Ask HN: Best resources to learn about design? - <AUTHOR>

Being a programmer, I lack a natural sense of design, and not every project requires or allows to hire a professional designer.
In short, I want to become better at making things look good. I like to believe that I have good taste, as in recognizing good design as such, but am pretty hopeless about creating good designs myself.
What books/blogs/websites have you found helpful to learn more about design?
Some suggestions of my own:
- Usability overlaps with design quite a bit (making things pleasant to use, getting rid of clutter etc), so books like Joel Spolsky's user interface design for programmers, Steve Krug's Don't make me think, or Alan Cooper's About Face can help with design, too.
- Robin Williams: The Non-designer's design book. Short, to the point, and teaches the basic principles.
- Blogs: Smashing Magazine and Six Revisions. <comment><USER2> <http://www.webdesignfromscratch.com/articles-and-tutorials/> is a good place to start.</comment>


Ask HN: What are some current shortages you were surprised by? - <AUTHOR> <comment><USER2> Common sense

</comment><comment><USER3> Had to redo my online shopping cart three times because of components going out of stock before I finished making my selection... sigh I knew I should have bought it last night but I slept on it and now that lambda a++ psu will have to wait

</comment><comment><USER4> Toilet paper. Post apocalypse media usually uses soda, sugar, cigarettes, Twinkies as currency, but nobody mentions toilet paper.

Bread shortages were unexpected too, in a nation that mostly eats rice.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> US, Austin: I was surprised by shortage of coffee and peanut butter.

</comment><comment><USER5> Germany: yeast in supermarkets (people bake more at home?), weights in ecommerce (those having to skip the gym training at home?)

<comment><USER6> People buy yeast to be prepared to bake at home if food/bread shortage. I don't think they bake more already.

<comment><USER7> Fresh yeast is a thing in Germany. In the US, it's dried yeast or nothing.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Gym barbells/weights/racks/dumbbells are sold out nation-wide in Australia</comment>


Climate-change Super PAC to target "science deniers" - <AUTHOR> http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/USA-Update/2014/0522/Climate-change-Super-PAC-targets-Republicans-who-deny-human-role-in-warming

<comment><AUTHOR> Shades of Ralph Nader's "Only the Super-Rich Can Save Us!"</comment>


The Linux Programming Interface - <AUTHOR> http://www.man7.org/tlpi/index.html#ordering <comment><USER4> My short review of this book: [http://www.amazon.com/review/R5XJW6NQUUKSR/ref=cm_cr_pr_perm...](http://www.amazon.com/review/R5XJW6NQUUKSR/ref=cm_cr_pr_perm?ie=UTF8&ASIN=1593272200&nodeID=&tag=&linkCode=)

<comment><USER5> Thanks for the review! I ordered it yesterday after reading your review. It arrives today.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> 1550 pages and 60 bucks.

Wow. Must be some kind of book.

I've been reading as much as I can about Linux over the last month, but I'm not sure I have the sixty bucks or the time to go through that much material. Sounds like a great reference book, though. I'm putting it on my list. Sounds like something I could use.

Is it just me, or over the last ten years or so computer books have become these huge everything-but-the-kitchen-sink monsters? I was reading a book last week -- it wasn't so good -- when I realized the author had just taken the API spec, made an outline, and then fluffed up the content with lots of sample code, tables, and lists. Made for a great encyclopedia, but not much in thee way of I'll-hold-your-hand-while-you-learn-this.

<comment><USER7> While it seems like programming books are sold by weight, these days, it makes a certain amount of sense for a book like this (or Steven's _Advanced Programming in the Unix Environment_) - it's a detailed reference for Unix's rather large API. It'd probably be better in multiple volumes, though.

There _are_ some good, short programming books. (Many of them were co-written by Brian Kernighan.)

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> It looks great. I'm dying for an ebook. Technical books stack up so quickly.

<comment><USER9> If a DRM free ePub is sold, I'll take out my credit card immediately.

Not a big fan of dead tree format, I don't like books that don't fit in my pocket.

<comment><USER10> As a reference book, I would much rather have a physical copy than have to piss around with the electronic version. An ebook might be nice as a backup for travel, but I would mostly be referencing this in my office anyway.

<comment><USER9> Even as a reference book, I find the ability to read it on my cellphone useful. I've can either waste my 10 minute light rail ride browsing pics.reddit.copm or I can learn the existence of a few system calls that might be useful someday.

The ability to search is also nice.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> This led me to the already mentioned APUE book, written by Stevens. I was saddened by his loss at a yound age of 48. [http://www.salon.com/technology/feature/2000/09/01/rich_stev...](http://www.salon.com/technology/feature/2000/09/01/rich_stevens)

That article led me to this:

[http://www.salon.com/technology/feature/1999/11/30/lions/ind...](http://www.salon.com/technology/feature/1999/11/30/lions/index.html) which is another fantastic read.

You can read about Lions' efforts here: Lions' Commentary on UNIX 6th Edition, with Source Code [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lions_Commentary_on_UNIX_6th_Ed...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lions_Commentary_on_UNIX_6th_Edition,_with_Source_Code)

<http://tinyurl.com/2k9rwr> (If the link above doesn't work)

The commentary is available as a PDF file here: <http://www.lemis.com/grog/Documentation/Lions/book.pdf>

</comment><comment><USER12> The sample chapters look great, and given the creator I'm sure the book is amazing. Unfortunately, I don't have $60 to spend right now on it. I'm saving the link though for when I do.

</comment><comment><USER13> We have a copy at the office. It's fantastic at first glance - <USER2> produced, well laid out, clearly written and sensibly organised.

</comment><comment><USER7> How does this compare to _Advanced Programming in the UNIX Environment, 2nd ed._ by Stevens? (Aside from being specific to Linux)

<comment><USER5> This review compares the two:

<http://www.amazon.com/review/R1886YLT8PR55U>

The dearth of exercises disappoints me, so I'll probably read APUE also.

<comment><USER7> Saw that (but thanks), wondering if anybody here has both and could expand on it. I have and love APUE, especially since it isn't Linux-specific. To what extent would TLPI be relevant for (say) BSD?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I read on some blog that soon the ebook version will be out. Also it stated that No Starch would be giving the ebook away with purchase of the book.

I know this is exactly the type of book I've been looking for over the last few months. As soon as the book+ebook version is up you have my money.

</comment><comment><USER15> I've been following this book for many months. Quite expensive. I wonder if/when it will be available on Safari.

<comment><USER16> I think $60 is quite reasonable for a book of this scope and size - <USER3> if it lives up to the reviews I read, particularly jgrahamc's. I'm surprised it's not closer to $100 - the market for this book is small and it's quite large, even for a technical book.

<comment><USER15> It really is 99$. Now I've noticed that Amazon is giving a significant discount.</comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: What web framework would you recommend for a greenfield project in 2018? - <AUTHOR> It's really hard to keep up, they're changing and coming and going all the time. Between now and the time I last looked into the latest frameworks, Angular has jumped from 1 to 2 to 4 and now I think it doesn't even have a version number? And React blew up but Vue is keeping up, Rails seems to be losing traction, ClojureScript and Elm seem to have had a brief spike in popularity, then there's Ember, and in general I'm very confused.
In particular I don't have a lot of particulars. I plan to deploy to EC2 and there is a need for a little bit of JS on the front-end for some stuff that can't be done server-side, but other than that it's all a very standard web app.
Comparison articles come out all the time but it's really hard to judge the competency or bias of the author. So I'm turning to you HN considering your reputation for being at the front of the game. <comment><USER2> Is this project a serious one? If it is, go for something mature and something you are familiar with even if it's "unsexy" like PHP and jQuery [1]. Learning a new technology while building your product can be fun, but it is often counterproductive. Unless your project has specific needs which only a few technologies can fulfill, it'll be just fine. Choosing something familiar allows you to focus on your project instead of your tech stack.

Don't worry too much about choosing the "wrong" language or framework. What you build matters more than how you build it. For example, many would recommend Postgres over MySQL for good reasons, yet those who use MySQL are doing just fine [2]. Their advantages are often insignificant in practice, so feel free to ignore the hype (especially here on HN)!

Angular, React, Vue are all fine choices for building SPAs. Rails is kind of out of place here (it's not a front-end framework). The hype around it has died, but Rails itself is still very much alive, and it's very mature. ClojureScript and Elm may need a bit more getting used to depending on your experience. Their communities are relatively small though, so you'll have less resources available.

[1] PHP gets a bad rap for its past, but modern PHP really isn't so bad (very Java or Ruby like, depending on the framework that you choose). jQuery is "old", but reliable. Not a good idea if you're building something highly interactive, but if you only need "a little bit of JS" then it seems like a good fit. SPAs have many advantages, but are also much more complex, so avoid building one if you don't need to.

[2] [https://www.mysql.com/customers/](https://www.mysql.com/customers/)

</comment><comment><USER3> This is a very simple checklist I recommend to anyone who asks me this question:

Know PHP? Take Laravel. Know Ruby? Take Rails. Know JS? Take vanilla Express. Know Python? Take Django.

Sprinkle some jquery on top for the frontend with bootstrap for quick UI. And if you plan to support only modern browsers (not IE), you might not even need jquery. A whole lot of the api is built straight into modern browsers.

Any such tomfoolery such as Single Page Application Frameworks, Server Side Rendering of said frameworks is never required. Not even facebook, which built react for its own use, has a fully React rendered page.

Deploy them on a regular servers/stacks. No unnecessary docker, kubernetes, etc., is required, unless you are making a project for google where you will get a million hits on the first day.

<comment><USER4> Awesome, thanks for this detailed answer! I was really starting to get nervous with the option-overload, but I feel comfortable with Express.js and Node.js and some ORM for the back-end, and vanilla JS for the front-end, so that's probably the direction I'll go! I guess I'll still need a build tool though since I'd like some things like autoprefixer etc, and I'll need to figure out a template engine for Node. Anyway thanks again!

<comment><USER5> Hey, I picked a similar stack when I developed my product. Basically we started with EJS templates since they were the closest to normal HTML but had to move to serverside Vue + Express because of security issues when mixing Vue + EJS.

I'd love to talk more about what/why if you have any questions. Shoot me an email @ [redacted] if you're interested.

</comment></comment></comment><comment> crooked-v For a frontend project I would recommend React, as the tooling available for it goes way beyond Vue or Angular. A React component is syntactically equivalent to a plain JS function or class, so once you're set up you have a much easier time (IMO) managing a large project using it.

If the project is such that you don't need to specifically have server APIs separate from the content you serve, you might want to look at Next.js or After.js, which are two similar approaches to a "just make a whole website out of React components, including server-side functionality".

</comment><comment><USER6> What languages are you comfortable and proficient in?

If you plan to write a volume of code comparable to a small novel, you will likely want to do so in a comfortable way, able to express nuances and details in an efficient, readable, elegant manner.

There aren't many writers who can write equally well in French and English, and even fewer who can write fluently and with finesse in Belgian French, Canadian French, UK English, Australian English, Mexican Spanish and Catalonian Spanish.

It takes constant experience and refinement to master Ruby + the rails API, something I imagine is even more true for the front end in the presence of elm etc.

I know that i would pick up the tools that my brain groks with the least effort (from a set of reliable, popular, well maintained options). The way my mind works can be the weakest link or my strongest asset — if I take it in consideration.

I can think Vue but I can't think React. I can joyfully think Ruby but I get frustrated with C# or pho etc. slim makes me happy, erb pokes my eyes.

</comment><comment><USER7> I recommend elixir with plug/cowboy. Phoenix is nice too.

On the front end try Elm.

</comment><comment><USER8> In terms of front-end development for business applications I'd recommend Angular (current version: 6. Since they adopted semver major releases have become much more frequent).

It gives you an easy way to structure your application in a predictably manner.

In my opinion, Angular lends itself to CRUD-type applications particularly well because of a clear separation between business logic and the presentation layer as well as due to easily reusable components.

Since Angular 2 the tooling has become quite reliable as well.

As for the back-end I'd suggest Spring Boot. It allows you to draw upon the vast amount of high-quality libraries available for the JVM without incurring the complexity cost that in the past often used to come with Java.

</comment><comment><USER9> Unless there is a compelling reason to go another direction: React on the front, Node on the back, deployed in Docker containers.

<comment><USER10> I disagree. Not all projects need a two tiered approach. For simple webapps a server-side, template-driven framework like Rails, Django etc. will make life much easier. You introduce a lot of added complexity when you go with an API + SPA

<comment><USER4> I'm not sure about that. If I use create-react-app to do a lot of the heavy lifting for the front-end, and use nothing but GraphQL for the back-end, that is still pretty simple, right?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> React on the front, python Flask on the back (if you need to build a small app quickly), or Java dropwizard if this is going to be something big.

</comment><comment><USER12> I think it really depends on what you are building, and it may be the case that a frontend framework is overkill for what you need!</comment>


Mysterious Explosion and Fire Damage Iranian Nuclear Enrichment Facility - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/02/us/politics/iran-explosion-nuclear-centrifuges.html <comment><AUTHOR> It seems like the cause of the explosion is not yet known, but the incident itself is reminiscent of the Stuxnet attack of yesteryear: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stuxnet](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stuxnet)</comment>


Ask HN: Freelancers, do you find the Elance services agreement reasonable? - <AUTHOR>

I was just reading the Elance services agreement [1] when I came upon this paragraph:
9.Indemnification Contractor will defend, indemnify, and hold harmless Client against any damage, cost, loss or expense arising from a claim, suit or proceeding brought against Client (i) alleging that any Work Product infringes upon any Intellectual Property Rights, (ii) alleging that any Work Product misappropriates any trade secrets, of any third party, or (iii) arising from Contractor's breach of the terms of this Agreement.
I find this highly worrisome because my understanding of it is that if a client I did work for is sued for IP infringement, even if no IP infringement occurs, I need to pay for the client's defense. This is just one example of many possible scenarios under the terms above.
I.e. if I did mobile apps and a client of mine got harassed by a patent troll and the client wanted to settle, I would have to pay the settlement on behalf of the client.
Do you find this risk worthwhile? Why do you accept it? Do you charge more, to be able to mitigate this risk?
[1] https://www.elance.com/p/legal/independent-contractor-services-agreement.pdf <comment><USER2> First, cause of sue happy people: I am not a lawyer and nothing I am saying should be considered legal advice, just my experience.

You will find almost every professional organization will have similar clauses in their contracts. Specifically it is addressing "Work Product" which is what you are producing for the client. So yes, if they are sued over something you deliver because you snagged images off the web and didn't pay for them, or you used someones IP without a proper license then yea they can hold you liable and make you pay some of their expenses. In general, a corporation isn't going to trust you to fight on its behalf, so this is more about you being a witness and paying expenses and damages if you infringed.

And you are right, you could do everything right and someone comes along and sues your client. That is why professional liability insurance etc is a must anymore. Not that it is a fix for this, but in the off chance, at least you have some protection from financial ruin. And in general, I always deliver to the client any licenses I purchased on their behalf (or a resale license), as well as details on any third party software or designs I used. And even before I use any 3rd party code, images etc that requires a license I always make sure the client signs off on it if it is core to some piece of functionality. This way they are aware during development and at time of delivery of what I used and why. This doesn't mean they can't make you hold them harmless, but it sure does help if you ever had to go to mediation or court.

<comment><AUTHOR> I understand the need for indemnification, however the scope of elance's terms seems too broad (it covers even alleged infringement) -- which I, personally, find questionable.

Do you have other freelancing sites to recommend, with, perhaps, more reasonable terms?

Where did you purchase your professional liability insurance? How expensive is it?

<comment><USER2> We don't use any of the freelancing sites, not because of their terms but it is mostly a race to the bottom. So instead, we rely on networking etc. Probably stuff you have heard.

And yea, I agree their statement seems overly broad and very one sided, which may make it tough to enforce. Usually these are handled as mutual agreements, and at least in my case I have a not to exceed the cost of the work clause etc. Again, I am not a lawyer though so, just my opinion.

As for liability insurance you can get it at most reputable insurance agents. There is also techinsurance.com which can hook you up with good insurers, at least in the US, not sure about anywhere else. I personally have a top insurer and it isn't all that expensive. For General Liability and "E&O" (errors and omissions) its around $1k/year for a significant amount of coverage. I have heard of people (never myself) paying as little as $400/yr for $1M of protection, from my experience it all depends on your situation: e.g. are you incorporated, do you have employees, how long have you been doing the job, have you had any claims of negligence against you etc.

Hope that helps some.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes it helps. Thank you.

"[...] and at least in my case I have a not to exceed the cost of the work clause etc.".

Now, that makes sense. It would have massively changed my opinion of the elance terms if they would have included that as it would decrease the risk of personal bankruptcy by a mile.

<comment><USER2> Cool, glad I could help any bit. And I agree totally on the limitation, its something I demand if they try and take it out. But its really rare for them to try since its pretty common.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Balancing Scooter Version 2 - <AUTHOR> http://www.tlb.org/scooter2.html <comment><USER2> Sounds fun, no indication of cost to make it though, nor details of the dealers he used to get all the parts on the internet (and not have to talk to!).

<comment><USER3> I'm guessing Octopart (<http://octopart.com/>) might've helped with getting some of the parts.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Are these photos from Burning Man?

</comment><comment><USER5> Things I enjoyed: the article

Things I did not enjoy: the shirtless picture</comment>


The world's first Muslim woman in space - <AUTHOR> https://www.techinasia.com/worlds-muslim-woman-space-shes-helping-bring-people-online/ <comment><USER2> Incredible! I would love to see a writeup on the the technical challenges that had to be overcome. How technology has advanced these sixty years!

Actually, despite my tongue-in-cheek comment above, given the preference in the vast majority of societies for risking male lives rather than female ones, this _is_ an indicator of greater reliability in spaceflight.

</comment><comment><USER3> The implication of the headline is that the reader should think, "Congratulations on make it to space despite being Muslim."

In other words, shit headline. And the headline's focus on being Muslim completely ignores all of the very impressive things this woman has achieved.

Shame on this "journalist", and shame on whoever submitted the post. (I wouldn't be at all surprised if the two were the same person.)</comment>


Xmonad made me more productive - <AUTHOR> http://charlieharvey.org.uk/page/xmonad_made_more_more_productive/

<comment><AUTHOR> tl;dr woirkspaces = less distraction, less fiddling with windows, less using the mouse could probably do the same with (insert window manager) but the constraints of a tiling wm help</comment>


14% of women considered quitting their jobs because of the coronavirus pandemic - <AUTHOR> https://fortune.com/2020/04/23/coronavirus-women-should-i-quit-my-job-covid-19-childcare/ <comment><USER2> >Eleven percent of men told the pay-equity software company that they have considered doing the same.

Is a 3% difference statistically significant?

The article details inequities in employment between men and women, but I don't think this survey shows an example of that.

<comment><USER3> Numbers from: [https://www.surveymonkey.com/results/SM-67XBXHYX7/](https://www.surveymonkey.com/results/SM-67XBXHYX7/) men: 11.74%, 298 subjects women: 14.24%, 288 subjects

Statistical analysis from: [https://www.socscistatistics.com/tests/ztest/default2.aspx](https://www.socscistatistics.com/tests/ztest/default2.aspx)

I don't believe the difference is significant at p<0.1 or any number below.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Here's the link to the survey results: [https://www.surveymonkey.com/results/SM-67XBXHYX7/](https://www.surveymonkey.com/results/SM-67XBXHYX7/)

It's a shame that they did not record/release data on the number of children the respondents have, as this is likely to be a major input to the decision about whether someone would give up work. There are exceptions scenarios but broadly it seems reasonable to expect more children would make it more worthwhile to give up.

There are some other quirks in he results: differing age distributions of men and women - you could imagine that if people were asked in person that traditionally some women may be more reticent to give the true answer but responding inaccurately online seems a little odd. It's also instructive that about 5% of respondents had considered quitting but hadn't told their partner.</comment>


Google SMS search has been shut down - <AUTHOR> http://productforums.google.com/forum/#!msg/websearch/yKG7BGro7QQ/ntAXQWWKj70J <comment><USER2> Hello all,

I'm CEO of DOTGO, which provides access to the internet using SMS.

Good news: you can still access google's search service using the short code DOTCOM (368266). Just text "google" + your search term to DOTCOM (368266).

You can actually access a bunch of websites by texting the website's domain name to DOTCOM (368266). For example, try "cnn" or "nytimes" or "yahoo" or "gmail".

And if you have your own website, you can use DOTGO to make your own website SMS-accessible for free. Visit our website dotgo.com to find out how or check out this doc:

<http://dotgo.com/Support/Documentation/doc0001.1.0/>

I can't guarantee how long we'll able to provide access, but we will as long as we're technically able!

Stefan Gromoll [first initial dot lastname] @ dotgo.com Co-Founder & CEO DOTGO 200 Varick St. #805 New York, NY 10014

Text "dotgo" to DOTCOM (368266) to find out more

</comment><comment><USER3> Sometimes when a google service shuts down I think, "Hmm, what did that one do? I don't remember hearing about that."

</comment><comment><USER4> I posted this when it was pulled a couple days ago, to no traction :/

Google says their mission is to 'organize the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful.' To me (and several others who have posted in that forum), this seems to be counterintuitive to that mission. Many people can't afford or don't want to pay for a smartphone or the data plan. When you try using SMS search now, google responds "SMS search has been shutdown. You can continue to search the web at google.com on any device". This isn't exactly helpful for someone lost in an unfamiliar city without a smartphone or GPS.

<comment><USER5> Sure, it isn't helpful for those without a data plan, but decisions doesn't exist in a present day vacuum. People with phones without data plans are a dying breed, and I think any reasonable person would focus their efforts on the premise that the world is moving toward smartphones.

<comment><USER4> I'd like to know what you're basing this on. In the U.S. this may very well be true, though the fact still remains that lower-income people are less likely to have smartphones. But what about in developing nations?

<comment><USER5> Plenty of stats around. The trend is fairly clear. Mobile data is the future and almost the present, even in developing countries: [http://mobithinking.com/mobile-marketing-tools/latest- mobile...](http://mobithinking.com/mobile-marketing-tools/latest-mobile- stats/b#mobilebroadband)

<comment><USER4> On the google products forum, someone mentioned that in India, everyone was using this service because it's fairly uncommon to have a data plan. The study you just linked seems to show monthly 3G access at about 8% for urban India. Which seems like a pretty clearcut minority to me.

<comment><USER5> It isn't about the present numbers, it is about where the numbers are going. Google may have a mission statement of "organize the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful", but clearly that require a company to make decisions. A lot of people would find it useful to have Google physically mail them info, but that isn't efficient or the way of the future.

I suspect a lot of people who are lamenting the "loss" of this service haven't used it. I have. It is better than nothing, but it is a hack designed for a world that isn't going to be around for long. If I was a Google shareholder, I'd be questioning them wasting any resources on it.

<comment><USER4> Whether or not that is the trend, it still sucks for the people who used it daily, such as myself. Your reasoning is sound, but that doesn't mean those of us who used it shouldn't be upset, or that those who no have need for it and possibly didn't even know about it until now shouldn't agree that it sounded useful.

I'm not trying to say google owes it to us to keep the service running or anything like that. They're a business and it's their prerogative to make decisions like this. I'm reminded of a Wayne Gretsky quote though, roughly "I don't skate to where the puck is, but where it's going to be." And that's solid reasoning. But from my perspective, with a team as strong as Google's, it wouldn't hurt them to leave a player where the puck is either.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Wow, from that thread the service looks very useful(even if you have a smartphone with data). Wish I knew about it before the shutdown.

I guess such is life in the Googleverse now: if you're unprofitable then you're "distracting us from our core mission". Who wants to make bets on the next service(s) to bite the dust? :)

<comment><USER7> Let's extend that idea to it's logical extent: <http://www.gwern.net/Google%20shutdowns>

<comment><USER8> I looked in the original data set [1] to see if this was in there; unless "SMS" meant "SMS search", it may not be at all. If it isn't in there it would be interesting to put it in the model as it stands now and see what the model thinks of the probability of shutdown.

[1]: <http://www.gwern.net/docs/2013-google.csv>

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I was always a huge evangelist for this service and it was incredibly useful to so many people I know. I'm both surprised and disappointed to see it go but I guess you can't serve ads via SMS (well, you can, but...).

<comment><USER10> Orrrr the non sinister explanation, that few use it any more.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> People with feature phones are still going to need to find info, and this move shifts the traffic onto services with less resources than Google (eg. <https://twitter.com/Telefact>). As additional services shut down due to increasing traffic, that traffic will move to the surviving services, until they all shut down.

</comment><comment><USER12> Are Google having cashflow problems?

How come they're shutting down so many of their services?

<comment><USER13> >Are Google having cashflow problems?

Nope, they are more profitable than ever.

My friend who works at Google explained to me that a big issue is maintenance. It's a tougher problem than it sounds because if an issue comes up someone needs to understand the codebase well. When a product is no longer worth the budget of full-time employees the best course of action is to kill the product.

<comment><USER14> This: _Nope, they are more profitable than ever._

Goes hand in hand with "shutting down a lot of services" since rounded to the nearest billion dollars the _only_ business Google has is search & display advertising, generally deleting anything else accretes positively to the bottom line :-)

<comment><USER13> There's some truth to that, but their profits are growing because their annual revenues are consistently and exponentially growing, not because their costs are going down:

[https://www.google.com/finance?q=NASDAQ%3AGOOG&fstype=ii...](https://www.google.com/finance?q=NASDAQ%3AGOOG&fstype=ii&ei=ed6PUbDGDYat0AGfBw)

Digital advertising just happens to be a very good industry to be in right now.

<comment><USER14> The term you are looking for is _efficiency_ which is the measure of how much of the business is dedicated to the parts that provide the revenue versus the parts that don't :-).

I left Google a couple of years after Patrick Pichette joined. Patrick is a great guy and very focused on putting as much money as possible into the bank account (great for share holders, not so great for lifestyle benefits).

But the point is that there is a target return on capital that every group is being held to and those that don't make the cut are being tossed. That helps the overall number get better (assuming those freed up resources either join more profitable projects or leave)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> If there really is a market for this, it shouldn't be too hard to recreate with the help of twilio and google APIs. The problem is getting paid, maybe you could charge a monthly fee or the users could agree to receive 1 ad for every X searches?

</comment><comment><USER16> It seems to me that this service would be really, really handy in countries where Nokia bar phones are prevalent. I'd love to see how many people actually used this service in those areas, because it depriving those people of this service goes against Google's mission of providing the entire world with information.

</comment><comment><USER17> I don't know which is more depressing, Google ruthlessly killing off a valuable service, or people being astonished by their doing so.

<comment><USER18> > killing off a valuable service,

Which valuable service is being killed off here? I'd never heard of this before. Doesn't look like it is used very much.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> Google's new mission statement: "organize the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful for a few years."

</comment><comment><USER20> As per some of the suggestions here, just published a tutorial on building your own Google SMS search with Twilio: <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5700331>

</comment><comment><USER21> How expensive can this be to run. They should just leave it up.

</comment><comment><USER22> I think this has something to do with the fact that you can't monetize and sell ads through SMS.

</comment><comment><USER23> What did Google SMS Search return exactly when you sent a text?

<comment><USER4> See my response here <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5688008></comment></comment>


GPS equipped shoes that will lead you home with LED signals - <AUTHOR> http://www.dominicwilcox.com/gpsshoes.htm <comment><USER2> Sometimes I lament about the lack of creativity shown here (yet another twitter/facebook/ad based company, etc) and say to myself that we, the human race, can and should do much better.

But _this_ is great- a perfect union of technology and fashion to build something that's not just cool, but ubercool, highly desirable, with many applications (say alzeihmer patients?)

When was the last time you got yourself lost in a city and wanted to walk back to where you came from? Sure you can bring out your cellphone or GPS and spend some time typing an address, or use chance and your memory, but what if you could just click your shoes together and they brought you back there?

Wow. It's awesome. I don't know what to say, besides "shut up and take my money" :-)

There is only one drawback for me : you have to input the original gps coordinates with a USB cable. Not good. Something else, like storing coordinates on a cue (jumping twice?) or automatically storing coordinates to take you back to each of your previous stops on your road (say where you spend over 1 minute) would be better.

But even without that feature, and with the ugly red inside that'll certainly turn my socks pink, I'd still buy a pair if I can upload the GPS coordinates by bluetooth :-)

EDIT to add a big thank you to the original author. You made my day.

<comment><USER3> I had the same thought about Alzheimers sufferers - I know a handful, one quite well.

Alas, part of the challenge of the disease is that you're generally not able to use mental "crutches". E.g. give the person step-by-step instructions, and he misplaces them.

In this case, I'd guess that advanced sufferers would most likely not think to look down at what their shoes were telling them or not be able to interpret what they saw.

Now if there were a gentle way to have the shoes compel walking in a certain direction, you'd have something very useful for this population.

<comment><USER4> > Now if there were a gentle way to have the shoes compel walking in a certain > direction,..

How about Galvanic Vestibular Stimulation (GVS), demonstrated by NTT in 2005 [1,2]? There's also a GVS implementation using an Arduino [3], so it is ripe for integration, especially given the availability of a GPS shield for the Arduino. An auto-homing human!

[1] [http://www.semanticmedia- showcase.de/WerkstattSM/Forschung/S...](http://www.semanticmedia- showcase.de/WerkstattSM/Forschung/SiggraphBeispiel/16-maeda.pdf)

[2] <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZlNfBrXYYTc>

[3] <http://arduino.cc/forum/index.php/topic,21780.0.html>

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> _Dave Lister: Sometimes I think it's cruel giving machines a personality. My mate Petersen once brought a pair of shoes with artificial intelligence. Smart Shoes, they were called. It was a neat idea. No matter how blind drunk you were, they would always get you home. Then he got ratted one night in Oslo, and woke up the next morning in Burma. See, the shoes got bored just going from his local to the flat. They wanted to see the world, man, y'know? He had a helluva job getting rid of them. No matter who he sold them to, they'd show up again the next day! He tried to shut them out, but they just kicked the door down, y'know?

Arnold Rimmer: Is this true?

Dave Lister: Yeah! Last thing he heard, they'd sort of, erm, robbed a car and drove it into a canal. They couldn't steer, y'see.

Arnold Rimmer: Really?!

Dave Lister: Yeah. Petersen was really, really blown away by it. He went to see a priest. The priest told him, he said, it was alright, and all that, and the shoes were happy, and they'd gone to heaven. Y'see, it turns out shoes have soles. _

\-- Red Dwarf, 1988.

</comment><comment><USER6> When I saw the 'northskirt' the first time I had an idea similar to this one. Vibrate the little buzzer in your phone more aggressively when you're going the wrong way, slowing it down as you are going the right way. Simple, only one 'bit' output needed (you could even tape a slave buzzer to your ankle or so). Instant pigeon sense of direction where-ever you go. No peeking at the screen required. Special signal: three rapid buzzes when you've reached your destination.

<comment><USER7> I saw a news story about a similar invention, but it had a buzzer in each shoe, and could help blind people know when to make a turn to get to their destination.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> cancelbubble, your account was hellbanned 614 days ago: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2102219>

<comment><USER9> I always want to say this, but figure that I would get banned as well. Fun.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> I love this, such a creative creation - although I'm not much sure I'd wear it, fashionably speaking, but it's a great idea. Setting coordinates via USB isn't the best, it'd be awesome if I could use my smart phone to connect to the shoes and set the GPS coordinates.

<comment><USER11> a great idea? I guess you mean as art/concept, right? as a product... I can't think of anyone buying it except as a wacky gift, ironic footwear, collecting...

I mean, the "User Experience" of the interface to programming a shoe to highlight directions will be bad, USB won't do, if you could use your smartphone + wifi/bluetooth...why not just look a map in the phone? specially since you'd need to walk looking at your shoes to know where to go...

a practical use: adventure sports, hiking, trekking and the like(they already have to prepare for the thing, configuring the shoes would just be another thing, and it would help their safety)... alzheimer ehhhhhhh, I think not. Alzheimer sufferers probably need more care than just knowing where's their homes, and public health probably wouldn't like the idea of lost alzheimer pacients walking somewhere they don't know where it is guided by shoes and distracted from road/cars/etc

<comment><USER10> Not great as a product no, but in concept yes. I personally haven't seen anything like this, and I just think a much better job could be done. I agree you could just use your phone if you were able to update GPS coordinates via your phone, but then you have to keep out your phone to know which way to go instead of just looking down at your feet. Off topic, I think something like Google Goggles GPS would be far more interesting.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> This is more art, as it is only borderline practical at best.

A shoe with a traditional magnetic compass might be more practical from a usability standpoint.

This makes me miss the trend of wristwatches with compasses embedded in the bands.

</comment><comment><USER13> I see a large college kid market for this. After the bars.

<comment><USER14> Designated shoes.

<comment><USER15> Requires [some] motor skills to operate.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> This could be great for people with Alzheimers, or kids.</comment>


CSS techniques - <AUTHOR> http://trevordavis.net/blog/tutorial/the-6-most-important-css-techniques-you-need-to-know/

<comment><USER2>
        body { font-size: 62.5%; }

This alone is gold if it works.

<comment><USER3> Use pixels.

<http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/001212.html>

The only browser that doesn't support zooming is IE6. Zooming has become the default scaling method for every other major browser.

<comment><USER2> Thanks</comment></comment></comment>


My Diplomatic Life - <AUTHOR> https://www.mydiplomaticlife.com/ <comment><USER2> The author seems to have a penchant for taking the most dangerous assignments.

I'm a "diplomat brat" and most diplomatic careers are much more boring and pedestrian. I (US citizen) grew up in Japan, Venezuela, and Costa Rica.

I echo the other current top level commenter's sentiment that diplomacy should not be a family business. I recognize many of the advantages I have in terms of having a broad worldview and understanding, as well as language skills. However I would trade it all to grow up in a stable suburb and graduate from high school with a few handfuls of folks I'd been to primary school with.

Being uprooted every few years has led to an inability to form long-term relationships. I was essentially trained to have a timer on my friendships: approximately 3-5 years. In my time we didn't have the internet so once I moved it was over.

Not a fun time. I do not recall my childhood very fondly. In my case it was especially hard because I'm an only child. I often wondered, as a child, why it was so hard for me but not my peers. When I was in high school I realized that all of the "better adjusted" kids I was comparing myself to had siblings similar in age.

To those of you thinking of a diplomatic career: don't try to raise a family and be a diplomat. Just don't. It's not worth it. Do it while you're single for as long as you can, but the term "settle down" exists for a reason.

<comment><USER3> > Being uprooted every few years has led to an inability to form long-term > relationships. I was essentially trained to have a timer on my friendships: > approximately 3-5 years. In my time we didn't have the internet so once I > moved it was over.

I don't mean to belittle the specific challenges/hardships of your childhood, but I think the 3-5 year friendship thing is pretty common. my childhood was almost the one you wish you had: I went to school with the same kids K-12 and I have a brother two years younger than me. I can't say it worked out much differently for me though. outside of the main clique, which I was not part of, all the friend groups seemed to get scrambled up every few years as people got older and grew apart. I had tables where I was welcome to sit at lunch throughout school, but it took me halfway through highschool to find a good group of friends. most of my classmates came from well-off families, so it was expected that we would go to college out-of-state. so we all went off to different colleges across the country. I'm now the only one from my highschool friend group to live in our home state. I made some good friends in college too, but again, we were all going to school far away from home, so we naturally went our separate ways after graduating.

I'm not sure whether it's better to be exposed early or sheltered for a while, but I think this is just the nature of our world. people move around in search of the best opportunities, making new friends and losing track of old ones along the way. as a CS major, I can get at least a decent job pretty much anywhere, but most people aren't this lucky. after living a different life in a different place for a few years, memories start to be the only things you have in common with your old friends.

<comment><USER2> Regardless of whether the average friendship length is similar, being FORCED to abandon your friends based on someone else's schedule is much more traumatic than friends entering and exiting your social circle due to the natural cycle of friendship.

<comment><USER4> > Regardless of whether the average friendship length is similar, being FORCED > to abandon your friends based on someone else's schedule is much more > traumatic than friends entering and exiting your social circle due to the > natural cycle of friendship.

No. Losing friends through the "natural cycle of friendship" is just as traumatic or even more so.

You are forced to "abandon" your friends regardless. This is true when you switch schools - from elementary school to junior high to high school. The same group of friends you had in your freshman year isn't necessarily the same as you'd have in your senior year. Heck, you can lose friends and make new friends just by having different classes/schedules. People just simply drift apart, fight, etc.

Just like people have a romanticized view of your childhood, you seem to have a romanticized view of childhood in the suburbs.

Also, losing friends because you have to move falls under "the natural cycle of friendship".

<comment><USER5> > No. Losing friends through the "natural cycle of friendship" is just as > traumatic or even more so.

Not like this doesn't happen to those people as well, and in this case you are literally never _allowed_ to have any relationship mature past a handful of years during a key time in development of social skills.

Grass is always greener, obviously there will be benefits the person that moved will have that the other didn't recieve, but saying they are the same thing just isn't logically true.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Most diplomatic careers deliver rather less in the way of storytelling materiel than the author's. Nonetheless, I'm glad that I am no longer a diplomatic spouse. A life in which we regularly uprooted ourselves every few years to move to a new country was never one that I wanted, and one that I am more than happy to leave behind. (Although I do miss my children terribly, and wish there were some way I could maintain contact with them).

<comment><USER7> What happened to your children?

<comment><USER6> Still with their mother on posting. I had a breakdown and returned to the UK about 18 months ago.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> TIL: Britain has an embassy in the DPRK!

<comment><USER9> Why would it not? The UK recognises NK as a country and is not at war or in any serious dispute with it, so it makes sense.

<comment><USER10> [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_diplomatic_missions_in...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_diplomatic_missions_in_North_Korea)

What you are saying is true for many countries, still most of them do not have an embassy in North Korea. The reason being probably also that it is quite expensive (as every embassy is) while not providing a lot of benefits because trade/cultural relationships with North Korea are very difficult.

<comment><USER11> I imagine it's also hard to find people to staff an embassy in such a disconnected place

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> This is really quite a gripping read. Enjoyed it!

[https://www.mydiplomaticlife.com/tirana-ambushed- and-2-diplo...](https://www.mydiplomaticlife.com/tirana-ambushed- and-2-diplomats-shot/)

</comment><comment><USER13> I know that some countries like the USA make foreign-service personnel go back to their home country for a couple of years between assignments, so that they don't "go native". I wonder how many of those employees have resigned at that point, because they had already come to feel that whatever country they were serving in was more pleasant than their home country.

</comment><comment><USER14> >There is virtually no literature on this and I have looked hard for examples.

Considering how spies are mixed in, I don't doubt it

</comment><comment><USER15> Enjoyed reading it. I was under the impression that diplomats live luxury life with Govt Protection when they deployed. I wish if author would have shared detailed experience on few particular countries. Its good that this guy has seen so much. Its great learning of world wide system.

</comment><comment><USER16> This is fascinating. Glad it has an RSS feed so I can come back for more later.

<comment><USER17> Where's the feed?

<comment><USER18> [https://www.mydiplomaticlife.com/feed/](https://www.mydiplomaticlife.com/feed/)</comment></comment></comment>


Nanowire arrays restore vision in blind mice - <AUTHOR> https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-03212-0 <comment><USER2> For people like me, who find reading these papers verbatim hard work, one sentence in the article is worth repeating here:

"...although NW arrays used in present work have not been capable for color vision, further development of multiple nanowire types with different spectral responses may be a potentially feasible strategy to realize such a scenario in the near future. "

So the nano-wires do work, but for monochrome type vision. I think.

<comment><USER3> My experience looking at black-and-white pictures and video suggests that, compared to being blind, the difference between color vision and monochrome vision is negligible.

<comment><USER4> Squint and you'll find that vision is heavily reliant on contrast between light and dark rather than color fields.</comment></comment></comment>


12- Distributed, Shared, Seamless Windowing For Linux, Windows, OSX..  - code-dog http://nerds-central.blogspot.com/2012/05/12-amazingly-powerful-distributed.html

<comment><AUTHOR> Ha! I use it all the time. Just the other day someone asked what this mixed windowing system was - I just explained and they say Doh!</comment>


The Law of Shitty Clickthroughs - <AUTHOR> http://andrewchen.co/the-law-of-shitty-clickthroughs/ <comment><USER2> I remember when I realized I'd become immune to banner ads.

I had to sign up for a college related thing on a website once and I just could not see that sign up button. They made it a flashing advertisement sized block right above another article, with big letters "SIGN UP HERE". A friend sent me the link and I literally spent 5 minutes trying to find it in navigation bars and other links in the article. My friend had to send me a screenshot of his screen with a big red arrow pointing to the sign up block before I noticed it. I now use Adblock but for the times that it doesn't work, my mental Adblock seems to always help me out as well ( Especially for those sneaky ads mixed in between real articles ).

<comment><USER3> [http://www.commitstrip.com/en/2013/12/09/le-truc-quun- codeur...](http://www.commitstrip.com/en/2013/12/09/le-truc-quun-codeur-sait- reconnaitre-dinstinct/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I found it amusing that an article on this topic has a newsletter signup dialog appear immediately upon scrolling down. I'm sure the effectiveness of such a technique follows the same kind of curve as the other techniques discussed in the article.

<comment><USER5> Commenting for this exact reason. If not for this article pointing out this behaviour I'd have never noticed that I automatically closed it off. Didn't even read what it wanted me to do

No doubt the next iteration is to change the functionality so that the 'x' does something other than close the window, but we'll all learn to avoid that too

<comment><USER6> You mean you haven't seen the ads where you have to mouse over the X to select "Close?"

I feel dirty having to look at the ad for the 3 seconds it takes me to figure this out.

<comment><USER7> If it's not immediately apparent to me how to close it I get out dev tools and start slapping "display: none;" on things. If that takes more than 30 seconds I just give up and close the tab...

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> "When HotWired showed banner ads for the first time in history, people clicked just to check out the experience. Same for being the first web product to email people invites to a website – it works for a while, until your customers get used to the effect, and start ignoring it."

Well, duh, people tend to avoid unrewarding experiences. And advertisement is basically the pursuit of pushing unrewarding experiences onto people. Of course once they are onto you they won't fall for the tricks again. People have just become much, much better at filtering now (both mentally and digitally).

</comment><comment><USER9> I doubt we will see the sidebar ads disappear very soon though. Even though our eyes do not focus on the ad we are still aware that the ad is there. There are many studies concerning subliminal media being successful. In fact Derren Brown made a career out of it. [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science- news/6232801...](http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science- news/6232801/Subliminal-advertising-really-does-work-claim-scientists.html)

<comment><USER10> We'll yeah, brand recognition/awareness, many companies are willing pay a lot of money just to display some logo to a large audience.

Just think stadium sideline advertising.

We all have our heads filled with company/product logos, slogans, jingles, etc. all this useless junk that just keeps piling on and on throughout our life, insidiously altering our behavior.

Everything today, TV, Radio, Internet, Newspapers, public/private space, Clothing, ... also doubles as an advertisement delivery pipeline.

I can't imagine using the internet without an ad-blocker anymore, it's already such a different experience.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> All advertising today is arbitrage by definition -leveraging a discrepancy between the value of those eyeballs and the cost to attract them. All arbitrage will eventually be corrected by the market.

This is why there is such a strong push to content marketing, which is essentially the brands becoming media companies.

This is also why native ad units (not just advertorials but any ad unit that Is the atomic consumption unit of the site like news feed ads, AdWords ads, etc...) Work much better than display, because they are value add and are essentially the flip side of content marketing.

I think the future, sustainable strategies will be user experiences that naturally progress into buying. (I.e. a content site selling premium content or hosting a conference or a Saas product using a freemium model.)

Maybe ads are called ads because they should be adding value.

</comment><comment><USER12> Highway billboards have a 0% click through rate. Are they worthless?

<comment><USER13> Yes. And ugly.

<comment><USER14> >Yes.

The research[1] says otherwise.

<And ugly.

Subjective. I'd argue these[2] are anything but.

[1][http://www.arbitron.com/downloads/InCarStudy2009.pdf](http://www.arbitron.com/downloads/InCarStudy2009.pdf)

[2][http://www.hongkiat.com/blog/brilliant-creative-billboard- ad...](http://www.hongkiat.com/blog/brilliant-creative-billboard- advertisements/)

<comment><USER15> If I am driving near my home, it will likely be to a business that I decided to patronize before I even left home. Those in-town billboards are thus only good for subconscious name recognition. I'm not going to hire an ambulance- chaser lawyer unless I need one, but if I do, there are two in particular that saturate the local ads around here, including the billboards. If you're in that sort of business, you really do need to put your name on every space you can buy.

On the highway, most of the billboard ads are for businesses positioned near the highway.

I don't think highway billboards and in-town billboards are realistically in the same advertising market, even if they have similar form factors.

Clever and eye-grabbing is strictly for in-town boards. The same people will see this message multiple times, perhaps even twice a day.

Highway billboards have to be simple and informative, and highly relevant to travelers. People may only see these once, ever.

When I'm on the highway, I won't even look at billboards unless one of the following applies:

      - need food
      - need gas
      - need a toilet

And those functions are increasingly being replaced by GPS navigators with preloaded points of interest and by smartphones' interactive map applications.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> There's a bunch of issues with this post. He points out AT&T's one ad had a 78% CTR, and then labels HotWired's entire site CTR at 78% CTR (he assumes that they didn't have other ads after ATT and that all their ads have a 78% CTR)

And then he compares it to the FB CTR of 0.05%

0.05% is not accurate. It's likely what you'll hit if you have no idea what you're doing, or just don't care because you're an agency advertising a clueless big brand. But it's not that hard to hit a 1-3% CTR on FB now -- especially with the newsfeed ads. Even using standard IAB display it's not too difficult to hit a 1-2% CTR.

Last, the 78% CTR is suspect. I wouldn't just believe it blindly. It does make sense that it would be high (I.e. 20-30%) given that people weren't used to banner ads at the time. Additionally, it's a Trick to Click ad that would never be Approved today. And I've even tried out of curiosity, and it was immediately slapped by reviewers ("I bet you can't click your mouse right here")

<comment><USER17> _" But it's not that hard to hit a 1-3% CTR on FB now -- especially with the newsfeed ads."_

Facebook introduced newsfeed ads in 2012, and this article might (?) date from as far back as 2011, going by the statistics and dates cited in it. I might be wrong about that, but I do know it's an older article. Andrew doesn't date these blog posts, but I remember reading this article years ago.

<comment><USER18> One of the nice things about Open Graph Protocol is that these sorts of things are often in the article's metadata:

<meta property="article:published_time" content="2012-04-05T11:50:46+00:00" />

<comment><USER17> Ok, good catch. :) I'll own up to the embarrassment I deserve right now.

Even still, the point stands: the article was published before newsfeed ads debuted (in June '12), and certainly before their use became commonplace enough to establish benchmark CTRs.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> I uninstalled Facebook on my mobile phone because it buried my actual notifications. I don't have the patience for disabling them.

<comment><USER20> A single tap does not require much of the patience. Edit: ok, I will expand a bit. At least on iOS an app using notifications asks for the permission. So a single tap is all it needs to get zero notifications. Even if one allows notifications first it only takes going to settings->notifications and toggling a single switch there.

<comment><USER21> FYI, you can do the same in Android. Hold on the notification, click "App Info", untick "Show Notifications". Or go to settings, "Applications", select the app, untick "Show Notifications".

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> How does this account for ad blocking usage? I'd bet the rise of ad blocking SW correlates with the drop too.

<comment><USER23> I'd say the opposite, ad block correlates with higher CTR since you don't load the ad.

<comment><USER24> That would depend on the ad blocking implementation. Some only hide the elements instead of preventing them from loading.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> If anyone else remembers them, those banner ads where the cursor became a swatter attempting to squash flies were the only ones I ever clicked on.</comment>


Why strict atheism is unscientific - <AUTHOR> http://www.realclearscience.com/articles/2012/11/27/why_strict_atheism_is_unscientific_106413.html <comment><USER2> Nonsense. The scientific method says that the burden of proof lies on those who make extraordinary claims, not those who do not believe said claims. And that is all.

To clarify a bit further, see quote: "You can't prove that God exists!" they accuse (correctly). Yet, hypocritically, strict atheists are guilty of the exact same crime: belief without evidence. This is nonsense. It is not belief without evidence, it is disbelief due to the lack of evidence. An embarrassingly basic strawman argument.

<comment><USER3> See also: the strict unbelievers of the invisible, ethereal, and completely silent unicorn I keep in my garage.

<comment><USER4> I let that out months ago. I'm surprised you didn't notice.

<comment><USER3> I don't believe you!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment> vezzy-fnord This entire article is an argument to moderation, which is a well-known fallacy. The truth must always be in the middle ground, right? No.

" _Should array indices start at 0 or 1? My compromise of 0.5 was rejected without, I thought, proper consideration._ "

\-- Stan Kelly-Bootle

Second: "belief in a higher power" is a very vague statement and in no way implies worship of a creator deity, and even less: religion. Lumping in religion with theism (a mere component of religion, not even a necessary one) is grossly wrong. We are all subject to higher powers every day that we exercise little control over, be they forces of nature or what have you. That does not mean they are divine, sapient or anything of the sort.

Thirdly, atheism comes in various degrees: strong/weak, explicit/implicit, gnostic/agnostic. The article presents a false trinity: "There's only two extremes and a middle ground!" No.

Finally, I despise when theists try to incorporate Einstein as one of their own. The Einsteinian God has absolutely nothing to do with theistic notions of a creator God. Rather, Einstein was a pantheist whose God was a metaphor for nature, reality and knowledge. He was not a believer in creation or divinity. This article tries to equivocate his statements, as many other religious demagogues have done before.

Sharpen your arguments.

<comment><AUTHOR> Firstly, is moderation in your belief of your understanding of the origins of the universe a well-known fallacy? Also the focus on moderation in the article was in describing 'possibilianism', a middle-of-the-road example belief.

Second: belief in a higher power, as answered on a Pew Research poll, seems to directly imply deism as a belief. I agree that it isn't 'religion' which has a set of dogmas & behaviors, or even deism worship, but I don't think someone that believes gravity is a higher power would answer yes to this question on a poll. It has a fair bit of connotation that implies a particular belief.

Thirdly, I agree, it's an unfair comparison, and a bit of a ham-fisted article. I submitted because it was the most clearly written on the topic I could find.

Fourthly, If Einstein was a pantheist, he was theist. Theism is the belief that at least one deity exists.

he was also a known apologist for religion, oft quoted for writing in the NYT Magazine "science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind". Why would a scientifically minded religious ilk NOT try to incorporate such rhetoric as their own? and, why does that upset you?

Einstein seemed to have a respect for religion's acceptance that human understanding is flawed. a quote from Isaacson's biography:

 _" You may call me an agnostic, but I do not share the crusading spirit of the professional atheist whose fervor is mostly due to a painful act of liberation from the fetters of religious indoctrination received in youth. I prefer an attitude of humility corresponding to the weakness of our intellectual understanding of nature and of our own being"_

I am not religious, nor particularly spiritual, but I do believe that a respect for religion is a positive thing. I find wisdom in attitudes that try to include the value that religion brings to the human condition as opposed to damning it for 'making shit up' scientifically. I'm well acquainted with religion's uglier and more ignorant sides (grew up in Saudi Arabia, family in West Texas), but I agree with Einstein (Nassim Taleb also writes some interesting stuff on this) that I would prefer an attitude that accepts the weakness of our understanding.

I appreciate your comment, I submitted the article for discussion and I got it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> This line of argument wasn't very interesting 50 years ago and it certainly isn't of interest today. Frankly, I have no idea why this link is on the front page of HN.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell's_teapot](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell's_teapot)

</comment><comment><USER6> Atheism is a matter of ontology/metaphysics and not science. Science, too, is a matter of ontology, in that it says that there are electrons and they have such and such properties.

But atheism, while accepting the results of science (what science says there is), it goes a bit further. And the keyword in understanding how and why and where does atheism goes further is the word 'evidence'.

Many times you'll here people saying "There is no evidence!" for that or that matter. However, in understanding what kind of evidence do we expect to see (etymologically, evidence holds the reference to what is seen), we need to have a clear idea of what is there to be seen.

Atheism expects and denies that there is evidence of a God. A super-natural being, a person, conscious, free, and able to do whatever they may wish to do. And this is where atheism CAN NOT apply any of the methods available in science. Science has been able to understand nature (its laws and ontology) because what happens in nature, happens in virtue of law. That is, all the time. Repeatedly. Experimentally verifiable.

The actions of a person are not like that. Be it a God, a bird, a fish or a bug. The intentional behavior of a conscious being can not fall under the umbrella of exact, objective science. Unless there is some sort of determination which resembles a (statistical) law. Which, by definition, it's not the case for God.

So, yes, atheism and religions are not scientific. Which is not to say they may not be true. One of them all.

</comment><comment><USER4> Hard atheism, believing that god definitely doesn't exist, is different to the rational position because it's a belief in the lack of evidence. It's stating that there definitely isn't a god. Rationally, you can't prove a negative. You can't prove there is no god because an absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. The fact there isn't any evidence of gods might be because we've not found it yet. Rationally, in scientific terms, you should lean towards agnosticism (with a large pinch of skepticism).

However... the politically sensible position to take in these sorts of discussions is ignosticism - the idea that you can't know because you're ignorant of what the terms are. Unless you can define what god is you can't state whether or not there is evidence for his/she/its existence. Most religious people don't like defining their god, so they leave you alone. :)

<comment><USER7> I will say strongly that I do not believe there is an invisible, 70-foot-tall, green monster standing right behind me right now. I can't prove a negative, you're right about that, but since I have exactly zero evidence for this thing's existence, I'm going to take a shortcut and say it doesn't exist.

One can be forgiven for not having stumbled across these arguments before. We all had to read them for the first time at some point. But I'll just say that this is well-travelled territory.

<comment><USER4> That shortcut is why, for thousands of years, humans believed in things like the 4 elements, a flat earth, geocentricism, and so on. Taking the path that "feels right" despite a lack of evidence is wholly unscientific, and, occasionally, will prove wrong. So beware of that monster. :)

The fact is there is no reason to state god does or doesn't exist. There are more important things to think about. Things that actually make a difference.

<comment><USER8> "The fact is there is no reason to state god does or doesn't exist. There are more important things to think about. Things that actually make a difference."

According to the bible, the consequences for non-believers are very dire. If the bible is true, then this is a very important thing to think about.

Weak agnostic or strong atheist, we're all going to hell.

I contend that there's little difference between a weak agnostic or a strong atheist. If you're not scared of hell, then you're living your life as if you believe that God doesn't exist.

As in most things in life, it's what you do that matters, not what you say.

<comment><USER9> There are many religions now and in the past that have dire consequences for non believers and doom to those who do not follow the religious laws dictated by the particular god of that religion. My question to you is which one should we follow? To be safe should we follow all of them? and what about the many religions that forbid other gods? what do we do at that avenue? In case you reply "Christian, of course!" Which sect? Which version of the bible? From what I can see, we will have to cycle through all the hells, or possibly none. Can someone tell me the best hell to shoot for?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Yhe simplest definition of "atheist" is one who lacks a belief in God. If you don't actively possess a belief that god exists, you're an atheist. Atheists confidently disbelieve in god in exactly the same way that they disbelieve in Santa Claus - the mere fact that humans tell stories about some mythical creature doesn't mean that creature exists.

But the bigger problem is the definition of God. Without defining it, the question "does it exist" is of course unanswerable. But if you mean "the Judeo-Christian God, the guy described in the bible" then one potentially _can_ prove that it doesn't exist. Maybe you can't disprove the existence of ALL gods or rather all definitions of god, since the full set includes Spinoza's version. (If you choose to define god as being the same the universe and allow that the universe exists, then "god" exists.) But you CAN disprove the existence of THAT ONE particular god, because it is defined in self- contradictory ways. The "God" that religious people seem to be talking about most of the time is logically incoherent. So believing it doesn't exist is like believing something that's simultaneously green and invisible doesn't exist.

God is what you get when you start with Santa Claus and turn all the absurdity knobs up to 11. Omnipotent and omniscient, yet somehow allows us all free will even though he knows everything we'll ever do. "existed before the universe", even though the universe is defined as "everything that exists". And so on.

</comment><comment><USER11> Beware, this hole goes deep. I'm currently traveling and spending my nights listening to Zizek talk about the ideology represented by our actions, since we all think we're a bunch of hard-reality-observing scientist-minded smartypantses who disavow anything unfalsifiable. I mean, I've known this about atheists and atheism for a long time, but as I say, the hole is deep.

</comment><comment><USER7> I'm tempted to address some of the points in the article individually, but, really, the whole thing misses the mark. I'm an atheist in the same way that I try not to make claims about _anything_ without evidence and this is such a common misunderstanding that we have invisible pink unicorns and orbiting teapots on standby to rebut it.

</comment><comment><USER12> Could there actually be someone in the world who cares that their atheism is not "scientific"? If there were, would that person also worry that their taste in music, their love for their wife, their hatred for roasted peanuts and their sexual quirks were similarly unscientific?

Who wrote this stupid article? Mr. Spock?

</comment><comment><USER13> I feel like I've seen this somewhere before...

[http://xkcd.com/900/](http://xkcd.com/900/)</comment>


Artificial Photosynthesis - <AUTHOR> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_photosynthesis <comment><USER2> _Water oxidation is a more complex chemical reaction than proton reduction. ..._

 _Without a catalyst (natural or artificial), this reaction is very endothermic, requiring high temperatures (at least 2500 K)._

Water oxidation may well be endothermic, however, catalysts can not change that fact. A catalyst can change the activation energy of a reaction (thereby changing rate of reaction), but can't change a reaction's thermodynamics.

Endothermic reactions can be driven forward by coupling them to one or more exothermic reactions. Biological systems do this all the time. But even this does not change the thermodynamics of a reaction, which merely represents the difference in energy between products and reactants.

Endothermic reactions can also be driven forward by adding energy (in the form of heat, for example).

<comment><USER3> If you feel very confident that you're correct, then you should update the wiki. I'd make it, but I wouldn't feel confident since I don't know much about this subject matter.

As a random aside, if you search for that sentence on Google, a journal article [1] appears. It looks like they've copied parts of that wikipedia section verbatim.

[1] [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3858868/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3858868/)

<comment><USER2> Good find. It does appear to be copied verbatim. The statement is wrong (in the sense of what it implies) in both the plagiarized article and in Wikipedia.</comment></comment></comment>


I've Looked at Airbnb and It's Way Worse Than You Think - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/@sfhousingrightscommittee/an-open-letter-to-airbnb-emey-about-housing-and-prop-f-8d1bfb84356 <comment><USER2> Merits of the arguments aside, righteous indignation is one of the worst tones you can choose for a persuasive piece.

Edit:

Rather than just being snarky ( which I love sometimes ), I found an alternative piece which I find much more compelling/more reasonable in tone: [https://pleblog.wordpress.com/2015/09/29/i-have-read- prop-f-...](https://pleblog.wordpress.com/2015/09/29/i-have-read-prop-f-and- it-is-a-perfectly-normal-and-reasonable-piece-of-legislation/)

I don't know enough about the whole situation, nor have I read the original proposition so I can't say if this opinion piece is more correct.

What I will say is the SF housing market seemed to be in dire straights ( due to government regulation? ) long before AirBnB hit the scene.

</comment><comment><USER3> I would much rather hear from tenants who have been affected by AirBnB evictions and what they are doing to deal with the housing crisis. Too many of these pieces are just blame games that alienate/ignore the people factor.

</comment><comment><USER4> I feel like there's a massive disconnect between these pieces.

1.) New law/proposition/whatever gets proposed. 2.) Article is published detailing how (1) can be abused. 3.) Article is published detailing why we need (1).

I feel like if I was trying to get a law/proposition/whatever passed, my focus would be on these articles and knee-capping them by either amending my whatever to prevent abuse, or point out why those abuses are impossible (not unlikely, im-pos-sible).

Until then, all I see is "I want _MY_ problem fixed with my bad solution, and I don't care who it hurts."</comment>


Anyone know of a Netflix-style audiobook subscription service? - <AUTHOR>

If there isn't one out there already, someone build it and I'll be your first paying customer. (: <comment><USER2> Audible?

<comment><AUTHOR> No, because your subscription really only buys you one download per month. I'm looking for a flat fee for unlimited downloads per month.</comment></comment>


Show HN: simple, free geolocation via CORS-ready JSON (AngularJS demo) - <AUTHOR> https://city-check.appspot.com/examples/angular.html

<comment><USER2> The author here... I put this together right after I realized I could use it on so many of my different on-going projects. Of course geolocation is never perfect, but it adds lots of personality to a site to be able to list where people are coming from. Now with CORS support, means I can use this bit of infrastructure on all sorts of different browser-side JS projects.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Free alternative to <http://www.maxmind.com/en/home> :)</comment>


Speeding up JetBrains IDE – catalinxyz.com - <AUTHOR> https://catalinxyz.com/speeding-up-phpstorm/ <comment><USER2> Supposing I have the inspections and language injections I already use: move the ~/.PhpStorm2018.1/system folder (or whatever it's called on your box) to RAM. This will mean that the project is reindexed after a computer restart, but then searching is lightning-fast.</comment>


Announcing Octane 2.0 - <AUTHOR> http://blog.chromium.org/2013/11/announcing-octane-20.html

<comment><USER2> An interesting mix of benchmarks. Hopefully the latency tests drive more investment in that area.

Results for me (on Windows):

Chrome 30: 21051

Firefox 25: 18804

IE 10: 4093

IE 11: 6720

Firefox got 2x Chrome's score on the asm.js benchmark!

<comment><USER3> > Firefox got 2x Chrome's score on the asm.js benchmark!

And Google includes the asm.js benchmark where Chrome is only 2x slower when typically it is 4x slower. And puts it in an eval(). That's Google for ya.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> A sloppy (no reboot or browser restart) run on iOS 7 on an iPhone 5 gives me the following scores, highlighting the difference between Safari's JIT and the Webkit view available to apps:

Safari: 2793

Chrome: 443

</comment><comment><USER5> IE10: 4236

FF 28.0a1: 10083

Chrome 31beta: 11289

I'm actually positively surprised at IE10's performance - that's possibly not even all that noticeable.

One note however: none of the browsers were particularly responsive under load, but FF was unresponsive even in other tabs.

</comment><comment><USER6> Interesting...

OS X 10.9

\- Chrome 30.0.1599.101: 21264

\- FF 25: 15911

\- Safari 7.0 (9537.71): 14438

<comment><USER7> It's interesting to me that OS X builds of Chrome and Firefox seem to show a bigger performance gap than Linux/Windows builds do. I wonder if any of the tests are dependent on platform-specific features like Canvas or WebGL? It seems like they shouldn't be...

<comment><USER5> There are real plaform differences in the way the browser interacts with the OS. Significant differences aren't inconceivable - it's not just stuff like GFX, there's also threading, power saving, async, I/O, memory, caching - I've no idea what's going on here, but it's definitely possible.

Also, is it possible some of these browsers are running as x64 on macosX? Because on windows, I'm pretty sure chrome and FF don't.

<comment><USER8> _> Also, is it possible some of these browsers are running as x64 on macosX?_

The OS X task manager lists Safari and FF as 64 bit, Chrome is 32 bit. I'm also seeing the same dramatic performance gap. Chrome is at 23k, whereas Safari and Firefox come in just under 16k.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Archlinux x64 Asus eeepc with amd apu e450

Firefox 25 => Octane Score: 4223

Seems low looking at other values here in the thread, exactly what I'd expect.

</comment><comment><USER10> Win 8.1 64-bit

Chrome 30: 15842

FF 25: 14621

IE 11: 11039

Not really that far apart...

</comment><comment><USER11> Ubuntu 13.04 64 bit

Chrome 30.0.1599.114 : 15231

Firefox 25: 13133</comment>


Entrepreneurs and Risk - <AUTHOR> http://www.businessweek.com/smallbiz/running_small_business/archives/2009/08/entrepreneurs_a.html

<comment><USER2> One person's calculated risk is another persons sheer terror. If you have been employed by a midwestern insurance giant for 20 years, your idea of risk might be heavily influenced by gartner, and you think in terms of "best of breed" and look for approaches that are "mature". If you are familiar with the field, and familiar with what you can do, you dive into building the key part yourself--something that never existed before and therefore has infinite gartner risk. And you are going to build your business on this?

My point is that the article shows how a different point of view about the risk of something if you are running your venture.</comment>


On rvm's *cd* script - <AUTHOR> http://batkin.tumblr.com/post/8847990062/on-rvms-cd-script

<comment><USER2> > I knew about .rvmrc's behavior, but I thought that the shell must have > provided a hook for the directory changing!

And this, my friends, is another reason to use zsh which calls chpwd() whenever the working directory has changed, which is in fact precisely what the infamous rvm cd script does (I wasn't sure, but just checked).

So those people already running zsh with rvm, you are free of the cd replacement.

Aside of that I still believe that rvm might be a tad bit intrusive and as a Linux user of old, I learned to value the use of distribution packages. But rvm is so darned convenient... :-)

<comment><USER3> Thank you for doing the digging for me! I've been hearing all this controversy about overriding 'cd', but when I open a shell (with RVM installed), I still see the following:

        ~/Desktop > which cd
        cd: shell built-in command

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> "Finally, one thing I'd like to know, is if rvm was loaded, would another script be able to override cd in the same way that rvm does, and would both script's hooks be called?. I suspect that the answer is yes."

I'm not a shell expert but I played around with the code in this SO answer from Wayne Sequin and I think the last script to be loaded would win, in other words another script might break RVM. At least that's what appeared to be happening in Bash 3.2 on OS X.

[http://stackoverflow.com/questions/5605277/how-does-rvm- dete...](http://stackoverflow.com/questions/5605277/how-does-rvm-detect-when- youve-changed-directories)

btw I use RVM and find it pretty useful.

<comment><USER5> Which is exactly why it's a terrible idea. There is no "super" mechanism in Bash. Imagine if the Perl, Python and Node equivalents of rvm overrode cd -- they'd all have to be aware of each other's existence in order to play together nicely.

Overriding cd for dependency injection purposes is like killing a fly with a machine gun. It's completely inappropriate for the task at hand, and it's precisely the kind of problem that $PATH is designed to solve.

Furthermore, rvm breaks the expected behavior of the cd command by prompting you with security theatrics the first time you enter a project with an .rvmrc file: <https://gist.github.com/34c251a56e83c61c667e> This kind of thing wreaks havoc with third-party programs that attempt to interface with rvm. I've had to deal with far too many bug reports in Pow as a result of this messy behavior.

This is not some theoretical concern. It's just bad design.

<comment><USER6> How would you get the same behavior of project base .rvmrc files without hijacking cd?

<comment><USER5> By using a shim approach, like rbenv.

1\. Maintain a directory of shim binaries with the same name as every Ruby binary (ruby, irb, rake, gem, etc).

2\. Put the shim directory at the front of your $PATH.

3\. When a shim is run (as in typing `rake` from the command line or running a script with a `#!/usr/bin/env ruby` shebang), check for a version file in the current directory or any parent directory, map that to the right path, and re- exec the corresponding binary.

<comment><USER6> Doesn't this solution not scale? Doesn't this mean a shim must be created for every gem that I install that has a binary? Or is this only required for "core" binaries?

<comment><USER5> `ls -l /usr/bin | wc -l` reports 1085 entries on my machine. Meanwhile, I have 40 entries in my ~/.rbenv/shims directory. I think the shell can handle it.

<comment><USER6> I'm sorry, I was not aware of the 'rehash' function, I thought rbenv would have to ship with all the required shims. The rehash functionality is quite clever and cool. Is there an easy way to have that automatically execute after I do any installation of a ruby or gem?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> What a shame. Overriding a shell built-in is a fucking horrible idea. While it might be technically innocuous -- and I'm sure for most people it is -- philosophically and politically this is a design failure that will taint RVM forever. It makes people wonder what other poor design choices lurk beneath. People are mostly too lazy to look at this objectively and RVM will suffer for it. What a shame.

</comment><comment><USER8> > Only one of a dozen or so posts I've read about raising concern with it > cited a concrete problem with it. It was also for an earlier version of rvm, > and it may already be fixed.

The exit status issue is definitely fixed[1]. I had the problem, traced it back to rvm, popped into #rvm on irc, and it was fixed in two seconds. Wayne is exceedingly active there (and mpapis also now). Things tend to get fixed very fast.

(For the record, the other issue I had - TAB autocompletion with cd - is also fixed, though that one was more complicated. As I recall, Wayne was getting complaints from both directions. Some people reported that autocompletion for _cd_ wasn't happening with rvm, and so Wayne added custom autocompletion for _cd_ [2]. Then I and some others began to complain that our previously working _cd_ autocompletion from _CDPATH_ and/or _bash-completion_ wasn't working. It took a couple of weeks to sort out, but now rvm's autocompletion is opt-in[3]. If you don't ask for it, you don't get it.)

[1] [https://github.com/wayneeseguin/rvm/commit/f9aa3adebcca54792...](https://github.com/wayneeseguin/rvm/commit/f9aa3adebcca547924c8095fa7696967bd2d8d15)

[2] [https://github.com/wayneeseguin/rvm/commit/c683a7c069bf8ca30...](https://github.com/wayneeseguin/rvm/commit/c683a7c069bf8ca3054cea94d25dcbb034db8d90)

[3] [https://github.com/wayneeseguin/rvm/commit/f856e3c8f50168776...](https://github.com/wayneeseguin/rvm/commit/f856e3c8f50168776d7dd8edd7edc052c9402591)</comment>


To Settle Infinity Dispute, a New Law of Logic - <AUTHOR> https://www.simonsfoundation.org/quanta/20131126-to-settle-infinity-question-a-new-law-of-logic/

<comment><USER2> This article is confused and its confusion is apparent right from the first paragraph: "In the course of exploring their universe, mathematicians have occasionally stumbled across holes: statements that can be neither proved nor refuted with the nine axioms, collectively called "ZFC," that serve as the fundamental laws of mathematics. Most mathematicians simply ignore the holes, which lie in abstract realms with few practical or scientific ramifications. But for the stewards of math's logical underpinnings, their presence raises concerns about the foundations of the entire enterprise."

Actually, it's confused from the first sentence: the job of a mathematician isn't to explore "the universe," which is ultimately an empirical question.

Anyhow, what Gödel proved is that such "holes" — a term a mathematician would never use — are a necessary consequence of any sufficiently powerful theory. In a nutshell, Gödel's incompleteness theorem says that if we have an axiomatic system powerful enough to describe the natural numbers and arithmetic — what is called Peano arithmetic — but manageable enough for us to enumerate the axioms then there will be theorems expressible in that axiomatic system which are neither provable nor disprovable in that axiomatic system. Note that they would well be provable or disprovable in some larger, more powerful axiomatic system. Or, like Euclid's parallel postulate, we could have a consistent mathematics whether we assume the theorem or its negation.

Even if we extend ZF(C) with axioms which allow us to prove or disprove CH, there will still be other theorems which are unprovable. Because CH is independent of ZF(C), the following statement is true: "If ZF(C) is is consistent then both ZF(C)+CH and ZF(C)+not-CH are consistent." That is, if we believe ZF(C) is consistent, we can add either CH its negation to our set of axioms and remain consistent. This is what it means for CH to be independent of ZF(C).

It's also worth noting that the Axiom of Choice — the (C) in ZF(C) — is independent of ZF. This means one can consistently do math in both ZF(C) and ZF(not-C), assuming ZF itself is consistent.

In the history of mathematics, Cantor believed CH to be true and Gödel believe it to be false. Nowadays, most mathematicians don't worry about this stuff. Instead, mathematicians prove statements like "In ZF(C), statement X is true if and only if CH is true." Whether one assumes CH or not-CH has to be decided on other grounds, e.g., aesthetics, utility, and so on.

The independence of CH from ZF(C) makes arguing for its truth or falsity a fool's errand. I think the error is in believing that every statement in mathematics must be a statement about our universe, i.e., either CH is true or it isn't and that's that. It's not a statement about our universe, however — it's a statement about some axiomatic system we've developed. If that seems weird to you, consider that you play with utterly un-physical constructs all the time, like numbers and perfect circles.

</comment><comment><USER3> Some of us just happened to be discussing this topic here [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6844885](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6844885)</comment>


Garadget bans customer from accessing Cloud for negative Amazon review - <AUTHOR> http://community.garadget.com/t/iphone-app-will-not-stay-open-just-flashes-when-trying-to-launch/1706 <comment><USER2> Events like this make me think that internet connectivity is a bane, not a boon. This may be one of the unpopular opinions that one believes but is not willing to say out loud.

It may be time for me to stock up on multiple 1965 VW bugs to supply my transport needs until the apocalypse. Simple car, no electronics for a vendor to snoop with (hello Tesla) or tamper with (sorry you stooped to your customer's level of behavior, Garadget).

<comment><USER3> I too, liked Sleepers. You will need to stock up on extra paper gasket, cork gasket (valve covers), hoses, fan belts, fuel pump diaphrams, oil, and somehow gasoline, although wood, coal, propane powered bugs were made during ww2. Oh, and vw bugs did have electronics that failed, the regulator. On a 65 it uses a generator (6 volt) and has the reg under the back seat, buy a few.

Personally, I would opt for the '67 for virtue of the sealed beam headlamps, 12v electrical (still a generator), and extra power (1500cc vs 1300cc). And for end times utility, a swing side bus would win out.

But I digress. Any pre-obd2 car is easily flashed with a eeprom and burner, or replaced by an aftermarket ecu. No reason to be stuck with a 'black box' in your more modern car.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Time to pull the plug? - <AUTHOR>

I launched Govit.com in 2008. It's an eGov site. You vote on  Legislation, and votes are sent to government representatives.
It got press, but no real traction (3k-15k visits/mo).
Is there any opportunity here? Any ideas to keep out of deadpool? Or is it time to man-up and pull the plug? <comment><USER2> You're getting 3k-15k visits/month currently? I would encourage you not to kill it off. The design could use some revision, but if you have the users, keep them. Any idea how many of your users come back on a regular basis (weekly/monthly)? You have a good opportunity here.

Let people sign in with Twitter as well as Facebook (which you have already). Encourage users to share the votes on FB, Twitter, etc (and make it easy for them to do so). Maybe have a weekly 'Featured Vote' or something. There are a lot of possibilities with a tool like this, it just needs some guidance. Giving people a way to "be heard" on issues that they care about is valuable.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes, currently getting 3K-15k visits/mo. About 20% repeat visits.

Agree that giving people a way to "be heard" has value, just need to get the process right.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> An excellent idea! The public needs effective ways of making their voices heard. Your site just needs heaps more exposure to gain more traction.

You don't mention what your motivations for setting up the site are. Since there appears to be no way to monetize it, there might be some other agenda?

Went off and took a look at govit.com site. A few comments:

The name "govit" just doesn't jell for me. I think you need something trendier, click2vote, SamClick ...

"Beta" suggests that the site isn't complete. Any progressive web site remains as work-in-progress as it adapts to the demands of the marketplace.

The concept appears to be sound. Needs heaps more marketing, PR, exposure, get talked about, get journalists quote your stats, etc. Yeah! lots of chicken or egg problems. But you have enough to build up momentum.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks, glad you like.

My motivations were fairly pure, wanted to build a platform that gave citizens more power. Also thought there could be a way to monetize (ethically) with traction.

Got some press in the early days, and believe the problem is other than exposure. The site just isn't filling a need. Need to come up with something people really want.

<comment><USER4> I like the idea very much, and have a suggestion for you, if you are trying to be non-partisan, as indicated by your comment. I think you should change some of the colour scheme on the website, especially on the won/lost bar, because using red to denote loss, and blue to denote winning makes it seem like you are 'siding' with the democratic party. You might also want to change the colour of the banner, and possibly hide the number of votes for each side on incomplete polls, so as not to make users feel like part of a small minority who participates (which would be discouraging), unless there are a large number of voters.

Disclosure: I am a Canadian with no interest in US internal politics, and would just like to see this kind of site succeed.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> You have not really given much information about what steps you have attempted to gain traction. From the outside looking in I would try to polarize the audience around hot topics like gun control and abortion.

<comment><AUTHOR> Polarizing would be a good tactic. Not sure I want to go there though. I've still got some idealism ;)

Steps to gain traction were focused on making the product viral (send to friends, embed vote on site/facebook, etc).

Also partnerships with other organizations, for example, democracyinaction.org had an email your reps widget (powered by govit).

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Keep at it, or sell it. See if you can partner with some politically-oriented websites. Maybe find more "marketing"/politically-oriented partner(s) who can help? Don't kill it though!

</comment><comment><USER7> did you market to political communities like dailykos? They are often trying to do things like this, maybe figure out how to "integrate" with them or sites like theirs

</comment><comment><USER8> why do you want to deadpool it?

<comment><AUTHOR> Main reason is the money. I'm not a programmer, so fixing bugs, update scrappers, server, etc. cost money.

<comment><USER9> I decide whether to continue on a project based on opportunity cost. Do I have ideas to try out? Do I feel optimistic they'll teach me something? Do I think the project has a chance of eventual success? When I run out of ideas I stop working on a project. Usually I'm working on something else by then.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Can you expound on the tech. Here is an idea:

what if you can turn it into a tool for government elected officials to engage with their constituencies - make it a tool that senators/their aides/whomever can ask questions of their supporters and collect feedback. You make it effectively a 'facebook for government' engagement?

<comment><AUTHOR> I like the idea, but think I'd need more users before I could attract the attention of senators/aides/other.

Congress members have their websites, email list of their supporters, would need to offer something they didn't have.

<comment><USER11> Just an idea, but you could whitebox the software and sell it to congresspeople to use on their websites. You are right that without the traction they may not want to affiliate themselves with you, but they still want the functionality. Technically other voting software may fulfill requirements but people always like specialized and you are already in this space and would be considered an "authority".

<comment><USER10> Agreed, thats what i was thinking as well.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Groupon Has Called Every Business In The United States - <AUTHOR> http://larrycheng.com/2011/02/08/groupon-has-called-every-business-in-the-united-states/

<comment><USER2> I don't think the numbers add up since MANY businesses are not the types of establishments that Groupon would do a deal with like let's say a personal accountant or a B2B focused operation. Also, my understanding is that Groupon has a ridiculous backlog of merchants waiting to get in hence the ease of entry of competitors since there's a high demand to test daily deals and Groupon has a waiting list. I think for a lot of sales reps, a lot more time is spent negotiating the right offer, terms, and closing the deal than on cold calling.

<comment><USER3> Exactly,

HVAC design Janitors Construction Nannys PLumber Cable Pullers Architects Landscaping

All of these are compan types that would never have groupons.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> The headline should read, "If Groupon has 3,000 sales reps, and each rep calls 40 businesses a day, every day, then by the end of 2011, Groupon could have called every business in the United States." Not quite as catchy, but much more accurate.

</comment><comment><USER5> Do these sales people never actually negotiate or require a longer call than about 30 seconds?

That would be a fairly unusual market.

Also, I'm assuming Groupon's US sales force probably handles all of the international markets too, otherwise enough sales people to call every business in the US would be massive overkill anyway.</comment>