Asimov's Empire, Asimov's Wall - <AUTHOR> https://www.publicbooks.org/asimovs-empire-asimovs-wall/ <comment><USER4> Asimov gave the world plenty of mind-expanding ideas, many that we take for granted today as staples of science fiction. I'm also amused and a bit humbled at reading his many stories featuring futures with "a world market for maybe five [building-size] computers" on my one-of-billions smartphone.

That said, I've witnessed (and been guilty of) full-throated defenses against character assassinations based on little more than being a fan of the work. It's important for fans, who ought to be _more_ informed than average, to be aware of and acknowledge the works' and creator's flaws. This both gives the fan more credibility, and by reducing the perceived personal protection the creator may feel from their fans, in aggregate should discourage bad behavior.

So thanks for sharing.

<comment><USER5> Yeah, acknowledging flaws is more useful than ignoring them or papering over them.

> "a world market for maybe five [building-size] computers" on my one-of- > billions smartphone

Though in some of Asimov's books' terms, it easy to imagine that the internet would have counted to Asimov as having only one "building sized computer" and we just have billions and billions of terminals. The microcomputer revolution remade what the world calls a computer [1], and it's hard to predict futures when the words themselves shift out from under you. ;)

[1] Just as I like to half-jokingly predict the lasting impact of the smartphone revolution is that it is possible the word phone eats the word computer, bringing about AT&T's 50s retro future visions in a roundabout pathway they didn't foresee.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> He probably never understood the harm he did. His writings reveal quite a lack of real understanding of other people. And I guess no one ever sat down with him and tried to explain the consequences for him.

I'm very happy that these things are brought up loud and clear nowadays so no one can continue to be ignorant.

<comment><USER7> This is why I'm generally supportive of contemporary efforts to call out that kind of behavior as unacceptable.

I think on some level, everyone who finds someone else attractive has at least some instinctual desire to touch them or hug them or kiss them, etc. It's the definition of sexual attraction. If all you've been told and all of your experience says "hey, go for it! It's not a big deal and occasionally they'll reciprocate," why would you refrain?

It's important for people to learn and understand at a very basic level that it's inappropriate, unacceptable, and degrading to the person on the receiving end. When I was in my mid 20's I used to work with a lot of young guys who would catcall and pester women all the time. I'd shake my head and ask them why they did that. Didn't they know it annoyed the hell out of the women (at the very least)?

Their response was usually along similar lines to the one quoted in the article: "well, some of them like it and occasionally it might work!" Without a real understanding of how flawed this logic was, these dudes had been taught that the ideal approach was just to proposition as many women as possible in the hopes that one might respond positively.

Without understanding the flip side, they just didn't consider or grasp the harm it caused to the vast majority of their "targets".

<comment><USER8> I'm not sure that it's always sexual attraction, although it might have been for Asimov. Look at the Joe Biden case, how he used to hug, touch etc. people all the time in a problematic way. It wasn't _sexual_ , but it was still an overstepping of sensible boundaries, intimacy etc. that we intuitively feel as "creepy".

Whatever the context (sexual or not) it's important for people to learn _how_ to go about that sort of implied social negotiation that ultimately might make these contacts non-problematic and perhaps even desirable. Just telling them "it's not okay" is not nearly as effective. Tell them it's not OK, and then _ask_ them why they aren't doing it the right way. Do they feel _that_ entitled to another person's boundaries?

<comment><USER6> All people don't have the same boundaries. This makes me think of a guy I went to high school with. He always stood way too close when talking to me (and everybody else). Close enough to smell his mouth and feel his warm breath against my face. When I moved away he moved after. This was certainly nothing sexual; he did it to everyone, males and females of any ages, teachers and fellow students. I tried to talk to him about it once, because no one wanted to hang out with him and I hoped I could help him. He had absolutely no idea that he did anything wrong. He never understood why no one liked him or that all the girls thought he was a creep.

Maybe people like Biden are the same. They just have a different sense of boundaries, and don't react themselves when other people touch or hug them. I don't know how asking them why they do something that feels perfectly natural to them would help.

<comment><USER8> > All people don't have the same boundaries.

Of course, but that's precisely why that implied negotiation is so important - far more perhaps than most people might realize. It's never okay to "move after" people who are clearly trying to keep their distance; that's creepy, almost predatory behavior. I don't care if it's Joe Biden doing it or just someone in your high school.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> If Asimov was still living, what do you think he would say about younger Asimov?

The Civil Rights Act of 1991 happened the year before he died. There was a big change in the way people saw this behavior between the 80s and now.

How many celebrities, who lived through that era, would now say that behavior is okay? I honestly think had he lived, he'd say he was wrong.

<comment><USER10> Great point! The dead may never change. Is it fair to eternally damn them from a modern perspective?

One of the reasons I left religion was principally this eternal damnation practice. It's extreme. The variety of life and even the universe requires nuance and forgiveness.

<comment><USER11> There's plenty of nuance and forgiveness in traditional religion.

Speaking of which, Asimov was certainly aware that "thou shalt not covet" and "whoever looks at a woman lustfully..." had been preached for a couple of thousand years, so it's not like he had no idea what he was doing could possibly be wrong.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> The article mentions Harlan Ellison and his grabbing a Hugo Award host's breast and I thought to myself that surely that can't have been possible a mere fifteen years ago in front of all those people and yet [https://youtu.be/Zxd1jFDXzsU](https://youtu.be/Zxd1jFDXzsU) that's a video.

I can't imagine someone doing that in front of me. I don't even know how I'd act. Probably just sit there wondering if they really did just do that.

<comment><USER13> I know nothing about the incident nor about that particular person (except his most famous short story), but what I can see on this video is an awkward and misplaced move that sometime happen in nervous situations to some people. Like someone was trying to pat other person's shoulder and shake their hand (using his left) at the same time while speaking and failing both. If you ever had similar situation, you know what I mean.

Please, mind it, I don't _say_ that's what happened, I just say it looks like it and may be interpreted this way. A person can hide his intentions using awkward behaviour, of course. Prior information and context tip the scale in the end.

<comment><USER14> It looked pretty deliberate to me. They always say never meet your heroes - <USER2> loved the Stainless Steel Rat.

<comment><USER15> Ellison did not write the Stainless Steel Rat if that is what you're saying.

<comment><USER14> Oh man. That's embarrassing. You are of course right - it was Harry Harrison! Sorry about that.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> People do not protect harassers. People protect their own jobs and status. Let someone unimportant to have the same behaviour and it will land in prison. It is the system that rewards the people protecting the harassers. Think about Human Resources in your company. Do they work for the employees, for the company or for upper management? I have seen upper management abusing their positions while damaging people and projects alike. And Human Resources have always protected them. The few times that is not like that, the person that tries to fix the situation get silently fired. We should request from people to NOT protect famous/important/rich harassers. But, we also need to change the system to make sure that they are not protected by people looking for a reward. Without changing the system we are doomed to continue suffering these behaviours.

<comment><USER17> Yes and no - you will often see people trivialize or make excuses for harassers even if there is noting on the line for themselves. Nobody is scared of Asimov since he is long dead, but just look in this comment section.

<comment><USER18> You're right, people protect more than their job; they protect their ideologies, too.

There's an interesting story about the early Buddhist monks who, while the Buddha was alive, would squabble and fight over "right view". So, even after giving up _almost everything_ , they were still attached! The Buddha, in classic Buddha way, responded by walking into the forest to meditate alone.

Personally, I wish we'd all just relax and realize what assholes we ALL are, each and every one. There are no exceptions.

<comment><USER19> I'd go further, people protect their _identities_ , which includes whatever ideologies & personal facets of themselves they've codified.

Where one person shrugs when a family member is insulted, another might come to blows to protect an idea of family. It's cultural, economic and political...it's belief.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> > _These two numbers might seem very different, but both are central to > Asimov's legacy_

Yeah, I really don't think so. The legacy of people with important contributions (technical, cultural, political, etc) is their work, not what they did in their private life, unless they were also moonlighting as the Boston strangler or something.

In 2500 nobody would care whether he did this or that. But they would probably still read some of his work.

<comment><USER21> Well his personal issues with women definitely are apparent in his work. His female characters are often shrieking ninnies.

Also I don't think anyone but an academic will be reading his work in a few hundred years. As much as I enjoy his ideas and his easy style he is actually mediocre.

<comment><USER22> > Also I don't think anyone but an academic will be reading his work in a few > hundred years. As much as I enjoy his ideas and his easy style he is > actually mediocre.

I don't like to point out and say people's opinions are wrong but The Embire series are cornerstone of science fiction writing and will surely be read in the future. I can't imagine someone studying the history of scifi literature and skipping Asimov at any point in time.

<comment><USER23> > someone studying the history of scifi literature

would be an academic.

<comment><USER20> No, could just as well be a sci-fi fan/reader.

I certainly did dug back for most genres I follow to earlier history of the genre.

<comment><USER24> I enjoy reading older SF too. A lot of SF is responding to older works, expanding or critiquing on their ideas.

Without the Foundation series, I doubt there'd be the Culture novels - or at least not in that form.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> I read his biography about 20 years ago, still one of most entertaining books I've ever read. Don't remember him talking about this stuff, other that his female fans were very rabid. Strangely, was never a fan of his fiction, but the biography is wonderful!

<comment><USER26> Is this the biography you read? [https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00317G7K6](https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00317G7K6)

<comment><USER25> Yap, it sure is, great, easy and entertaining read.

<comment><USER27> I guess they asked because there are more of them: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autobiographies_of_Isaac_Asimo...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autobiographies_of_Isaac_Asimov)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> SF has always had a problem. As the article points out, there's a certain irony in going to Harlan Ellison to ask about Asimov being a harasser. I think the list is pretty long. But the "communal aspects of fan culture" of SF - almost groupies in the fandom - has led to some very tight networks protecting all sorts of people.

A particularly horrifying axis is that between Marion Zimmer Bradley and her husband, Walter Breen. Bradley is merely accused (to be clear: I believe the accuser) but Breen was a convicted molester who was _known_ to be problematic for years - with people in fandom just trying to manage the situation.

If this doesn't sound familiar from tech, you haven't been paying attention.

idk what to do about all this; it's pretty easy for me to pass on rereading Asimov or MZB anyhow. But the obvious lesson, still unlearned in many quarters, is "don't keep protecting harassers". To quote a better, or at least IMO more interesting author (please don't let him be a harasser too):

"Papa Hegel he say that all we learn from history is that we learn nothing from history. I know people who can't even learn from what happened this morning. Hegel must have been taking the long view." \- Stand on Zanibar, John Brunner

<comment><USER29> > idk what to do about all this; it's pretty easy for me to pass on rereading > Asimov or MZB anyhow.

His books don't become worse because of alleged bad behaviour.

<comment><USER30> They do. His female characters might as well have been written by an adolescent.

He's hardly unique in that. MZB's Mists of Avalon has similar issues from a different gender perspective.

Asimov looks especially crude now, with the distance of a few decades. I wouldn't be surprised if more recent fiction suffers a similar reassessment in time.

SF is rarely character-led and it may be optimistic to expect depth or nuance from it. Character design is more likely to be an aspect of fan service - <USER3> the readers a fantasy they can identify with, maybe add some flaws for spice - and not so much an opportunity for self-reflection.

<comment><USER31> > SF is rarely character-led and it may be optimistic to expect depth or > nuance from it.

I really don't think it's true anymore, see all Hugo award SF nominees and winners from the past few years. They are all character-led.

<comment><USER32> _Everything_ these days is people-orientated. The rise and rise of reality TV and social media is testament to that.

<comment> Ar-Curunir Mate, everything throughout history has been people-oriented. Almost every famous story throughout history has had a main character, because that's what humans find easiest to identify with: other people.

<comment><USER33> Quite a few early SF stories were gimmick-oriented.

As an example, one old short story - I've forgotten the name - involves a space race from Earth to Jupiter and back (or something like that). The participants usually go full blast 1/2-way there, invert to slow down, then repeat to get back.

The main character starts with an engine problem or something, can't catch up, then in a burst of inspiration realizes he can use Jupiter's gravity to swing around, at speed.

Everyone at first wonders if there's a problem, then when it happens they realize the brilliance of what happened.

My interpretation is the author had just learned about gravity assist ("first used in 1959 when the Soviet probe Luna 3 photographed the far side of Earth's Moon" says Wikipedia) and structured the entire story around that concept.

The people were secondary to the orientation.

While it's true what you said about almost every famous story, most SF is not made of famous stories.

(I would be grateful if anyone can tell me the name of the story I just summarized.)

<comment><USER34> > anyone can tell me the name of the story

try [https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/story- ident...](https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/story- identification)

<comment><USER33> Sweet! I recognized two of the stories on the first page, and see they have been answered correctly. Thanks!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> Interesting article, but doesn't this come back to the age-old question of whether you can divorce a person from their art?

Isaac Asimov, Michael Jackson, Roman Polanski - can you enjoy their work knowing what you know about the creator?

<comment><USER36> I personally can, maybe that says something about my moral code, maybe not. Orson Scott Card's works are some of my favorite books to read, and it puzzles me how he was able to write a book like Speaker for the Dead while holding the xenophobic and racist views he did. Mel Gibson also holds some pretty reprehensible views, however that doesn't stop me from watching the Lethal Weapon films.

Contextualizing works of art is important in some cases, and moreso if the art is political. In cases where author bias either isn't present or doesn't matter, however, I don't think it matters.

<comment><USER37> I think the point about Card is particularly interesting. Card's writing can be terrific, and in particular some of it is terrific because of the nuanced way it questions religious orthodoxy and/or the role of religion in society. As an anti-religionist, I greatly appreciate how Card's writing has both acknowledged my concerns and also raised counterpoints. It is indeed hard to reconcile that with what we have heard about his personal positions. Good on him, I guess.

I note that he's not the only Mormon SF writer I've thought that about, though the other one that comes to mind has evolved his public politics over the last decade. But making that connection ("Mormon SF writer") may be an invalid cognitive bias.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> I find it hard to believe that such behavior was socially acceptable; I mean was there really no way at the time to complain about advances like this? I mean I was born in 1970 but that was never part of my experience.

<comment><USER39> I expect one could complain and it seems apparent at least some did, but in the context of the environment it would have seemed out of place, it's very hard to apply contemporary moral values to historical times, morality is not a fixed thing, our lives are entwined with social convention that for the most part is invisible until viewed from the future. Try and consider now, what things we do that in the future could be seen as abhorrent, it's hard, eating meat maybe, not including externalized costs in commercial endeavours, but, history shows, it's probably true that something we do now will fall 'out of time' and be viewed as a moral deviation in the 'new contemporary'.

<comment><USER11> FWIW I don't think Asimov's behavior would have been broadly accepted in "historic times" in general. If you think that groping another man's wife in public has generally been acceptable in the past, see "thou shalt not covet" and the Sermon on the Mount. Of course men, especially powerful men, have often ignored such restraints, but the sexual revolution of the 20th century gave them a lot more license.

<comment><USER39> That's not my point, my point is about the agency any particular individual has in any particular situation to take action against something they find offensive needs to be taken in the context of that time. Without that context, 'offensive' is hard to define.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER40> The real dilema though is everyone has done something wrong. Everyone.

So why do some people get called out and lambasted while other continue (right now) to get away with it?

I think there is a mob mentality out there that controls the media and wants to take down a very specific set of people and leave the others standing.

Edit: To not be misunderstood I have personally suffered molestation as a kid/teen, and even the single photo of Asimov trying to kiss that girl is sickening. Power, fame and narcissism corrupts.

<comment><USER41> That's not how this works. That's not how any of this works.

If you see someone doing something wrong, call them out. Like this article does. Otherwise they will simply keep doing it.

If you have a problem with someone not getting called out, call them out. Otherwise you are simply protesting the act of calling out because you're afraid to do so yourself.

<comment><USER40> Mob justice benefits no one in the long run. Hypocritical mob justice is the worst of it's kind.

It simultaneously enrages one side against another while claiming it's actions are justified by it's own group, but no other group can act the same.

The accused should be taken to court.

But mobs don't like court, they want a lynching.

<comment><USER42> How on earth would you take a dead man to court?

And how do you take someone to court for "being an asshole"? If you knew someone who is constantly doing extremely shady things, like screwing over their business partners or repeatedly cheating on their spouses, there's no way to "take someone to court" on those counts. Does that mean their shady dealings should never be exposed?

<comment><USER40> How do you get justice by accusing those that can't respond?

True justice requires a defence, even if you don't like it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER43> He _was_ a product of his time. For all his intellect, cultural imprinting resides at a deeper level, and is hardest to shake.

<comment><USER43> OK, I'll clarify. His _attitude_ was a product of the time. I love that his fiction had strong female protagonists, but his everyday attitude toward women is typical of the era.

Mad Men illustrated this very well (slight spoiler: especially consider what happened to Peggy, by Pete, early in the series..). Women were expected to take a _lot_ 'on the chin'. After all, guys will be guys, right?

If others raised eyebrows about his behavior, it was only because it was more risqué than normal, but _not_ out of any consideration for the victims.

<comment><USER11> His female protagonists were mostly sex objects. The only exceptions I can think of are Susan Calvin (who is portrayed as hardly a woman at all) and Arkady (too young, just).

<comment><USER43> Wanda? Bliss? Bayta?

<comment><USER11> I haven't read "Forward The Foundation" so I don't know about Wanda.

Bayta was reasonable, I'll give him that.

Bliss was embarrassing. Sexy goddess implausibly falls for elderly academic man ... can you say "authorial wish fulfillment"?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER44> very little of a writer survives with time; asimov had interesting world building but his characters are a little flat. the surviving great works of literature deal with human beings rather than the world they find themselves in. there is also the problem today of new authors breaking through and having to compete with a giant cannon of golden age sci fi or fantasy, and it can be overwhelming. if you read genre fiction, you could continue to do so for another 20 years and never leave the 20th century. there is a similar problem in literature, but there you get a lot more adventurous readers and experimental writers so novelty is sought out.

the general problem is a massive bloat of amassed and received works. record keeping is almost exhaustive so new books, movies, shows and songs just keep piling up, and the immensity of choices is overwhelming. i wonder how many people are subscribed to dozens of channels on youtube but just never find the time to catch up with more than 2 or 3 videos a day, and their backlog just keep growing and growing.... overcommunication and data creep. i can see a near future where the virtual you goes off and tests entertainment products then comes back and offers recommendations. in a primitive way this is already happening it's just past-you helping make selections for present-you.

it reminds me towards the end of the middle ages, when chroniclers amassed hundreds of manuscripts and began creating world history by condensing it down into something readable and understandable. maybe the essence of the age we live in is that of the neo-chronicler, tools that will reconnect people with the passage of time.

</comment><comment><USER45> Dupe of [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21989855](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21989855) from yesterday (where there was 0 interaction with the subject)

<comment><USER46> This happens all the time. It's usual to link to the old post when it had a lot of attention. (The thresholds is not clear. 20 upvotes? 20 comments? 20 upvotes + comments? 40? ...)

An exception is when the older post has a very good comment. And in those cases I sometimes quote the comment partially.

More (less?) details in: [https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html](https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html)

</comment></comment><comment><USER47> Asimov is on record as saying he didn't help new writers because he wasn't good at it. If the claim is that his behavior cost the speculative fiction world many young women writers, who exactly are the young men who were gained?

<comment><USER48> The article doesn't claim that the harm to women was just from lack of mentorship. It states that Asimov's (repulsive) behavior made the sci-fi community inhospitable for women, particularly given his unique position as an incredibly popular author.

From the article:

> From an early age, Asimov was drawn to the communal aspects of fan culture, > but he made it more difficult for women to experience that sense of > community. Women have long occupied an ambiguous place in science fiction, > where they have been alternately welcomed, dismissed, and harassed. Asimov > took advantage of what he called the rising percentage of "shrill young > girls" at conventions in the 1960s, and his unique position at such > events—he was invariably the center of attention—made his example especially > insidious. His admirers looked to him as a model of how to behave, and > fandom was complicit for years in his serial misconduct in ways that have > never been fully acknowledged.

> Asimov has always meant a lot to me, and the best qualities of his work—his > rationality, curiosity, and imagination—changed thousands of lives for the > better. Yet the visible edifice of his hundreds of books needs to be > balanced against the unseen wall that he built around the heart of science > fiction. His actions had a negative impact on an untold number of women > [...]

<comment><USER49> > From an early age, Asimov was drawn to the communal aspects of fan culture, > but he made it more difficult for women to experience that sense of > community. Women have long occupied an ambiguous place in science fiction, > where they have been alternately welcomed, dismissed, and harassed...

There's a common refrain heard recently regarding basically any historically male dominated domain, that women are not welcomed or encouraged. This is unfortunately all-too-common in software engineering. As a male software engineer, I feel as though no-one is welcomed or encouraged. I feel as though women are reacting to industries that have always been harsh and unwelcoming and feeling uniquely victimised.

<comment><USER50> > _As a male software engineer, I feel as though no-one is welcomed or > encouraged. I feel as though women are reacting to industries that have > always been harsh and unwelcoming and feeling uniquely victimised._

Have you ever had someone grab your ass or try to kiss you without consent in a professional context? Ever had a corporate officer seem interested in hiring you, call you in for an interview, ask you on a date, and then decide not to hire you when you rejected them? Ever been told on the first day by a new boss about their open relationship with their spouse, and their search for new sexual partners? Ever had a coworker make an overtly sexist joke about your gender to your face? Ever been propositioned for sex by a stranger at a conference? Ever heard a friend explain that "I would never work for a woman boss. No offense, you're not like most women." Ever been denied a new job or a promotion because the decision-maker thought you might have a child within the next few years? Ever been the clear expert or authority in a meeting with multiple people and been repeatedly interrupted by someone asking the clueless novice next to you to explain what you were just trying to say? Ever had a novice badly try to explain the content of your own book to you, even after you mentioned you were the author? Ever gone to speak at an event and had someone ask you which speaker was your spouse? Etc. etc. ad nauseam.

If none of the above, then you probably are misunderstanding what people say when they claim to feel frequently unwelcome.

<comment><USER51> > Have you ever had someone grab your ass or try to kiss you without consent?

Yes

Someone has grabbed my cock without my consent as well.

> Ever been denied a new job or a promotion because the decision-maker thought > you might have a child within the next few years?

Yes

<comment><USER50> > _Someone has grabbed my cock without my consent as well._

In a professional context? Yeesh. Sorry to hear that (whatever the context). Sexual harassment/assault of anyone anywhere should be unacceptable.

I'm not asking whether this has ever happened to any man ever though. I'm asking if _the specific guy_ claiming that nobody of any description feels welcome in the tech industry (and that women who claim that there is specific gender discrimination are just imagining things) has had any of those kinds of experiences.

As a man, I have had conversations about this topic with various male and female friends in the tech industry over the years, and anecdotally few if any of the men ever experience gender discrimination or sexual harassment in professional contexts while essentially all of the women do at least occasionally (some regularly).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Is my memory failing me, but I seem to recall in one of the Foundation books one of the female characters is interrogated and assaulted during the interrogation, but she just shrugs it off.

It seriously disturbed me when I read it.

<comment><USER41> Also in the Foundation books: Sex as a weapon (for men), sex as a reward (for men), sex as payment by the (suddenly irresistible) main character to get concessions out of an amazon politician.

</comment></comment><comment><USER52> An aside about the article's author. His blog is very interesting and full of fantastic articles that will delight a science fiction fan, especially for those who like their SF combined with "high" literature. He writes thoughtfully also on the craft of being an SF writer, showing discipline and care. Given all of that, I was really looking forward to read his first novel. Well, I wish I hadn't done it. It was terrible in almost every aspect: Pace, dialogue, characters, plot, and prose. It goes to show for the n-th time that to theorize about a topic is a very different skill that to practice it well.

<comment><USER53> Often theorizing about something makes it much harder to do it, because you get bogged down by constantly thinking about how bad what you're doing is.

</comment></comment><comment><USER54> isn't slap in the face an appropriate response to a unwanted ass grab? Sex is everywhere, and each person have their own approach to sex. This is too deep in the rabbit hole for me, collecting opinions of opinions of opinions

<comment><USER17> So imagine this scenario: A big fat guy with a creepy smile follows you around and grabs your ass. What would be an appropriate response?

</comment></comment><comment> ur-whale I find it very bizarre that the building of the great wall of China seems to be considered by the author an achievement.

I'm rather confident that the folks involved in the actual piling of stones and likely forced to do so at sword point would have begged to differ.

Also, building border walls is apparently an unfashionable endeavor these days, I'm not sure why one built a 1000 years ago should be treated different.

<comment><USER55> The author of the linked piece doesn't really ascribe any moral value to the Great Wall that I can see. Something can be monumental without being good.

Borges certainly doesn't describe the building of the Wall as a good thing:

> Herbert Allen Giles relates that those who concealed books were branded by a > red-hot iron and condemned to build the outrageous wall until the day of > their death. This information favors or tolerates another interpretation. > Perhaps the wall was a metaphor, maybe Shih Huang Ti condemned those who > worshipped the past to a work just as vast as the past, as stupid and > useless.

Borges isn't comparing a good act and an evil one. He's comparing a great creation with a great destruction -- the building of an enduring historical artifact with the destruction of recorded history.

<comment><USER56> > Borges isn't comparing a good act and an evil one.

He is a bit -- at the end of the article there is a suggestion that they two acts cancel each other out, and we can agree that the burning of books is an evil one.

<comment><USER55> That doesn't mean they cancel each other out as acts of good and evil, though. They cancel each other out as acts of historical creation and destruction.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> IMHO, Asimov was a terrible writer of fiction. (I haven't read his non- fiction.) Some interesting ideas, but nothing like the imagination of, say, China Miéville. Terribly thin characters and plots, and very mediocre writing.

He had the good fortune to get into sci-fi near the beginning and crank out a lot of readable material, and get some good ideas out there first. The rest is confirmation bias. Had he appeared 30 years later he would have been writing Star Trek or Star Wars novels.

I've got nothing against classics per se. "Dune" for example is still very good. But some classics were only considered great because they broke new ground, and they do not stand the test of time.

</comment><comment><USER57> Sigh, in Summary: The reason why most women dont write nor like science fiction is because of Asimov's behavior.

What a joke, Even if the article has plenty of valid points (unsourced of course), the above insinuation makes the whole article untrustworthy.

<comment><USER58> I don't see that insinuation in the article. It says he was part of a bad tone and that his actions had a negative impact on an untold number of women, but that's a far cry from what you said above.</comment></comment>


How to create a website banner with the GIMP (a beginner tutorial) - <AUTHOR> http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com/articles/make_banner_gimp

<comment><AUTHOR> I have several websites in mind that I would like to start working on, but one of my issues is that I don't really have any graphic design chops. I have opened the GIMP a few times, only to run away in horror.

In my attempts to come up with a banner for a future blog, I came across the submitted tutorial. It is a straightforward, useful introduction to the GIMP for someone who has never used it. Hopefully it can get you over that initial design hump and help you get to work on those personal websites you've been putting off.</comment>


Show HN: Stop Covid-19 by taking your temperature - <AUTHOR> https://www.takeyourtemp.org/ <comment><USER2> I really want to call upon any engineers/managers at Apple/Google/Garmin/Fitbit: please start working on body temperature monitoring. It doesn't have to be a realtime readout like a heart monitor, but something that could work overnight to find an average. This could stop entire pandemics.

<comment><USER3> Kinsa is doing a lot of this already. Check [https://healthweather.us/](https://healthweather.us/) for their published maps.

<comment><USER4> So what's going on with Florida?

<comment><USER3> Really good question. One hypothesis is that they're massively under-testing, but there's not a lot of data to support that. If you look at [https://covidtracking.com/data/](https://covidtracking.com/data/) for example, you see a positivity ratio of about 9% for FL, compared with 86% (!!!) for NJ, where it is really clear that the situation is dire but we're not seeing it because of lack of testing.

The other one to watch is Michigan. There the "data quality grade" from covidtracking is a D.

<comment><USER5> I think Iceland pop 300,000 tested everyone. The result is 50% of the cases are asymptomatic. That's terrible in two ways, one is potentially it's spreading undetected. And two natural herd immunity comes at an enormous cost.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> The usefulness instantly clicked when I saw this - awesome work, and I wish it were government promoted.

I'm no good at writing copy, but I'd work on the homepage's phrasing. Link to [https://healthweather.us/](https://healthweather.us/) as well as the NYT article on them, rather than making a reference to Maddow elsewhere (it'd be dumb for someone to be turned away by that, but someone will be.) Explain that CDC data lags three weeks behind historically, and point out all the counties without data. Say all this on the front page, and run A/B tests once you have enough visitors.

Again, great work!

</comment><comment><USER7> May I ask how is any of the data you collect of any use if there is zero verification that said data is from actual people with symptoms?

I was just able to enter a US Zip code and normal temperature 98.6 without any verification. The site doesn't even check for location. I was able to enter data for a "US citizen" from Europe. Then clear cookies and do it again.

Verification of data is a huge thing if you want to make any kind of decision based on that data.

<comment><USER8> [https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.19.20038844v...](https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.19.20038844v1)

[https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/1/2/e000234](https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/1/2/e000234)

[https://www.bmj.com/content/351/bmj.h3480.full](https://www.bmj.com/content/351/bmj.h3480.full)

<comment><USER7> Ok cool, you give me three links.

The first one says

This article is a preprint and has not been certified by peer review [what does this mean?]. It reports new medical research that has yet to be evaluated and so should not be used to guide clinical practice.

The second one has a sample size of less than thousand people and concludes "Self-diagnosis does not accurately predict influenza seropositivity"

The third one is the only one that has a good set of data in terms of sample size ( 50+ Million ) but concludes "Symptom checkers had deficits in both triage and diagnosis" and that said I have no idea if those websites need some kind of verification as well, so if not someone who's bored could have just added bogus data to that as well.

I am not sure what's your point.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Is anosmia worth including in the symptoms options?

<comment><USER9> In case anyone's interested - [https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/22/health/coronavirus- sympto...](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/22/health/coronavirus-symptoms- smell-taste.html)

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> > contributing to the most important crowdsourcing operation in US history.

Why is this US centric?

<comment><USER11> Because presumably they are working with US health officials.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> I'm curious about something: Is fever is a symptom that would appear without someone noticing it? Wouldn't other symptoms like chills/coughing manifest first?

<comment><USER13> People often don't know they have a fever. Not necessarily because they feel well, but because they fail to identify their ill feeling as "fever". I've had tons of patients deny fever, endorse fever symptoms, and then have a fever on thermometer.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> Will this track individual's symptom progression over time? e.g. if I submit everyday as suggested, are these uncorrelated datapoints, or do you get trend info?

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes, we get trend info. We're storing a cookie in your browser with a UUID that is associated to your temperature reading. If you submit temperatures for multiple people in your household, they all get that UUID, which we assume to be a household identifier.

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Carson here, site developer. Thank you for the positive response so far, but also feel free to leave us constructive criticism. If you want to contribute to this effort, the GitHub is [https://github.com/carsonbaker/takeyourtemp](https://github.com/carsonbaker/takeyourtemp). We're working on it with frenetic energy.

<comment><USER15> Celsius would be good. It'd save me a manual conversion. And 98.6 is just a conversion from 37C anyway that ignored the rules of significant figures...

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Make the data public like [https://covidstudy.com](https://covidstudy.com)

<comment><AUTHOR> We might. There's some worry that e.g. showing a heat map of the data might be alarming, so we're trying to figure out where the balance is between transparency and cautiousness.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> I would love to, but I don't have a thermometer and the stores are all sold out :(

<comment><USER5> My GF and I have a single thermometer that is over 20 years old. It seems to still work but still.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> Just keep in mind that fever plus flu like symptoms is probably the flu!

</comment><comment><USER18> wont let me enter my temp

<comment><AUTHOR> You might be on Firefox. I just fixed this!

<comment><USER19> Still broken on FF :(

<comment><AUTHOR> Sorry! Try again.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> I had an idea, that one way to eliminate this COVID-19 coronavirus, as well as the H1N1 influenza virus from civilization, is to shut down all human movement for 30 to 60 days.

You have to go 2 or 3 weeks, without any new reported infections to be sure.

This would require that all the countries and governments of the world, act in unison, to ensure that all 7 billion people are tracked, and monitored.

But the reality is, good luck, as this will never happen. The economic cost is too high, but the alternative, is that the COVID-19 virus will hunt down the human race.</comment>


Poll finds 90% of Native Americans not offended by "Redskins" team name - <AUTHOR> https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/new-poll-finds-9-in-10-native-americans-arent-offended-by-redskins-name/2016/05/18/3ea11cfa-161a-11e6-924d-838753295f9a_story.html?tid=a_inl <comment><USER2> The poll choice was either "do you find the name offensive, or doesn't it bother you?".

There are many reasons people may want something to change. I want more dedicated cycling paths. That doesn't mean that streets offend me.

I can imagine that people will not agree to being described as "offended" because it carries with it a sense of hypersensitivity or egoism. Here's a 1982 Bloom County cartoon poking fun at people who are offended - [http://www.gocomics.com/bloomcounty/1982/11/14/](http://www.gocomics.com/bloomcounty/1982/11/14/) .

Why couldn't the question be "do you want the Washington Redskins to change their name?", rather than require an emotional reason for the change?

Also, you should not place weight in the statement: "What makes those attitudes more striking: The general public appears to object more strongly to the name than Indians do."

The ESPN poll asked the question "should the Redskins change their team name, or not?" Which is the question the WaPo would have to ask in order to compare the results of the two polls.

<comment><AUTHOR> Definitely agree that it's not apples to apples to compare the two poll results. It would also be interesting to see what Native Americans say about whether they would like the name to be changed.

But the legal question at issue is perhaps more closely aligned with the poll question that was asked. That is, the USPTO doesn't strictly care whether people want the name changed—they only care about whether it is offensive to people. Either way, of course, this is a very fuzzy test, and likely to leave someone upset at the end of the day

<comment><USER2> As I understand it, the complaint isn't that the term is "offensive", but that it's "disparaging". Here's the USPTO decision for "Washington Redskins Potatoes" (quoting [https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20140319/11225326627/uspto...](https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20140319/11225326627/uspto- again-redskin-cant-be-trademarked-because-its-horribly-racist-term.shtml) ):

> "Registration is refused because the applied-for mark includes matter which > may disparage or bring into contempt or disrepute persons, institutions, > beliefs, or national symbols," the decision, handed down on March 17, says. > It concludes: "Given that "REDSKIN" in the mark is a derogatory slang term > that refers to, and is considered offensive by, American Indians, > registration of the applied-for mark must be refused" under the Trademark > Act, a 1946 law that prohibits the trademarking of offensive or derogatory > terms. The examining attorney's decision cites dictionary definitions of the > word "Redskins" that say it is "usually offensive" or "offensive slang," and > it also notes that groups like the National Congress of American Indians and > the Oneida Indian Nation regard the word as a disparaging slur.

To my limited understanding, it appears that if the term "Viking" were a disparaging term, with a long history of being used that way, then the Minnesota Vikings could not trademark their name, even though the Norse are long dead, so cannot be offended.

<comment><AUTHOR> You raise an interesting philosophical/linguistic question about the nature of "offensive." Certainly one has to exist to be offended, but I'm not 100% sure that means that something cannot be "offensive" if there is no one to be offended. For example, if you make a crude remark about a baby, or someone who does not understand your language, have you not said something that is "offensive"? Academics could argue about this (in peer-reviewed journals) for years.

Regardless, you're absolutely right that the Vikings should have been listed also—can't believe I missed that one!

<comment><USER2> Well, I was hoping to point out that "offensive" wasn't relevant. The trademark question is based on "disparaging", not "offensive".

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> Oh, but that 10%! Seriously guys, it's 2016--can we please respect people's ethnicity. The Cleveland Indians and the Washington Redskins should change their names already!

<comment><AUTHOR> Don't forget about the Atlanta Braves, KC Chiefs, Chicago Blackhawks, Golden State Warriors, and Boston Celtics!</comment></comment>


Seven "Corporations of Interest" in Selling Surveillance Tools to China - <AUTHOR> http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2010/01/selling-china-surveillance

<comment><USER2> I wonder when these traitors are put against the wall, probably never, the American corporations are the ones that gave china all these suppressing tools, but worse, they gave the vibrant economy to buy all these things while most of us warned against that, but no "When their economy is good then democracy will follow". We see now what is really happening, but probably nobody will learn from this.</comment>


Want to live forever? Leave it to Google. - <AUTHOR> http://blog.bitmakerlabs.com/2013/09/26/want-to-live-forever-leave-it-to-google/

<comment><USER2> I can't help but think that a future -- where those in power are not replaced -- is going to present huge negative effects for society.

It's my belief that we've dramatically slowed natural human evolution through the development of medical science, increased community populations, altruism, etc., for better or worse. I'm absolutely no social darwinist, but this has the potential to completely halt our evolution. Will the only option be genetic engineering (like this) and/or transhumanism?</comment>


Apple Alters Maps and Weather to Show Crimea as a Russian Territory - <AUTHOR> https://www.theverge.com/2019/11/27/20985762/apple-maps-weather-apps-crimea-russia-territory <comment><USER2> [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21648633](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21648633)</comment>


China wins space race to launch world's first 'quantum communication' satellite - <AUTHOR> http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/china-wins-space-race-launch-8043085 <comment><USER2> This looks interesting, but the title is misleading. First, they will launch the satellite in July, and after that they still have to test and prove that it works as intended. So they haven't won yet ...

Another detail is that I guess that this is only an experimental device to test the design and do some research, not something that can be applied (for example by spies or banks). Does anyone have a link with more technical details?</comment>


Important database news from the last few months - <AUTHOR> https://winand.at/newsletter/2018-07/sql-over-the-cloud-fsyncgate <comment><USER2> Anyone know a really good SQL book or tutorial? Every book I've ever bought is usually way too simple. I'll flip to the "advanced" section thinking I'll finally learn some tricks only to see the "advance" section just introduces the join syntax...

I'd like a good book that goes over queries common in reporting, you know a 3 page sql query that joins to sub queries that themselves are joining to sub queries. You know, the good stuff!

<comment><USER3> If you are looking for something advanced, you should check books written by C. J. Date. For example, his "An Introduction to Database Systems" considered as one of the best book on database theory.

<comment><USER4> _Theory_.

However he insists on living in his relational purist fantasy land without nulls or outer joins or other pragmatic things that people who use databases to get real work done rely on every day.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I recently bought the author's book to brush some cobwebs off parts of my SQLing. Over the years I've seen Markus's blog posts and guides posted here on HN. I'm always impressed when I see an individual focus on a topic and build an identity / business like this. Thanks for all the blog posts, Markus!

</comment><comment><USER6> SQL is by no means perfect. For one, t̶h̶e̶r̶e̶'̶s̶ ̶n̶o̶ ̶o̶f̶f̶i̶c̶i̶a̶l̶ ̶s̶p̶e̶c̶i̶f̶i̶c̶a̶t̶i̶o̶n̶: some dialects are meaningfully different than others, and even similar ones are often full of implementation details about the underlying database. It has a ton of quirks, and isn't as powerful as I'd always want it to be. And sometimes it can be really hard to read.

But I still haven't found a better universal "language" to talk about extracting and manipulating data. The core set of functionality of SQL (selects, joins, aggregations) is usually adequate to express powerful ideas. Most importantly, a lot of people who work with data know it, and I've found semi-technical people (including non-programmers) can learn it quickly. Anyone who has been paying attention to trends in the data world in the last 5 years knows SQL is here to stay for the long-term.

<comment><USER7> As for myself, I wish SQL's SELECT were more expressive. It's currently organized almost exactly like a mirror of the underlying relational algebra operators that a query engine has to execute internally.

But relational operators isn't what developers like to work with. SQL is about "projecting" relations, putting them through some basic transforms, none of which compose that well because of SQL's statement-oriented syntax. For example, you can't group a group-by. A group-by takes a list of terms, but you can't funnel the output through another one without wrapping the whole query in a "SELECT FROM (...) AS ...".

I'd like a query language that more expressive, expression-based syntax where the results of each expression can be "piped" into the next step to perform transformations, joins, reductions and so on.

<comment><AUTHOR> SQL uses nesting as you have shown instead of a "pipe" (think of it like functional programming).

The difference is just the syntax, not the expressiveness.

<comment><USER7> Well, I am explicitly talking about syntax.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Finally, an open source SQL database with history for data builtin: [https://mariadb.com/kb/en/library/system-versioned- tables/](https://mariadb.com/kb/en/library/system-versioned-tables/)

Always wondered why this feature has been ignored for so long.

<comment><USER9> Thanks for pointing that out! They appear to only support one of the two time models proposed by the research community. They support transaction time (when you write it), but not the interesting and useful 'valid time'. The difference can be explained as you are going to be paid a salary for working say from July 1, 2018 to June 30, 2019 (this is valid time), but we write the information into the db at a different time, say we write it on June 15 (this is transaction time), then we realize a mistake and update your salary record on June 20th. But your employment starts July 1.

<comment><AUTHOR> Just FYI: The SQL standard supports both types. The other one (valid time) is called "application versioning" in SQL.

Read this paper if you'd like to learn more about it: [http://cs.ulb.ac.be/public/_media/teaching/infoh415/tempfeat...](http://cs.ulb.ac.be/public/_media/teaching/infoh415/tempfeaturessql2011.pdf)

<comment><USER9> Cool I hadn't heard about that.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> It would be interesting to see a "new and noteworthy" section in these types of news recaps. There's always a lot of hype around new databases, and it'd be nice to see an unbiased perspective from someone with such deep knowledge of database systems, similar to Aphyr's deep dives into consistency and durability.

This seems focused on only SQL systems, and only the largest ones, which is okay, but I think there's a lot more to the story than that :)

<comment><USER11> If you are into global consistency but also want NoSQL flexibility, my employer FaunaDB has ACID transactions, joins, indexes, and object level access control.

<comment><USER7> I'm sure you guys are doing good business, but the only way we'd use FaunaDB is if it's open-sourced.

I suspect you'll have a hard time competing against Google Spanner (or even Google Cloud Datastore).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> From a _developer's_ point of view, I absolutely hate SQL. Converting my data from and to row format is a pain. Transactions don't really tie well with the rest of my application logic. And of course embedding multiline SQL statements in my code looks like monstrosity.

<comment><USER13> Why do you put SQL statements in the "core"? Just put them behind and interface and call it a day.

SQL and relational data is the only option, unless someone comes up with an equally powerful alternative with similar theoretical underpinnings.

<comment><USER12> Sorry, it was a autocorrect shenanigans. s/core/code

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Is this the final nail in the coffin for the NoSQL hype?

Although I'm not sure the road back to sanity is to add SQL interfaces to non- relational database systems. SQL and the relational model are often conflated, both in the NoSQL hype and apparently also in the backlash. I like things like LINQ in .net which allows you to work with a relational model and use relational algebra without having to use the SQL language

<comment><USER15> I am personally playing a bit with Apache Calcite - SQL without the data storage - and it sounds very interesting. For most reporting jobs, a couple of SQL queries are all that s needed and are easy to read and easy to write, even if you are actually querying some in-memory structures.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> "According to the "shoot the messenger" principle, PostgreSQL has been heavily criticized for fsyncgate. Indeed, PostgreSQL suffers from this problem more than other databases as it doesn't offer direct IO."

Not a problem on any illumos based operating system, as fsync(2) and ZFS do what they're supposed to do and do not lie about data being on stable storage when it isn't. PostgreSQL is a good database, and if you want it to be bullet proof, run it on an illumos based operating system.

<comment><USER17> I would dispute the claim that PostgreSQL has been so heavily criticized. Instead, the project was invited to send a representative to the Linux Storage, Filesystem, and Memory-Management Summit ([https://lwn.net/Articles/lsfmm2018/](https://lwn.net/Articles/lsfmm2018/)) to discuss solutions with the kernel development community; some of the resulting kernel changes are finding their way toward the mainline now.

<comment><USER18> Indeed (I was the PG guy at LSF/MM). I didn't feel ill-treated at all. Unless you count attempted poisoning via adult beverages, that is.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Maybe the NOSQL hype is dying down, but it still seems like for caching for fast reads it can be helpful. What do you think?

<comment><USER20> NoSQL is a catch all term. There is a place for key/value, document, graph, etc databases.

People got all excited cause they discovered that these exist. They've been around for a long time.

Relational DBs are a good default, but there are plenty of cases in which you'll use another type of DB.

Engineers need to stop trying to find a silver bullet.

<comment><USER21> They also exist as features within an (otherwise) relational DBMS. Perhaps the trouble is that it's mostly been in the realm of the commercial ones and only relatively recently has Postgres started adopting enough of them to make the notion popular.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> On the database subject, I'm working on a new project called DBacked, basically a simple and encrypted database backups as a service. I'm not ready yet for a Show HN (more things to improve on the presentation website) but happy to get your advices ;)

<comment><USER23> easier if you show us the code

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> "NoSQL" took the idea of a rejection of syntax (SQL) but also, in practice, burned in with it a rejection of vast swathes of database theory that resulted in the modern RDBMSes. It was a meme that was generally easy to ignore and identify the "bad ideas" within if you understood the history of databases. SQL obviously is just an incidental syntactic detail on top of a fairly sound, generalized model for databases -- relational algebra combined with a clear semantic model for transactions (ACID, etc.)

These two things I believe will stand the test of time. Everything else, I think, is ultimately incidental complexity to meet operational goals (like indexing, or caching methods, or sharding, or replication, or denormalization) or conceptually useful models and interfaces (like graphs, or literate APIs, or query langauges, or ORMs, etc) on top of these basic facilities that need to be provided by a database system.

The trend of NoSQL databases I think can be summarized as people building systems that tilted towards letting these bits of incidental complexity dictate the design of the system as a whole. The overriding concern seemed to be "scalability and performance" with "easy APIs" a close second and so that resulted in specific data structure and API needs or access patterns dictating everything about how the database system itself worked, and how data was modeled in that system.

For example, MongoDB was hearalded as finally letting you access a hierarchical data structure without SQL JOINs, but did so not by just providing a nice abstraction on top of a sound relational schema that allowed you to "re-project" your thinking and access patterns to a document-oriented one when it was the right model contextually, but instead by burning that denormalized, document-oriented data structure into the entire conceptual and technical stack for the whole system!

The cost, of course, is self-evident since choosing to reject the relational model also chooses to reject the benefits that were explicitly recognized as a reason for the relational model to be a good choice for database systems: normalized data allows a much more rich set of transformations and projections on that data to be unambiguously expressed and fulfilled by the system. In other words, it's much more future proofed since you now have the flexibility to mix-and-match and analyze it in arbitrary ways, decoupled from your choice of schema. So the effect of choosing MongoDB meant that you had minimal future-proofing if you got your document structure wrong and suddenly needed to re-project your data in a new way. The supported path, of course, was to "just run map reduce on it" \-- ie, lets force every application developer to do the job the database is supposed to do :(

It's nice to see things are moving forward on this again, hopefully the trend doesn't just reverse now and we have a flood of "SQL access" APIs to poorly grounded database systems.

</comment><comment><USER25> > The marketing term NoSQL, which was the hippest buzzword just a few years > back, is slowly becoming a synonym for a defect. Without SQL, there is > something missing.

I guess RDBMS companies are too afraid of NoSQL to attack it with such silly propagandist statements. You can't win the market this way.

To me it increasingly looks like SQL is losing in distributed systems. And NoSQL may never really gain SQL beyond niche usage after all.

<comment><USER26> _To me it increasingly looks like SQL is losing in distributed systems._

I'm seeing the reverse trend. Google went from nosql to sql with cloud spanner. The various flavors of SQL on hadoop are on the uptick. Cockroachdb is looking really interesting.

<comment><USER25> But do you see Spanner, CockroachDB, TiDB actually getting any ground?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> Whew. Those years of enduring "SQL is dead" posts were not easy. Now if we can just rebrand "cloud" to "someone else's computer", much will be right with the world.

<comment><USER28> The conflation of SQL with consistency in this blog post is dumb. Yes Google offers SQL on Spanner but the query execution is built atop lower level Spanner primitives that are also available to developers and are similar to Bigtable concepts. Also Bigtable is still much, much larger and more important within Google than is Spanner/F1, so the death of Bigtable is much overhyped.

Point is there are strong and weak consistency models with and without SQL execution engines, and they're all useful.

<comment><USER29> The SQL standard specifies explicit consistency semantics for statements and transactions, though. So something claiming to adhere to e.g. SQL:2011, is claiming that executing certain commands will have certain consistency properties (and if you've set up your DBMS to have weaker consistency, then it should be blaring a loud alarm that you've effectively put it in a non-SQL- standard-conformant mode.)

Other generic DBMS query protocols _could_ specify their own consistency semantics, but I'm not aware of any that do. (I guess, if you consider REST a "DBMS query protocol", then CouchDB is an example of a DBMS "conforming" to the consistency semantics specified in the REST protocol.)

<comment><USER28> If that's your definition then it's even more dumb to hold up Google Cloud Spanner as an example of how SQL gives you consistency. There's NO WAY to mutate Spanner tables via SQL. All writes are performed via the lower-level RPC interfaces. The only thing you can do with Spanner from SQL is query it. The consistency provided by Spanner is clearly not provided by SQL.

<comment><USER29> Even if a DBMS only exposes read-only SQL support, that still has consistency- model implications—namely that, if you can execute several SQL statements in a transaction with a long delay between those statements, then all the statements in the transaction should execute against the same MVCC "version" of the affected tables.

So a write on that lower-level RPC interface _shouldn 't_, by the SQL spec, be able to cause a sequence of SQL wire messages like this:

        BEGIN

        SELECT COUNT(*) FROM foo;

        -- 100s later
        SELECT COUNT(*) FROM foo;
        COMMIT;

...to return separate numbers for those two SELECTs.

If it could, under Spanner, then Spanner wouldn't be conformant to [the read- only subset] of whatever SQL standard it claims to obey. But, according to the Cloud Spanner docs ([https://cloud.google.com/spanner/docs/transactions#read- only...](https://cloud.google.com/spanner/docs/transactions#read- only_transactions)), the above code _will_ always return the same values for the two queries.

And, if you're feeling argumentative, you could interpret the _reason_ for the particular consistency semantics, as the fact that Cloud Spanner claims to support SQL, and SQL mandates that consistency. You could suppose that, without that claim, Cloud Spanner would never have bothered building a transactional MVCC layer into their architecture.

<comment><USER28> Unfortunately, no. Spanner may garbage collect the snapshot timestamp to which your example query was bound, if the garbage collection policy was triggered by additional writes at greater timestamps, or by the simple passage of time. The result of the second query may be a permanent error indicating that your data has disappeared.

Spanner had a transactional MVCC system in their original implementation described in the 2012 paper which predates SQL support described in the 2017 paper. Therefore it is probably wrong to credit SQL with Spanner's MVCC system.

<comment><USER29> > The result of the second query may be a permanent error indicating that your > data has disappeared.

That's actually okay, per SQL. Any SQL transaction may fail, for any reason, at the server's discretion. Because the user's permission to operate on the table was revoked in the middle of their transaction, for example. Or because the server is going down and wants to drop connections.

SQL clients have to be written to assume that any transaction could enter a failed state "before" the execution of a statement, even if the previous statement returned a success.

Helpfully, though, they know that 1. by the SQL standard, that failure means that no part of the transaction applied; and 2. that this failure-state is a failure of the transaction context to be valid, rather than a failure of their statement to be valid. (They don't know that their statement _is_ valid, but they know that they haven't been told that it isn't.)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> How is realistic this article without a word about FoundationDB?</comment>


Ask HN: Eco-powered server or cloud providers? - <AUTHOR> I'm wondering how many providers out there – cloud, metal, VPS, what-have-you – have a clear focus on powering their offerings with wind, solar, or hydro power. As the climate discussion becomes more urgent, I'm interested in knowing more about the eco-friendly server industry, if it exists. <comment><USER2> AWS has crossed 40% renewable energy, and is on track to hit 50% this year, as per [https://aws.amazon.com/about- aws/sustainability/](https://aws.amazon.com/about-aws/sustainability/)

Google is a bit harder to pin down, as per [https://cloud.google.com/free/docs/what-makes-google- cloud-p...](https://cloud.google.com/free/docs/what-makes-google-cloud- platform-different)

Microsoft makes no comment about Azure specifically, see [https://www.microsoft.com/about/csr/environment/renewable_en...](https://www.microsoft.com/about/csr/environment/renewable_energy/)</comment>


SQLite vs MongoDB - <AUTHOR> http://hammerprinciple.com/databases/items/sqlite/mongodb

<comment><USER2> "This database is good at high concurrency writes" and "this database has very good write performance" strongly favors MongoDB.

This is interesting because MongoDB has taken a lot of flak for their global write lock. Also, updating a MongoDB document can require moving it if it grew too much for it's allocated space, which is another thing that hurts write performance. I guess these things haven't hurt their public perception of their write speed as much as I thought.

<comment><USER3> You have to remember that this is relative to SQLite, which has a global write lock of its own.</comment></comment>


The No Excuse List: The Best Place On The Web To Learn Anything - <AUTHOR> http://www.noexcuselist.com/ <comment><USER2> Hey guys, I'm the creator of the site. Thanks for posting it Joel!

I've been trying to delicately balance the line between too many links versus not enough links. I created this site in the first place because I had seen tons of these "best places to learn online" compilations, but all of them had about 200 links. Way too many to actually be useful.

So I sought out to create something where there were only a few websites per category, but you could trust that they were all the best the web has to offer. As you can see from some of the comments on here, it's a fine line between too many and too few. I keep finding new ones that I think are too good not to include.

I've been thinking lately about how I can make this site more useful to my users. It seems like most people come once or twice, see a link they like and don't come back until the next time they want to learn something. Although you could argue that's basically what the site is designed to do, I would like to see more repeat users. Any ideas? I have a few in mind already, but I wanted to see what the general consensus was.

<comment><AUTHOR> You could pull together different courses and show how they complement each other to create tracts.

Sure, you can just organize them and leave them as they are right now and let people pick what they want, but if you vetted the courses and had suggested tracts to send people through, that could be pretty valuable.

<comment><USER2> This is basically what I was thinking about doing earlier.

"This is actually something I was thinking about. For instance, say someone wants to learn Ruby. They could go to noexcuselist and find a step-by-step process that someone has made using only free resources. Does that sound like something that would be useful? The hard part is, I'd have to expand the site and make it social, so people can post their own guides. I definitely don't have the technical expertise for that."

Is that what you had in mind?

<comment><AUTHOR> I'm thinking of it as a guidebook or as a course, for all the courses out there (if that makes any sense).

So, wow, there are a ton of free resources out there - here's how to aggregate them, and utilize each of them most effectively with all the other free resources out there.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment> saint-loup This is great, and I like the "no excuse" angle, but the list is a little overwhelming. The problem of self-learning today is not to find ressources, it's to find a good one and stick to it until you mastered the subject. If there are several good ones, just pick one of them. On this subject, see The Paradox of choice[1] and Buridan's donkey[2].

Sidenote: For me, "Windows 7, OneNote + more for students" and Dreamspark go to the same link.

[1] <http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6127548813950043200>

[2] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buridan%27s_ass>

<comment><AUTHOR> I thought it could have actually been built out a bit more. If they created a few more categories (and sub-categories), they could really have something very cool on their hands.

<comment><USER3> I've got the same feeling. I'd add categories for education level, accreditation and course length. Having a "starting soon" section would also be fine, listing the courses starting between now and the next two weeks.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> As someone who took up this hobby a couple years ago, I can attest that the collection of cooking links is awful. There's a difference between learning how to cook and a recipe, and these sites aren't even good at either.

I've heard good things about chefhangout.com and rouxbe.com. And sadly most of the best cooking information still exists in printed books. Ruhlman's 20 is a great place to start.

<comment><USER5> I, too, have been really disappointed with cooking education online. This is an area ripe for a good startup (that someone else can do, I have my hands full). :)

Some ideas:

\- Leverage Google Hangout for some interactive classes

\- Use gamification to help users learn some of the more boring fundamentals (basic cooking terms, substitution guidelines, units and measurements, basic baking chemistry guidelines, etc.)

\- A better instruction format geared toward using your iPad or other tablet propped up in the kitchen. For example, make sure the user can navigate with the nub of a knuckle or some other clumsy way, so they don't have to touch their iPad with fingers that just got through tenderizing raw chicken.

\- That instruction format should probably incorporate a hybrid text-audio- video approach. And by that I don't mean a blog post with an embedded video at the top. I mean a way to constantly review just that part of the video that talks about what you're doing.

\- Start with videos about things that are obvious but are useful to see. For example, what EXACTLY should olive oil look and smell like before you add the food to it? On a typical gas stove or electric range, where approximately should the knob be? I'm starting to get nervous about this pan-fry step. Are you sure I shouldn't go ahead and flip the chicken? I think I'm burning it! Those kind of things are currently best learned with the assistance of a REAL cook alongside you in the kitchen. He or she can say "don't you DARE touch that portobello; it's SO not done!" There needs to be a way for the more moment-by-moment learning experiences to be available online.

TL;DR - thinking of doing a cooking startup? PLEASE don't give us another "recipes with an embedded video" site. Please.

<comment><USER4> I think voice would be a better method of navigation in the kitchen. I don't want to touch my tablet at all when cooking, and I'd love to keep my hands free to do other things. I'd rather say "pause" or "continue" or "go back a step" than try swiping when I've got things going.

Chef hangout is pretty much what you described. It's a live video lesson using Google Hangout. I haven't done it but hear good things.

Also I think a lot of what you want is just being taught the basics. Many of those you can pick up just from a video or in some of the simpler cases even a text description. Your oil (preferably canola if you're cooking with it, olive has too low of a smoke point and is better suited for other uses) looks a certain way (sorta shimmery) when it's ready. Once you know that it's pretty much the same for every recipe.

Some a chef would have to be present for. I don't think you can tell by sight when the alcohol has evaporated when cooking with wine, you just have to smell. You can't tell by sight when meat is done or a bean you're blanching is crisp-tender, you have to touch it or bite it.

For that reason I don't think online instruction will ever totally negate offline the way it can in many disciplines. But it definitely can do a lot better than it is.

<comment><USER6> Olive oil is actually excellent for frying. Extra virgin olive oil has a smoking point of 405 deg. F, which is similar to canola.

<comment><USER4> Um, no. There's a lot of misinformation on oil smoke points on the net unfortunately. Going way off topic here for HN, but see <http://whatscookingamerica.net/Q-A/SmokePointOil.htm> for an accurate chart. It's ~320F for EVOO vs ~400F for canola.

That makes a noticeable difference in the kitchen. Using olive oil you'll find yourself overheating more often. It's also more expensive, and imparts a flavor, which you typically don't want in your oil when sauteing or pan frying. If you want that flavor, pour a little high quality olive oil on at the end. I do that with something like a pan seared halibut, it's heavenly.

Thomas Keller mentions in his books (I believe both Ad Hoc and Bouchon) that he uses canola for sauteing and pan frying for exactly those reasons. (Grapeseed oil is great, he mentions, but very expensive. Peanut oil is typically used for deep frying.) He's probably the most technical of the chefs with numerous Michelin-starred restaurants so I'm inclined to take his advice.

<comment><USER7> From the same chart:

Extra Light (Olive Oil) - 468°F

Maybe that's what GP was referring to. I would put the oils with higher smoke points in the chart closer to exotic territory (avocado, ghee, rice bran, tea seed). I buy my Extra Light OO in jugs at Costco.

Short takeaway: I use EVOO for dressing/cold applications, Extra Light for frying.

<comment><USER4> Extra light olive oil is garbage. One should not use it for anything. It is "a mixture of refined olive oils that are derived from the lowest quality olive oils available through chemical processing."

Do yourself a favor and buy jugs of canola instead. (Really you should buy small batches, as oil does degrade over time, but it's arguably worth the cost tradeoff.)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Memrise (under the languages section) is pretty amazing. Or, at least seems amazing from 15 minutes of going through the Chinese stuff. I hate memorizing things, but the interface and visual cues for learning characters, and way they track your progress actually makes the process enjoyable for me.

So far, at least.

As with all these tools, you could teach yourself this stuff before, it'd just require more work and discipline for you to find the necessary books and make your own teaching plan. The advantage of these services is that they lower the friction to learn. Hopefully they reduce the friction enough so that there is a much higher ratio of enjoyment/reward to effort, making you more likely to stick with it. But you still have to stick with it to learn anything.

Here's hoping I will.

<comment><USER9> Check out skritter.com for learning Chinese. These guys are incredible.

<comment><USER10> Seconding Skritter, they're amazing. I'd also like to add that they support Japanese kanji as well, and that their iOS apps are brilliant. The Chinese iOS app is out, and the Japanese one is in beta. I own a Wacom tablet that works great with the website, but more and more I find myself using the mobile app because it feels even more natural than writing with a pen, and I can do it anywhere.

<comment><USER11> Skritter seems pretty sweet, but has no love for Cantonese; it supports traditional characters (so they're most of the way there), but the tone selection is mandarin-only and they only display pinyin and not some cantonese phoneticization like jyutping.

Pretty slick, though.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> This is a nice comprehensive list, but I think sites that focus on aggregation need to step it up beyond a simple text-listing. There needs to be some other metric/gauge beyond just the title of the course. It could even be as simple as icon(s) for whether the resource is a text-based site, available as an e-book, or taught mostly through videos. Or: a complexity level (beginner/intermediate/expert)...Or hell, just a 15 word summary of why you included the link.

It's tough to design good taxonomies of course, but resources like this would greatly benefit from _anything_ that would keep someone from having to click- through each link to discover the usefulness of each resource.

Not trying to sound ungrateful, but a lot of these link-sites come up on HN (there are several based on just programming books, for instance)...It'd be great to see such things evolve into something more.

<comment><USER2> Thanks for the suggestions. I agree with you on all of those points. I think for the next version, it would be great to have icons and more of a description.

As of right now, if you hover over the link, it'll explain what the website is focused on and what it generally covers.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> A couple of good sites for this, that list not just the source website, but the actual courses themselves:

<http://www.openculture.com/freeonlinecourses>

<http://www.class-central.com/>

</comment><comment><USER14> When in doubt, there's always Reddit to crowd-source this kind of thing - [http://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/tmtd4/what_are_th...](http://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/tmtd4/what_are_the_most_intellectually_stimulating/c4o3csl)

<comment><USER15> Don't forget the continued discussion on HN - <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4240007>

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> Programming ebooks: <http://hackershelf.com> <http://freecomputerbooks.com>

Video Lectures: <https://www.coursera.org> <http://www.udacity.com> <http://www.academicearth.org/> <http://www.learnerstv.com> <http://lecturefox.com> <http://thecodeplayer.com> <http://www.cosmolearning.com> <http://www.class-central.com> <http://videolectures.net>

</comment><comment><USER17> Some good links, but something like this really needs search and filtering, and some sort of category overview - as it is, on most monitors you need to scroll to even see all the main categories...

</comment><comment><USER18> The description of the arXiv is a little off, it says "Cornell's library of published academic research papers", while really the arXiv is mainly for preprints, i.e., papers that have not yet been published. It is true, however, that in some fields it is common for journals to let you keep a (non-final) version of your paper on the arXiv.

<comment><USER2> Thanks. I will update.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> From those that have taken them, which of the coursera/udacity/EdX courses are really really good? I go to the sites, get excited and register for everything but I know focus would mean I'd stick with them.

<comment><USER20> 6.002x is an amazing course (it's the only EdX course that has run so far, but they have a great platform).

The Udacity courses are generally slightly easier (e.g. they avoid the low- level details of the maths), but I really enjoyed CS373 (Programming a Robotic Car) and CS212 (Design of Computer Programs).

The Coursera courses are a little hit and miss in terms of quality, but Quantum Computing and Design and Analysis of Algorithms are both very good.

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> What about Code School (<http://www.codeschool.com>)? I'm pretty sure that it's a well known place to learn programming, etc.

<comment><USER22> I think he didn't include it because there is a (monthly) fee on this one. But some courses are free and I agree, I definitely endorse this one to be on the lilst. I am one of those learn-by-doing people and codeschool is just great. Like codecademy on steroids.

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> You need feedback on whether you are doing well or not. That's the other part of on-line education that is missing.

</comment><comment><USER24> Cool site, simple and with great links

</comment><comment><USER25> I would also like to add <http://net.tutsplus.com> <http://www.djangobook.com> <http://www.w3schools.com> <http://www.stackoverflow.com>

<comment><USER26> you had me until w3schools ... see <http://w3fools.com/>

<comment><USER22> Yea, came to say the same. Change that link to w3schools for the good one: <https://developer-new.mozilla.org/en-US/>

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> This reminds me of dmoz, centered on learning and without external suggestions.

</comment><comment><USER28> I love the simplicity of this site. The site is very precise and easy to use.

</comment><comment><USER29> strobist.com for photography

<comment><USER19> <http://cambridgeincolour.com> for photography too. Particularly excellent guide on all the related concepts.

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> Good one

</comment><comment><USER31> Include Treehouse

<comment><USER32> Treehouse is a great resource but it isn't free

</comment></comment><comment><USER33> very nice aggregate you've created there.

</comment><comment><USER34> Let's help Li with a list of resources to learn how to Draw, Paint, Illustrate, Graffiti, Stencil, etc.

So far we only have this one: <http://www.drawspace.com/>

If you know of any other links please leave a comment

<comment><USER2> Yes, that happens to be the only one I have at the moment. I have 2-3 photography ones that fit under art as well... I was also looking for art history for my own interests, and that seems to be hard to come by too.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: How are you managing your employees digitally? - <AUTHOR> I'm particularly interested in hearing from small businesses. What solutions do you use for account management, hr info, authentication, etc? Larger businesses, at what point did your scrappy answers to the above begin to break down? <comment><USER2> GSuite & Gusto (small startup)</comment>


Google Holodeck - <AUTHOR> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0zpKwPe-GqQ&feature=player_embedded

<comment><USER2> The next step is to interface that with an exercise bike.</comment>


Research: testosterone changes brain structures in female-to-male transsexuals [pdf] - <AUTHOR> https://www.ecnp.eu/~/media/Files/ecnp/About%20ECNP/Press/AMS2015/Hahn%20PR%20FINAL.pdf <comment><USER2> I mean sure, yeah, but...

[https://hn.algolia.com/?query=changes%20brain&sort=byPopular...](https://hn.algolia.com/?query=changes%20brain&sort=byPopularity&prefix&page=0&dateRange=all&type=story)

so does meditation, walking in nature, inactivity, porn, drugs, focus, menstruation, Alzheimer's, cellphones, the iInternet, The Knowledge, programming, football...

changing it's structure is how the brain reacts to basically any regular stimulus. Thats how it works.

<comment><USER3> Agreed. Also, I've not read the paper yet, but I'll be very interested to see the effect size. Lots of sex differences neuroimaging papers rave about significance while ignoring the minuscule scale of effects.

<comment><USER4> Significance == publication, prestige, advancement

Effect power == bury it in the results, give it a one line 'yeah, we noticed that' in the discussion, so the publication reveiwer can't accuse you of missing something.

<comment><USER3> Indeed. It's all too tempting -- I've often found myself overlooking it a bit in my own work. When appropriate, I try to summarise key numbers, significance tests and effect sizes all in one table to avoid that problem.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I have MtF friend. We knew each other when we still we're both officially men. We became roommates for a year when she was mid transition.

I thought that would be cool, because I might understand women better now that I had somebody who had seen the both perspectives. How it is to be a man and how it is to be a woman.

I was wrong. She had never understood anything about manhood. Now she didn't even pretend anymore. I think there are some real and big differences between the sexes, but I still don't have good grasp about them.

<comment><USER6> Could you elaborate more? What are some of the differences she didn't understand?

<comment><USER7> I think the point vlehto is trying to make is:

He expected his friend, who he perceived as a "man", to have a particular kind of insight after the transition. Instead, he learned that his perception of the friend as a "man" was a projection. His friend would not have felt the need to transition if she felt she was a "man."

His friend could only provide more nuanced insights, because her experience was not that of a "man" becoming a "woman."

<comment><USER8> I think this explanation has the opposite effect: it cheapened the nuances of what he said.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I had a (male) colleague once argue with me that men and women had no differences in mentality due to testosterone. The desire to believe in equality is weird sometimes.

To be clear, I don't think there is any difference in generic mental abilities due to gender / sex, but it seems clear that brains would be affected by hormonal differences - for instance I have a thyroid deficiency, and I can really feel it when I'm low.

<comment><USER10> There are definitely differences in both generic mental abilities and what fields interest people between the sexes. From an evolutionary biology perspective, it would be really weird if there weren't.

To be clear, men and women are equally mentally gifted as a whole, but focused on different skills, and with bigger variance in men.

Pinker's "Blank Slate" lays out the case well: [http://www.amazon.com/The- Blank-Slate-Modern-Denial/dp/15012...](http://www.amazon.com/The-Blank-Slate- Modern-Denial/dp/1501264338)

<comment><USER11> You mean evolutionary _psychology_ , not biology. The former is basically a pseudoscience and the latter makes no such claims.

<comment><USER10> I'm not even saying this is an established scientific claim, only that it would be _really_ weird if the statistical differences between men and women were 100% outside of the brain, given how different the evolutionary pressures are.

Evolutionary psychology does have some problems :) It's easy to tell dazzling and believable stories in that frame, but much harder to prove them empirically.

I think some real science is being done in the field, but I agree that when people make EP arguments on the internet, you need to apply a lot of skepticism.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> It's unfortunate that changes in the brain is all they studied. If you have 18 people who are undergoing this transition, it would be useful to document any other changes and note them as candidates for further study.

For example, many people will remark on an increased sex drive (not a surprise considering the testosterone), but the way people actually think about and treat the opposite gender seems to change as well. It would suggest that testosterone has a part to play in the development of gendered social structures. But who knows?

<comment><USER13> > It's unfortunate that changes in the brain is all they studied. If you have > 18 people who are undergoing this transition, it would be useful to document > any other changes and note them as candidates for further study.

As a transman with a background in the sciences (social), I was actually really disappointed that there weren't any attempts to systematically gather this data when I was transitioning. I agree, it could bring a lot of data to the table that otherwise can't be ethically collected. Of course, in reporting any correlations there would need to be clear indications that the data came from the transexual community.

> many people will remark on an increased sex drive (not a surprise > considering the testosterone)

Holy smokes! I was prepared for an increase, but I was totally not prepared for the amount of increase! I transitioned several years ago, and this change was definitely the one I was least prepared for.

> but the way people actually think about and treat the opposite gender seems > to change as well.

Caveats galore: I don't think _I_ treat the "opposite gender" any differently (to be clear, I was born in a female body, but identify as a guy, so "opposite gender" for me has always been women). But, I am very definitely treated differently _BY_ many people, including women, now that I pass, i.e. I am seen as guy. As a result, I definitely treat _individuals_ of the opposite gender differently _because of how they treat me_. For example, I can't stand women who complain about being discriminated against, but then _clearly and unambiguously_ discriminate against me _because I appear to be a privileged white guy_. I simply couldn't judge this when I passed as a woman (I was aware that it happened, but without being a participant it's hard to determine whether that is in fact what's happening.) I now pass enough that I've experienced this with quite a few women. I've also dealt with more than a few women who are so hell bent on how they've been wronged, that they won't work with me _because I 'm a guy_. The irony is that because I pass, when I'm in predominantly or exclusively male groups, I'm better able to argue for things which will reduce actual discrimination and bias against women.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> You should see what it does to structure in utero!

</comment><comment><USER15> Beautiful example of politics driving research. They only studied something they knew was a disadvantage for males, while the first thing everybody is curious about is how the IQ changed, if it changed: [http://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/higher/dr- paul-i...](http://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/higher/dr-paul-irwing- there-are-twice-as-many-men-as-women-with-an-iq-of-120-plus-426321.html)

<comment><USER10> It's a little weird to say males have higher IQ on average.

As I understand it (I'm not an IQ expert, just some internet know-it-all), women score better on some categories of questions, as do men, so when you put together a test, you try to make sure it balances out so both get the same average.

<comment><USER16> AFAIK the average is the same, but males have a higher variance, meaning that they are more likely to be found at the dumber and smarter ends of the population, while there are more women of average intelligence.

<comment><USER15> [http://emilkirkegaard.dk/en/wp-content/uploads/Males-have- gr...](http://emilkirkegaard.dk/en/wp-content/uploads/Males-have-greater-g- Sex-differences-in-general-mental-ability-from-100000-17-to-18-year-olds-on- the-Scholastic-Assessment-Test.pdf)

<comment><USER16> Wow, this is new to me... Please note, however, that this is an indirect measurement.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Coronavirus 'could infect 60% of global population if unchecked' - <AUTHOR> https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/feb/11/coronavirus-expert-warns-infection-could-reach-60-of-worlds-population <comment><USER2> We are really eager for the panic today, aren't we?

C'mon, this is just absurd. We don't live in quite the same conditions were commonplace during the Black Plague

<comment><USER3> Your right we don't have the same conditions, we are much more connected now. The plague was also spread through flea bites where as Wuhan Fever has an aerosol vector.

I don't know what the icubation period before symptoms is for bubonic plague but Wuhan Fever hides for aleast 14 days which makes it particularly difficult to contain.

My biggest fear is not getting Wuhan Fever as apperantly it only kills 1% of infected but rather what cancers and other diseases may come from it later in life, similar to HPV and it's ties to ovarian cancer.</comment></comment>


Freewrite Traveler: portable writing tool with an eInk display - <AUTHOR> https://getfreewrite.com/collections/writing-tools/products/freewrite-traveler <comment><AUTHOR> I really don't have a use case for one of those, but I really want one. I'd love to have vim on one of those.</comment>


Getting Sick Can Be Really Expensive, Even for the Insured - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/21/upshot/getting-sick-is-really-expensive.html <comment><USER2> "The team also looked at a big California database of everyone over 24 who was admitted to the hospital, data it was able to match with individual credit reports."

Is anybody else concerned that they were able to access _individuals '_ credit reports without the subjects' knowledge or consent?</comment>


I paid 10k for our team's new domain. But all we got was less traffic - <AUTHOR> http://backstage.crew.co/crew-co-domain-switch/

<comment><USER2> Once again, using 3rd party services bites a company in the ass. What they should have done is hosted the old domain's email on a cheap VM - perhaps the free tier Amazon offers to new accounts - and simply auto-forwarded from that.

On the second one, never ever change more than one thing at a time - don't change your domain _and_ move to https. Just do one thing at a time.

Both of these are common sense for old school system admins like myself, but it seems like the new DevOps types would rather re-learn all the hard lessons from scratch.</comment>