A reimplementation of NetBSD using a MicroKernel (2015) - <AUTHOR> http://theembeddedboard.review/a-reimplementation-of-netbsd-using-a-microkernel-part-1-of-2/ <comment><USER2> (2015)

Previously: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9735358](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9735358)

And see [1], my note about this talk being more or less the same as the 2010 Minix talk at FOSDEM[2]. If you saw that one, or any other talk by Tanenbaum of that period, I'll spoil it for you: there's nothing substantially different in this talk.

1\. [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9736214](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9736214)

2\. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bx3KuE7UjGA](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bx3KuE7UjGA)

<comment><AUTHOR> Apologies, I checked the date and the comments before submitting and they looked recent. I wasn't aware that the article itself was a repost. Clearly I should've checked the date on the embedded Youtube video!

<comment><USER3> I hadn't seen it before, and HN wouldn't have let you submit it if the link had been posted too much recently. So thanks for sharing! :-D

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Now we just need Minix to start approaching the hardware portability that NetBSD has fought so hard for.

<comment><USER5> Those cases are well covered by netbsd, which runs well even on some Amiga 1200 with an 68030 accelerator board I've got.

I've tested recent Minix3 release candidates. Software compatibility is starting to get there, as unlike previous versions, a good portion of pkgsrc builds and runs, including X11 software.

However, hardware support is not very good even on x86. It boots fine, X11 can be used well with VESA drivers and most popular NICs do work, but USB is missing, which means keyboard/mouse needs to be attached to PS2 ports. As I understand it, there's USB support, but only for the beaglebone board. I know there's an effort to make it work on x86 too, but it won't be in this release.

The main hardship Minix3 is currently experience is that they've been releasing RCs for 3.4 since early last year, and the actual 3.4 is still not out. A lot of work has been done which won't be on 3.4, and the delays on this release are effectively delaying everything else. They need to focus their efforts on closing the blockers, release, and move to some more frequent release schedule, such as strictly time-based; if a feature isn't ready, then it gets delayed to the next release, but releases do need to keep happening.

There's a Minixcon soon; I'm hoping it triggers some progress to happen. The project is this close to the important landmark which is being somewhat usable as a workstation. After that, both press and development would pick up considerably.

<comment><USER4> Well, according to [http://www.minix3.org](http://www.minix3.org), MINIXCon2017 is cancelled due to shortage of papers, so there won't be progress-triggering happening there... I hope you're right (and think that you are) that getting itself sort of "self hosting" as a development/workstation will increase the acceleration of its progress.

edit: s/minux/minix/

<comment><USER5> Bummer. That's extremely sad.

They really do need to get that release out, and move on.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Linux can be upgraded without a full reboot using the now-somewhat-ancient two-kernel-monte, or kexec?

Plan 9 had been able to load new kernels and such without rebooting the machine fully as well.

I love when people make crazy claims like "NO ONE ELSE CAN DO THIS... I MEAN WE NEVER ACTUALLY VERIFIED THIS OR LOOKED BUT WE'RE PRETTY SURE NO ONE ELSE CAN DO THIS!"

Should go into marketing where that crap is allowed.

<comment><USER5> >Linux can be upgraded without a full reboot using the now-somewhat-ancient two-kernel-monte, or kexec?

Sure, and some time is saved, as the firmware/bootloader doesn't need to run. But otherwise, like with a reboot, everything is shut down and restarted.

Minix3 can update system servers and drivers in place, without rebooting and without user processes even feeling a hiccup. It can even go back to the older, working version if there's any issue with the new one.

>I love when people make crazy claims like "NO ONE ELSE CAN DO THIS... I MEAN WE NEVER ACTUALLY VERIFIED THIS OR LOOKED BUT WE'RE PRETTY SURE NO ONE ELSE CAN DO THIS!"

And I'm still waiting to see such an example. Linux's kexec is not.</comment></comment>


Show HN: SameVideos – Find Copies of a YouTube Video - <AUTHOR> https://samevideos.com/ <comment><AUTHOR> Hi, I'm the author of SameVideos.

SameVideos is a search engine that helps you find copies of a YouTube video. You just paste the URL of a video and you should get a list of near-duplicated videos sorted by similarity. So basically, this is like TinEye or Google Images but for videos.

As far as I know, this is the only free to use, real-time(ish) reverse video search engine on the web right now.

Obviously I haven't crawled all of YouTube and the duplicate detector's accuracy could still improve A LOT. However, I think this still shows that you don't need a million dollars to run a project of this scope. In fact, the whole thing is currently running in a $5/mo VPS (I hope it doesn't break ).

If you have any questions, feedback, or reasons this sucks, please post them and I'll try to answer to all of them.</comment>


Gen Studio – An experimental collaboration across The Met, Microsoft, and MIT - <AUTHOR> https://gen.studio/ <comment><USER2> This is a very interesting visualization of GAN capabilities. This seems a part of a larger group of collaborative projects between the MET, MIT and MS - [https://www.microsoft.com/inculture/arts/met-microsoft- mit-a...](https://www.microsoft.com/inculture/arts/met-microsoft-mit-ai-open- access-hack/) There are other interesting applications e.g one that would presumably take an instagram feed and substitute images with "similar art" \- [https://www.microsoft.com/inculture/uploads/prod/2019/02/myl...](https://www.microsoft.com/inculture/uploads/prod/2019/02/mylife- my-met.pdf)

</comment><comment><USER3> It's good to see someone building something easily explorable. If people had more access to experiments like this, there would be far less BS hype around deep learning, since the public would get some intuitive feel for what those networks are doing, how they work and what are their limitations.

<comment><USER3> BTW, this is a combination of several goblets and an armor:

[https://imgur.com/a/JPslbIs](https://imgur.com/a/JPslbIs)

It find it hilarious how many people who ought to know better claim that GANs do not rely on memorization of source data. _Obviously_ they do. At some point people even studied how connectivist memory could work (e.g. Hopfield networks, which I've just started looking into - fascinating stuff). Somehow that branch of research is never mentioned in any of the recent deep learning papers.

<comment><AUTHOR> Very cool! You have left the realm of the MET Open Access data and ventured into the realm of the network that was pre-trained on imagenet!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Code repo: [https://github.com/Microsoft/GenStudio](https://github.com/Microsoft/GenStudio)

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for adding this!</comment></comment>


Uber faces at least five U.S. probes - <AUTHOR> https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2017-10-11/uber-pushed-the-limits-of-the-law-now-comes-the-reckoning <comment><USER2> The media's outlook on Uber is always very fascinating to me. At least this article got things mostly factually correct, but the amount of times that blatant speculation and rumor have been published about Uber is astounding.

Before UberX, Uber followed all the laws to a tee. This article correctly points out, that only after lyft and sidecar were flaunting the law and getting away with it, did Uber decide it must do so as well in order to stay ahead of the competition.

Laws and regulations about new and innovative technologies and products are a grey area. While I don't agree with a lot of the shitty tactics Uber employed, I can say with confidence that 80% of the bad shit written about Uber is totally false.

In hindsight, Kalanick could have and should have handled things better. Looking at the regulatory landscape for cryptocurrencies and blockchain tech, I find myself wishing there was a Kalanick out there pushing for innovation rather than letting the banks reign everything in and stifle it.

<comment><USER3> Cmon, tho, they literally built a system to ID cops. It's no wonder people are giving them shit, even if you forgive it all you have to know its terrible optics. It's not really _astounding_.

And I don't think the blockchain world is any _any_ way over regulated or stifled, 5ish years in and its still basically the wild west. Btce was one of the biggest exchanges until recently, and I doubt whatshisface would have even been arrested had they not vacationed in greece or w/e. And any random jerkoff can still make something just like it. Or implement some funny p2p exchange etc..

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Is scraping competitors' public API's out of the ordinary for technology companies? I was under the impression that Wal-Mart/Jet scraped Amazon and vice versa, similar to how retail chains employ "secret shoppers" to discover competitors' prices.

I do remember a case where Craigslist sued a company for scraping its API and won. I wonder if it is invalidated by Weev's subsequent acquittal.

They could be apples/oranges since the former is civil while the latter is criminal. Also, Craigslist was able to demonstrate damages, which were clearly linked; every visitor to the other company's page was one that didn't visit Craigslist. And there are clear copyright issues with scraping Craigslist and using that user-generated information to populate another website.

<comment><USER5> Not only do competitor's do it, but also university and transportation authority researchers have as well.

Usually scraping is covered under tort law as a trespass to chattels. Since services have limited capacity, any scraping that imposes an undue amount of traffic is essentially depriving that entity of using their capacity to serve legitimate customers.

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

Insofar as copyright is concerned, you can't really copyright data, but you can copyright a collection of data. See Feist v. Rural.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feist_Publications,_Inc.,_v._R...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feist_Publications,_Inc.,_v._Rural_Telephone_Service_Co).

To determine if someone is copying your data wholesale via scraping or some other method, it's not uncommon for a data provider to include false data that isn't real. If they see a competitor publishing that data, they can make the case that the competitor is copying their collection of data, especially if enough pieces of false data show up. In mapping, these are known as trap streets.

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

<comment><USER4> Ha! I love the idea of trap streets. From the wikipedia article, it appears that they're not protected by copyright in the U.S., though they are in the UK and Singapore.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> They might be big enough to get away with an apology.

Obviously their business model was against the law as taxis are virtually everywhere regulated and then they are tax related issues regarding employee /contractors etc. A _typical_ Harvard MBA would not have stated Uber.

I have a feeling that they made it...new CEO, plenty of cash, and a willingness to issue e thousand apologies and /or settlements.</comment>


Microsoft Acquires Calendar App Sunrise for North of $100M - <AUTHOR> http://techcrunch.com/2015/02/04/microsoft-sunrise/

<comment><USER2> I'm kinda surprised Microsoft acquired Sunrise. I mean, the UX for so many products has been less-than-stellar, and Sunrise made invites and calendars _usable_ for me, which was a chore otherwise.

Either way, I'm glad for the Sunrise team, as the success was much deserved.</comment>


The 8 biggest lies the CIA told about torture - <AUTHOR> http://www.theverge.com/2014/12/9/7361295/biggest-lies-the-cia-told-about-the-torture-program

<comment><USER2> "In 2002, a detainee died of suspected hypothermia while "partially nude and chained to a concrete floor;" later, CIA leaders admitted they had "little or no awareness of operations" at the site in question. "

This is beyond horrific - the methods and the denial.</comment>


A formal assessment of domestic pet and shelter cat preferences (2017) - <AUTHOR> https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0376635716303424 <comment><USER2> From the abstract: "Adult cats from two populations (pet and shelter) were presented with three stimuli within each of the following four categories: human social interaction, food, toy, and scent." Cat on cat social interaction wasn't in the variables. So, the cats in the study highly desired social interaction, not necessarily from humans. If they had included falling anvils, I would bet on the cats eschewing that variable.

<comment><USER3> Cat on cat interaction, when the cats aren't already familiar with one another, is often hostile.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Anecdotally, rather often the preferred stimulus category appears to be none of the above, but a catnap.

<comment><USER5> In this case, shouldn't it just be called a nap?

I do wonder how a sunny spot on a soft object would have compared to the other stimuli.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> I'm surprised that it was not a scientific knowledge before this research. Cats are not like dogs, who are ready to sell their mothers for a bite of sausage.

<comment><USER7> This is worth some research, as I am only familiar with dogs utterly non food- motivated while my gf (until she met me) was only familiar with the opposite.

She was frankly astonished that my dogs didn't care for treats when the alternative was a pat or even a look. Of course I knew no alternative.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> I'm teaching a stats/research methods/mini-data-science for lawyers class right now. Assign this article, because cats are the best? (Y/N)

</comment><comment><USER9> Waiting for the Youtube cat video, the Instagram cat pictures, and the Twitter commentary.</comment>


Copyleft and community licenses are not without merit, but they are a dead end - <AUTHOR> https://www.influxdata.com/blog/copyleft-and-community-licenses-are-not-without-merit-but-they-are-a-dead-end/ <comment><USER2> I agree with the overall reasoning of Paul, and we are having the same conversations inside Redis Labs. For instance the reason why Redis remained BSD licensed is that, while it's odd that cloud providers are exploiting open source system software in this way, yet to look just at that does not capture the whole story. Open source software changed _our world_ completely, so the real balance must factor in also what happened to IT because open source exists. Even what now is a problem for OSS producers, the cloud providers, is in some way a product of the fact that software was democratised in this way by the OSS movement (and note that without the cloud to productize OSS is harder). Personally even the fact I write software is because I installed Linux 23 years ago or alike. So the point is to also have something that is interesting enough and that can be released in a commercial license and is complementary to the original project. Because the part that needs to be commercial, must go totally commercial (it's a long story but AGPL for sure, and probably also other attempts including SSPL and Common Clause are not just confusing, they may not be enough). However what this requires is a very good balance between what's open and what not. In the case of Redis this is a bit a natural process because I'm very unwelcoming to a lot of things that users want because I feel they are not a fit. Proof is that for instance, two of my popular open source projects, that are linenoise and dump1090, are currently both mostly distributed via forks made by other people. So Redis Labs can just jump in and do a number of very useful things like graph database, CRDTs, on- disk support and so forth without any conflict of interests. Let's see what happens. Right now the trend is to distribute the non-open parts with source code available and with very few limitations for end users: if this works is great, and it looks like is the only way because it is very unlikely that users will have the need of something as a service if they do not use it already in some form.

DISCLAIMER: This comment was written incrementally and modified several times adding things that came to mind while writing.

About BSD,MIT,... vs CopyLeft. We can say what we want, but if we just stick to facts, MIT-alike licenses provide more freedom for the final user. If one would like to dig more I think that the canonical example would be the Linux kernel and asking questions about, what if it would be BSD licensed.

<comment><USER3> > cloud providers are exploiting open source system software

This keeps popping up from database maintainers and unless addressed we're just going to keep talking past each other.

I'd like to challenge the notion that cloud providers are somehow competing with the likes of MongoDB, et al. We're at the point where anyone can stand up a database in a VM with minimal effort. Cloud providers are spending billions on infrastructure to make sure the bits in that database are highly available with low latency. This is scarcely distinguishable from what a traditional colocation service does.

The whole idea of "open source abuse" amounts to special pleading. No one is forced to use an open source license. MongoDB and its peers have access to lawyers who can explain the consequences of this or that licensing decision. Cloud providers offer database deployments under license terms that were offered to them.

If Redis Labs or MongoDB decided tomorrow to take their database proprietary there wouldn't be much gnashing of teeth. The projects would fork. The proprietary forks would see more feature development and we'd all go on with our lives. You're seeing pushback for a few reasons:

1\. The name "Commons Clause" appears to intentionally invite confusion with "Creative Commons." Plus the idea that you can jam a rider onto an arbitrary Open Source license and end up with something coherent is woefully misguided. The GPL explicitly blows up language like this.

2\. On the heels of the Commons Clause, the SSPL was put up to the OSI as an open source license even though it obviously violates OSD 5,6 and 9. Along with Salil's rants on TechCrunch, this makes it look like a transparent attempt at undermining open source and the OSI.

> In the case of Redis this is a bit a natural process because I'm very > unwelcoming to a lot of things that users want because I feel they are not a > fit.

As an aside, I don't send you patches for this reason.

<comment><USER4> Creative commons has an NC version. All the video game art I made in my younger days was NC/SA because the freedom to inspect all software you run does not mean you get to sell the software to other people.

<comment> crooked-v What I'd really like for my own use is an NC-for-20-years style license, where after a given term the work becomes de facto public domain.

<comment><USER5> I'd like to see a copyright-donor programme like organ donation-- a standard "public domain on death" declaration you can bake into your will.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> It was interesting reading this person's viewpoints but I think they misunderstand the point of copyleft licenses.

> They're forcing a world view that everything should be free and shared like > some sort of make-believe Star Trek future where money doesn't exist.

Is a world where you are allowed to repair and modify your own house or car a "make-believe Star Trek future"? Asking to have insight and control over the software which plays an increasingly important role in our lives is not a fantasy to be dismissed.

> Ultimately, in my philosophy, copyleft represents real open source, despite > what the OSI says. Copyleft is a restriction.

A typo? A restriction for you the creator perhaps, but for your users it represents the freedom to use, modify, and redistribute the software they use.

<comment><AUTHOR> Ah, good catch on the typo. I meant the opposite of that, but so many edits messed it up.

I get the idea that copyleft gives people the freedom to see the code and modify, but the limitations it imposes for using that code in derivative works is what makes me think it's a utopian ideal.

<comment><USER7> > I get the idea that copyleft gives people the freedom to see the code and > modify, but the limitations it imposes for using that code in derivative > works is what makes me think it's a utopian ideal.

The problem is you can't get the benefits without the cost. And _all_ of the derivative works problems are political -- the issue is that companies don't want to (or can't for various reasons) give you their changes. Personally I view this as antisocial and shortsighted behaviour (when a company fails, the work in their fork is lost).

Though to be honest, most proprietary changes aren't very good. The GPL is just one more (political) hiccup that gives an incentive for companies to contribute upstream -- in addition to general out-of-tree problems.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> > If software is a process of evolution and continuously building on previous > work, copyleft licenses represent an evolutionary dead end, while liberal > licenses represent branches of the tree that can live and progress much > longer.

This strikes me as not quite right and a bit out of place for an essay that's otherwise pretty thoughtful. Copyleft is a niche or a branch, not a dead end.

There's a fundamental question facing anyone approaching the economics of a software project (and the economics of many other kinds of projects too): how much of the value of the project do you try to control/capture vs how much do you try to share in an effort to multiply the value? Source licensing questions are a subset of this: how much of the value of the project lies in certain levels of control of the source vs the prospect of a community around the source.

The copyleft licenses are one answer to the question: if the utility value of software developed by an active community around the source strictly exceeds the value of any one player controlling access to the source, control the source to maintain community property of contributions, but let anyone work out their answer to the value capture question via the utility of the software or their knowledge about it.

It isn't the only answer and I think it's fair to say that not every useful piece of software can be developed or maintained on that model, which is why I'd say it's an adaptation to a niche.

A niche is pretty different than a dead end, though.

This also addresses some odd conceptions of copyleft being incompatible with improving ones own lot or based in premature adoption of Star Trek values.

<comment><AUTHOR> Heh, the Star Trek thing might have been a bit of an overreach based on people's reactions, but let me see if I can restate the point I was trying to make with that little bit.

Licenses like MIT give the most possible freedom, particularly with how derivative works are commercialized. Copyleft licenses limit the freedoms of derivative works by forcing them to be copyleft (although with some hacks and exceptions). This limitation means that options for creating a derivative commercial product from copyleft sources are very limited.

If you are able to get around the copyleft restriction (like SaaS products developed on GPL and AGPL'd software) then you are able to build a commercial product. But if you want to ship that software to a customer in a licensed product or a piece of hardware, you won't be able to do it without exposing your entire source code to be copyleft.

I've heard people argue that copyleft is better because it forces this opening of source on everyone. It's a utopian ideal that I think limits its utility, particularly with regard to derivative works.

<comment><USER9> Licenses like MIT don't give "the most possible freedom". I am not more free to modify and repair the software running on an iPhone despite the plethora of BSD and other permissive licenses on it than I am on a laptop running GNU/Linux under the GPL.

Likewise if you want to commercially exploit some MIT-licensed software that I have modified and am selling binaries of, you are not more free to commercially exploit that than you would be under the GPL.

Copyleft doesn't "force" the "opening" of "source" on anyone. It's a pragmatic measure covering existing software in order to ensure recipients of that software are free to use it as they wish.

The GPL doesn't limit utility. You are confusing use value and exchange value. The GPL ensures that software retains its utility for its users.

All that said, if you want to give all your software to users under the MIT or Apache licenses knock yourself out.

<comment><USER10> The LGPL works as you're describing; I can license my own code however I want, as long as I let people freely modify all the LGPL libraries it links in. The GPL proper is very deliberately viral.

<comment><USER11> The LGPL is fine for libraries - but that limits where it can be used.

I think the LGPL becomes something just like the GPL for scripting languages because there is no "linking" for many languages.

For example an npm package for nodejs can't be made into a "library" \- all the source is "compiled" together at runtime.

<comment><USER7> If you can replace an LGPL component with a changed version then you don't need to license any additional code under the LGPL. Shared libraries are just one mechanism for doing this.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I remember a time when people complaining about "open core" licensing were considered OSS zealots. That includes me.

Now, in light of even more restrictive licensing options being adopted by prominent companies, "open core" seems awesome!

It feels like we take one step forward and two back. I'll just say, I wish these companies went full proprietary and stopped capitalizing on community participation while disdaining it at the same time.

</comment><comment><USER13> If Linux was MIT-licensed, there would be proprietary "Linux with Oracle extensions" and "Linux with Microsoft extensions". They'd cost money, wouldn't operate without the the closed source parts, and would be incompatible.

Engulf, extend, devour.

<comment><USER14> Oh no, it would've been worse from the fact that Microsoft and Oracle used BSD code in their proprietary OS's whose code they certainly didn't share. Plus, all the money they made let them fight against software freedoms with monopolistic schemes, lobbying, and lawsuits. It's much worse than just an open product with extensions.

<comment><USER15> This already exists... Android is MIT licensed and nearly every cell phone vendor has incompatible proprietary extensions.

<comment><USER14> It's Apache 2.0 and it did lead to incompatible, proprietary extensions:

[https://source.android.com/setup/start/licenses](https://source.android.com/setup/start/licenses)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> The challenges are:

0\. Megacorps exploiting FOSS and not volunteering enough (a) money or (b) code back overall.

1\. The limitations brought on everyone who's not a megacorp by authors trying to acheive 0a &| 0b.

As such, there are some difficult &| uncool ways around this:

i. A name-and-shame web app that everyone know about that impacts a company's sales and reputation if it cheats FOSS.

ii. Going micropayment commercial with intrusive license auditing to verify compliance.

iii. Begging harder from big companies that are known to abuse FOSS.

PS: Before OSS was popular, shareware/freeware with code hidden like it was some sort of arcane secret magic much as scientists did before the modern era.

<comment><USER10> But (0) is a completely neutral thing for most members of a FOSS community. Amazon starting up a new service won't stop me from merging code or change my (generally zero) income. It only hurts you if you're another company who also wants to exploit the software for profit.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> > Ok, let's get into licensing. Copyleft licenses like AGPL and SSPL have a > weaker result in terms of overall benefit to society than liberal licenses > like MIT and Apache2. [...] They're forcing a world view that everything > should be free and shared like some sort of make-believe Star Trek future > where money doesn't exist.

That's FUD right out of 1998. Sigh.

Look, any attack on copyleft needs to start from a position of describing how any of the open source revolution of the last two decades happens without it. I mean, basically everything was driven by GPL software.

Instead, this starts from a position of poop flinging by calling GPL proponents naive communists. I don't see that it gets any better. Skip.

</comment><comment><USER18> _Ok, let's get into licensing. Copyleft licenses like AGPL and SSPL have a weaker result in terms of overall benefit to society than liberal licenses like MIT and Apache2. You can take two interpretations on copyleft, which I'll call "the crusader" or "the capitalist"._

The problem with the "crusader" model, as practiced, is that it came with a "you're either with us, or you're against us" stance. This created a community subculture which encouraged the alienation of potential allies and served more to make the Free Software movement more of a hipster pose. It served more to make Free Software a kind of antipodean "unwalled" garden, where the barriers to entry also acted as a validation of the virtue signal.

Don't get me wrong. Copyleft licenses have a place. It's just that the place is not "Uber alles."

<comment><USER19> Personally I make an effort to not contribute to any freedom-limiting software (GPL 2.0 is already bad enough, but GPL 3 is way worse). I explicitly check for GPL 3 and make sure I don't help in any way.

The alienation created by the crusader model is deliberate. It's meant to control and change, not to live and let live.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> I think it won't help them in the long run - people and companies will just switch to another software with friendlier license (or a new software will emerge).

</comment><comment><USER21> >People are motivated not only by a sense of purpose and the desire to contribute to something greater, but also by improving their lot in life and that of their families and heirs (read: capitalism). Copyleft ignores the latter while assuming the former will make everything ok.

This is a bit of a tricky sentence, because it's clear that capitalism isn't simply the motivation to improve your lot in life, since this was around since before capitalism. The idea that "copyleft" ignores the desire to improve one's lot in life is silly. Much more often (though not even necessarily) it's individuals themselves who would rather give something to the world (and make sure it keeps giving to the world if it's something good) - and they choose a license accordingly. It's also strange to me that while it's less likely the most ardent capitalist supports the GPL or copyleft licenses, Richard Stallman is something of a little-L libertarian himself. In fact, he views software freedom as an important freedom like freedom of speech is, to be counted among the liberal ideas that the bourgeois (capitalist) revolution ushered in. Copyleft-as-freedom (in the sense that a freedom cannot be exercised to remove the freedom of others) is spiritually just as much of a 'capitalist' ideal as permissive licensing is, and the distinction can't be reduced down to the more modern dichotomy of positive and negative liberties, since even in terms of software, the content of the freedom can be framed in terms of either.

>The community licenses fall in exactly the same boat. They're open, free to use and contribute to, as long as you follow the set of rules and restrictions. Whether they are open source is a boring semantic argument. If you claim they are not, then copyleft licenses aren't either, unless you're actually a crusader. If that's you, I recommend having some whiskey ready for when the cruel realities of life come crashing down.

This is my main disagreement with the author. By brushing aside discussion of whether something is 'open source' as a mere semantic argument, he's of the idea that the principle can be abstracted away from the software. But in the case of open source software, I'm an essentialist; open source software is essentially open source, and in this Platonic sense is how I understand open source to be, just as an idealist might understand pears, apples and oranges to be part of something supersensibly real - fruit, not merely a mental idea.

The issue that people (like me) take with "community licenses" isn't that they have restrictions, it's that the restrictions are fundamentally at odds with what open source (or "free" or whatever other term you'd like to use for the essence of this software which would be well represented by a random aliquot of Github to be representative of the class). The author has tricked us - "open, free to use and contribute to" misses out a massive component of what we consider free software (including copyleft licenses) to be.

To me (YMMV) free software contains the hope for a better world, one which may be incompatible with this one. The talk of monetization and creating a 'business' around it has come about very naturally in the trend of commodification. Many people are (justifiably) upset because open source like houses or art now faces an internal contradiction between use-value and exchange-value, and it must do, in order to survive in a world dominated by capital, in which between 8 to 12 hours of our days are shifted towards those activities which produce exchange value away from those that don't.

</comment><comment><USER22> GPL was a mostly failed, idealistic attempt at creating a separate non- commercial hobbyist computing ecosystem. It's not a big surprise that corporate developers don't like non-commercial software that they're not allowed to use.

<comment><USER23> Calling GPL a failure or non-commercial is to ignore the role of GPL software in the ISP, Hosting and cloud computing industries. For those of us writing commercial software, as the article points out, the GPL makes it very hard to create a license revenue driven business. Selling licenses is not the only model, but it is a proven one.</comment></comment>


MicroBlocks: Scratch and Smalltalk-inspired MCU VM for live embedded programming - <AUTHOR> http://microblocks.fun/ <comment><AUTHOR> Make Zine article: [https://makezine.com/2020/07/31/microcontrollers-meet- microb...](https://makezine.com/2020/07/31/microcontrollers-meet-microblocks/)

Podcast: [https://kidslab.dev/2020/08/03/microblocks-with-bernat- romag...](https://kidslab.dev/2020/08/03/microblocks-with-bernat-romagosa/)

May 2020 keynote from John Maloney: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iq4fOv64CfQ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iq4fOv64CfQ)

</comment><comment><USER2> Disclaimer: I do not intend the following as a criticism.

Can somebody explain why these Scratch-like GUI programming efforts always seem to invent their own language? Why not build ASTs of a "real language" with such a system, and take advantage of its ecosystem? Is there some reason why implementing drag-and-drop blocks is, at the very least, synergistic with building an entirely new VM? It seems to me that you should be able to build Lisp or Python very easily, and hence bridge the gap to "real programming".

<comment><USER3> Maybe because the VM needs to run on rather limited hardware, not capable of running any of those "real" languages -- that might be the reasoning behind it. On the other hand, ESP32 and similar boards can run not only Lua and JavaScript, but even ClojureScript, so it depends on where you draw the line.

<comment><USER4> You can run those language on very small devices. MicroPython works great on the micro:bit for instance, which only has 16k of RAM. An Arduino might be pushing it though with 2k of RAM. Lisp was originally run on a system that had 4K 36bit words of memory for RAM, but no ROM (the IBM 704).

There's a pretty long history of virtual machines on small memory systems, going back to the days of BASIC and SWEET16. They can actually make better use of memory in some cases, with the VM byte code sort of being a compression technique versus native code.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SWEET16](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SWEET16)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Glad to see MicroBlocks on the front page of HN!

I'm one of the project devs. Feel free to AMA :)

<comment><USER6> I love Scratch-like programming environments _in principle_ and as an introduction to programming, but dragging blocks with the mouse is tedious. Do has anyone ever tried to design a keyboard-based input scheme that still works in this graphical environment?

<comment><USER5> In Snap!, GP and MicroBlocks there's a pretty powerful keyboard interface to assemble blocks. I use it all the time instead of dragging blocks. Check out page 115 of the Snap! reference manual here: [https://snap.berkeley.edu/snap/help/SnapManual.pdf](https://snap.berkeley.edu/snap/help/SnapManual.pdf)

Jens Mönig implemented keyboard input for both GP and Snap!, so the same hotkeys will work on both. Since we're using GP for the MicroBlocks GUI, the same will also work on MicroBlocks.

<comment><USER6> Thanks, that looks exactly like what I was missing! Will try that out sometime soon! In my defense, _" page 115 of a pdf file"_ is not typically indexed by search engines afaik ;)

<comment><USER5> Yup, totally. Power feature discoverability is not where we shine... :p

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Very nice. Reminds me of Physical EToys [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_Etoys](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_Etoys)

</comment><comment><USER8> born to click</comment>


Why do airlines overbook their flights? - <AUTHOR> https://techcrunch.com/2017/04/11/overbooking/ <comment><USER2> Meh. They can rationalize it however they want, but there is a word for selling a resource you don't actually have available to sell: fraud. All this is really saying is "it's no big deal because we usually get away with it".</comment>


Ask HN:"Error establishing a database connection" on sites submitted to HN - <AUTHOR>

Whats up with all wordpress based sites submitted today at HN, I came across 2 instances (both wordpress) throwing "Error establishing a database connection".
Are pages submitted to HN today facing DDos ?
some eg. - http://www.ministryoftruth.me.uk/2013/07/24/cameron-porn-advisors-website-hacked-threatenslibels-blogger/
- http://blog.programmableweb.com/2013/07/23/standard-treasury-wants-to-bring-banks-into-the-21st-century/ <comment><USER2> "Are [wordpress based sites] submitted to HN today [unable to handle increased load]?"

Is the sky blue? Is grass green?</comment>


Americans are having less sex and researchers are blaming Netflix - <AUTHOR> http://fortune.com/2017/03/07/americans-sex-netflix/ <comment><USER2> I would attribute it more the glut of free online porn than netflix. Men consume porn far more than women because men are more visually stimulated than women. This has been verified by numerous scientific studies. In many ways, women can't compete with porn. Hundreds of years ago, the average man would be delighted to get sex from the average woman in his local community. Through porn, your average guy has seen more naked women than all his ancestors combined. These women are far more physically attractive, sex-hungry and available than anyone he could meet in person. Today, after seeing countless videos of the the most physically attractive women imaginable, perfectly suited to his preference, taste and sexually proclivity, the average woman seems like a lame approximation for what can be accessed readily online. Men are far less willing to deal with all the pitfalls, annoyance and cost of dating when an approximation for sex, like porn, is much less costly and easily available.

<comment><USER3> >> "videos of the the most physically attractive women imaginable"

Is it just me, or are most of the porn stars really just little above average, when it comes to looks? Like 7/10? The women that I would call "most attractive women imaginable" are all regular movie/pop stars, not porn stars.

<comment><USER4> If you have seen them with proper clothing and make-up in proper movies, most of them would not have much, if anything, to make them less attractive than regular movie/pop stars. The packaging context and presentation matters, and having them sing/play roles in Hollywood movies, creates all kinds of secondary attractiveness factors related to the content and presentation (as opposed to the merits of the person).

The opposite is also true. There are teens who believe e.g. that Jennifer Lawrence is a crazily attractive girl, whereas one could argue there are several just as, or even prettier, ones, in their high school. It's the added myth, styling, and exposure that's shoved in their minds that elevates her. (And similarly for male actors). Of course there's the occasional Errol Flynn or Brad Pitt, or Ingrid Bergman or Margot Robbie - but most of them are elevated ordinary people + Hollywood allure.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> If you are craving a more penetrating discourse on how technology is affecting the modern mating game. I'd give a listen to this enlightening interview noted couples therapist Esther Perel gave on a recent episode of Fresh Air with Terry Gross. She makes the point that due to social media, etc. there is now what amounts to a paper trail for our assignations. And a mere "like" is enough to constitute a form of cheating ;)

As Marriage Standards Change, A Therapist Recommends 'Rethinking Infidelity'

[https://www.npr.org/2017/12/13/570131890/as-marriage- standar...](https://www.npr.org/2017/12/13/570131890/as-marriage-standards- change-a-therapist-recommends-rethinking-infidelity)

While it may be impossible to empirically quantify if humans are enjoying less intimacy than a generation ago. I do see a danger that the erotic sphere is becoming abstracted away from its powerful roots by modern alienation. To get that mojo back, is to return to more ritualistic practices. Perhaps inspired by ancient rites of fertility common to all cultures. Akin to the way farm-to- table and slow food movements can cure one of the malaise that arises from prolonged daily exposure to Seamless dinners without any connection to Nature.

But then again, my cure for almost any modern ailment tends to be to look to the ancients!

[https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/29044.The_Secret_History](https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/29044.The_Secret_History)

</comment><comment><USER6> I'd blame work and stress. Your average person is working longer hours for less financial benefit, while the cost of basics (housing and health care) has gone way up.

Longer working hours for less money makes people tired and stressed...two instant mood killers; and a condition that is likely chronic among many.

"Netflix and chill" is the modern term for hooking up, but for many it probably simply means what it means...to sit and relax.

I don't blame Netflix or phones or anything other than the fact that simply getting by in the USA has become a chore for many, and Netflix and phones are the salve, not the root cause.

<comment><USER7> From the abstract of the paper:

> The decline was not linked to longer working hours

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> To sum up and to thrown an idea up in the air:

There has been a decline in sex over the past decade. It can't be purely coincidental that while the world became witness to a depressing depression, people are having less sex. After all, depression is often linked to reduced libido... and if you're constantly stressed out over your (and your family's) future, you might not have enough energy to enjoy sex either, which in turn can form a negative feedback loop.

Welcome to the brand new (joyless) world.

<comment><USER9> I'm surprised there has been so much less response to this comment than so many of the others. It's very plausible that the root causes of widespread depression and a widespread decrease in sex are related. I'm not sure you can easily pull out any one cause, but it would be reasonable to suspect that modern work and social habits are leading factors (possibly also diet).

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> If we're going with hunches (as in the article) free streaming porn seems more likely than streaming conventional entertainment like Netflix. I mean, both have taken off over the relevant period, but porn is obviously a bit more closely tied to sex.

<comment><USER11> I'm not so sure. I think boredom is the biggest factor, so Netflix is probably the cause. For example the Indian government once tried offering electricity in rural areas to lower child birth rates. "If there is electricity in every village, then people will watch TV till late at night and then fall asleep. They won't get a chance to produce children,"[1]

[1] [https://www.treehugger.com/culture/indian-government- pushes-...](https://www.treehugger.com/culture/indian-government-pushes-rural- electrification-for-population-control-television-as-contraception.html)

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> I don't know what's more ridiculous in this article, the "hunch", the fact that Netflix is never mentioned by name (while Hulu is) or the apex of stupid tech junk called "the smart condom" which auto-plays at the side...

<comment><USER13> Netflix to movies on demand is like iPad to tablets and Xerox to photocopy machines. Technically it is not correct, but people call stuff by the first success to market.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> Porn not Netflix, why would any male want sex with the effort of chasing a woman, romanticising, dealing with the hard-line feminists, when they can just knock one out for free?

<comment><USER15> Men have been able to knock one out for free since, at least, the evolution of opposable thumbs (and those probably aren't strictly necessary). Porn isn't material.

<comment><USER14> Not with the same stimulation and reason, that's why many Japanese men are steering clear of marriage and children, they want to do what their minds are programmed to do, not deal with tasks women traditionally do , and for them, they don't need a relationship to fulfill their other needs.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Original paper (abstract): [https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10508-017-0953-1](https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10508-017-0953-1)

<comment><USER16> According to the abstract, the declines are driven by people married or living together, and especially people in their 50s, with kids, and those who DONT view pornography.

So according to the paper pornography is a complement to partnered sex, not a substitute.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> It's the phones, not Netflix. Phone use is a constant source or ire in relationships.

</comment><comment><USER18> I don't think you can blame one thing.

I blame smart phones, but blame is a strong word. We no communicate with texting, social networking, and many other means than in-person conversations. Teenagers are electing to get a drivers license later in life because they don't need a car to be connected to their friends. Less in-person interaction results in less opportunity for intimate interaction.

I blame the womens movement, and that's a good thing. More women are placing their careers first, and getting around to having a family later and later in their lives.

I also blame the economy. The recession ended technically, meaning we stopped getting worse. But our economy isn't seeing the wage growth that would indicate a prosperous environment that encourages recreational activities, and procreation.

</comment><comment><USER19> I'd have imagined Facebook usage, if anything. And to the degree that they allow to use it even more, smartphones.

</comment><comment><USER20> I think that the researchers are on to something broader. The research shows that smart device use lessens sex. Japan for example has early high technology usage and high suicide rates but low birth rates. Does devices with entertainment substitute getting together with your partner and friends?

<comment><USER21> Repeat after me - _correlation does not imply causation_

<comment><USER4> It merely doesn't prove causation. But it does imply it (as in: hints there might be one), and it's necessary for causation to exist.

Any causation mechanism will also have a correlation in its base.

<comment><USER21> True - in logic/philosophy, implies means _a sufficient basis for_ so it is just a semantic problem. I wouldn't say that a result can be necessary for a cause though, that is dangerously circular.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> With shows that good, fewer and fewer couples manage to reach the "chill" part before falling asleep.

</comment><comment><USER23> I don't have a citation and I have no plans to dig one up. But everything I have ever read indicates that poor people have less sex than rich ones because they are just struggling to survive and can't manage to fit it into their lives. Historically, Americans had more sex on average than people in other countries because we had a large comfortably well off middle class.

I find it ironic that a magazine named _Fortune_ would miss the obvious angle that this is likely related to the general financial distress in the world. It suggests Americans are too poor for luxury items like regular sex. They are working longer hours, exhausted and stressed out, so sex is just not happening.

</comment><comment><USER24> On Hacker News it's totally fine to blame men: "It's men that watch to much porn".

If you on the other hand suggest that maybe #metoo, unfair divorce court etc. has something to do with it (meaning maybe woman are also part of the issue), you get flagged or downvoted to hell.

</comment><comment><USER25> Netflix and chill

</comment><comment><USER26> Honestly I would be depressed it that was the field of my research.</comment>


Wasabi – S3 Compatible Cloud Storage - <AUTHOR> https://wasabi.com/s3-compatible-cloud-storage/ <comment><USER2> The pricing is interesting. But, imho, the true benefit of S3 comes with the integrations with lambda, etc. And signed URLs. You can move so much of your client side logic into AWS infrastructure if you build it using their tools. I'm not sure how Wasabi could really integrate with those systems. And, that is where the real cost is, in building and maintaining those systems, so the cost is not in the storage but elsewhere. For a large organization maybe the cost savings would be significant, but I can't imagine they would outweigh the gigantic development and maintenance costs.

</comment><comment><USER3> After Microsoft's giant OneDrive bait-and-switch a few years ago I am super skeptical of any "too good to be true" storage pricing. I really wonder how it is physically possible to offer these rates.

<comment><USER4> Not too good to be true.

Check out Wasabi's graph, you'll see even at their pricing, you can buy a brand new top of the line fully loaded Synology or QNAP NAS populated with high capacity high performance (online use) Enterprise model HDDs every year for the same price.

And that's at consumer scales. Turns out very easy to beat at commercial scale.

<comment><USER5> But the point is, it's easy to offer low prices to start, then once a bunch of customers have shifted their data, to jack up the prices and profit from it. Do they offer a guarantee of price stability?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Contrasting with B2 (the cheapest usable option I know of) it's cheaper, especially if there's a lot of egress. Has anyone used this or have any experience with their support?</comment>


Ask HN: Please review my webapp: Playlistr - <AUTHOR>

I've been a Python programmer for years, now, but web frameworks have always given me trouble. Over the past two days, I became determined to learn a Python web framework once and for all and came up with Playlistr. Playlistr is a small webapp for generating playlists of internet radio stations, something that I've always found to be tedious to manage. It's essentially a webapp version of a similar script I wrote about a year ago.
It's (obviously) lacking in the polish department, and the current selection of stations is small (for development purposes). Planned features include Google account support for saving your selected stations, caching of stream URLs for each station to speed things up a bit, and more output formats.
http://playlistr.appspot.com <comment><USER2> You need a tagline. My first reaction was "what does this do? something about music?". Obviously with more effort I was able to figure it out.

"Custom playlists in 3 steps" would do it.

Also your "Generate Playlist" button doesn't immediately read as a button. See this article to see what I mean: [http://www.smashingmagazine.com/2009/10/13/call-to-action- bu...](http://www.smashingmagazine.com/2009/10/13/call-to-action-buttons- examples-and-best-practices/)

<comment><USER2> Here's another good article on button design: <http://www.getelastic.com/cta- size/>

<comment><AUTHOR> Ah, thanks you! It's obvious that I'm a programmer, and not a designer. Haha.

<comment><USER2> No problem.

<comment><AUTHOR> I'm having a designer make me a much nicer logo with a tagline, so for now I added directions. I'll tackle the button when I get access to Photoshop later tonight.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> Good effort sli! I was all set to hear some drum n bass when I clicked Generate playlist. But was surprised when Winamp popped up! I had even forgotten I had it on my computer.

I think you should have an embedded music player. There are tons of free swf's out there.

It's good that you've identified a problem - managing playlists of internet radio stations - but it's not clear what your proposed solution is.

Keep us posted on the developments.

<comment><AUTHOR> The idea is you visit Playlistr once in a while and download an updated version of your playlist, in case the station has added and removed servers. It will be a bit more user-friendly when it starts remembering the stations you've selected, which will reduce the workflow to a mere: 1\. Visit Playlistr 2\. Click 'Generate' button

<comment><USER4> _in case the station has added and removed servers._

Does that happen a lot?

<comment><AUTHOR> More than you'd think. It's _especially_ bad with Digitally Imported. I've seen them add and remove new servers to the same station twice in one week.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I'm on a machine without sound at the moment, so I didn't get a chance to try the resulting playlist, but the interface is very easy to understand, and useful to throw together quickly.

Are you going to extend it to other genres later on? Since this is sending a standard m3u file, would it work on the iphone?

Sounds like a fun app.

<comment><AUTHOR> Actually, my original plan was to organize the stations by genre. But after fleshing out the idea a little more, it started to seem either a bit subjective, or way too generalized. For example: do I group electronic into breaks, dubstep, house, trance, etc? Or put it all under electronic? In the end, it was easier to organize by sources.

New stations will be coming once I finish the Google account and cache support.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: How do you choose which project to start? - <AUTHOR> I have a few projects in mind like motion graphics and starting drop shipping. I have ideas for both and I am able to start now. How do you decide on which project to start? Both will take a whie. <comment><USER2> Can you find an online audience, say a forum where there are people actively discussing some problem for which your project is the perfect solution?

</comment><comment><USER3> I think you wouldn't get your answer from here. I do not want to disappoint you. Most time, you did something out, you can hardly get feedback, to say nothing of target.

You have to figure out yourself, try and try, stop to think and try again. If you don't know how to do, keep trying.

</comment><comment><USER4> Here's what works for me:

1\. Give each idea a quick title and write them down

2\. Write down the following questions:

* Does this solve a problem for me/am I the target audience?

* Am I part of an online/offline community that are also like me and would likely love this idea because it solves a problem?

* Can I easily get 3 paying customers within the next 5 days, because I have easy access to the target audience?

* Is this something I can launch by myself quickly?

There are more stuff you could ask to the list of questions, but basically the idea that has 'Yes' to all of these questions, is the one you should be jumping on right away. Cross away the other ideas that have No's, or try to figure out how to turn it into a Yes. But your time is limited, so don't waste it bouncing around with ideas that aren't a good fit.</comment>


The importance of tuning your thread pools - <AUTHOR> http://www.javaadvent.com/2015/12/the-importance-of-tuning-your-thread-pools.html <comment><USER2> _Thus to manage 1000 concurrent requests, the 1000 threads would consume 1GB of the JVM's RAM just for thread's stacks._

Can anyone explain why this could be an issue on a 64-bit JVM, assuming these threads only need a small fraction of the 1MB of stack they're allocated? 1GB of address space is nothing on a 64-bit system, and surely the only physical memory that's allocated is what the threads actually use.

Does the JVM enforce a limit on virtual allocations, even for its own 'internals' like thread stacks?</comment>


How Nokia helped Iran "persecute and arrest" dissidents - <AUTHOR> http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2010/03/how-nokia-helped-iran-persecute-and-arrest-dissidents.ars <comment><USER2> Very disturbing.

Of course, a secondary point is that there's a hidden human rights cost to law enforcement's demands on communications companies. Even if you have the touching faith that your country's law enforcement agencies always acts in a proper and upright manner, _the whole world ain't free_. Some brutal and oppressive governments are going to get their hands on the same functionality if we make companies include it.

</comment><comment><USER3> Funny how we object to companies selling to these bad countries - while we are happy to prop up the same bad countries by buying their oil/gas.</comment>


What's the most ridiculous job title at a startup? - <AUTHOR> I am not talking about jokes <comment><USER2> Any title that incorporates Ninja, Rockstar, Pirate, Guru, etc. Also Full Stack is so misused it's becoming a joke.

<comment><AUTHOR> "Guru" really made my eyes rolled over. Now it's "Full Stack" I guess

<comment><USER3> Is full stack that bad? You're the third or fourth person I've seen complain about it in the last few days.

Unlike ninja, it actually is a descriptive term, is it not?

<comment><USER4> If you tell us what your stack is I suppose.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> My personal best was "Release Messiah". To this day I still cringe.

<comment><USER6> This made my day. Thank you :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Strangeberry had titles like Chief Hackberry, Chief Wiseberry, Chief Smartberry before Tivo bought them in 2004.

</comment><comment><USER8> CEO. Any C-level title, really.

To me those titles imply a lot more structure than 3-5 employees who got enough venture capital to sustain business for about a year. Maybe I'm crazy, though.

<comment><USER9> It gets you in the door with other businesses. That's why people call themselves CEO/CFO/etc. It's a designation of authority rather than qualification.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> An entire row of "directors", none of whom have more than six direct reports and no managers below them? Where I come from, those are called "leads".

</comment><comment><USER11> "Happiness Hero" in the recent Buffer salary breakdown made me cringe. Customer service is an important role at a startup, but I couldn't tell another person that job title and not feel like a joke.

There's no way of knowing this, but I'd be willing to bet that it's deterred potential hires in the past.

<comment><USER12> I seriously doubt the cheesy title has deterred anyone from applying. They pay somewhere in the region of over $65K for "customer support".

Probably 5-10 times more than what a service-person doing a very similar job in outsourced India earns.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> There is a local startup where literally every single employee from the CEO, to a developer, to someone in marketing has the same job title: brander. Imagine being a developer and having to put "brander" as your previous job title.

</comment><comment><USER14> When I read GURU, I automatically add "scam" to it. It is biased of course, yet my past experience made me very wary of "gurus".

</comment><comment><USER15> Everybody at the Nerdery is "co-president"

[http://nerdery.com/copresident](http://nerdery.com/copresident)

...but it comes from a good place in memorandum of the tragic loss of one of the co-founders of the company.

<comment><USER16> I recently moved to MN and came across the nerdery and the story behind it. It's pretty moving and doesn't deserve to be on this thread. Especially considering they have actual title and CEO goes with it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> I worked at a startup with a star-themed name that made an internal CRM called Astronomy. Then, they hired someone to manage it and their title was Astronomer, when it should have been something like Sales Associate.

</comment><comment><USER18> Years ago, while working at a VC firm (in the office pool) my wife got to pick her own title. I convinced her briefly to go with business cards with the title: Floccinaucinihilipilificatrix

</comment><comment><USER19> Web Spinner was one that a company I worked at used to label Web developers. Personally, I don't want the word "spinner" associated with me in any way, even if I was a DJ.

</comment><comment><USER20> I actually saw "Scaling Sherpa" once. Clever, but lame.

</comment><comment><USER21> Chief Innovation Officer always struck me as odd. Sort of says 1 person heads up innovation. Chief Techie

Startup titles should be jobs, not titles. Sales, Marketing, Development, QA.

</comment><comment><USER22> One company I knew had a "Director of Clever" and "Director of Delight" or something similar. They're out of business now. Nice guys though.

</comment><comment><USER23> "Customer Happiness Hacker/Intern/Person".

</comment><comment><USER24> It think title "brander" is the most ridiculous

</comment><comment><USER25> Anything relating to culture. If you think you can control your company's culture from the top down, then you don't understand what culture is.

</comment><comment><USER26> Under Secretary to the Sub-Committee on A/B Testing

</comment><comment><USER27> this link might be relevant [http://www.bullshitjob.com/title/](http://www.bullshitjob.com/title/)

</comment><comment><USER28> CEO 1 and CEO 2

</comment><comment><USER29> "Evangelist". Nothing quite as pride-instilling as being compared to a preachy religious fanatic.

</comment><comment><USER30> "Research Specialist" and all I'd do was to Google stuff.

</comment><comment><USER31> COO, particularly if the company has fewer than 10 employees.

</comment><comment><USER27> Perhaps Social Media Facilitator ?

</comment><comment><USER32> Dream Manager. dead serious.

</comment><comment><USER33> Chief Scientist

</comment><comment><USER34> Founder</comment>


The case for organic food - <AUTHOR> http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/editorials/la-ed-organics-20120905,0,5514318.story

<comment><USER2> I think the case for local food is much stronger than the case for organic food.</comment>


Two Centuries On, a Cryptologist Cracks a Presidential Code - <AUTHOR> http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124648494429082661.html

<comment><USER2> Submission from when this was first published - <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=684023>

</comment><comment><USER3> It's interesting how in those days being "simple to learn and memorize" was an important part of a cipher, but not these days.

<comment><USER4> It's because all cryptography was done (almost) by hand and most importantly the people trying to break it were only really using metal methods. Nowadays people use computers to break your codes, so your code has to be much more complicated. The only way to do that is with a computer.

Codes are an arms race.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Sounds like a pretty weak cypher by todays standards. 90 million combinations seems like it would be fairly easy to brute force. Still, it's interesting to see that some of his ideas, like row operations on matrices, are still used in some crypto algos today.

<comment><USER6> The article says "90 millions of millions", which is a little larger than 90 million.

<comment><USER5> Yes, but how much longer?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Correct me if I'm wrong, but it almost sounds like a rudimentary AES-type encryption when they describe how he broke it into a grid and then jumbled the lines. I'm no cryptographer, but the description of this compared to AES encryption seemed remarkably close.

That said, using digraph probability to solve it was inspired.</comment>


All the photos NASA-related twitter accounts are tweeting right now - <AUTHOR> http://nasa.floxee.com/photos

<comment><USER2> Nice job that's really sweet.

NASA has an excellent Flickr photostream and you could incorporate it and the Astronomy Picture of the Day pretty easily as well.

I know it's called NASA Tweets but aggregating more content could make this the only place I need to visit when contemplating space travel.

Cool project!

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for the kind words! Flickr is definitely on the short list of sources to add!

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Fantastic! Is there a way to follow all of these accounts at once?

<comment><AUTHOR> no, Twitter frowns upon bulk-following...</comment></comment>


Git pretty - <AUTHOR> http://justinhileman.info/article/git-pretty/ <comment><USER2> This is excellent: opinionated and correct.

 _Guess what happens if you try to git revert a merge? Yeah. Don't do that._

You can, but you really need to understand what happens when you do so, so that you're not confused by future merges from the same branch. Straight from the horse's mouth:

[https://www.kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/howto/rever...](https://www.kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/howto/revert- a-faulty-merge.txt)

<comment><USER3> Reverting a merge is totally OK if you kept your history clean and rebased the branch you're merging into to get updates instead of merging it into your branch.

Like if you created a new branch from master and you have been merging master into your branch to get updates in master, once you merge your branch into master you cannot revert this merge because the act of merging master into your branch changed which branch owned commits.

If you rebased master into your branch instead everything will be fine. If you merge your branch into master, reverting that merge will simply undo the merge as you expected.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> "Split off a logical chunk from your mess, stage it" should really be another box with "git add -p".

Being able to pick and choose (and even edit) individual chunks to be staged is enormously useful. Quite possibly my favourite feature of git.

<comment><USER5> I agree with the git add -p , but I feel that at point, it often should be followed by a stash then a rebuild and/or some testing. Next, commit and unstash to continue.

<comment><USER6> Yep yep. `git add -p`, `git stash -p`, etc. That's exactly why that bit of the chart isn't very specific. There's a whole workflow right there, in that one little cycle. One of these days I'll get around to writing that one up :)

<comment> bulte-rs git isolate! I've been trying to make something like this :( Unfortunately my git-fu is failing me.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Mercurial Changeset Evolution is going to solve the "It's safest to let it stay ugly then" and "Send them a note, let 'em know you're changing history" problems. No more force pushes or lost data! The new version of history applies on top of the old version. Immutable data structures, flexible workflow.

</comment><comment><USER8> As a one person web design/development studio, it's charts like this and threads like this that keep me off git. I've played with it, used it on a project but the fact that I am always reading about the messes people get in with git...I really don't have time to deal with versioning messes.

<comment><USER9> I'd counter that these messes aren't caused by git; rather they are messes that without git you wouldn't even bother cleaning up.

However, git lets you fix the mess in such a way that you'll have a clean commit history. This is really helpful if you're trying to keep your codebase clean so that `git bisect` will always work nicely, and if you just want to keep your codebase history really grokkable.

<comment><USER8> Oh, I'm not blaming git. I take full blame but still have a hard time rationalizing the headache.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> magit mode in emacs has bailed me out numerous times from git messes. If you're an emacs and git user but not using magit, you're seriously missing out.

<comment><USER11> Dunno, I've been very happy with egg. But then, due to a large part of my career being maintenance, I've fallen into a lot of self-discipline patterns that tend to keep me out of messes.

<comment><USER12> egg looks pretty similar to magit in terms of functionality. I haven't tried it, but I would guess either one is fine.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> That is a really fun poster to have!

I hope of course that people realize you should not rely on this as an educational tool but merely as a quick reference. Please, don't use any of these commands without knowing what they do!

</comment><comment><USER14> "Do you hate them?" was hilarious.

</comment><comment><USER15> If you really mess things up, there is Reflog

</comment><comment><USER16> If you like this, check out gitjk[0], it's saved my codebase a handful of times.

[0] [https://github.com/mapmeld/gitjk](https://github.com/mapmeld/gitjk)

</comment><comment><USER17> What does "I don't think it means what you think it means" refer to?

<comment><USER18> I don't think it's specifically about reverting merge commits but rather the fact that "git revert" is quite different from "svn revert" which may not be immediately clear and may not meet everyone's understanding of the term "revert" \- which is to say, it does not simply "get rid of" the unwanted commit but rather creates a new one that has the net effect of undoing that commit's changes.

<comment><USER19> I keep meaning to make an alias for it called "git anticommit".

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Nice chart, at least for a reminder of the command you're likely to need. However, "Is it already on GitHub" should be "have you already pushed it publically". Reminder: git is distributed.

<comment><USER21> Git is distributed indeed, but good writing style prefers specifics to abstract generalities. It's better to use Github as your example and expect the reader to understand - or if appropriate, explain in a separate paragraph - that there are other options for public repositories.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> Great tool for young interns! :D

I think there is a small mistake though, for the "I accidentally commited something": the answers yes and no for "Has anyone else seen it?" are inverted.

<comment><USER23> Hmm, I don't think so. The answer for "yes" is to do a `git revert`, which does _not_ modify history. Instead, it creates a new commit.

The answers for "no" all involve modifying history, which I think is generally perceived to be quite OK so long as you aren't modifying history that is public.

<comment><USER22> yep you're right and the question was already answered in the comments. :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> SO useful, thanks!

This is an area where I get completely lost with regard to the 'right' thing to do to fix things up.

</comment><comment><USER25> There should be a section for git filter-branch.

:>

</comment><comment><USER26> git is only good for people that was working like Linus. if you didn't have been accepting patches by email but instead had a fluid svn, perforce, etc central repository and people already collaborating with commit powers, then if you move to git "just because" (which is the reason of 99% migrations) you're going to have a bad time.

sadly, my company decided to move just to use pull requests as a poor man's code review tool. sigh. I'm the 99%

<comment><USER27> Sounds more like resistance to change than anything wrong with Git. I used perforce at my previous company, and while Git's learning curve was higher, I definitely see the advantages of a distributed version control system over a centralized one:

1\. Not having to check out files means I can work offline.

2\. When working on multiple features, it's much easier to create a new Git branch than it is to create a new Perforce workspace.

3\. People really tend to abuse Perforce's 'lock file' feature. I'm glad this isn't possible in Git.

4\. I haven't really noticed any drawbacks to the pull-request feature. You can still review and comment on diffs on Github.

5\. It's the version control of choice for open source software, so if you use any third-party libraries (and I hope you do!), you'll probably need to know how to use Git anyway.

I can't really think of anything I miss from Perforce.

Edit: these advantages are not specific to Git, but any distributed version control system. If you find Git to be too difficult, don't worry, it's not the only game in town. I've heard Mercury is much easier to pick up. Good luck!

<comment><USER28> Why would you need to know how to use any version control software at all to use a third party library? I mean, I do both, but haven't really seen a connection.

<comment><USER29> Before git-based package managers became the norm, it wasn't uncommon to track/update dependencies manually using command-line git.

Also "using" a third-party library hopefully results in finding bugs, fixing them, and submitting a pull request to the project.

<comment><USER18> > Before git-based package managers became the norm

When did using git-based package managers become the norm?

> it wasn't uncommon to track/update dependencies manually using command-line > git.

Are you saying you normally update your third-party libs with the latest from HEAD instead of using versioned release artifacts?

(I'm guessing you're speaking from a JS dev perspective?)

<comment><USER29> > When did using git-based package managers become the norm?

I'm a web developer, so my response was hastily written thinking about my own narrow scope. I'm sure that non-web developers can go their whole lives without interacting with git, but it's impossible for web developers.

Npm (Node), Composer (PHP), and Bower (web) package managers all use git (and often GitHub itself) pretty religiously. I know that one or more of those may support other VCS repos, but git is the de facto flavor.

> Are you saying you normally update your third-party libs with the latest > from HEAD instead of using versioned release artifacts?

Not exactly. First of all, that's what I _used_ to do before every language had its own package manager.

Second, I do use versioned releases. However, I use the tagged versions that are determined by the author(s) of the library. I'm not just pulling down a bleeding-edge, un-tested library, and I don't get every single commit.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Mini iPhone is critical - <AUTHOR> http://utestme.com/post/6756564153/ittai-kidron-knows-it

<comment><USER2> It's called an iPod Touch, which costs $229 unsubsidized.

Is there actually some magic market Apple is missing between the $99 iPhone 3GS and the bottom of the line Android handsets? Maybe, but they don't seem particularly enthused about targeting the free-with-contract market.

Maybe this is a different story outside of the U.S. where phones are often purchased unsubsidized. While Apple is making money hand over fist, however, they might not see the need to scramble for that low end of the market.

<comment><AUTHOR> I've got the exact same feeling</comment></comment>


Thank You HN: 100 early invitation requests in 2 hours - <AUTHOR>

Thank you!  100 early invites in two hours for useHipster.com? Not bad in my book.
I posted this 2 hours ago:
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2093662
Since then, I've gotten over 100 early invites to useHipster.com.  I just wanted to say that the Hacker News Community is unlike any community out there - it really supports the efforts of its community members.
Thanks again! <comment><USER2> How many did you to ----> Invite at least 3 friends using the link below. The more friends you invite, the sooner you'll get access! out of those over 100 invites?

</comment><comment><USER3> Congrats - hopefully even more will come for you soon.</comment>


What does Verizon mean for the iPhone 5? - <AUTHOR> http://www.kenthorvath.com/what-does-verizon-mean-for-the-iphone-5 The recent announcement of the iPhone 4 on Verizon is somewhat unusual for Apple, which tends to release new versions of the iPhone in June or July. Because the Verizon iPhone 4 is not slated for release until February, does this signal a disruption in Apple's yearly iPhone update cycle? <comment><USER2> There will probably be an iPhone 4S (ala 3GS) that will feature a couple improvements but not a departure from the current iPhone 4.

the other conjecture of a universal iPhone probably won't come to pass as Apple gave up on the programmable SIM ([http://www.todaysiphone.com/2010/11/carriers-force-apple- to-...](http://www.todaysiphone.com/2010/11/carriers-force-apple-to-forget- programmable-sim-plans/)) also it doesn't take into account fitting another chip into pretty tight space.

I believe expanding to other carriers is pretty much a given.

His other point that they will Focus on the Mac this summer doesn't really take into account they will easily be able to do more than one thing at a time.</comment>


The Vault: an incredible web series, made by two guys outside of work - <AUTHOR> http://www.youtube.com/user/VaultShow?feature=watch

<comment><AUTHOR> I just discovered this today and was blown away. I thought HN might find it interesting because 1. the show itself is one of the best I've seen, and 2. I think the big content companies of the future will start exactly where these guys are starting now. This show in particular is getting close to reaching a critical mass, and I suspect the people making it will be quitting their day jobs in the near future. Note I'm not affiliated with them in any way, so this is just speculation.</comment>


How 12 Founders Named their Startups - <AUTHOR> https://www.braintreepayments.com/blog/whats-in-a-name-customer-spotlight

<comment><USER2> I am running through the name game right now with my cofounders. I joined 3 months after they had incorporated with equal share, however this led me to inherit their name and website. It took me 4 months to get them to change their website (actually it was only until a client told them it was ridiculous that they relented). Now 8 months in of discussing changing the name, I finally convinced them and they started bouncing around ideas. Most equally bad. I finally just set a deadline (3 pm today) for us to pick one. I will update in an hour with more info on our process and the outcome...

</comment><comment><USER3> When naming an application I tried doing some wordplay and consider its domain availability. Like my current app, I'm dealing with texts, like web articles. And I'm extracting important sentences in it to serve as its preview. Preview of movies are called teaser. That's why I named my app TextTeaser (and TextTeaser.com as its domain). It's a preview for web articles.

</comment><comment><USER4> I can't say this enough.

Great names are made not found.

<comment><AUTHOR> Can you elaborate on this?

<comment><USER4> The point is that it's the company that makes the name not the name that makes the company.

So don't spend too much time finding the right name.

I elaborated on this a while back.

[http://000fff.org/whats-in-a-name-tips-for-naming-your- start...](http://000fff.org/whats-in-a-name-tips-for-naming-your-startup/)

<comment><AUTHOR> Good observations and I couldn't agree more with this line: "great names are the byproduct of great products not the other way round."

It's still important to be thoughtful about the name, but it's definitely not worth spending lots of $$$ or dwelling on for weeks.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> \- I liked the thought process behind "Parse.ly" name selection. \- "Unfuddle" is not obvious to me.</comment>


Accessibility is a Harsh Mistress - <AUTHOR> http://diveintomark.org/archives/2009/03/21/accessibility-is-a-harsh-mistress

<comment><USER2> "You realize no one is ever actually going to do any of this, right?" There was an awkward silence as the people who had spent their lives in the trenches of access enablement contemplated the very real possibility that no one would ever benefit from their work." QUOTED

Haha, thats the problem with accessibility its hard to know when anyone is really going to use it with a screenreader, more then likely you are just wasting your time.

<comment><USER3> I'm actually writing some (custom internal) software for blind folk at the moment, as an extension of having worked with a small nonprofit for visually disabled people for general volunteer work (mostly admining the network and teaching). Through this I also found myself taking a look at the needs of blind users all over the place, and they do exist. I've had one dev tell me that it's stupid to prematurely work on accessibility, until it came up that most of my blind friends didn't end up using that software because it was inaccessible and that they probably would at least take a look at it if it were. Soooooo..

(edit: not to say that that detracts from the original article. i think all the points brought up are valid and very frustrating on all sides. yes, often times the changes that are "accessibility 'best' practices" are complete BS and some of the accessibility advocacy groups are annoying...I wish life were easier.)</comment></comment>