this.

<comment><USER4> Well the law says[1]:

Except as provided in this section, sections 30113 and 30114 of this title, and subchapter III of this chapter, a person may not manufacture for sale, sell, offer for sale, introduce or deliver for introduction in interstate commerce ... unless the vehicle or equipment complies with the standard and is covered by a certification issued under section 30115 of this title.

which according to [2] has been ammended with:

(A) LOW-VOLUME MANUFACTURER- The term `low-volume manufacturer' means a motor vehicle manufacturer, other than a person who is registered as an importer under section 30141 of this title, whose annual worldwide production, including by a parent or subsidiary of the manufacturer, if applicable, is not more than 5,000 motor vehicles.

So assuming the various shell companies aren't owned by each other it just depends on whether the factory's owner is manufacturing the car or the company leasing the factory. The definition[3] of manufacturer says "person -- (A) manufacturing or assembling motor vehicles" which doesn't give a lot of guidance on that because these laws are clearly aimed at the corporate person not the individual assembly line workers (who would of course be employed by a temp-agency).

I mean not that it matters much. They still have to be 25 year old models and any IP has to be correctly licensed (which would mean getting the companies to sign off on a deal with a probably very high dodginess/profit ratio) I don't see any one trying to make or succeeding to sell 10000 '89 Ford Ranger clones.

That said you're absolutely right that if it ever got to court the judges would pierce the veil like * that *

[1] [https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/49/30112](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/49/30112)

[2][http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi- bin/cpquery/?&dbname=cp114&refer=&...](http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi- bin/cpquery/?&dbname=cp114&refer=&r_n=hr357.114&item=&&&sel=TOC_1393421&)

[3][https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/49/30102](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/49/30102)

<comment><USER3> Thanks for looking up the actual law. Does the inclusion of "by a parent" mean that the companies would all need to have separate ownership, so you'd have to go recruit a bunch of friends into the scheme?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Tesla should've fund a way to license the design people would've paid much more than 100k for that one.

</comment><comment><USER6> One of my neighbours a few doors down actually has an original DeLorean. He only gets it out on the road 3 or 4 times a summer and is constantly working on it although fixing it up is more of a hobby for him than anything else so I don't think he considers that to be a negative.

It is quite exciting to see it go.

Unfortunately the doors locked in the open position last summer which took him quite a bit of fiddling to get fixed. I suppose that was better than having it locked with users inside though.

</comment><comment><USER7> "The price is about $100,000, and unfortunately hover conversions and flux capacitors aren't included."

Sad that the original manufacturer options are somewhat lacking, but luckily there are always after market add-ons: [http://www.oreillyauto.com/site/c/detail/EB00/121G.oap](http://www.oreillyauto.com/site/c/detail/EB00/121G.oap)

</comment><comment><USER8> This same type of article about the DeLoreans comes up at least once a year. Vaporware.

</comment><comment><USER9> $100k for one? Holy cow. If I'm spending that I'll get a Tesla. I get the novelty and I'm genuinely happy to see them doing it but that seems sky high for a V6 coupe.

</comment><comment><USER10> I was so excited!!! Then I was left sad after reading they're only going to produce 300 of them at a rate of 1 per week out of old spare parts, except for an updated engine.

</comment><comment><USER11> So you can take an old car design, you make new ones but triple the power of the engine and... You don't need to recertify it ?

</comment><comment><USER12> ...but it was a terrible car! Just stylish; and now that style is dated.

<comment><USER13> Still stylish.

But, I wouldn't buy one, because I like living, and I don't really want a car that "luckily" doesn't have to meet safety standards. Also, $100k will buy a lot of modern sports car, including a Tesla or a Nissan GT-R (depending on the kind of supercar you like), which also happen to meet modern safety standards. DeLorean's are beautiful, but not $100,000 worth of beautiful, to me, when they also suffer from most of the usual failings of cars designed 40 years ago.

<comment><USER3> I'm sure they're aiming for the nostalgia factor. Their target market is probably people who grew up with Back to the Future and always wanted one of these cars but don't want to deal with finding and maintaining an old, old used one with no manufacturer support. That demographic is getting to an age and point in life where a decent number of them (small, but perhaps enough) can afford this sort of price. "Dated" is exactly what you want, here. Just the right kind of "dated."

I wouldn't buy one either. I'm in the right demographic, and nostalgic for them, but not that nostalgic. But I think enough of my fellows are that this will enjoy some success. It won't be a mass market item, but that's OK.

<comment><USER14> > _I 'm sure they're aiming for the nostalgia factor._

That's a polite way of putting it. They're aiming for the kind of geek whose money-to-sense ratio is so high that they'll pay any amount of money for a thing that reminds them of a thing they liked when they were kids, no matter the quality.

Granted, replacing the engine fixes the #1 problem, which was that some dipshit thought 130 horsepower was enough for a status-symbol sports car. But somebody that silly isn't going to stop at one mistake.

<comment><USER3> Wasn't the engine due to tougher emissions regulations? I thought that it was supposed to have something better, but ended up stuck with what it got because the original plans wouldn't have passed emissions by the time they actually started producing the car.

As for being polite, if the buyers have the disposable cash for it, who am I to judge what they buy? Most cars are luxury purchases to an extent. Almost nobody buys the minimum necessary. It's just a matter of how _much_ unnecessary spending you do.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Christchurch Earthquake Reveals Time Capsules in Toppled Statue - <AUTHOR> http://www.independent.ie/world-news/asia-pacific/quake-yields-discovery-inside-fallen-statue-of-citys-irish-founder-2560537.html

<comment><USER2> See also: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2274791>

As I said there, I agree that this is interesting, but I think it's just as interesting to a wide audience, and has nothing specific to hackers or hackery. For that reason I feel it's off-topic for HN. The guidelines say:

        Off-Topic: ... If they'd cover it on TV news,
                       it's probably off-topic.

In particular, I've seen the same story from several sources now, and hence I feel that it's not specific enough for HN.</comment>