Why Apple Wants to Bust Your iPhone - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/03/magazine/why-apple-wants-to-bust-your-iphone.html?_r=0

<comment><USER2> Strange juxtaposition:

 _" "Buyers are smart, and if they start figuring out that one of the costs of buying Apple's products is that they're constantly nickel-and-diming you, they'll switch,"_

but earlier:

 _" So I could pay Apple $79 to replace the battery, or perhaps spend 20 bucks more for an iPhone 5C."_

If they can't even figure out that an iPhone 5C costs more than $99 dollars, then the chances of them figuring out anything else seem slim.

</comment><comment><USER3> Um........ Yeah. iPhone 4, an 3+ years old phone, which usage pattern are beyond what normal ( or called dumbphone) and therefore you charge it a lot more........

And you expect the battery to not died after 3 years of using it? Come on!

<comment><USER2> > And you expect the battery to not died after 3 years of using it? Come on!

On the other hand, if battery degradation after the warranty period is so predictable, then they could have built the phone to take swappable batteries. Otherwise their pretty much guilty as charged of planned obsolescence.

<comment><USER3> Well they do offer the services of replacing your battery. It is not they force you to buy a new Phone.

And the swappable batteries, They have their own set of trade off and problems.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> no evidence offered, no benchmarks, no citations, nothing. not even a personal anecdote(maybe "i used to be able to use the phone all day on 1 charge, but now it barely lasts past lunch.."?). no discussion of how product life cycles work. no discussion of how r&d is planned. i don't even like apple, but this is a bit much..

<comment><USER3> You see, it is fine people dont like Apple. I mean no one is forcing everyone to like them. I suppose people have different value and we have to learn to agree to disagree.

But the world has turned to attack Apple for the sake of Attacking Apple. To gain headlines or pageviews. And most of these attack are utter nonsense with zero facts and all imagination of thoughts.

Just what the F has happen to Journalism.</comment></comment>


Google's ads seem to have decided I want to go on a seniors cruise - <AUTHOR>

Or cruise for seniors.<p>I'm not sure which.  Either is somewhat disturbing. <comment><USER2> I've been getting junk mail from AARP to join since I was 28. One had my name on a card. Algorithms aren't perfect.</comment>


Ask HN: Users vs PageViews - What's more important - <AUTHOR>

If pageviews are consistently high, but registered users are not, is that bad?  How much does it matter?
I know user data is good, but is it critical for investors?  I want to understand what's critical and why.
Can someone suggest the most important/relevant stats of the following?
Registered Users, Visits, Pageviews, Pages/visit, Avg. Time on site, New Visitors.
Thanks! <comment><AUTHOR> Advertisments are what pays, the service is free. Thanks for your help.

</comment><comment><USER2> Depends on your business/product and the business model

</comment><comment><USER3> what one pays you money?</comment>


HaxeDevelop: A Haxe IDE on Windows - <AUTHOR> http://haxedevelop.org/ <comment><USER2> Haxe developers on other platforms may want to look at KodeStudio[1], a fork of Visual Studio Code for Haxe development.

Focuses mostly on Kha, but general Haxe editing and IDE features are planned as well.

[1] [http://kode.tech/kode-studio-16-1/](http://kode.tech/kode-studio-16-1/)

<comment><USER3> Was about to ask why it needs to be a fork and saw your link answers that question, thanks. I'm not sure what Kha is though is my only other question, might want to add a (quick) description for others who may not know as well. I'm guessing it's some sort of game development framework though?

<comment><USER4> Kha is game framework for the haxe language. It can be used for other things like multimedia aplications. Kha can build apps for many different targets (thanks do Haxe), like windows, mac, linux, android, ios, html5, flash and others (see [https://github.com/KTXSoftware/Kha](https://github.com/KTXSoftware/Kha) and the wiki). It has support for 2d and 3d, and vulkan is being add. Kha is very simple and portable, usually the users use its functions or build a engine on top of it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I remember convincing my teacher to let me use haxe instead of flash for a multimedia course. It went pretty well (Got an A) and it allowed me to use vim (with the vaxe plugin)

Heres the game: [https://github.com/Superpat/haxefighting- game](https://github.com/Superpat/haxefighting-game)

<comment><USER6> Awesome! I wrote the vaxe plugin, glad to hear it was useful.

Vaxe has some new long term plans. I wanted to improve it, but couldn't move forward with viml, or python. Instead, I'm working on a new lua target for Haxe, and will focus on lua support for vim/neovim in the near future.

[http://wwx.silexlabs.org/2016/](http://wwx.silexlabs.org/2016/)

<comment><USER5> Cool! I've mostly switched to neovim these days (Even wrote a blog post about it: [http://patrickmarchand.com/posts/neovim- tuto.html](http://patrickmarchand.com/posts/neovim-tuto.html))

Thanks for the good work.

<comment><USER7> Thanks for the link, I see that you're using deoplete, how good is it for python? For me it doesn't really work..

<comment><USER5> Hmm havent done any python since I've installed it, have you tried using it in conjuncture with jedi-vim?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> If you're interested in Haxe you might check Quaxe [1]. It's still a work in progress but basically all UI specified in html5, styled in CSS and compiled to native.

[1] [http://quaxe.org/](http://quaxe.org/)

<comment><USER9> this looks really cool but have there been any recent updates or is the source code anywhere I can look at?

<comment><USER8> The Swift implementation has been updated a few days ago : [https://github.com/therealglazou?tab=repositories](https://github.com/therealglazou?tab=repositories) but I had to admit it progress slowly and seems to be a single man project.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> This is a custom distribution of FlashDevelop, which I loved working with when I had a PC. I still prefer working on a Unix-like OS, but I would recommend this to anyone developing on Windows!

</comment><comment><USER11> I hoped they had written this in Haxe itself but it is Flashdevelop written in c#?

<comment><USER3> I think both projects are forks of MonoDevelop.

<comment><USER12> Close; -- but FlashDevelop is not a fork of MonoDevelop.

HaxeDevelop, however, _is_ a fork of FlashDevelop, mostly a light rebranding given how much momentum has switched from Flash to Haxe. (Many people didn't know how many Haxe features FlashDevelop had, for instance).

<comment><USER3> Are you sure? It always looked like MonoDevelop (before it looked like Xamarin) to me... Guess I thought wrong then, but it's interesting both are in C# at least.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> This is nice, but for me it's never going to be a good option since it doesn't have any native Linux support...

<comment><USER14> Thankfully there is Vim w/ Vaxe, and a decent Atom plugin as well.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> It's a rebrand of Flashdevelop (with cruft stripped out). We're still waiting for the ultimate Haxe IDE-in-Haxe...

</comment><comment><USER16> It's been awhile since I saw .NET 3.5 Windows Forms application featured on HN. Interesting decision considering the fact that .NET 3.5 is EOL-ed in 2011. They're probably targeting people using Win7.

</comment><comment><USER17> This was a nice trip down memory lane, first to FlashDevelop and then to FDT (which is what my team always used to use) - it's actually rather nice to see that both are still being actively developed.

</comment><comment><USER18> IntelliJ IDEA Community Edition has a decent Haxe plugin.

<comment><USER19> Seconded. Works well enough for Mac.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> "Build and develop cross-platform applications using this application that only works on one platform"

</comment><comment><USER21> > Build and debug cross platform

but only on windows :p

<comment><USER22> Haxe is a cross plaftform language [1], Haxe develop is just an IDE it seems.

[1] [http://haxe.org/](http://haxe.org/)</comment></comment>


Why Programmers Work at Night - <AUTHOR> http://www.businessinsider.com/why-programmers-work-at-night-2013-1#

<comment><AUTHOR> I was looking at my startup's GitHub punch chart and I noticed that the quiet period for us is around 5am - 11am, and our busiest period is 12am - 4am.

It makes me wonder if larger companies should try to optimize for these times for their developers, such as not requiring them to come into work until after lunch.</comment>


Introducing Phoenix, Swift set free - <AUTHOR> https://ind.ie/phoenix/ <comment><USER2> A few thoughts:

\- Browsing the source code directory, this is very very "early stage" at best and perhaps too early to warrant a "Get It Now" link

\- There is an alternative implementation of Swift for the interested, although not open source, being developed by RemObjects: [http://www.remobjects.com/elements/silver/](http://www.remobjects.com/elements/silver/)

\- Apple should definitely open source Swift, but I doubt this kind of pressure is going to have any significant sway on their decision one way or another. When in the past did developer pressure influence any of their major strategic decisions?

\- Referring to Richard Stallman as "Richard", Steve Jobs as "Steve" and Chris Lattern as "Chris" in the letter comes off as a bit sarcastic/snippy in tone

\- I don't believe Apple is promoting Swift to encourage lock-in anymore than Apple promoted Objective-C to encourage lock-in; as others here have stated I think the author misunderstands Apple's business model/philosophy

<comment><USER3> > Referring to Richard Stallman as "Richard", Steve Jobs as "Steve" and Chris > Lattern as "Chris" in the letter comes off as a bit sarcastic/snippy in tone

Not necessary. First names are often used for familiarity, and it is fine e.g. for celebrities. Although, I have no idea who is Chris :)

<comment><USER2> That's right for familiarity. Unless he personally knows each of them, he shouldn't assume such familiarity. At least where I'm from it's considered uncouth to do so. Of course it's a cultural thing, and perhaps where you're from it doesn't sound the same way to your ear.

<comment><USER3> I think it's more personal [opinion] thing rather than cultural. To me, "Mr. Stallman" would sound sarcastic. And don't forget that we're talking about celebrities. Another example - if you've grown up on Beatles music, you'd say Paul and Ringo rather than Mr. McCartney or Mr. Starkey, right? And I'm pretty sure Paul and Ringo prefer the former one ;)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> _" Guys, feel free to make up your own dragons if you want, but your speculation is just that: speculation. We literally have not even discussed this yet, because we have a ton of work to do to respond to the huge volume of feedback we're getting, and have to get a huge number of things (e.g. access control!) done before the 1.0 release this fall. You can imagine that many of us want it to be open source and part of llvm, but the discussion hasn't happened yet, and won't for some time.

Sorry to leave you all hanging, but there is just far too much to deal with right now.

-Chris"_

[http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2014-June/073698....](http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2014-June/073698.html)

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

<comment><USER5> I wonder if there is an intentional difference between "You can imagine that many of us want it to be open source" and "As you can imagine, many of us want it to be open source".

<comment><USER6> I see you're taking his first sentence to heart then.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Wow, this _open letter_ is so full of nerd rage that it fails to capture any of my sympathy. I expected to see a humble effort to create an open-source Swift compiler that would move the conversation forward. Instead, I'm left feeling this effort is out of spite alone. All of this before Apple has made any final decision on the matter one way or another.

It would be really cool if the Swift compiler would build code for both Windows and Android so we could have true portable software in a language that isn't C or C++. So I'm hopeful the Swift engineers also see value in that. Though right now it's a language that's so tightly tied to Objective-C and Foundation that I suspect it will be a very long time before we see that come true.

<comment><USER8> >Wow, this _open letter_ is so full of nerd rage that it fails to capture any of my sympathy. I expected to see a humble effort to create an open-source Swift compiler that would move the conversation forward.

It's funny, when I first skimmed the letter I thought, cool, open source Swift. However when I moved past skimming and actually read the letter... wow, it's terrible.

As others have mentioned the first name thing makes the authors sound like some douchey Brogrammers. The rest of the letter is just condescending, snarky or just plain undecipherable and wrong. For example "Swift is a beautiful language but you want to keep it all to yourself. That's just not on.". They're not keeping it for themselves, they made the language so it's easier for developers to create software and in fact they give away the language/ide/debugger/etc away for free.

"That's just not on." Is this open letter really intended for Tim Cook? Do you think the leader of Apple actually likes to wade through clumsy slang? Have you thought of sprinkling the word "hella" around for more emphasis?

I now view the whole thing as a cautionary tale about the dangers of skimming internet pages.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> They should really come up with a better name. Phoenix is over used and even in open-source has a long history [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firefox](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firefox)

<comment><USER10> Seriously. Unfortunately OpenSwift appears to be taken [0]. It would have been the obvious choice.

[0] [http://sourceforge.net/projects/openswift/](http://sourceforge.net/projects/openswift/)

<comment><USER11> How about "Veloces" (Latin for 'swift")?

<comment><USER10> As long as you and everyone else pronounces it correctly as "veh-lawk-ays". Personally I'd go for "Velocitas" (swiftness).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Hey folks, just wanted to say that it's very early days at the moment (as WoodenChair commented) — and we're changing the button to "Sneak Peek" to reflect this. Poor Greg has been working his fingers off to get it ready (he's pulled three all-nighters and that can't be healthy so he's been told in no uncertain terms to get some sleep now) and we should have a running compiler within the week.

If any of you want to help out, please do get in touch.

Ideally, of course, if Apple opens Swift up, we can contribute to that instead of duplicating effort :)

<comment><USER13> Startups led by non-engineers just leave a bad taste in my mouth for some reason. This comment definitely evokes that feeling.

<comment><USER14> Erhm. Aral knows code. Trust me :)

Also if you read a bit further, the effort on Phoenix is lead by Greg Casamento, who is also involved with GNUStep (and thus bringing the NS* objects to Linux).

<comment><USER13> Thanks for the clarification. I've met Aral and consider him a very smart guy, I was just commenting about my gut feeling in situations similar to this. I'm happy to learn I'm wrong in this case. :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment> k-mcgrady Aren't they probably just holding off on open sourcing it until...it's finished. I know they've just shipped '1.0' but I think they're still making pretty big changes.

<comment><USER15> Seems likely. It's not like objective-c is closed to other people, and the extensions to Objective-C that Apple has made are open.

Swift and Objective-C are based on LLVM, which Apple has supported since very early on, and which is open sourced itself.

It would be kinda out of character for Apple (the real Apple not the boogeyman Apple which is mostly a straw man) to not release a programming language as open source.

Hell, the core of OS X (and iOS) is open source... they've only kept the UI layer closed source (notice Google has not open sourced their platform- map reduce, page rank, everything related to source they kept closed source. They only open sourced Android to try and be the Netscape Navigator to Apples Internet Explorer (iOS). Note that like Android, Navigator was free. Only after netscape ended did it become firefox, which is open source. Google shares android source, but to be official "Android" you have to license it from google, and that comes with a lot of requirements. So, Android is more properly understood as free)

<comment><USER16> >It's not like objective-c is closed to other people, and the extensions to Objective-C that Apple has made are open.

When Objective-C was developed in 86 it was closed source. NeXT purchased it (in 88, still closed), and planed to keep it closed source. Orginal Obj-C would be parsed into byte code to be compiled by the GCC, not directly parsed. GNU didn't agree with this (adding a way to compile byte code).

Eventually The FSF/GNU sued them over this because the Objective-C compiler was simply a modification of the GCC, without code contributed back to the GCC.

Thus, it was open sourced.

As the Clang/LLVM toolchain removes "FSF lawsuits" from possible things that could happen. I think its unlikely we'll see Swift be open sourced.

<comment><USER17> _As the Clang /LLVM toolchain removes "FSF lawsuits" from possible things that could happen._

That toolchain nonetheless appears to be open sourced, so I'm not convinced it stands as evidence that Apple won't open source Swift. (Not that it stands as evidence that they will, either.)

Wikipedia's telling of GNU and Objective-C's history sounds somewhat less combative than yours. According to Richard Stallman, "NeXT proposed to distribute a modified GCC in two parts and let the user link them. Jobs asked me whether this was lawful. It seemed to me at the time that it was, but since the result was very undesirable for free software, I said I would have to ask the lawyer. What the lawyer said surprised me; he said that judges would consider such schemes to be 'subterfuges' and would be very harsh toward them. So I went back to Jobs and said we believed his plan was not allowed by the GPL." There's no suggestion that the FSF ever sued NeXT; Stallman's own description boils down to "We told them they couldn't do that, and they said okay and made it free."

<comment><USER16> The tool chain was developed in academia for 6 years before they adopted [1]. With an _incredibly_ pervasive BSD-esque license [2].

Thus, companies can use the code without giving themselves back. This is why Sony uses BSD based OS on the playstation [3]. Its cheap, they can modify it, and keep what changes they deem necessary.

And yes, I'm aware Apple has given back to the project. But it seems pretty obvious why they don't use the GCC when you consider how hard Apple has tried to purge the GPL from its OS [4]. And the legal battle NeXT had with the FSF/GNU [5].

I stand by, we won't see Apple open source it.

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

[2] [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Illinois/NCSA_Ope...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Illinois/NCSA_Open_Source_License)

[3] [http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTU1MzA](http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTU1MzA)

[4] [http://meta.ath0.com/2012/02/05/apples-great-gpl- purge/](http://meta.ath0.com/2012/02/05/apples-great-gpl-purge/)

[5] [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objective-C#Popularization_thro...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objective-C#Popularization_through_NeXT)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> [http://www.opensource.apple.com](http://www.opensource.apple.com)

Give it time, I think it will be open. It's just not 100% finished yet, despite what Apple says.

The Xcode 5.1 sources include clang, lldb etc. We just need to wait for Xcode 6 sources to be up, pretty sure it'll include Swift.

Also worthy of note is that most of these packages are under BSD/APSL license, which doesn't mandate Apple to release the sources at all (e.g. the OS X kernel xnu is fully open source). Yet they do it. Google's version of "open" Android development isn't any different, they develop in private and dump the code to AOSP only once a particular version is 'finished'.

</comment><comment><USER19> _Swift is a beautiful language but you want to keep it all to yourself._ We don't know that's true or not. AFAIK, Apple has not officially commented on this topic.

Actually, having spoken with Swift team in Apple (rather not mention their names in case they get in trouble) on this topic, they seemed to be happy opening it up in general and opening it up as a general purpose language. Swift could ultimately replace C++ as the language of choice for game development and more.

That said, IMHO, the language will progress a lot faster initially if it's driven by a single master than to be pulled into many directions.

<comment><USER12> Indeed, I believe there is some internal conflict on this. Hopefully Phoenix will help sway the debate.

<comment><USER20> Ah, now that is an interesting belief. Is it based on anything you can share?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> Um, I actually disagree with the author's assertion that Swift is designed to make it harder to co-develop iOS and Android apps. If anything, Swift's syntax and object model are more similar to Java than Objective-C was, which should make it easier to write portable code.

I also disagree with the author's entire premise, because Apple open sources a lot more than its competitors do. Like, a whole lot more. [1] You can download the source for the entire OS X kernel.

I believe Swift will eventually be open sourced. It would fit entirely within Apple's strategy to do so: they like to open source foundational technologies, while keeping the libraries and proprietary features the build on top of them to themselves.

[1] [https://developer.apple.com/opensource/](https://developer.apple.com/opensource/)

<comment><USER22> And you can download the source for Google's browser, both OSes, both their programming languages, etc...

The argument that because OSX's kernel and WebKit are open source that Apple is somehow 'more open' is silly because they really aren't 'more open'. Maybe compared to MS...

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> Whoever wrote that needs to proofread the post a bit and be more familiar with Apple's strategy.

<comment><USER15> and history.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> I really don't get why people stress over this.

Swift only has value with the Mac OS X and iOS ecosystems, specially as a mean to drag Objective-C developers into the FP world.

There are so many open source languages in the ML family, a few of them are even used in the industry for several years now. Just go and join one of those projects.

They will appreciate any help they can get.

<comment><USER12> Also remember that Swift is already starting to be taught in schools. Imagine if a natural language that is taught in schools was tied to a single company. If, for example, you needed an Apple pen to write English. How much of literature would we have missed out on? Would Shakespeare have been able to afford an Apple pen? Thankfully, we never have to find out ;)

<comment><USER24> When I graduated, we had to buy our compilers...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> Mentioning the Apple/NeXT GCC/ObjC/GPL history is _not_ a good way to get on Apple's good side.

</comment><comment><USER26> I'm glad somebody is doing something about this. Swift deserves better than to serve as a pair of golden handcuffs. I remember back when Swift was first announced, people said they were sure Apple intended to make Swift free once it was ready for release. Sadly, Apple didn't live up to people's expectations on this one.

<comment><USER27> If people actually expected that, then it was just silly of them. Even if Apple were completely committed to making Swift open source (and I'm hopeful they are), I wouldn't expect anything to show up for a couple more months at the least. Apple often takes their time open sourcing new stuff.

<comment><USER26> You can see people in this very thread _still_ expressing the same thought — "Oh, it's just not finished yet. It'll be open-sourced when it's finished."

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> I can't find a license?

<comment><USER29> This. Pretty Ironic (And I opened the source tree, which doesn't have the licence either). Besides, wouldn't the best way to start this sort of thing be to write an LLVM frontend, rather than a new main.c?

I get the impression more time has been spent on the "Launch Site" than the actual "Product".

<comment><USER26> I think the primary purpose at this point is to try and get Apple to not force the community to divide the development effort like this. They would rather _not_ move forward with this codebase.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> Interesting it seems to be more about building an open version of the iPhone called 'stratosphere' (see this [https://source.ind.ie/project/ind- ie/blob/master/source/inde...](https://source.ind.ie/project/ind- ie/blob/master/source/index.html)) Given that Apple went all patent troll on Google's Android licensees and patents, unlike copyrights, cannot be avoided by re-expression, I'm wondering about the strategy of making an open phone. Easily doable in 20 years (post patent expiration) but hard at the moment.

<comment><USER31> I think "stratosphere" is the Cloud platform. The phone from AFAIK is Indie Phone.

<comment><USER32> I wish Indie Phone all the best, but... haven't OpenMoko [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Openmoko](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Openmoko) and Ubuntu Edge [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ubuntu_Edge](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ubuntu_Edge) shown that open source phones just don't fly? I surely wish they did.

<comment><USER12> The phone is several years away… we're concentrating on building the platform at the moment — starting with a lovely way to share stuff you care about between your devices and with other people (without any Facebook-like creepy uncle in the middle — thus, peer-to-peer). Once we get the UX right on the core, we'll go from there. If we fuck up the UX, none of the other stuff matters. That's really where we differ with Openmoko, etc. :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> Just a shout to say, if you believe in what the ind.ie guys are doing, then please sign their manifesto: [https://ind.ie/about/manifesto/](https://ind.ie/about/manifesto/) It's time we valued our privacy one again.

<comment><USER33> Just to confirm why I posted this. Due to receiving a down vote. Phoenix is a component of [http://ind.ie](http://ind.ie) and the movement they are trying to create. User experience driven design/technology, which empowers individuals to remain connected, while protecting their privacy and freedoms.

</comment></comment><comment><USER34> They should definitely do this as they have in the past with Webkit, canvas, Khronos support of OpenGL ES (finally getting a focused product out of OpenGL ES/WebGL), and more.

They might just be taking a bit of an early adopter grab and will open it up later, hopefully. Metal is awesome as well but just when OpenGL really became _the_ platform after mobile disrupted gaming.

Even if they don't open up Swift, maybe at least let Phoenix be like a Mono to their .NET and support it.

Taking a step back it is crazy how much Apple has influenced and taken over gaming focus in 6+ years. Not only do they control the market and hardware but naturally now the graphic and native software/platforms.

</comment><comment><USER35> I think these guys are either very naive (comparing apple and google this way) and making such a significant business decision based on such shaky arguments. or this is a PR stunt, in which case who are they targeting, HN?

</comment><comment><USER36> Seeing more and more thoughts be published like this in the last few months. It seems developer discontent might be growing with Apple.

<comment><USER15> This is the kind of unfounded complaints we've seen from people about Apple going back at least to the 1980s. More recently, there was an "outcry" when Apple waited a few months to release the latest version of OS X as open source after releasing the retail version.

Truth is, Apple is pretty good about open sourcing their stuff, especially when compared to their peers (Microsoft, Oracle). But that doesn't fit the "Google good, Apple bad" narrative that is popular in some circles.

It's important to remember that Android being "open" is googles attempt to commoditize a competitors product... you don't see google open sourcing core technologies related to source.

<comment><USER36> Here is another one today.

[http://9to5mac.com/2014/10/21/rapidweaver-6/](http://9to5mac.com/2014/10/21/rapidweaver-6/)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> Looks like it's based on "swift2js", which I hadn't previously heard of and seems pretty nifty:

[https://github.com/swift2js/swift2js](https://github.com/swift2js/swift2js)

</comment><comment><USER38> Someone hit the commit button too soon. parser.y is missing:

$ make make: __* No rule to make target 'parser.y', needed by 'parser.c'. Stop.

</comment><comment><USER39> Well, we already know that Swift is not swift at all. Let's see if Phoenix will die and then resurrect.</comment>


College Board Scraps Plans for Sat at Home - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/02/us/at-home-sat-coronavirus.html <comment><AUTHOR> _"Taking it would require three hours of uninterrupted, video-quality internet for each student, which can't be guaranteed for all," the board said, acknowledging the technology gap facing lower-income students_</comment>


Oculus to hold VR dev conference - <AUTHOR> http://www.oculusvr.com/connect/

<comment><USER2> Hah, we tried to set one up for earlier this year in Texas, were told by everyone they were too busy working on the big trade shows.

If anybody would be interested in getting together in Houston, drop me a line.</comment>


If we've won, why are we still explaining open source? - <AUTHOR> http://opensource.com/business/15/6/still-explaining-open-source

<comment><USER2> because the claim is commonly made that free software is open source.</comment>


Lego NXT Mindstorm Bot controlled through IRC using perl - <AUTHOR> http://bsdpunk.blogspot.com/2009/02/spike-irc-nxt-mindstorm-video-using.html

<comment><USER2> This reminds me of the beginnings of the webcam project, I had a silicon graphics box with a camera attached to it pointing at a 'mobile' with a bunch of paper birds, a fan and a light. You could control the fan and the light via the internet, a simple cgi program would change the state of two output lines, a couple of relays and it was done.

For months I would receive messages that would roughly fall into two categories, those that thought that it was really neat and those that thought it was fake :)

Now, as for this robot, imagine two of them in an arena!</comment>


There are no "regular results" on Google anymore - <AUTHOR> http://vimeo.com/51181384

<comment><AUTHOR> Do users want "regular results" or "relevant" results inside their bubble?</comment>


The Importance of a Github Profile - New Developer Question - <AUTHOR>

I'm getting into a bit of both client and server side development, and in looking around, I see a lot of developers pointing to Github profiles. I've also seen many job listings ask for the same.<p>I'm curious, how important is it to build a repository for either serious consideration as a job seeker and/or reputation as a hacker? <comment><USER2> If you want to be considered a hacker, you have to...hack. That doesn't mean you have to have a github account. It's the new hotness, sure, but you can get by without it.

What do you hack? No one would argue that someone who is a core developer for, say, Emacs isn't a hacker merely because Emacs uses bzr for source control.

Github is a means to an end: simple sharing and collaboration of code. If your hacking doesn't require that, don't get a github account. But if you can't point to what you've done -- this is not necessarily "show me the code"; if you build a website that does something cool, or hack some hardware, that'll count -- you're probably not a hacker.

Worry about your projects, not github.

<comment><AUTHOR> I can dig that, thanks.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> The point of github is being an easy place that you can point to to tell people "I hack, look here for proof". You can still point to other places or things. It doesn't have to be on github.

If you don't hack and are just in it for the career/job, don't bother.

<comment><AUTHOR> That's what I wanted to know. My issue with Github was that it felt like open source rather than "look what I built," so I wasn't sure if I was missing part of the culture or just seeing things wrong.

I'm definitely not in it for a job, I was more curious about the reputation factor, as in - do I need to give code away in order to taken seriously.

Sounds like it's not so much about giving away code as it is using it to supplement your portfolio.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> To "build" a repository is 3 mins job in git. I'd still put in your CV once you've built one though. I'm currently considering making switch from the SVN <http://goo.gl/Ho66I>

<comment><USER5> Unshortened url: [http://alpha.beepl.com/question/why-should-i-choose-git- over...](http://alpha.beepl.com/question/why-should-i-choose-git-over-svn-ask- seriously-i-would-like-to-know/)

Just stop using shortened URLs on hacker news.

<comment><USER4> Will do. Sorry about that.</comment></comment></comment>


CME gave high-frequency traders peek, lawsuit claims - <AUTHOR> http://m.futuresmag.com/2014/04/13/cme-gave-high-frequency-traders-peek-lawsuit-claim

<comment><USER2> It's unclear what the specific allegation is here.

The HFT's definitely can see the orders before the person entering the order "received confirmation," because the HFTs have servers in the same building as the CME and their algorithms are lightning fast. That in itself is legal.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Absolutely explosive if proven true, should be interesting to follow this story.</comment>


Path to a free self-taught education in Computer Science - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/ossu/computer-science <comment><USER2> Seems like a great list.

One criticism: I believe that the majority of programming jobs are software engineering jobs (even if that's not in the job title). Since many are using CS as prep for programming careers, I believe this list may need more emphasis on software engineering and contemporary skills and knowledge in SE.

For example, I saw testing in the advanced section if I remember correctly. But it was one of multiple options I think. Doesn't everyone need some testing knowledge/experience?

Another one is requirements analysis or negotiation. Figuring out _exactly_ what needs to be done, in a way that makes complete sense all the way through, is feasible and high priority, isn't nonsense from a UI or database perspective, and getting the other people to go along with that, is pretty important to most programming jobs I have had.

Another example: back in the good ole' days of CS, large scale code re-use may have been mostly a dream for most popular programming language ecosystems (that weren't Perl). But now, even though dependency reduction still seems much cooler, being able to use real package management systems and select the right modules or components is critical for most jobs. Not sure that type of thing gets quite enough attention in this list.

<comment><USER3> Do people get testing experience in a CS degree? For me it may be a small part of my software engineering course but that would be it.

<comment><USER4> In my experience, at my school testing is done to pass a professor's designed test cases. Usually you don't know the professor's test cases in advance.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I'm learning programming on my own. I don't have a formal CS education and cannot afford it. Do I need to pursue all this curriculum to become good at coding? It seems overwhelming, but I'm not against learning and am not in a rush. Currently I'm not a professional programmer. I started answering at Stack Overflow and Reddit a couple months ago and am doing really good. I like C and Python, but I regularly write in the latter. My GitHub repo has some programming exercises, has about 300 stars and 50 forks and it happened within a month's time and I'm releasing some more exercises soon. I had to discontinue my education after 10th grade, but my love for English and math has never faded. I had worked in health information for about 15 years, had a passion for it, excelled in it. My employers never asked about my formal education. They wouldn't believe me if I told them the truth. I quit my previous job for learning programming full time because I like this more than anything now. I want to spend the next 15 years programming and learning math. These two and I are inseparable. Born in a village in a third-world country, I learned English by listening to BBC Learning English and VOA Special English radio stations. As a kid, I loved grammar, syntax, punctuation, vocabulary. This is not my best writing :) I have another handle on HN and it took me about 250 days to reach a 14,000 karma here.

<comment><USER6> No, you do not need to pursue this whole curriculum to become good at coding.

<comment><USER5> I knew it. Programming is part of computer science. Now I say CS is part of math :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I've followed this github project for the past year and a half and although I find the repository full of amazing resources, I still find it unsuitable (for my own needs) since there's limited (to no) feedback -- necessary for learning -- from a dedicated resource (I.e professor ). However , the project maintainer(s) are aware and working on addressing this -- as well as other -- issues; its worth noting that this problem isn't esoteric to this project , but many other (free) online resources .

<comment><USER8> Join a programming community and ask for feedback on your exercises/projects. Tons of communities out there. Not saying this is a non issue but the fix is pretty simple.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> Here's a couple more:

>[https://teachyourselfcs.com/](https://teachyourselfcs.com/)

>[https://functionalcs.github.io/curriculum/](https://functionalcs.github.io/curriculum/)

</comment><comment><USER10> Can anyone explain to me the continued prominence of "Object-Oriented Design" as part of a fundamental computer science curriculum?

It seems to me that the basics of OOP, the kind of things that most programmers need to know about, can be covered in a single lecture or two as part of a general programming or software engineering class. Java-oriented design patterns and general API design seem more appropriate as an advanced/optional offering for students who are interested.

The linked curriculum has 6 weeks dedicated to Object-Oriented Design in the intermediate part of the "core programming" section. It seems like that much time could be spent on something more fundamental.

<comment><USER11> This is explained by the teaching staff having been there for 25 years and no effective process in place to force them to change the curriculum.

I'm a CS professor. My colleagues and I have complete control of the program. When you see an outdated program it's the faculty's fault in general and the leadership's fault in particular for not forcing the issue.

<comment><USER10> Not that my opinion matters, I don't have any advanced degree and no experience building curricula. But if I were going to include OO in a curriculum here's how I'd do it:

1\. (Intermediate/Core) I'd cover basic OO in Python. I'd demonstrate basic features like instantiation, introspection, properties and methods before moving on. I would not cover defining new classes before I had covered creating a dispatcher with first-class functions in a hash-map/dictionary. I would not cover defining new classes unless I could cover pros and cons of using OO style versus simple functions that accept rich data structures like lists and hash-maps.

2\. (Intermediate/Optional) I'd offer Java, C# and(or) Smalltalk classes at the intermediate level, where the goal would be competence with the chosen language's implementation, tooling, ecosystem and common programming idioms. These classes would involve object-oriented principles, given how important the paradigm is to these languages, but it wouldn't be the sole focus of the class. Edit: Also C++ if possible.

3\. (Intermediate/Optional) A design patterns practicum. (Visitor, observer, factory, etc.). Just a programming-heavy class where you solve problems using as many of the common design patterns as possible.

4\. (Advanced/Optional) A bottom-up class where we'd cover implementation details of object systems in a low-level systems language like C. Perhaps a semester-long project might be to build a working object system in C. The pedagogical goal would be impart an understanding of the kinds of problems that object-oriented programming was invented to solve by relying on first- hand experience rather than dogmatic instruction and hand-waving about the evils of procedural style.

5\. (Advanced/Optional) An Object Oriented Design class that would cover issues in designing large-scale systems using object-oriented programming. It would cover issues relating to inheritance, Object-Relational Mapping, and API design. This is where you'd cover UML and that sort of thing.

<comment><USER12> I think the main issue with structuring a curriculum like this (assuming the classes are sequential) is that it would take 2.5 years of university to cover it all. That's a A LOT of class time to cover only one programming paradigm when the average CS curriculum is already heavy and lacking slots for electives.

Someone would need to start this Sophomore year and not miss a single course until graduation in order to complete this... While that's fine for core classes like Chemistry which have multiple timeslots offered per semester, having such a brittle pathway for a less-taught topic would cause some grief to plan around.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> A suggestion for the section - "Computer Science - Great Readings". How about "Readings in Computer Architecture"? While I'm aware it's a tough book to read, and there are already books like "The Elements of Computing System" (NAND2TETRIS) and "Computer Organization & Design : The Hardware Software Interface", which suffice in getting acquainted with hardware architecture, Readings in Comp Arch will take reader to the transistor level. Any other book suggestion that takes reader to the transistor level would be appreciated.

<comment><USER14> Computer Organization & Design : The Hardware Software Interface by Hennessy and Patterson is a great book for any coder that is interested in how CPUs actually tick.

However I don't think knowing the gorey details of transistors is necessary. What they need to be aware of is cache hierarchies and pipelined superscalar processor architecture.

These sophisticated architectural features can be flouted by code that causes them to behave poorly. Such as code that does random accesses in a large buffer causing the probability of the desired data being stored in cache to be low.

The ways in which real computers differ from idealized ones is what CS students need to know.

Also CS students ought to have to learn to read others' code.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> I'd really like to pursue a PhD in Comp Sci (My BS is in CS). But with a family there's just no way. If I kept my full-time job, I might have the money to do it, but I wouldn't have the time. And vice-versa if I quit my job and became a full-time student.

I did go and get an online Masters of sorts (an MBA from WGU), which was definitely do-able while working full-time (and also useless), but it was nowhere near as rigorous and time-consuming as an engineering graduate degree would be :)

<comment><USER4> A PhD is paid. Universities near me pay around $30,000+/yr.

<comment><USER15> Even so, I could never get my family to agree to a ~$100k/yr drop in household income :P

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> I'm going to show this to my co worker. He was telling me the other day how he felt trapped at his job and wished he could learn computer science but didn't feel like he'd ever be able to get the money or time to do it.

<comment><USER17> Tell him to apply to UoP and get an accredited degree tuition free online [https://www.uopeople.edu/programs/cs/degrees/computer- scienc...](https://www.uopeople.edu/programs/cs/degrees/computer-science- bachelor-degree/) it's $4k or so for 4 years of exams ($100 each). Problem with self-learning courses is most people decide to skip things they believe won't be useful but actually are, which is why they are in the university curriculum, then later they get lost since they didn't do all the pre-reqs. UoP also has TAs

<comment><USER6> FWIW, I thought you were referring to UofPhoenix until I read the URL. Haven't heard of UoPeople but thanks for sharing. Do you know anyone whose had success with their programs?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> As a self-taught programmer I hoped for one of these to explain whatever I needed to wrap my head around "frameworks"\--abstractions which make it possible to build the vast diversity of programming development tools built on top of programming languages, while themselves being written in that language.

You can learn about the idioms such as Callbacks and Hooks, but to really grasp how these are organized into frameworks seems difficult for authors. It's easier to just tell you, If you want this effect, Do that. Or, I'm just not getting something about computer science pedagogy; Maybe the domain of programming where I find my interests doesn't teach programming the way I think about learning it. I will dig into this to see what's here.

<comment><USER10> A framework is kind of like a big template for software applications. A framework gives you a skeleton to work with, where the programmer fleshes out the details in the flexible spots. Except that instead of just some boilerplate code, you have a whole set of libraries and applications.

For a trivial analogy, consider this template for a C program:

        #include <stdio.h>
        #include <stdlib.h>

        int main(int argc, char *argv[])
        {
          // Your code here.
          return 0;
        }

It is not technically a "framework" because it's just a few lines in one file, but it's different mostly by magnitude (though also by the fact that it is trivially modifiable). And maybe, if this is an IDE, it puts our cursor right at the line where you're supposed to start putting your own code. Conceptually, what this does is give you a clear place to start developing. It sets up some libraries that you'll probably use defines a main function that accepts arguments and gives you a default return code of 0 (which means success, by convention).

Frameworks essentially do the same thing on a larger scale, and usually with multiple discrete components. The key difference between a library and a framework is that a library is something that the developer imports and invokes, whereas the framework establishes a useful context for a specialized type of development.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> This is quite awesome.. I'm gonna use it!

</comment><comment><USER20> We really need to quit forcing programmers to take calculus. Even set theory is a minority of us. Nobody actually needs order of magnitude either, so long as you can tell one thing is bigger than another which is about one day of learning after you cover polynomials.

The vast majority of us never use more than basic algebra. Counting, multiplying and dividing money, and estimating effort in story points (and maybe dollars as you get seniority) are the big math items.

I'm horrible at calculus, a fault that cost me around $30,000 in makeup classes and a delayed graduation as I kept losing scholarships.

Yet I have never, and will never, use Calculus in my field. This was told to me by the career coach in my intro class, who said almost none of you will ever use Calculus, yet my school still made everyone take up to Calculus 4. Who the hell is finding the area under three-dimensional curves without relying on a library? Madness.

<comment><USER21> I'm inherently biased because I studied applied mathematics, but if you advocate removing mid-level mathematics (calculus, set theory, much of college algebra) out of a computer science degree, what you have left is a few years of courses about 'scripting' and practical use of particular specialised tools. One cannot aim to become some kind of 'engineer' or technical person without at least a grasp of these mathematical techniques, even it they're only learnt for the sake of understanding and then forever set aside. They enrich your thinking; without enrichment your mind remains... impoverished.

Beyond that, computer science is an offshoot of mathematics (Turing laboured on Computability, Boole on relation algebra, Von Neumann on finite difference methods). To rid computer science of mathematics makes about as much sense as stripping psychology out of counselling,

You have a much too 'practical' view. What you have in mind is not a graduate degree in computer science but some kind of... vocational training for programmers. Which is OK, if that's what you want, and provided you leave the faculty of computer science intact for those who wish to study the abstract field and make progress therein.

<comment><USER22> I agree. Too many people conflate a computer science degree with the ability to code. The real purpose of a computer science degree is to learn to model, analyze, and solve problems in a computational framework. Mathematics is the language used to do that, so math is a necessary part of such an education.

When it comes to sitting down and writing software, such a mathematical computer science education provides a clear benefit. The more math you know, the more problems you can formulate and solve with a computer. If the job is cranking out web pages, a mathematical background will increase efficiency because you'll recognize the problems at hand fit into familiar formalisms with familiar solutions. Moreover, if you run into a hard problem, a mathematical background will provide the necessary tools to work through it in a principled manner.</comment></comment></comment>


Slack for Real Businesses - <AUTHOR> https://blog.hibox.co/business-chat-is-dead-we-fixed-it-introducing-hibox-87fb5dbb4840#.r64cpi9ri <comment><USER2> Does it anything Slack doesnt? Except VOIP

<comment><USER3> Guessing from Android stats for Hibox, Slack has nothing to worry about - [https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=co.hibox.app&h...](https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=co.hibox.app&hl=en)

If anything is going to kill Slack, it will be this - [https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.bitrix24.a...](https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.bitrix24.android&hl=en)

<comment><USER2> I don't think even mobile downloads say a lot. Slack is mainly desktop users. A proper mobile app is just a plus.

I just asked because this project seems like a 1:1 copy of Slack.</comment></comment></comment>


Equifax doesn't want consumers to get their $125 - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/16/opinion/equifax-settlement.html <comment><USER2> Don't know if anyone posted this before, but if you scroll down to #25 here: [https://www.equifaxbreachsettlement.com/faq](https://www.equifaxbreachsettlement.com/faq)

You can send a letter to the Courts and let them know why you do or don't think this is a sufficient and decent settlement.

Share it, let's get people writing in, because this lets Equifax keep really everything and in the end little real effect from their failure to take care of the information they were entrusted with.

<comment><USER3> Thanks for posting this. My wife and I already have credit monitoring so we've been very frustrated that it seems like Equifax will be weaseling out of paying us our $125 each. We'll be sending a couple of letters today. Personally I'd like to see the courts rethink the settlement and force the $125 payout to everyone who requested it.

<comment><USER4> I'd like to see the courts force Equifax to pay $X to _everyone_ whose information they leaked, whether they request it or not. But this settlement doesn't seem to be about actually punishing Equifax at all or fairly recompensing those affected.

<comment><USER5> This is a very, very imperfect method of figuring out the key question here ("Would Equifax just file for bankruptcy?"), but their enterprise value is ~$20B, and paying out $125 per person would cost over $18B, so it seems pretty clear you'd need to reduce the per person payout. It would take more work than I can put in right now to decide what it should be, but _finger in the wind_ halving it seems like the right starting point.

<comment><USER6> Bankruptcy seems quite appropriate. They not only failed to maintain the security of the data, they also provided no identity theft protection to the public (unless you _asked_ for it), and as a company appeared to have no plan for this event. Given that they were entrusted with the identity data for basically all Americans, that is inexcusable.

<comment><USER7> > Bankruptcy seems quite appropriate.

Hmm... Would not they just file for a Chapter 11 bankruptcy, restructure their debts (i.e., write those pesky $125 payments off), then emerge in a better shape than they were?

<comment><USER8> (i.e., write those pesky $125 payments off)

What does that mean? As far as I know, you can't just announce that you're "writing off" debts and have them magically disappear.

<comment><USER9> You sell the company at a low price to a friend and pay out the low sum to the plaintiffs. This would need approval under chapter 11, I guess, and if you sell the company it includes the debt, so they'd have to be tricky about it and just sell the meat or the milk, not the whole cow. Ironically, this invariably means selling the customer data (but also existing contracts and what not). IANAL

<comment><USER10> The bankruptcy judge and trustee wouldn't approve an asset sale at significantly less than fair market value.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> If anyone is getting a mortgage or refinancing soon, ask your lender to 'drop' equifax without running your score with them - just take the score from the other two. Equifax is an unnecessary security and privacy risk.

They are a horrible company that needs to go out of business. Make their customers feel embarrassed to be doing business with them.

<comment><USER12> Do we really know for sure that the other bureau's are really any better, and not just lucky at this point?

<comment><USER13> I swear this is the motto of hacker news. "Everything sucks and you're wasting your time trying to change it" \- HN

<comment><USER14> Not just hacker news, it's pervasive in any community where people who value intelligence meet. It's because cynicism is a lazy shortcut to a 'smart opinion'.

How do we sound smart with zero effort? Well we don't want to be gullible (everything is good and fair!) so we do the opposite (everything is corrupt and bad!).

I really wish it were more than that.

<comment><USER15> So what you're saying is, everyone says something is black (or white to appear smart), so therefore to appear actually smart, I should say everything is a shade of grey?

<comment><USER16> Everything is a shade of grey Seriously though, most of the time it actually is, and it's almost always more complex than we realize.

Saying something like "Amazon is good" well, that's an opinion, definitely grey. Saying "This is exactly 1 inch", well, it probably isn't and the more you care about it's accuracy, the harder it is to measure. Most things are like that. Clear cut at first, and increasingly more difficult the more precise you go. The devil is in the details.

So, yes, if the only options are black and white, the answers are generally easy, you've got a 50% chance of being wrong. As soon as you blur the line, you're basically wrong all the time. The goal is to be less wrong, and to improve, make progress.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Everyone needs to realize that the whole "fine" was just an inside deal. Who do you think provides credit monitoring services? That's right, credit bureaus. That's why the they're pushing everyone to take the "free credit monitoring", so they recover the loss from the fine.

If they were to pay all 140 million people $125, the sum would be $17b or so, which is an appropriate fine.

<comment><USER18> It's doubly painful, because the "free credit monitoring" on offer is provided _by Equifax_ \-- the exact company whose competence we don't trust anymore. The compensation for being affected by Equifax's security failure is a gratis security offering from that same company. For crying out loud, they could have at least paid Experian or TransUnion to do the monitoring: while they are just as shady, we don't have immediate evidence of their security incompetence.

It's like if you purchased a product that exploded, injuring you, but somehow the manufacturer was permitted to compensate you by giving you other products they manufacture. Why would you want those products? How do you know they won't also explode?

<comment><USER19> > It's doubly painful, because the "free credit monitoring" on offer is > provided by Equifax -- the exact company whose competence we don't trust > anymore.

The free credit monitoring is provided by Experian, not Equifax. [1]

[1] [https://www.equifaxbreachsettlement.com/](https://www.equifaxbreachsettlement.com/)

<comment><USER18> Oh neat, I must have glossed over that part. Egg on my face then. It's still not great, but significantly better than I thought it was.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> It seems like companies only get the message when there's jail time involved. None of the companies would freeze my credit since their web sites said some unspecified value couldn't be verified for me, despite confirming my data was indeed lost. Pretty sure, like other regulations that include jail time, this wouldn't have happened or their website to freeze my credit would have worked.

<comment><USER21> Why is Hacker news so obsessed with sending people to jail? Literally every time any sort of corporation get's fined (for nearly anything), there is a loud call to send people to prison.

It's like there is this undercurrent of bloodthirstiness and hatred for large companies and their leaders that get's brought to the surface.

<comment><USER22> Because many times, the default "punishment" is a fine that is often times a _small percentage_ of the _profit_ from the illegal/negligent act.

That is not a punishment, or even a deterrent. And therefore, corporate leaders continue, unabated, doing things like this. Because there is effectively zero incentive to do so.

If you are a corporate officer, directing and / or approving policies that are illegal, tell me why you should -not- go to prison?

<comment><USER23> > If you are a corporate officer, directing and / or approving policies that > are illegal, tell me why you should -not- go to prison?

You should and the law allows for this. Certain crimes will get corporate executives locked up. It's a matter of making stricter liabilities and sentences for these white collar crimes, which really should have happened yesterday.

<comment><USER22> I absolutely agree. I was addressing the parent, more - and their question of "why does HN have this obsession with sending people to prison for corporate/white collar crimes?"

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> Are we "consumers" now, rather than "victims" or "citizens"? Are we defined by what we buy?

<comment><USER25> > Are we "consumers" now, rather than "victims" or "citizens"?

Are you a child, a parent, a sibling, or a citizen?

Or are you all of those things depending on context?

I get what you're saying, but you chose a way of expressing it which invites immediate response.

<comment><USER26> They were saying that in this context it should say victims.

Saying consumers changes the way it is read.

Following your logic try this one:

Equifax doesn't want children to get their $125

It reads differently.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> In an ideal world, a white-hat would write a script that uses all of the hacked data to apply for the settlement on behalf of the hacked users so that the affected users don't have to individually work out how to hack Equifax's claims process.

<comment><USER28> In an ideal world, a government agency would fine Equifax the full amount, and customers could claim their money from them instead.

<comment><USER29> Or better, liquidate Equifax entirely to demonstrate that there are consequences that a fancy law firm can't mitigate.

I realize that's wishful thinking. Of course they're going to get away with paying what is effectively a parking ticket. Nor will any of their executives face any meaningful repercussions.

<comment><USER30> Courts would also have to bar current board members and maybe even investors from founding another credit agency. Not good enough to kill the company, gotta make sure it doesn't come back.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> I have credit monitoring but signed up for it from this settlement anyway. I doubt anyone will see anymore than a couple of bucks from this. It's a scam and they got away with it. That's what happens when your government cares more about corporate profits than people. None of the things here will do anything to change that short of pursuing your own case against them which will definitely cost more than $125, not to mention time and effort. The bad guys just won. As usual.

</comment><comment><USER32> Equifax cannot afford to pay $125 to each member of the potential class. It's way above their revenue, let alone profit. So they would go bankrupt and whatever cash is on hand would be divvied up. The credit information would presumably be sold to the highest bidder.

How about the FTC instead agrees that identities cannot be stolen and puts companies on the hook for the money they lose by not verifying identity. You have an account with a bank and they give the money to a fraudster? Well, then they have to credit your account and go looking for the money. Someone opens a loan in your name? The company has to pay you for the time spent removing their garbage from the credit report and they have to go get the money back from the fraudster. Why not just remove the bite from identity theft?

<comment><USER33> > Equifax cannot afford to pay $125 to each member of the potential class.

That's not the victims' problem. Even if Equifax has to be completely liquidated to cover the compensation, the government should fight to make an example of such a terrible company and give the victims some sense of justice. Hopefully the board and the executives would rethink their lives and careers, maybe even change.

<comment><USER34> It becomes the victims' problem when Equifax declares bankruptcy and escapes paying.

<comment><USER35> The upside is their competitors sees what happens to that guy and never make the same mistake.

A company the size of Equifax going bust due to negligence would show Experian, Lexis-Nexis, and Transunion that these records aren't assets but large liabilities to be handled with extreme diligence.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> This whole process is a joke. I went and dug up my claim number, entered it into the site to amend, and the site just dies and doesn't allow me to proceed any further. If they had my contact info to begin with, just cut me a check and skip the shenanigans.

<comment><USER37> do you have a link? I can't find it. This same thing was happening to me when I first got the email

<comment><USER38> I just did it and it worked fine. followed the link from my email.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER39> I'm definitely going to write a letter objecting to the settlement, and will urge everyone I know to do so as well.

<comment><USER40> To what? The Trump-controlled FTC? The castrated CFPB that now spends its time promoting a partnership with the most medieval red states called the "Financial Innovation Network" ([https://www.consumerfinance.gov/about- us/newsroom/bureau-sta...](https://www.consumerfinance.gov/about- us/newsroom/bureau-state-regulators-launch-american-consumer-financial- innovation-network/))? Where do you think that's going to get you?

<comment><USER41> To the court. RTFA please.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER42> The title of this post (which, admittedly, was taken from the NYTimes) isn't really correct.

The terms of the settlement have been set. Equifax's financial outlay is fixed. All of the post settlement divvying up of the funds is being administered by the government bodies who negotiated the settlement, not Equifax.

Equifax's desires about how the money gets divvied up at this point are irrelevant.

<comment><USER43> You're right. The title is not very accurate.

The text from the Equifax Settlement Administrator

> Your Equifax Claim: You Must Act by October 15, 2019 or Your Claim for > Alternative Compensation Will Be Denied. The amount you receive in > connection with your alternative compensation claim may be significantly > reduced depending on how many valid claims are ultimately submitted by other > class members for this relief. Based on the number of potentially valid > claims that have been submitted to date, payments of these benefits likely > will be substantially lowered and will be distributed on a proportional > basis if the settlement becomes final. Depending on the number of valid > claims that are filed, the amount you receive for alternative compensation > may be a small percentage of your initial claim.

That text was just them fear mongering. Even the FTC urged to opt for the credit monitoring instead through more fear inducing statements.

> You can still choose the cash option on the claim form, but you will be > disappointed with the amount you receive and you won't get the free credit > monitoring.

> [https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/cases- > proceedings/refunds/eq...](https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/cases- > proceedings/refunds/equifax-data-breach-settlement)

But, if this is how the whole process is "administered", then I guess you might as well not have any hopes of seeing the compensation.

EDIT: Corrected to identify the authority of the email correctly.

<comment><USER42> Equifax didn't send you that email. If you read further down in the e-mail it even says "This email is from the Court-appointed settlement administrator, not Equifax."

<comment><USER43> Fair enough. That just makes the whole thing even worse. There's basically no hope in receiving the compensation anymore.

<comment><USER42> The vast majority of the settlement is designated for people who experience actual harm (identity theft of some kind basically) from the breach.

It's perfectly reasonable that people who's lives haven't been negatively impacted in any real way don't receive anything more than a token payment.

<comment><USER43> The alternative compensations was set at $31 million. And the cash compensations per person caps out at $20,000. If we start with this cap, the settlement was supposed to benefit only 1,550 individuals out of the 148 million records that were breached. Even if you assume just $125 per person, that number only benefits 248,000. So the number of people benefiting from this range between 1,550 and 248,000, if the original settlement claims were to be upheld. Instead, every claimant is now being asked to get credit monitoring from the same company that couldn't secure the records. To be fair, the FTC does suggest getting an alternative from Experian, but only in the FAQ.

<comment><USER42> The 31 million is for the people that haven't experienced any identity theft. This is the money being split up by all the people making $125 claims.

The total pool to pay out claims to consumer is 425 million. Subtracting the 31M that leaves 394 million for people who experience real harm. The $20,000 cap per person is for people drawing money from this pool.

<comment><USER43> Um, the FTC says otherwise.

> For consumers impacted by the Equifax breach, today's settlement will make > available up to $425 million for time and money they spent to protect > themselves from potential threats of identity theft or addressing incidents > of identity theft as a result of the breach.

[https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press- releases/2019/07/equif...](https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press- releases/2019/07/equifax-pay-575-million-part-settlement-ftc-cfpb-states- related)

That consumer fund of $425 million was "supposed" to also cover protection from any potential incidents of identity theft. So, let's go with this pool then. Assuming there are 21,250 valid claims qualifying for the cap, is the settlement complete? There's no one left to compensate? I'd say clearly not. Are you willing to bet that only 0.01% of the breached credentials were misused? How did they even arrive at this number? Let's say we assume, it really is a number lower than that. With whatever's left, I'd be willing to bet, a significant number would not trust Equifax with monitoring anymore. Perhaps they even bought credit monitoring as a reaction to the breach. How do you compensate that? Which ever way you want to slice this, it's clearly insufficient.

<comment><USER42> That FTC statement says exactly what I said:

There is a 425 million pool. It's to be used for:

1) "time and money they spent to protect themselves from potential threats of identity theft" (the 31 million part)

OR

2) "addressing incidents of identity theft as a result of the breach" (the 394 million part)

And yes, at some point both pools can be exhausted at which case there will be no more money for future claims. That's how a settlement works. Since there have currently been exactly 0 incidents of identity theft as a result of the breach it might not be so far fetched to say that there will be plenty of money in the pool to cover any incidents.

<comment><USER43> Your original comment, before you edited it, did not call that out. You specified the 425 million as only for people affected by the breach. And that's not what it was for. Anyhow, how do you know there have been exactly 0 incidents? Where do you even begin to trace any incident back to this breach as the cause? Claiming it as non-existent is a bit naive. The damage has been done. Your information is out there. Again, slice it anyway you want. Let's assume NO ONE has been ACTUALLY impacted. Let's go with identify theft protection. As a consumer, I don't trust Equifax anymore. Since they mishandled my data, it's perfectly valid for me to reject them and opt for another monitoring service I trust, which let's say I have to pay for. I am in the situation covering my bases because of Equifax. So, I expect them to compensate me for this service. Oh wait, there's no money left. Use our credit monitoring service or get wrecked. And this is ok? So, based on your statement, we're literally relying on a vast majority of people either opting for the credit monitoring from Equifax or not claiming any damages for the rest to receive any compensation? If that's OK, then I guess I'll stop engaging here.

<comment><USER42> There are numerous credit monitoring services you can use for free. There is no need for you to get any money to use one.

I personally like CreditKarma.com

<comment><USER43> It's not about you though. People have choices. They don't trust a free service, because you more often than not end up being the product. Again, not claiming Credit Karma sells your data (on the contrary the CEO claims it's only for selling ads based on your credit report)

[https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/2qq95l/i_am_the_found...](https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/2qq95l/i_am_the_founder_of_credit_karma_ask_me_anything/?utm_source=amp&utm_medium=&utm_content=post_body)

But it's my choice as a consumer. Do you make all of your choices with only cost as the factor? Probably not. Or at least not when it comes to security. So, people will have their preferences. But apparently not, if you're party to this settlement.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER44> I chose the cash option because I have credit monitoring through 2025 from the OPM breach of my SF-86 (security clearance application information) years ago. This is so idiotic. The FTC did consumers no favors in negotiating such an absolutely pitiful settlement.

</comment><comment><USER45> This is the sort of thing that millennials should focus our energy on. We may be politically polarized, but I think we can all agree that this is bullshit and needs to be fought.

</comment><comment><USER46> Is Equifax actually liable or responsible for anything? No jail time or other penalties for executives. Okay so how are they held accountable?

<comment><USER39> Jail time for executives seems a little excessive for some employee merely failing to apply a security patch...

On the other hand, this settlement shouldn't have been capped at such a ridiculously low amount.

<comment><USER33> They made the conscious decision to monetize personal data belonging to more than a hundred million people. That means they should take every measure available to make sure something that sensitive is not released.

If this was the US Airforce who lost an armed nuclear ICBM the commanding officer who was ok with this "whoopsie" would have to explain him or herself to quite a few officials.

<comment><USER47> > They made the conscious decision to monetize personal data belonging to more > than a hundred million people. That means they should take every measure > available

I disagree. I think it means they owe a hundred million people (a) an offer to opt-in to their service and (b) a share of their profits for doing so.

<comment><USER33> Yeah, I agree with that. Basically we want to use a and b as incentives for them to take every measure available not to fail like this ever again. And as incentives for everyone else in the business.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Something I've wondered always wondered when reading through class actions: do multiple class actions suits over the same set of facts ever happen? Are they possible?

It seems _technically_ possible: Class action settlement reached, somehow a huge portion of the impacted class opts out of the settlement (extremely unlikely, but possible). Opted out class members somehow organize a subsequent action.

Is the above possible? By opting out, you explicitly keep your own individual right to bring action against the defendant, but does it bar class action participation? There's a moral hazard argument that allowing this would create a perverse incentive on the part of the class legal representation to encourage class members to opt out of the settlement and organize subsequent actions.

<comment><USER48> I am not a lawyer, but to me if you signed up for class action, and you agreed that the $125 check supposed to be the payment for your damages and the other party backed off and did not provide it that means the agreement shouldn't be valid.

<comment><USER5> Disclaimer: IANAL (but did go to law school and vaguely paid attention to this part so lawyers, please correct my recollections where wrong)

My recollection is that, usually, only a small number of people actively sign up to the class during the lawsuit & settlement negotiation phase, and the named class is _guaranteed_ a substantially higher payout. The settlement is worded as _up to_ $X for the rest of the class, who can choose to accept the fact that the amount is not a guarantee or decline and keep their ability to bring a subsequent action (hence my original question of "Can you bring subsequent class action suits comprised of different subsets of the same impacted class?").

So basically, the people who actively signed up are getting a guarantee of an amount they negotiated, the rest of us are stuck deciding how valuable "up to" $125 actually is.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER49> We really need accountability for stake holders who discount security concerns because some cool widget "adds value" and everyone else is doing it.

Honestly.. send these people to jail make an example out of them.. hopefully people will think twice.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> [http://archive.is/HWdcR](http://archive.is/HWdcR)

</comment><comment><USER50> Question not specifically related to the settlement:

Shouldn't this breach of nearly half of all Americans' social security numbers be the nail in the coffin of pretending SSNs are a secret that can be used to verify your identity?

</comment><comment><USER51> We're all going to wind up with closer to $1.25. Wow. Thanks for the bean burrito.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> tl;dr: For those who applied for the $125 payout option in the Equifax data breach settlement, you should've gotten an email requiring that you provide more information by October 15, or that your claim would be denied.

The FTC confirms it's legit: [https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/cases- proceedings/refunds/eq...](https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/cases- proceedings/refunds/equifax-data-breach-settlement#FAQ4) (FAQ 4 item 2)

The article's author says Gmail filed it into the 'Promotions' folder.

<comment><USER52> I received no such email and I signed up fairly quickly for the $125. I've checked my spam folder as well as everywhere else, they simply haven't sent me such an email.

<comment><USER53> Neither did I. Does anyone know what to do in this case? I have my Equifax claim code.

<comment><AUTHOR> Go to the claim web site and choose to 'Modify/Amend Your Claim'. There should be a place now for you to specify which credit-monitoring service you are using.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER54> It seems like we should sue Equifax for their fraudulent handling of the settlement and also the FTC for letting it through. It seems like it was such a joke that it was probably enabled by bribes or something.

They should start over and aim for explicitly liquidating and redistributing all of Equifax's assets. At the same time if there were bribes or conflicts of interest at the FTC then those people involved should go to prison.

</comment><comment><USER55> Is there a way to know if I'm part of the class action settlement? IIRC I refuse to take part of the lawsuit since I was planning on suing them in small claim court.

</comment><comment><USER56> Equifax should go bankrupt and sell all its assets for paying the settlement. Equifax has no value and it can only create troubles to people. It should not exist.

</comment><comment><USER57> Equifax should have been flat out shut down and liquidated.

</comment><comment><USER58> Equifax wants global peace. Class lawyers and settlement administrators want a big payday (in cash, not credit monitoring). The judge wants the case off his docket.

No one represents the interests of the class. Class action lawsuits aren't designed to further the interests of the class. They are designed to encourage ad hoc, profit driven, independent regulators.

Whether this is a good idea or not is a tough question (I lean towards no) but if you aren't clear on what the system is trying to do you will certainly find it confusing and frustrating.

<comment><USER59> But why not do your job as a citizen and send a simple letter objecting to this settlement - [https://www.equifaxbreachsettlement.com/faq](https://www.equifaxbreachsettlement.com/faq) Q#25

<comment><USER58> I probably will. I have in the past. Judges don't care.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER60> Did the EU manage to extract anything for Europeans that were caught up in this? I note that only US-residents are eligible for this $125.

</comment><comment><USER61> How do I start a credit reporting company?

</comment><comment><USER62> They should be sued out of existence!

</comment><comment><USER63> Treble due!

</comment><comment><USER64> I don't understand it. Here is hn, where everyone knows that cybersecurity is 100% offence 0% defence. It is basically our job to secure systems and we all agree it is pretty much impossible, unless you airgap every computer in building and glue every USB port.

Then, knowing that, we blame equifax for data breach. Equifax is fat target and it was matter of time data would be stolen.

<comment><USER65> HN definitely has a pitchfork mentality similar to other groups. It also leans politically left. It's not as bad as reddit yet but it is slowly getting that way (waiting for downvotes).

<comment><USER66> What does political leaning has to do with IT sec?

<comment><USER67> It is a pretty common tactic on general topic websites lately. It is easier to dismiss comments without actual reasoning if you assume they are from people that don't align with your political views.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Inverview with Evan Ratliff, author of The Mastermind - <AUTHOR> https://www.gimletmedia.com/reply-all/the-founder#episode-player <comment><USER2> Everyone keeps recycling this story, it was originally done by the Atavist magazine, it is an incredibly rivetting read. [https://magazine.atavist.com/the- mastermind](https://magazine.atavist.com/the-mastermind)

<comment><USER3> My understanding is that it's the same journalist who wrote that story/book being interviewed in the podcast (Evan Ratliff). Either way, the Atavist piece is a great read and very nicely presented

<comment><USER4> It is - he's on a press tour for his book Mastermind which I just started and is good so far

[https://www.amazon.com/Mastermind-Drugs-Empire-Murder- Betray...](https://www.amazon.com/Mastermind-Drugs-Empire-Murder- Betrayal/dp/0399590412)

There is also a competing book that just came out called Hunting LeRoux:

[https://www.amazon.com/Hunting-LeRoux-Inside-Takedown- Crimin...](https://www.amazon.com/Hunting-LeRoux-Inside-Takedown- Criminal/dp/0062930516)

It is being developed into a film by Michael Mann

Based on reviews and my reading so far Mastermind from OP author seems like the real deal

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Interesting episode of a podcast I love (although it's more targeted to technologically interested but not too knowledgeable people).

I don't think they ever mentioned TrueCrypt in the episode.

<comment><USER6> I came here to say this, I listened to this episode but didn't realized it was related to TrueCrypt until now.

<comment><USER7> same here

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> The Atavist magazine version of this is available at: [https://magazine.atavist.com/the- mastermind](https://magazine.atavist.com/the-mastermind) It's a fantastic (but long) read, I highly recommend it.

</comment><comment><USER9> MasterMing the merciless? a funny typo.

<comment><AUTHOR> The title used to say "The Founder: how the creator of TrueCrypt became a criminal masterming". I just fixed the typo to "mastermind". Thanks @bryanrasmussen !

Edit: It has now been updated by the mods to its current title. It went through "The Founder", "The Founder: Interview with Evan Ratliff, author of The Mastermind", and "Inverview with Evan Ratliff, author of The Mastermind", and probably manually demoted from the #1 spot.

I understand the rules of non-editorialization of titles (unless you're the article author, the you can click-bait as you wish), but it seems even the mods understand the need to provide context.

<comment><USER9> hope my pointing out the typo wasn't the cause of the cascade of renaming.

<comment><AUTHOR> Not at all, don't sweat it. The HN rules explicitely say "don't editorialize": [https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html](https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html)

<comment><USER10> Despite the rules, the current title is completely meaningless to me. How many people here have heard of TrueCrypt, vs The Mastermind?

I only clicked because of your editoralization, and I'm very glad I did!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Slightly off-topic: any ideas of other good tech podcasts you'd recommend?

I just did a HN search, but did not find any such thread.

<comment><USER12> I like "Talking Machines", about Machine Learning/AI.

Link: [https://www.thetalkingmachines.com/](https://www.thetalkingmachines.com/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> I read the book from Amazon and done with it in just one day. If you are smart and have bad intentions, the book shows how far a mastermind can go in his vicious world.

</comment><comment><USER14> It's interesting that someone who wrote a tool called "Encryption for the masses" also happened to be involved in illegal crimes.

I don't mean "people who care about privacy etc. are criminals". But I can imagine a moral-panic of "but criminals write such software", and it doesn't undermine the value of using such software.

<comment><USER15> For what it's worth, the story seems to be that he was out of writing said software before having the ideas for criminal enterprises. He was supposedly rather spiteful of freeloaders after releasing E4M, and went after the TrueCrypt authors in particular.

It's very Breaking Bad.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> That is a completely bonkers story, would make a great movie or series.

<comment><USER17> Kinda reminds me of Breaking Bad, but different.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> transcript not accessible for nojs. any alternatives?

<comment><USER19> Does this paste [1] help? If not, I'll delete it.

It's set to expire in 12 months.

[1]: [https://framabin.org/p/?fc98aeebe5cb2585#Pa6OgUybxSWBWFGHlek...](https://framabin.org/p/?fc98aeebe5cb2585#Pa6OgUybxSWBWFGHlekZWdHWVZX75sPR4YXDzzoc5e8=)

<comment><USER18> Javascript is required for PrivateBin to work. Sorry for the inconvenience. Loading… In case this message never disappears please have a look at this FAQ for information to troubleshoot.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> I highly recommend this book. Probably the biggest criminal enterprise that nobody has really heard of.

</comment><comment><USER20> if you haven't yet read _The Mastermind_ , it's a real treat of excellent writing and journalistic skill: [https://longform.org/posts/the- mastermind](https://longform.org/posts/the-mastermind)

</comment><comment><USER21> This could make a good Narcos season.

</comment><comment><USER22> When genius meets dysfunction.

</comment><comment><USER23> Breaking...Blockcipher?

</comment><comment><USER24> can someone tl;dr this? what kind of crimes did he commit?

edit: the atavist article linked to elsewhere in these comments covers it:

"Paul Le Roux, the former head of a prescription drug, weapons, narcotics, and money laundering cartel, has been cooperating with the D.E.A. since 2012."

<comment><USER10> Also smuggling gold, literally having competing businesses burned to the ground, buying a ton (1000kg) of meth from North Korea, tried to smuggle it out in a submarine, having people killed for smaller and smaller things as he grew increasingly paranoid, then hiring another hitman to kill his main hitman, because he was stealing from him.

Under the podcast is a transcript you can skim.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> Another proof that a talented person is talanted in everything.</comment>