Machines will achieve human-level intelligence in the 2028 to 2150 range: poll - <AUTHOR> http://www.kurzweilai.net/machines-will-achieve-human-level-intelligence-in-the-2028-to-2150-range-poll

<comment><USER2> The problem with the poll isn't the sample (as the author suggests), rather its the fact that you can't predict such a thing, given any sample size/quality.

</comment><comment><USER3> I would put it toward the high end myself: 2100 or later.

We have achieved decent success at specialized AI: pattern recognition, chess players, text to speech, speech to text, flying planes, even driving cars (which is harder for AI than flying planes). I strongly suspect self-driving cars will be on the consumer market by 2030, and that specialized AIs will be doing all kinds of complex tasks all over the economy by then.

But from what I know, we have achieved almost _zero_ success at the general purpose AI or "strong AI" problem.

A lot of early AI optimism was fueled by the idea that general and specialized AI were more or less the same problem. If a computer can play chess well, then it should also be able to drive a car. We've found that this is most emphatically not the case. They appear to actually be different problems altogether. A great chess playing AI is utterly worthless at any domain other than chess. A great car-driving AI is utterly worthless for anything other than driving a car (or perhaps another vehicle with similar characteristics). Specialized AIs are _very_ domain-specific.

The only form of AI that I know of that can work on a very wide array of problems without highly specialized domain tuning is genetic programming, and that requires serious gobs of processing power to do even trivial things.

Hubris aside, we really don't know what the brain is doing. We have some ideas, but they're fairly vague and early. There's a lot going on inside neurons, glial cells, and their genetic regulatory networks that we can't see... maybe even stuff at the quantum scale.

Then there's the whole issue of "consciousness," autonomy, self-orientation, self-direction, homeostasis, and all those related issues. This area is less well understood than neural data processing.

So I would be floored if we see it before 2100. Personally I think we'll have colonies on Mars long before we have strong human-scale AI.</comment>


Amazon's Snowmobile Is Actually a Truck Hauling a Huge Hard Drive - <AUTHOR> https://www.wired.com/2016/12/amazons-snowmobile-actually-truck-hauling-huge-hard-drive/ <comment><USER2> Finally somewhere to store my porn collection.

<comment><USER2> Oh come on I didn't even know I could get downvoted on HN

<comment><USER2> [http://i2.kym- cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/733/284/16e...](http://i2.kym- cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/733/284/16e.gif)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> The more I see it, the more I think that this is just an easter egg from some Amazon guys that wanted to bring in a badass truck in the middle of the re- Invent presentation.

</comment><comment><USER4> A step up from SneakerNet ("You there, bring this bag of flashdrives to the office across the street, wouldya?"), I suppose.

</comment><comment><USER5> Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes hurtling down the highway. — Tanenbaum, Andrew S. (1989). Computer Networks. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. p. 57. ISBN 0-13-166836-6.

<comment><USER6> With the recent archive.org mirror announcement, I've had visions of Griswold- era Chevys (I think his was a Chevy) careening northward over the Canadian border.</comment></comment>


Prosecutors Are Reading Emails From Inmates to Lawyers - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/23/nyregion/us-is-reading-inmates-email-sent-to-lawyers.html <comment><USER2> Bar associations should demand that lawyers allow clients encrypted email communication. The adoption problem for encrypted email (all encrypted controlled by the client machine using open source software so google or whoever doesn't also have access to the plaintext) is so hard because it takes BOTH parties to keep communication secure. If all lawyers had to do this, people would become much more aware and maybe demand their medical and tax information sent over email also be encrypted.

<comment><USER3> Encryption should be mandatory for all sensitive data if it's not encrypted it's public.

However judges allowing the emails to be read sounds really stupid to me it's obviously protected by the attorney-client privilege.

Most obvious breaches in law are motivated by prosecutors as a lack of staff or convenience these days.

I don't care how understaffed you are or how inconvenient it is that is the law and you have to follow it or at least that's how it should be but apparently judges can choose which laws they want to follow.

PGP would be great in this situation, your attorney could give you a USB stick with the public and private keys encrypted by a password of your choice and you could use it to send messages to him.

Even if the warden or guards were to confiscate the USB stick they still wouldn't be able to decrypt the messages without the password which is protected by law because it's something only you know.

And because of how PGP works the messages sent by you to your attorney can only be decrypted by his private key. Once encrypted even you can't decrypt them anymore since you are using his public key to encrypt the message.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I was listening to NPR recently and there was an interview with a former Clinton administration official [1] who mentioned almost in passing that prosecutors regularly infringe on the right to privileged conversation between a defendant and their lawyer. Specifically, he mentioned that the room you are given with your lawyer has paper thin walls that the police and prosecutor folks can hear through easily, and when in jail there is no way to have a real private conversation with your lawyer as well.

[1] [http://wfae.org/post/webb-hubbell](http://wfae.org/post/webb-hubbell)

<comment><USER5> I'd hope that's not admissible as evidence in court though, while in this case the emails would apparently be.

<comment><USER6> Think of it this way: you're in jail and you're talking to your lawyer about what he thinks the prosecutor's strategy will be, and how he's going to defend you against it. That has nothing to do with evidence admissibility but could still be damaging to your case if the prosecutor finds out about it.

<comment><USER7> That's roughly equivalent to discovering the identity of someone on the internet who you're arguing with and using it to "win" the argument.

<comment><USER8> Why do you think this is roughly equivalent?

It's not about knowing the identity of the person, it's knowing how they are going to proceed in arguing their case. Setting up an argument takes a lot of time, it's their strategy for winning a case / defending their client. Knowing this beforehand will put one side at an advantage in preparing their case and specifically aim at any faults in arguments.

Also why is "win" in quotes? There's generally no winners in flame wars, but in a court of law decisions are made on who wins and loses unless there's a mistrial/deals being cut by both sides. So being able to concentrate efforts directly preparing against a known strategy that the opponent is using is a big advantage.

<comment><USER7> > Also why is "win" in quotes?

Because,

> There's generally no winners in flame wars

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Wikipedia tells me that both of the judges that ruled emails are unprivileged were born in 1946. The judge who ruled against the government, however, was born in 1955.

I don't think this is a coincidence. I'd be surprised if the former two judges even used email at all.

<comment><USER10> I really don't think that makes much difference. I'd be much more interested in the judges' political affiliations. The notion that attorney-client communications are privileged, regardless of medium, is not a new concept.

<comment><USER11> IIRC some judges consider email to be something like a postcard or talking in public.

<comment><USER12> In a way an unencrypted email is like a postcard. Anyone who gets their hands on it can read it without "opening" anything.

<comment><USER13> In the same way an unencrypted telephone call is also like a postcard (or posting a tape), but we still have laws protecting that information flow, like the client attorney privilege.

What we are seeing now is just a power grab from governments and organizations to have "novel" forms of communication classed as less protected so they can reap the benefits of being able to intercept it. This is exactly how a legally protected and democratic society breaks down.

There are only two ways to solve it. Either protect all forms of communication without discrimination, or use or invent technology to prevent it being possible in the first place (and not outlaw that technology). There are no other ways.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> >She seemed to take particular offense at an argument by a prosecutor, F. Turner Buford, who suggested that prosecutors merely wanted to avoid the expense and hassle of having to separate attorney-client emails from other emails sent via Trulincs.

Would it be that hard to specify one e-mail address as a "priviledged address" (with a signature from the lawyer about such) and filter out those? It's really surprising how people can go to court and argue such claims.

<comment><USER15> That's why the judge felt insulted.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> [http://youtu.be/WTPimUSIWbI](http://youtu.be/WTPimUSIWbI)

Attorney client privilege is one of the biggest fallouts from mass surveillance. Earlier this year there was a legal hackathon at Mozilla where I tried to make a product to help that.

<comment><USER17> Thanks for making that! Looks sweet, is it ready for use in the wild? (You mention making it user friendly with a link...)

Are there other encryption-type solutions for this problem? Something usable by people locked up in jail who may not be computer savvy.

I know a public defender who might be interested.

<comment><USER16> Definitely not ready for prime time, but it works with links now (see the example link in the video description).

However, it probably wouldn't be very useful for people in prison because it requires each party to have a dropbox account.

Another project that might be relevant is miniLock, but it's still a ways away from being ready.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> > Especially since he is acting as a public defender in this case — meaning > the government pays him at $125 per hour — Mr. Fodeman argued that having to > arrange an in-person visit or unmonitored phone call for every small > question on the case was a waste of money and time.

The juncture of these two factoids struck me as odd.

<comment><USER19> The article expects you to know that $125/hr is way below the normal rate for a criminal defense attorney in a major city, which I would expect to start at about $300/hr.

<comment><USER20> I'm a very well paid software engineer.. I apparently can't afford to hire a qualified defender if I find myself in need. I figure a defense is a minimum of 500 hours, so even at $300 that's $150,000. I have no idea where I get that type of money from.

Our justice system is severely screwed.

<comment><USER21> A 500 hour billing for defense would be pretty serious, so if that's going to be a problem for you here's a heads-up to ixnay on the crime you're committing that's going to require brand-new Supreme Court-favorable legal theories for acquittal. That's over 3 months of 40-hour weeks dedicated to just your case. I know lawyers bill like crazy, but still.

<comment><USER22> Avoiding crime isn't really an effective way to avoid needing a lawyer, unfortunately.

<comment><USER21> I wasn't trying to account for all crime everywhere, because after all there are cases of mistaken/misattributed identity that are very time-consuming to defend, but all in all it's a very good way to avoid 500 hours of lawyer.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> If inmates are allowed to email, and also allowed private communication with their lawyers, why wouldn't they be able to have a registered lawyers' email address not be monitored, or to be able to flag an email as privileged _exactly in the way they do with postal mail?_

>Prosecutors once had a "filter team" to set aside defendants' emails to and from lawyers, but budget cuts no longer allow for that, they said.

They seem to know that it's wrong, they're just becoming more confident that judges will let them do whatever they want.

I'd accept that inmates shouldn't be allowed to use the internet at all before I'd accept that budget cuts have made it too expensive for prosecutors not to use privileged communications in court.

</comment><comment><USER24> I worry for this country.

<comment><USER25> The executive, LE and intelligence have gone berserk, the congress is paralyzed, courts make corporations more people than actual people and still US is better place than anywhere on the earth.

<comment><USER26> > and still US is better place than anywhere on the earth.

Not really, this is a clear case of American Exceptionalism if unintentional.

I'd take Germany, Iceland, Sweden, Switzerland or the Netherlands over living in the US if I had the choice.

<comment><USER25> I am not a US citizen and live currently in EU.

Europe is not big on the whole freedom of speech stuff.

<comment><USER7> The US has freedom of speech, yes.

It doesn't bother making sure that you're alive to say it.

It doesn't bother making sure that you're capable of saying something worthwhile.

So, yes. You have freedom of speech. It's just that most American speech is pointless.

<comment><USER25> Compared to the terrible crimes of denying holocaust or denying communist atrocities or drawing a swastika. Or the terrible - well pretty much every law in UK (libel, knife carry, mandatory decryption).

I am an European, but we have a long way to go towards sanity. And with obesity declared a disability I feel like we are moving away from it.

<comment><USER7> The thing is that freedom of speech isn't all that important in the long run. It's important, yes, but speech is the first, tiniest baby step in a very long process towards change. To focus on it to the exclusion of all else is to no different than silencing yourself.

Indeed, having speech and naught else is like a vent that lets off steam, making change and better lives _harder_ to come by. It is the fool's prerogative to speak his mind, but at the end of the day, the king is still a king, and the fool is still a fool.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> "...budget cuts no longer allow for that, they said."

Is the amount of money being spent on prisons in the United States really shrinking?

Honestly, I have no idea.

<comment><USER10> I think it's more the amount of money bugeted for prosecutor's offices. Normally things like this would go past a review attorney whose job is is to separate privieleged communications from non-privileged and pass only the latter to the prosecutors, but those are the bottom-rung jobs and the first to go when there are budget cuts. Not many politicians are interested in the legal problems of federal prisoners, standing up on this sort of issue is a sure way to be labeled as 'soft on crooks' by your electoral opponents.

Chances are that this won't get fixed until a sufficiently high-level court rules on it, at which point we'll hear a lot of whining about 'activist judges' and so on. What a revolting development.

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> In most circumstances I am all for attorney-client privilege. But if you are in jail or prison and provided a medium to communicate to the outside world and that medium requires you to accept a consent to monitoring agreement before each use, then you should have no expectation of privacy regardless of whom the communication is with. The prison system has proper ways to initiate secure attorney-client communication and these people failed to use it, that's their problem. However, I do think the law needs to be updated to allow for secure email communication between the attorney and client, but until that occurs they need to live within the confines of the law.

</comment><comment><USER29> Surely I believe here ... and I think we should work out on this. [http://www.bloggerbulk.com](http://www.bloggerbulk.com)</comment>


LTE gets faster. Much faster. - <AUTHOR> http://gigaom.com/broadband/lte-gets-faster-much-faster/ <comment><USER2> While it'd be great to see this show up everywhere, I'm not holding my breath. Mostly because of the spectrum issue -- from the article: _In the demonstration, 60MHz of aggregated bandwidth was used, compared to the 20MHz maximum that is currently possible using LTE._

So we'd need to triple the amount of spectrum allocated to each base station to realize these gains. Well, we can hope.

Is there still progress to be made on increasing the utilization of currently- allocated spectrum? I'm lazy and don't feel like computing a Shannon limit at the moment...</comment>


The T-Mobile G1 keyboard: A lesson in failed ergonomics - <AUTHOR> http://venturebeat.com/2008/11/08/the-t-mobile-g1-keyboard-a-lesson-in-failed-ergonomics/ <comment><USER2> I agree with the commenter on the blog who said he's just not holding it right. I hold mine with my index finger wrapped around the right-hand side, so the joint at the base of the index finger is about next to the Home button. It's perfectly stable this way, and my thumb is not being blocked by the 'boot'.

I think this is just one of those cases where the author knows he can get more attention by complaining than by being reasonable.

</comment><comment><USER3> I find the keyboard pretty nice. I agree that maybe the boot at the bottom with the nav buttons is a bit clunky, but I still find the keypad on the G1 dramatically more comfortable and fast to type on than the iPhone touch keyboard.

</comment><comment><USER4> I was thinking about replacing my iPhone with the G1, but after having the same experience I decided to stick with my trust on-screen feedbackless keyboard. 40 words per minute is good enough for me!

</comment><comment><USER5> translation: I text too much.</comment>


Oreo's gimmick Facebook marketing, wait I'm not hating on it? - <AUTHOR> http://innovativevisionary.com/2011/02/15/oreos-gimmick-facebook-marketing-wait-im-not-hating-on-it/ <comment><USER2> There's nothing "innovative" or "visionary" about making me fill out a CAPTCHA just to read your blog post.

<comment><AUTHOR> Wait you got the CAPTCHA?

That's Cloudflare's Bot protection. You should have never gotten that. What IP did you try coming from if you don't mind sending so I can send to them to have them look into it.

I've not heard of anyone else having been caught by that (other then bots) which makes me wonder why you got caught in it.

P.S. if you go back to site you will see the "innovative" or "visionary" is a joke :)</comment></comment>


Show HN: Rebridge – A transparent bridge between JavaScript and Redis - <AUTHOR> https://www.npmjs.com/package/rebridge <comment><USER2> To each is own, but experience has taught me that IO operations should never be implicit, that just setting you up for a world of trouble.

</comment><comment><USER3> Code that obscures network access is not good. How do you handle errors, retries, reconnects, timeouts, etc?

It's not worth it :)

</comment><comment><USER4> The concept is fantastic. I do think that some details need to be ironed out for it to be developer-friendly.

Good: 1) I love higher abstraction for things that just work. I hate writing boilerplate code to do simple stuff. JS and Redis caching is one that I often have to write boilerplate code for. 2) Cheap and simple way to improve performance.

Bad: 1) Lacking fall-back mechanism and transparency about what would happen if error occurs, connection dies, etc. 2) One common reason (at least for me) people use redis caching instead of local caching is to have caching across difference servers or even services. How do you deal with conflict resolution and asynchronous operations?

<comment><USER5> Scaling solutions will always look different ... I think the idea here is that you have a one to one relation between the app and the database, so that the session data is not lost when the app restarts. And apps tend to restart often, especially during development. You might also store state history for easier debugging with time-travel.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Unlike some others I do think that the concept itself is interesting/valuable. Proxy objects are going to make things pretty interesting in terms of data access in general. However, I do think it's a bit _too_ cute and clever to be useful without greater flexibility in control flow and error handling. Just the simple fact that it doesn't return Promises degrades its usefulness. (Promise.all parallelization, for instance.) So I think the useful version would necessarily have to give up on some of the "it's just an object" syntax altogether.

      await db.hello.world(['foo', 'bar'])
      console.log((await db.hello.world()))
      await db.hello.world.push('baz')
      console.log((await db.hello.world()))

Just spitballing.

</comment><comment><USER7> It's opaque, not transparent.

</comment><comment><USER8> I think OP meant transparent in essence that you can (in some environment?) just drop-in the library for a quick persistence? Say, some single-time use script (a quick scraper?). In such cases, it is less syntax heavy. Not every code one writes has to be production ready.

</comment><comment><USER9> [https://github.com/CapacitorSet/rebridge/blob/master/index.j...](https://github.com/CapacitorSet/rebridge/blob/master/index.js)

A quick review...

1\. Could have made your life easier using promises or equivalent to handle the asynchronous flows.

2\. Could have made your life easier using lodash instead of implementing recursive functions that can throw stack overflows.

3\. JSON.parse can throw with invalid JSON and JSON.stringify can throw with circular references. There might be other cases in which those throw.

4\. Line 25: "if key is inspect, return thing". That wasn't in test code, but in the actual library code. That would execute in the application using this library.

...And that part was the one that pushed me over the edge and the extent of my review. I punched my keyboard.

Then, you claim it handles a redis connection transparently. But nobody would use a redis server without redundancy, you need a redis sentinel somehow, and this does not support it. When you have a sentinel you need to handle failover events. The library does none of this, and is therefore not suitable for production use.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thank you for your feedback.

* I don't think the asynchronous flow can be further simplified. If you do find a sleek solution, do submit a PR, or even an issue with some sample code.

* Stack overflow is not an issue at this time (and even less in the future, with tail call optimization in V8), except for pathological objects. As such, I didn't use lodash, to keep the library as small as possible.

* JSON.parse errors are not an issue, under the assumption that the Redis database is only written to by Rebridge itself. If you find otherwise, do submit an issue. Circular references are indeed a known limitation, documented in the README.

* Thanks, I removed it in beda881. It was probably a debug line.

For the sentinel, I haven't yet had to use it (I used it in a small Telegram bot with a single Redis server on a cheap VPS). I'll open an issue for that.

<comment><USER9> You can promisify redis during initialization and then use redis operations using promises.

You can still handle exceptions thrown by JSON.parse/stringify functions. Otherwise you can document that your functions are going to throw. (jsdoc: @throws)

You cannot assume a specific redis setup. If there's an intended redis setup then specify it in the README file.

Add an inline comment around your debugging code, e.g: (// FIXME: Do not check-in), so you can remove it while double-checking what you are committing.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> So basically

        db.hello = {world: ["foo", "bar"]};

vs

        db.set("hello", JSON.stringify(
          {world: ["foo", "bar"]}))

Why we don't have macros already.

<comment><AUTHOR> What do you mean by micros?

Anyway, yeah, it's just meant to be some sort of synchronous syntactic sugar on Redis.

Edit: I think you meant macros. In that case, consider that it's not as simple as that, because a) the redis library is only asynchronous, and b) such an approach requires to implement wrappers for every function that writes to the object, eg. Array.proto.splice.

<comment><USER11> Nice use of proxies and deasync. Will definitely make for cleaner code, and looks like a good simple pattern that can be implemented elsewhere.</comment></comment></comment>


What to do when your Peer perception varies greatly from Management perception - <AUTHOR>

I'm relatively new to the programming scene. I taught myself a new-fangled programming language and, as a result, landed my first programming job being taught yet another new-fangled programming language. After a short while (2-3 months) the person who hired me was usurped from their position and my new manager, though infrequently interacting with me, quickly developed what seemed to be an estimation of incompetency in myself. After about 6 months at this job the new manager had me dismissed on grounds of incompetence. The manager who originally fired me, and had been the one mentoring me, and actually working with me in a consistent fashion, was outraged but impotent to change things at that company (he did go out of his way to help me in my job search).
fast forward a couple months and, because of my experience learning two newfangled languages a company decides to take a chance on me and teach me Java.
In this new company my Manager is frequently gone for weeks at a time. I seem to have the same kind of dynamic, the people I work with seem to act and treat me like I'm doing fine, but my manager is convinced that I'm a lost cause.
I feel like I'm growing by leaps and bounds and that, all things considered, I'm doing pretty well. But my view of things isn't what keeps me in a job.
Any suggestions? Like experiences? <comment><USER2> Ask people. The best way to ground your perspective is to ask your colleagues (and boss) clear questions about how they think you are doing and how you can improve.

Obviously do this in private as, unless you have an especially open team, people are unlikely to give honest feedback in front of an audience.</comment>


8 Photos of New Yorkers Most People Don't See - <AUTHOR> http://m.imgur.com/a/gv7JJ

<comment><USER2> It's heartbreaking to take time and really consider the full cost of addiction in a lifetime

</comment><comment><USER3> New York, where the bums are better dressed and more fashionable than you

</comment><comment><USER4> Definitely more interesting than the latest iOS fad.</comment>


Ask HN: Portfolios. How little is enough? Does the type of content matter? - <AUTHOR> Short preface. My life didn't go so well (my own fault). I'm not that young anymore, have barely worked in my life, school didn't go so well, had to teach myself most of the stuff I know about programming. My friends think I'm pretty good and always seem to reassure me that I know far more than most of their friends who actually went to a university.
Because most of my problems stem from lack of motivation, focus and too much perfectionism. I fear the thought of being asked "Show me what you've created". It doesn't help that my friends think I'm a good programmer if I can't prove it.
But it's not that I'm not writing code. It's just that I'm usually tearing down what I've created. Like drawing on paper, then throwing it in the trash (no matter if it's good).
There is stuff that motivates me. Game development. Procedural generation. Visualization. It's just not that related to jobs I could have a chance of getting (like web development), if there is a chance anyway.
I had the idea that I could write example implementations and visualizations of algorithms used in procedural generation. Tufte-like. Perhaps a bit more in-depth than what is on the net already. I figured it has certain qualities that appeal to me, like being kind of modular. I can write one piece without having to worry about the next one, or having a tower named "things to do" in front of me. It's also not that much code, rather the code that needs to be written has to be clean and concise.
Would that be something I can put on my CV? If so, how "much" should there be so it doesn't look like "Hey that guy wrote 10 lines of JavaScript/C++/whatever and thinks we hire him". Even if I was happy to just get an internship. <comment><USER2> > It doesn't help that my friends think I'm a good programmer if I can't prove > it.

Get an open source project, and contribute or start your own and keep yourself motivated. Documentation is scarce on any project, so you could start there. Learn the project as you go. It won't be long before you start addressing issues in the issue tracker, become curious with the code and eventually do some pull requests and be an actual contributor to the codebase.

> too much perfectionism

This is perfect. Code quality in some OpenSource projects are terrible, really. It may need your perfectionism in code quality, optimizations etc. Trust me, I'm one. I love code reviews because I'm that kind of guy. Just prepare to make a stand as to why your code is better.

> There is stuff that motivates me. Game development. Procedural generation. > Visualization. It's just not that related to jobs I could have a chance of > getting (like web development), if there is a chance anyway.

There are corners in the web development world that need visualizations. Especially in the data gathering age, people need to make sense of all the data they have gathered. Learn charting and graphing libraries like D3. Learn vector graphics libraries like Raphael. It's not really that far off.

> I had the idea that I could write example implementations and visualizations > of algorithms used in procedural generation.

Create a blog. Write some code, even 10-liners. Pick them apart, show why it's wrong, why it's right, what is better. From what I see, you "specialize", and that's a good thing. There's this one front-end developer I know where every few days in a week, posts small snippets of CSS trickery that you couldn't even imagine possible (building animations, 3D stuff, just CSS). It's not really useful, but it shows the person is really into that kind of thing.

> Would that be something I can put on my CV? If so, how "much" should there > be so it doesn't look like "Hey that guy wrote 10 lines of > JavaScript/C++/whatever and thinks we hire him".

Everything I said above:

\- Learn a few tricks, library or no library at all.

\- Write a blog about that. Pick code apart.

\- Contribute to an open source project.</comment>


Man pages? tl;dr - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/rprieto/tldr

<comment> 97-109-107 I wonder how it is compared to [http://bropages.org/](http://bropages.org/)</comment>


GlassWire update 1.0.23b now available - <AUTHOR> http://blog.glasswire.com/2014/09/05/glasswire-1-0-23b-is-now-available-for-download/

<comment><AUTHOR> Thank you for all your feedback in the "ShowHN" post. We have fixed the font issues and increased stability along with a lot of other reported bugs.</comment>


Was life on the early Earth purple? - <AUTHOR> https://phys.org/news/2018-10-life-early-earth-purple.html <comment><USER2> Is there some reason why it would be mal-adaptive for a plant to have both retinal (yellow and green) and chlorophyll (red and blue) photosynthesis? Seems like it would greatly increase the energy it could harvest, which would probably be especially helpful to a shade plant.

<comment><USER3> Plants only have so much leaf area to devote to photosynthesis so if there's more light in certain frequencies, they're better off specializing than generalizing.

If the type of available light varied a lot, then generalizing would help more.</comment></comment>


The App Store isn't going to make you rich - <AUTHOR> http://stevenbooks.com/2014/10/21/i-made-20-and-was-ranked-in-the-top-20/

<comment><USER2> App store search and ranking is completely broken. My app for HN was updated 3 months ago, another one is getting push out this week. There are 3 other apps above mine that hasn't been updated in over 3 years. Some of them don't even work on retina devices.

The second problem is feedback, but this is with all software in general. Out of 1000 happy users, maybe one will bother taking their time to leave a feedback. Actually I'm just BSing here, I don't actually know the stat of happy users. I've included a contact button, but most never contact me first about problems. They just leave a 1 star review and it stays there -forever-, even though it's because HN changed their markup, even though I scramble to push out an update the next day.

Fortunately, I didn't develop this app with other people's reviews in mind or to get rich. It's serves mostly as an advertisement to attract potential clients and for personal use.

The app store today is mostly a playground for big dev shop. A lot of apps are free and serves as advertisement piece for big corporation. Either that or they work on the zero revenue model like snapchat. So, develop an app, make it free, get buy up by facebook, profit.

Edit: One other problem I didn't mention is the lack of refund policy. This is a serious deterrent to potential buyers that no app preview video will fix.

</comment><comment><USER3> Ranking doesn't mean much unless its in the top 100 free charts, because thats all anyone looks at when they go to find new apps.

Furthermore, a $19 from 62 downloads is quite good. You just need to learn distribution, it's the same as pushing out a website and not promoting it, then complaining that "web is dead". App store search and discovery is also broken, but that has nothing to do with a bubble.

<comment><AUTHOR> I agree that distribution is key. I think the point was more that Apps are not making near the money I would have thought they were making. To be ranked in the top 20 in "Top Grossing" for Finance, I would have expected that number to be much higher. That means that the far majority of Apps in that category aren't making much. In other words, I have distribution down much better than others.

The bubble I was referring to is really the bubble of way-to-many apps on the App Store. This bubble is driven by too many people having the expectation of creating an App, and having it "Go Big". As that expectation "pops", there will be far less people getting into the App game.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> _That app_ is not going to make you rich - it's too niche, and the $9/year price is sure to drive people away as well.

<comment><AUTHOR> Millions of people need to track their mileage for all kinds of reasons. It is one of the biggest tax deduction that is taken, so I don't really see it as niche (unless you mean something else).

I want to build a lasting business, that is why I charge $9 a year. I want to build something that will be around for a long time. I beat out a large majority of apps that are cheaper that do the same thing.

<comment><USER4> By niche I mean the number of people looking for a solution they can buy for their iphone. Most of those millions are using something already and even with some prominence your app only got 62 downloads, maybe your best case scenario is less than 200 downloads in a day which will be really hard to convert into a business.

You can confirm this by looking closely at other apps in your class to see if there really is a scenario where you could get eg 4 digits of downloads in one day.

I also think it's a weakness that it's not available outside iOS as it would be very hard for any company to standardise around you vs something all their drivers can use. It may also be a drawback that drivers have to pay for you themselves, or are companies able to pay subscriptions for them?

<comment><AUTHOR> >> You can confirm this by looking closely at other apps in your class to see if there really is a scenario where you could get eg 4 digits of downloads in one day.

I am not sure how you could confirm this since Apple doesn't publish the number of downloads that an App gets in a day for a particular app or set of apps.

>> I also think it's a weakness that it's not available outside iOS as it would be very hard for any company to standardise around you vs something all their drivers can use.

It is also available on Android.

>> It may also be a drawback that drivers have to pay for you themselves, or are companies able to pay subscriptions for them?

Yeah, I am planning on making more of an offering for companies, however, in initial research it has been very difficult to 1) Find companies that need to do mileage tracking and 2) Find the right person to talk to and (3) actually sell them on a package.

<comment><USER4> Google Play tells you download number approximations, additionally on iTunes / AppAnnie you really want to see an app like yours ranking well in a bigger category, being featured by Apple etc.

You could also approach this market from the other end - everyone has to give someone this data, and that someone has to do stuff with the data, maybe you could streamline it on their end so it's about more than saving the driver a small amount of time. The app may even be superfluous in some cases if you can just process GPS data a company collects from all their vehicles?

Edit: [https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.esocialllc...](https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.esocialllc.vel)

Seems like this is the biggest on Play, 100k - 500k downloads in 2 years, so there is hope, but it looks like unique differentiators and fast growth are a challenge.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Secret Rules Make It Pretty Easy for the FBI to Spy on Journalists - <AUTHOR> https://theintercept.com/2016/06/30/secret-rules-make-it-pretty-easy-for-the-fbi-to-spy-on-journalists/ <comment><USER2> And now Journalist moves into the top 10 jobs that people don't want to do. We've now moved fully to the 1890's where the press was controlled by the government. Happy that I'm an engineer....</comment>


Debugging an Erlang system by connecting to the Erlang VM with gdb - <AUTHOR> https://www.erlang-solutions.com/blog/how-to-analyse-a-beam-core-dump.html <comment><USER2> Redirect through external tracker (go.pardot) blocked by ublock; actual article:

[https://www.erlang-solutions.com/blog/how-to-analyse-a- beam-...](https://www.erlang-solutions.com/blog/how-to-analyse-a-beam-core- dump.html)

<comment><USER3> Ok, we changed the url from [http://www2.erlang- solutions.com/l/23452/2016-01-26/3kcj7b](http://www2.erlang- solutions.com/l/23452/2016-01-26/3kcj7b). Thanks!</comment></comment>


Facebook's Scribe technology now open source - <AUTHOR> http://www.facebook.com/notes.php?id=9445547199#/note.php?note_id=32008268919&id=9445547199&index=0

<comment><AUTHOR> Overview:

\- Scribe aggregates logged messages from every type of server application for Facebook.

\- It has a simple design in that it takes 2 string arguments: category and message.

\- There are no predefined categories; new logs are created with new categories.

\- Servers are arranged as a digraph with 1 outbound and 1 inbound edge.

\- To compensate for network and hardware failure messages are spooled to disk to be distributed when things are working again.

\- Uses thrift to accept log data from all different applications/languages.

Hosted on SF: <http://sourceforge.net/projects/scribeserver/>

</comment><comment><USER2> Facebook are pretty bad at driving open-source projects. For example: their Cassandra project has had no code commits for the last several months ( <http://code.google.com/p/the-cassandra-project/source/list> )

While this code and idea sharing is good, it seems like they mostly use it for publicity stunts (i.e. release something open-source, generate press and keep on developing it internally).

<comment><USER3> maybe Cassandra was mature and stable when they released it?

<comment><USER2> Unlikely that such a complex system does not have any bugs or improvements. Documentation for the project is also _very_ sparse.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Anyone know the advantages/disadvantages of Scribe vs. Syslog (<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syslog>)? Is it just that Syslog dies at scale?

</comment><comment><USER5> I remember hearing about Scribe last year from a FB Thift lecture and am really excited that they finally got it open sourced.

This definitely solves some design problems we have been having with news feeds.

Facebook's Thrift: Scalable Cross-Language Development <http://blip.tv/file/446822>

Thank you Facebook!

<comment><USER3> This is just the first part of the equation, I've done news feeds and one of the most difficult thing to do is aggregate similar actions from the network (such as X people from your network changed their profile photo). I've got a working thing but would love to know how they implemented this

<comment><USER5> My understanding is that each module (Photos, Notes, etc) has its own feed which gets aggregated to create the main News feed.

If each module is responsible for producing its own feed, it seems like this problem isn't too difficult to solve.

Couldn't you just cast this as a search engine problem?

You create a term vector with your social graph, and the corpus you are "searching" is people who updated their profile photo in the last 24 hours. You could compute the inverted index offline once an hour.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_index>

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Looks useful - I'd like to understand more... But not in the same way as the only response to the post announcing Scribe's release I saw. I love tender Diane's response: "Do you have basic information on how to utilize facebook ?? I'm old and don't know all the different things I can do on it. Do you have some sort of instruction or expanation of all the different functions and wat they are for and how they work ?? Thank you for your paitence and help, Diane Cheek "

</comment><comment><USER7> "We were collecting a few billion messages a day (which seemed like a lot at the time)"</comment>


Building the DOM faster: speculative parsing, async, defer and preload - <AUTHOR> https://hacks.mozilla.org/2017/09/building-the-dom-faster-speculative-parsing-async-defer-and-preload/ <comment><USER2> "One thing to pay attention to when preloading fonts is that you also have to set the crossorigin attribute even if the font is on the same domain: <link rel="preload" href="font.woff" as="font" crossorigin>"

But why?

<comment><USER3> Because the spec says font-loads from stylesheets must always be anonymous CORS. Thus the preload needs to match that.

[https://drafts.csswg.org/css-fonts/#font-fetching- requiremen...](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-fonts/#font-fetching-requirements)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Wow, that was a very interesting read. I had never even thought about the interaction between the different parts of the DOM before.

</comment><comment><USER5> Wondering if async attribute is actually a thing in 2017. Last time I observed chrome dev tools it seems that async is default behaviour at least for Chrome.

<comment><USER6> Depends on how you create it: in HTML, it matters but JS created script elements are async by default.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Great article. I can't think of another one that explains the complexity of how JavaScript and CSS block rendering. The diagrams really help.

</comment><comment><USER8> This seems like a very promising idea, especially since every site nowadays loads 12 scripts that were copy/pasted from eight different sources by six different developers all over the page, and each one just blocks everything no matter how fast your network or client is.

I mean, that's if you're lucky and the development team was relatively competent.

<comment><USER9> Build systems really help reduce the number of scripts (and stylesheets) loaded. I currently use Ember-CLI, and it's just a "vendor" script containing all your third-party scripts and another with your app-specific code.

The old-fashioned way of embedding scripts directly is really wasteful, I agree.

<comment><USER10> I think you vastly underestimate how wasteful 3rd party JS API implementations work. Especially for advertising, analytics, and other injected widgets.

Build systems exist, but that doesn't mean they are used everywhere or that all features can be integrated into them. The same goes for static analysis tools, dynamic analysis tools, perf optimization tools, security vulnerability testing tools, unit testing, automated integration testing, etc. -- they exist, but their coverage is _far_ less than 100%.

<comment><USER9> I understand build systems cannot solve every problem, and the mechanism described in the article is certainly useful. I was merely responding to the concern about third-party scripts with links copied-and-pasted mindlessly, and which would be better handled using a build system.

<comment><USER8> Sure, but adding GA to a page is what I meant by copy/paste, this still happens everywhere outside of the build process. Then of course marketing needs to add 10 other things and they can't figure out whatever hip new build tool someone set up and then suddenly things get really messy.

Yes this happened even at whatever company you think is a paragon of engineering best practices and modern development.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Signs your "profession" has been changing... When I click a story with "DOM" in it, expecting to read about a new Depth of Market interface.

<comment><USER10> Document Object Model (in the browser) has been a topic of heavy discussion on HN since I found it half a decade ago.

perhaps you just misjudged the composition of topics frequently posted to this site.

<comment><USER11> It was meant as humor :)

<comment><USER10> Strangely enough people usually can't infer sarcasm without body language.

This is the same reason the Secret Service put a large bounty on software that can accurately identify sarcasm from legit intent to do harm to political figures.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Uber avoids car pick-up app restrictions in London - <AUTHOR> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-35361153 <comment><USER2> >The California-based private-hire company had urged its users to oppose suggestions that had included a ban on apps being able to show where their nearby available vehicles were.

>a minimum five-minute delay between pick-up confirmations being sent out and drivers being able to collect their passengers

Whoa, that's not even trying to be subtle. That's just straight up trying to legislate a required level of crapiness.

<comment><USER3> >Other rejected measures included:

> a minimum five-minute delay between pick-up confirmations being sent out and > drivers being able to collect their passengers

> a requirement that private-hire companies let customers pre-book cars up to > seven days in advance

Um. Perhaps it would be better if the black cabs focused their efforts on enhancing their own user experience rather than trying to artificially cap it? :)

Also, this article links to nothing regarding the decision, it's just a single (unnamed) author's quick take, which is disappointing - if he/she is going to write so little, could they please provide a link to a first-hand source (the decision itself?) or a more thorough analysis?

I see from this that there are still several (perhaps minor) measures up in the air, and one measure that will be adopted is a "formal English language requirement[1]."

[1] [http://www.engadget.com/2016/01/20/uber-tfl-consultation- win...](http://www.engadget.com/2016/01/20/uber-tfl-consultation-win/)

(P.S. first post - did I link properly?)

<comment><USER4> "Um. Perhaps it would be better if the black cabs focused their efforts on enhancing their own user experience rather than trying to artificially cap it? :)"

That's certainly valid, but on the flip side, shouldn't Uber at least compete on even ground? They basically storm into town, ignoring things like taxi medallions and such. That's why laws like these start to get enforced, so that Uber can't try to sneak past laws by saying "we're not a cab company we're a <something only slightly different>".

<comment><USER5> Uber is competing on even ground. They've apparently designed a system that falls on the legal side of these medallion market protectionist schemes in most/many/a lot of locations. They're operating in the confines of municipal law.

There's a few taxi and black cab app hailing services that make Uber et. al. moot here in southern Germany. TaxiMagic, for example, is great and provides the full core set of capabilities (favorite drivers, estimated costs, time-to- pickup, in-app payments, etc.) and is actually a network of medallion-holding taxi drivers.

Consider that, if taxi companies offered competitive phone-based reservations (removing the convenience market differentiatior), they'd actually end up being the more reliable provider. No surge pricing, more consistent availability of favorite drivers, more predictable trunk/boot sizes ( no worrying if your luggage will fit when all the taxis in the city are ___ cars). etc.

There's a bunch of these app companies champing at the bit to find taxi providers to partner up. Which is to say... incumbent taxi ecosystems can absolutely be competitive and possibly offer a richer/more lucrative range of services beyond the awkward ride-along you get with an occasional Uber driver.

<comment><USER6> >Uber is competing on even ground. They've apparently designed a system that falls on the legal side of these medallion market protectionist schemes in most/many/a lot of locations. They're operating in the confines of municipal law.

It seems like that's not true in London, even though it would be trivial to comply. There, (my understanding is) you get to obey fewer regulations if you're offering a pre-booking service, and that exception requires that people be able to make a request for "a car at 3pm".

And IMHO, that's a pretty reasonable requirement; it's not saying customers _have to_ specify a time, and it allows requests of the form "3pm or ASAP". It's also a feature many customers have asked for. But for some reason, Uber has this bizarre insistence on not allowing pre-booking:

[https://www.quora.com/Why-doesnt-Uber-allow-customers-to- pre...](https://www.quora.com/Why-doesnt-Uber-allow-customers-to-pre-book- cabs/answer/Mark-Rogowsky)

<comment><USER5> I find that Quora answer interesting. I get the argument that Uber is building for the future, where cars-as-appliances just hang out and pick you up when you call for them. But if I know I'm going to need a car at a particular time, why wouldn't my Uber of the future want to know that it needs to adjust the random distribution of cars-for-hire, or logistically coordinate more rides to end up near me, for that time?

If Uber knows it needs a car at 3pm, it can push work availability notices to drivers near the pick-up location who may not at the moment be working. It would be a benefit to the driver to be able to have the guaranteed fare, and if the driver is late Uber can just give it to a different driver. Pre-booked cars can be priced differently for the driver or passenger to ensure the opportunities are attractive enough for the slight inconvenience of having to drive a bit more to pick up the passenger. And it's more convenient for the passenger to know a car will be there.

Pricing can still do its surge thing, or they could require a pre-booking fee or something.

I don't see how ^ would require a fundamental reengineering of the system.

(And, as a round-about way, I agree allowing pre-booking would be a reasonable requirement, if it's indeed an existing statue.)

<comment><USER6> Agree 100%; I made similar points in a reply to that answer:

[https://www.quora.com/Why-doesnt-Uber-allow-customers-to- pre...](https://www.quora.com/Why-doesnt-Uber-allow-customers-to-pre-book- cabs/answer/Mark-Rogowsky/comment/9205796)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I'm surprised a lot of the posts here are missing the key point.

The main argument black cab (taxi) drivers are making is that Transport for London (the regulatory body) forces them to go through a bunch of extra steps before they can work (1) whereas minicabs (e.g. Ubers) are free from this.

That said, it's definitely a good thing these measures did not pass because they simply made minicabs worse rather than trying to improve the situation for taxi drivers whose "it's unfair" argument is a valid one.

Even as someone who is open to new tech, there are nuanced arguments on both sides which are often overlooked.

(1) For example, taxi drivers must do a navigation test learning the vast majority of roads in London ("The Knowledge"); be CRB checked where minicab drivers do not.

<comment> adam-a You make a good point. I think some of those checks - the CRB for instance, are undoubtedly good things. I wish that the black cabs would move on and require operators to have GPS devices and not rely on "The Knowledge". Impressive as it is, in my experience it results in longer routes and often relies on the passenger knowing where they are going.

The main sticking point though must be the fares though - black cabs are significantly more expensive than Uber, and this is the main reason they are losing business IMO. I would be interested to see a breakdown of why the fares are more. Is it simply more money in the pockets of the drivers? Or does the extra money pay for better vehicles, insurance, training, taxes etc?

<comment> Digit-Al I don't know _why_ they cost what they do, but black cab taxi fares are set by TfL and they can't charge any more or less. Here is the breakdown [https://tfl.gov.uk/modes/taxis-and-minicabs/taxi- fares/tarif...](https://tfl.gov.uk/modes/taxis-and-minicabs/taxi- fares/tariffs)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> It's articles like these that make me wonder how many ridiculous laws there are that are not in the public consciousness. How can this possibly help make our lives better?

<comment><USER9> All the laws regulating taxi-like services were enacted because of abuses before they existed. It's a classic case of "be careful what you ask for."

<comment><USER10> > All the laws regulating taxi-like services were enacted because of abuses > before they existed.

I'm not convinced. What does the hour pre-booking requirement in Miami do to prevent previous abuses? What does the business test that drivers have to pass in Germany do to prevent previous abuses? What does NYC's 30+ day process to get the correct license do to prevent previous abuses? These all seem like laws regulating taxi-like services only for the benefit of making taxis more competitive.

The taxi industry in NYC has given the mayor over $500,000. Presumably they're looking to get laws passed (like the proposed cap on uber) in order to protect themselves, not to prevent abuses that previously existed. Maybe it's helpful to talk about what the previous abuses were, and then look at what are the best solutions to that in a world where everyone has smartphones. I'm not convinced that all (or even most) of the regulations out there are to prevent previous abuses, but maybe I'm missing something here.

<comment><USER11> > _The taxi industry in NYC has given the mayor over $500,000_

You say this as if Uber isn't _heavily_ involved in lobbying for their own benefit.

I'll consider Uber to be on a level-playing field when I can be certain that any car I climb into has the proper insurance required for transporting people commercially. Right now it seems like Uber is putting that responsibility on the drivers themselves (which, I suppose, is their right). But I believe that's a huge cost advantage (with associated externalities when someone is hurt badly).

<comment><USER10> > You say this as if Uber isn't heavily involved in lobbying for their own > benefit.

No. I say it to point out that there are laws that aren't for the public good. At that point, we're free to have an open discussion about which laws are for the public good and which aren't. If we start by assuming all laws are enacted to prevent previous abuses, we miss a key point here.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> IME the service offered by black cabs is worse than in NYC - they apparently have 'discretion' on accepting a fare or not, so even if they pull over they might just say they don't want to go in that direction. I remember saying 'sorry, I thought I was supposed to tell /you/ where /I/ want to go'. A problem that is compounded by the fact that the Underground shuts down at night.

Then again, my last experience with Uber was waiting 20 mins in the LGA cold for a driver '10 minutes away' never to arrive who then just cancelled the ride. And apparently because he never picked me up can't leave a negative review.

<comment><USER13> Honest question, why would you call an Uber to LGA? LGA has massive lines of taxis waiting to take you home. You'd easily get a cab in less than twenty minutes that is legally required to take you to your location.

<comment><USER14> Not OP, I live in a different city, YMMV, etc

I hate taking taxis. Their CC machine is always "broken", they always try to take me in some funky route, cabs are always dirty, and there's no way for me to give feedback on crappy drivers. I don't know if the taxis at LGA have these same problems, but I'd rather wait 10 minutes for an Uber than get an immediate taxi

<comment><USER15> > Their CC machine is always "broken"

If this ever happens to you, the answer is simple: tell them, "thanks for the free ride". If they don't tell you before the ride starts that the credit card machine is broken, you are not required to pay. (This applies both in New York and San Francisco).

Though for what it's worth, I'm not sure I've _ever_ had that happen in NYC, in almost ten years of living here and taking cabs here. The only time that's ever happened to me is in the Bay Area (where the cabs really do deserve their bad reputation).

<comment><USER16> > If this ever happens to you, the answer is simple: tell them, "thanks for > the free ride".

Done that on rides from JFK. Been threatened for a while. Like physically. Then suddenly the machine worked. Oh wonder.

The first time this happened to me, also JFK, I was half delirious after an intercontinental trip with long delays. The first time in the US. So back then I didn't feel like having a forceful confrontation with a cabbie I had a hard time understanding.

I think that's much less likely to happen to you if you live there. But it's usually pretty easy for a driver to recognize whether you're from NYC. Language, destination, asking outright...

EDIT: typo.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Yeah Uber is dodgy but when I don't know where I am in London, I can put a pin on a map and the driver will arrive to that point. Oh and I know their name and license plate instantly

</comment><comment><USER18> but they make all of our lives better....</comment>


Do Your Homework in Python - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/p/640538e599bb

<comment><USER2> I'm glad I practiced mathematics and writing and read lit and history in school.

I learned a lot of great supplementary things during that time fueled by my curiosity, but without the sort of mediocre communal baseline, I might have just spent all of my time listening to the full catalogs of obscure punk labels and mastering ideal StarCraft strategies. Fun times, of course, but it's nice to pepper that with some traits and knowledges society might need too.

Some homework is a waste of time. Other parts of it are just repeated application of principles that require drilling for deep concepts to really hit home. When you're a student faced with the work, it's unlikely you will be able to reliably tell the difference, in order to pythonize the bad and practice the good.

<comment><AUTHOR> As much as I agree that students including myself are more likely to misjudge these situations than more experienced products of academia, the thought of admitting to inevitably bad decisions makes me cringe.

If myself and others in similar circumstance yield our own inspirations in favor of others' wise words, we'll be throwing passion and ambition to the ground. Although I accept that students are statistically better off under advice of elders, I purposely ignore the fact, assuring myself of my own self- motivation and curiosity.

Thank you for the reply. I really do appreciate your honest comments.</comment></comment>


An Analysis of the ProtonMail Cryptographic Architecture [pdf] - <AUTHOR> https://eprint.iacr.org/2018/1121.pdf <comment><USER2> It seems Nadim (the author of this paper) took it really badly when we called him out for intentionally spreading fake news this weekend. Putting aside the author's personal biases for a moment, the difference of opinion with Nadim can be boiled down to a couple elements.

The key question being debated is whether or not web applications can constitute end to end encryption. Nadim's opinion is that, as he writes, "no webmail-style application could". His viewpoint is that E2EE is not possible with web clients, period, end of discussion. This is a rather extreme position to take as it would also apply to the web versions of Whatsapp or Wire, for instance.

ProtonMail, like Whatsapp and Wire, offers apps on Linux, Windows, MacOS, iOS, and Android. Like Whatsapp and Wire, we also offer a web app. The major opinion Nadim is expressing here is that we should offer all the above, minus the web-app, because in his opinion, you can't do end-to-end encryption in a webapp. Obviously Whatspp and Wire do not share this opinion. Signal coincidentally does share this opinion.

We do understand Nadim's arguments, and agree that web-apps are less secure than say a native iOS app. Where we differ in opinion is that we don't believe the threat model of web-apps is so fundamentally different from an iOS app, that we need to take the step of not offering a web-app at all. When it comes to mobile apps for instance, the situation is really not so different, particularly since automatic updates are the norm and recommended for security.

There are definitely design decisions that we could have taken to make ProtonMail more secure (no passwords, only passphrases, sync keys between devices using QR codes, no web app etc), but this could compromise usability to a large degree, which runs contrary to our goals.

Disagreeing on design decisions however, does not indicate that the cryptography is unsound or improperly implemented, as this paper seems to imply. That's why this paper reminds us a bit of the now retracted story in the Guardian about Whatsapp's "security flaw", which was in fact a design decision. It is also a bit disingenuous to claim that ProtonMail doesn't meet it's "self-professed security goals", when we have fundamentally different interpretations of those security goals.

<comment> tonic-music Where is this Windows app of which you speak? I don't see it linked on your website.

<comment><USER2> protonmail.com/bridge

</comment></comment></comment><comment> tonic-music Just sent this bug report (from the Android client, lol). Will post their response here:

What is the official response to this report?

[https://eprint.iacr.org/2018/1121.pdf](https://eprint.iacr.org/2018/1121.pdf)

I'm not a cryptography expert but I am a web developer and even I can figure out that typing my password into a web app reveals my private key to you if you want to steal it.

The author is right in one respect: the online and self- updating nature of the web app makes it impossible for anyone to verify what code you're really running.

Reading this report also makes me question your response to the recent hack/extortion incident. Now, I'm not really convinced about your response.

There's nothing in my PM account that's secret and I don't really care if you were hacked. I use PM to avoid being tracked for advertising. But I do agree with the author of this paper that you shouldn't make these security claims which aren't true.

Thanks in advance for your response.

\-- D

<comment><USER2> See our response above, hopefully that gives a bit more insight into why we have decided to continue offering a web-app.

</comment></comment><comment> tonic-music Very interesting, especially in light of the recent claimed hacks to ProtonMail. I've just switched to PM recently and, while I'm no cryptography expert, it did seem unlikely that typing my password into a browser app could ever be considered very secure -- certainly not "invisible" to PM since, as the author points out, you can't see or validate the code running in the browser.

<comment><USER3> You can actually see what code your browser is running, you have view source and all the developer tools to analyze the JS code.

This is their main defense, they will probably post a link to their GitHub page where the code of the front end application is hosted.

The thing is, to validate that the code published in GitHub is the same one that you're running right now while you're logged into ProtonMail, requires a dynamic analysis challenge that is quite not achievable.

So if ProtonMail decides to go rogue, or if an attacker compromises their servers, it would be doable to send all users, or some targeted users, a modified version of the webapp which steals your password, retrieves the decrypted key, etc, etc, etc.

<comment> tonic-music I think we all know about view source. The risk lies exactly where you described it. I've never heard of being able to diff a running web page against a set of source repositories. Perhaps another HN reader will go invent that.</comment></comment></comment>


Operation troll the nsa - <AUTHOR> http://www.trollthensa.com/

<comment><USER2> Let's see:

1) Served over raw HTTP so that Uncle Sam can add your request to his database.

2) Twitter and Facebook buttons up in the top right-hand corner in case you feel like associating your real-world identity with trollthensa.com.

3) The Big G's analytics running in the background just in case Twitter and Facebook didn't collect enough data.

4) All Javascript and typefaces served from CDNs.

5) Email hosted on... GMail. Because Google haven't been accused of granting the US Government carte-blanche access to their users' emails. Ever.

But don't worry, because they got their domain through DomainsByProxy, notable champions of Internet freedom!

This is why the PRISM leak won't change anything. It's all well and good to say "I'm OUTRAGED over what's going on", but it doesn't absolve you of the responsibility to start taking privacy seriously and reducing (or eliminating) your dependence on services which could trivially compromise your users' data.

</comment><comment><USER3> This was tried back when Eschelon was made public, didn't do much...

<comment><AUTHOR> I found the text interestingly well written more than anything else. I guess it indeed won't make any noticeable change.

<comment><USER4> What if you send it to WH? Maybe they have a disk space cap too.

<comment><AUTHOR> That would be direct targeting. Originally, the mail can be send to whoever you want.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> [http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/N/NSA-line- eater.html](http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/N/NSA-line-eater.html)

</comment><comment><USER6> i think these guys are seriously underestimating the computing power the nsa has accumulated.

<comment><USER7> And the algorithms. If they are intercepting everything and make use of anything like 'data finds data', these will just be ignored.

<comment><USER6> Exactly. Filtering out this pre-known email is even trivial. And in a world where AIs write stories ([http://narrativescience.com](http://narrativescience.com)) I'm pretty sure the nsa does a lot more than filtering for keywords.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> This is dumb.</comment>


Teach 3-6 Yr Olds How To Code With Robotic Turtles - <AUTHOR> http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/danshapiro/robot-turtles-the-board-game-for-little-programmer?ref=friends_backed

<comment><USER2> Reminds me of this, in board game form: [http://drtechniko.com/2012/04/09/how- to-train-your-robot/](http://drtechniko.com/2012/04/09/how-to-train-your- robot/)</comment>


Everything and Nothing Is a Tech Company Now - <AUTHOR> https://www.wired.com/story/everything-nothing-tech-company-now/ <comment><USER2> If the local grocery store or the local farmer was using the following 2010s tech buzzwords of the decade like AWS, Docker, Kubernetes, Tensorflow, AI, Blockchain, TPUs, Quantum Neural Turing Machines, etc in their pitch to investors to scale their local shop to 100 million customers in a month, then they could sort of qualify as a 'tech company' in the 2020s and raise their series G. /s

Everyone and their camels is somehow now working for a 'Tech company' because they are using someone else's tech and immediately think they can scale like Facebook or Google. When the cloud waiter/waitress gives you the final balance sheet for your AWS/GCP/AZ kubernetes buffet, you will be so disappointed to call yourself a 'tech company' only for you to kamikaze your startup shop into the ground.</comment>


An inteview with Brian Kernighan (2009) - <AUTHOR> https://www.computerworld.com/article/3488217/an-inteview-with-brian-kernighan-co-developer-of-awk-and-ampl.html <comment><AUTHOR> when he talks about the computing possibilities of today "combining large building blocks and less on detailed logic of little things" and services like AWS ... I had to check several times when this article was originally published: 2009!</comment>


Mark Cuban on How to Fix the U.S. Economy - <AUTHOR> http://www.inc.com/graham-winfrey/mark-cuban-on-his-plan-to-fix-the-economy.html?cid=sf01002

<comment><AUTHOR> "If Mark Cuban is running the economy, I'd go and say, 'Sallie Mae, the maximum amount that you're allowed to guarantee for any student in a year is $10,000, period, end of story,'" he said.</comment>


Ex employee spills 'sex, sleaze and secrets' of Facebook - <AUTHOR> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2165566/Mark-Zuckerberg-The-sex-sleaze-secrets-Facebooks-little-emperor.html

<comment><USER2> WOW, guess somebody kept silent until they got there bonus. Wonder why.

It is hard to take anything like this too serious without hearing from others and given it is to promote a book I do find it somewhat biased.

I doubt that things were as bad as she is saying and alot of it seems to be sour grapes. Are there no female programmers at facebook? Also if a company wants it's engineers who it pays alot of money closer to work what has that to do with reception/support staff who are paid less. Nothing to do with sex at all.

I'm not a great fan of facebook, but I still find such dramatisations a little off-key and realy believe this person is making mountains out of a mole hill and claiming it as sex descrimination, YET not actualy pursuing any legal redress, though they did write a book. That in itself lends me to believe that she is a shallow, spiteful, manipulative person who happens to be a female.

Realy does alot of females a diservice and in that I shall not be labeling any of this upon any sex or gender and put it down to a greedy person who is bitter.

Anybody who works at facebook able to comment upon this novel she has written?

</comment><comment><USER3> I may be biased because I'm a technical male, but From reading thisI got the impression that she was really just mad that she felt left out of the fun the technical people were having. The fact that they were white or male may been a side effect of that, but it was really a stretch for her to say that because they referred to the marketing and hr people as dumb as somehow being a sexist or race thing.

The line "whilst everyone else (particularly the nontechnical employees on the customer support team who were mostly female and sometime, unlike the white and Asian engineering team, black) were assumed to be duller..." seems to be trying to get you to believe that the white/asian engineering people hate black people. I find that hard to believe

. This reads more like bad gossip than anything else.</comment>


A single comment from Reddit has lead to a movie deal - <AUTHOR> http://www.reddit.com/r/RomeSweetRome/comments/k7xlr/an_announcement/

<comment><AUTHOR> The original threads can be found here: [http://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/k067x/could_i_des...](http://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/k067x/could_i_destroy_the_entire_roman_empire_during/c2giwm4)</comment>


Revolt against 'rich parasites' at Burning Man Festival - <AUTHOR> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/09/04/revolution-against-rich-parasites-at-utopian-burning-man-festiva/ <comment><USER2> $390 + $80 vehicle pass + fees.

Get real, they are ALL jet-setters & rich kids.

It's the red hats vs the blue hats. [http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0684186/](http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0684186/) The haves vs the have mores.

Yes I'm a little bit down on the whole burning man thing.

You want peace & love? Have a solar panel installation party. Plant trees party. Pick up sea trash party.

Not a check out my dreads, tattoo & flashy bicycle party.

<comment><USER3> Oh yeah, because being able to afford $470 is a sign of decadent wealth.

<comment><USER4> And getting there, and preparing everything, and taking time off of whatever work you have to do. It certainly isn't decadent wealth but it's probably more money than a lot of people can responsibly spend, especially if you aren't within, say, 500 miles of black rock

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Any sufficiently large group will eventually develop sub-groups. Those sub- groups may become sufficiently polarized to generate conflict among them.

Reading about this Burning Man dilemma, I'm reminded of the People's Front of Judea battling the Campaign for a Free Galilee to the death over _who first conceived of the plot to kidnap Pontius Pilate 's wife_ [0].

Human beings will fight over anything.

[0] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monty_Python%27s_Life_of_Brian](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monty_Python%27s_Life_of_Brian)

<comment><USER6> This is more complex.

<comment><USER7> More complex than what, exactly?

<comment><USER6> Than the parent's depiction of this situation as simplya case of fraternal squabbling.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I've always had the notion that a festival that you arrived at and departed completely naked, carrying nothing just as you do in the world would be awesome. Burning man became more about what you could shlep into the desert to show off than anything.

And as a poor kid growing up, nothing pissed me off in quite the unique and wonderful way as "show and tell" at school.

<comment><USER9> > I've always had the notion that a festival that you arrived at and departed > completely naked, carrying nothing just as you do in the world would be > awesome.

Some people do this at Burning Man, but it's a good thing they're in the minority. The alternative would not be "awesome" but a horrifying week of crises as naked people died en masse in the dust.

<comment><USER8> Eyyahh. Not really suggesting you show up to _Burning Man_ naked. This is a bad idea.

I was thinking perhaps of a hypothetical festival where you show up naked but the festival itself provides everything to everyone equally. Walk in the door and there's 53' trailers full of goodwill-like clothing, tons of raw food ingredients for the cooking, hand tools and wood for building etc. In short, everyone arrives in a new "world" as equals and makes of it what they can. Bonus points for _not_ allowing real names or talk of who you were on the "outside".

Oh crap. I'm kind of describing prison. So umm... like jail but not so sucky.

<comment><USER10> >like jail but not so sucky

Maybe that's the whole point. It is the intentions of the participants that define the experience. After all monestaries are just like prison with spartan conditions and rigid routines, but completely different in how the participants experience it. Voluntary vs. Involuntary. Searching for an experience vs. Counting down the days. Etc.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Let me see if I can explain all of this, as someone who has been 9 times since 2004.

There is a huge debate if rich people and their rich people only camps are a good addition to Burning Man. The rule is, your camp can not be closed and if you camp on the main street, Esplanade, you are definitely not a closed camp. Meaning, that anyone can walk in and hangout and you can make new friends or share alcohol and all that. You are suppose to have regular event that welcome outsiders. Esplanade spots are coveted locations and some camps spend years at semi-coveted locations off the Esplanade trying to prove to the Burning Man Org they good enough to be a Esplanade camp.

The problems with rich people camps like White Ocean (The camp that was vandalized) is they tend to be closed, they pay others to cook for them, they did not shop for their food, the camps are full of large RV's, they flew in, they did not build anything and they don't welcome outsiders into their camp. White Ocean pays people to do all their dirty work, include constructing their camp art. Some of the rich people camps are also for profit camps, which is completely against the rules (Not saying White Ocean is).

What makes it worse is there are plenty of stories of people walking by a rich camp while they are having a party and walking in and then bouncers tossing them out. That runs against every thing that Burning Man is and stands for. You can't not have private parties with bouncers and you should not even have bouncers for your camp. There are also a number of stories of people who signed up for work at Burning Man then not getting paid. Which not only is working at Burning Man illegal, so is not paying people who do.

On the flip side of the coin, a lot of the large art projects and major sound camps are sponsored by rich folks since the art project and sound camps can have budgets that are upwards to a million dollars. Ya, no joke. The ugly truth of Burning Man is that it needs rich people but it does not want its culture.

Let me just add, celebrities going to Burning Man is a non-issue. No one gives a fuck who you are off the Playa. No one does. Plus, all of the celebrities wear masks, so you don't even know they are there. You could be standing next to Katy Parry in the coffee line in Center Camp and not even know it. The only issue I see is that someone like Paris Hilton did nothing to get there. She got her assistant to buy a ticket off Stubhub and then flew in on a private jet or helicopter. She did not setup her camp, buy her food or sit in line. She just showed up and she won't add anything to Burning Man.

Edited: $390 + $80 is still cheap considering you are there for 7 - 9 days and you can't see what you see at Burning Man when you are not at Burning Man.

<comment> xkcd-sucks > art project and sound camps can have budgets that are upwards to a million > dollars. Ya, no joke. The ugly truth of Burning Man is that it needs rich > people but it does not want its culture

Super flashy art installations and professional quality music acts aren't integral to the burning man core ethos, while radical self-sufficiency is. One might even contend that large-budget things condition people to act as consumers of culture, which is certainly anti-burning-man.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> Seems like a microcosm of the gentrification controversy. I'd like to see BM fork, just to see a social experiment play out, as it might be instructive for other issues that are not so conducive to experimentation.

Have a BM2 where the original ethos is more strictly enforced, and see if all the rich people now find BM1 too phony and want to move to BM2 where they can get a more "authentic" experience, then proceed to ruin that with their money for the "artistic class". Or maybe everyone just prefers nicer things. Honestly curious.

</comment><comment><USER13> For once, I find myself agreeing with the write-up. They really were parasites (without the quotes) and the others really were hooligans. None of them seemed to understand the spirit of the event.

About jet-setters at least, there is little that can be done. Fork the event?

<comment><USER14> I think the solution is to lock the event early in the week and close the airstrip. That would mean if you want to be there for the weekend, you have to drive there (from Reno, at least) and stay at least 5 days in the desert. Those that want comfort and convenience need to get the message that Burning Man isn't for them and yet Burning Man should still be inclusive to everyone who's willing to embrace the principles behind it.

But I'm also extremely sympathetic to the vandals if the stories of bouncers are true. My favorite part of the years that I went was wandering into random camps and starting conversations with strangers. I met a lot of amazing people and still call some of them friends. There was something about Burning Man that allowed people to discard social conventions which keep people separated that was truly magical. If this aspect of the festival has been lost, or is being lost, I can see a lot of people being justifiably angry at the people responsible for that change.

<comment><USER11> I have worked at the Airport a few years and I am starting to see that what the problem is, is the Airport. Originally, it was so that people who owned airplanes could fly their planes there. Which for many years worked out really well. The Airport is self sufficient, a team of Volunteer's operate it and they smooth out all the necessary BS with BLM and FAA.

However, the Airport is the way that the people who don't contribute anything to Burning Man get into Burning Man. They need to go back to non-commerical flight only.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> I went to Burning Man in 2012 and had a blast, but there was definitely an air of "us and them". The poor nerds in a 99' camper bus versus the wealthy in their camps, with air conditioning, food, drugs, and women. I'm sad that the vandalism occurred, but happy the conversation has started. These people are parasites, and they're trying to recreate Burning Man in their own image of wealth and decadence. It's time for a change and I really hope the organizers listen.

<comment><USER16> It's only the wealthy that have women or drugs or food at Burning Man? Whatever. Pretty sure everyone has drugs, for starters, and "women", leaving aside you considering them a commodity, don't exactly seem scarce either.

<comment><USER17> OP is most likely referring to camps flying in models, in which case women are quite literally being treated as a commodity.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Any festival that becomes an institution will be invaded by wealthy parasites more concerned about tweeting and posting photos on Instagram than being there. Burning Man has become a place where you need to show off, just like Coachella, yeah remember when Coachella was "underground" and was a reaction against commercial festivals and ticketmaster ? lol ...

</comment><comment><USER19> I have never been to burning man but heard about it from friends who have been going for years. They say that people who are used to having closed boundaries around them, for example the Paris Hiltons of the world, have impacted on the bohemian nature of the event.

<comment><USER20> Well the rich need that extra protection. This incident reinforces that fact. If anything, this shows that the wealthy should build fences with barbed wire on top.

Or maybe increase the BM entry fee so that fewer of these hooligans can afford to come.

<comment><USER21> Or you could be rich and just, you know, camp out like everyone else. I think part of the problem is that they want to "rough it" like the traditional Burning Man culture without actually having to rough it, and keeping people out, which is anathema to the people who go there for the inclusion and unity.

<comment> xkcd-sucks Oh, but banning paid private event staff is uninclusive towards people with limited outdoors experience!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> "The Burning Man Festival" has reached "The People's Front of Judea" phase. Funny stuff, or why we need a World War for people to get real.

</comment><comment><USER23> _Jumps_ Hey - look down there! Check out the sharks! Cool!

</comment><comment><USER20> I don't understand why this is a problem.

Wealthy people should just build an electric fence around their section, install security cameras and hire guards to patrol the perimeter. Problem solved.

<comment><USER11> No, that is the problem. Esplanade camps are suppose to be open to everyone, not just camp members. If you don't like that, then you don't camp on Esplanade, you camp farther back.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> Here are some facts:

-Is whiteocean a plug and play elitist camp - yes absolutely. -are they inclusive? No they are not. -Is burning man's mantra radical inclusion? - Yes.

The jist is burning man has a mantra to radical inclusion and even if white ocean is a plug and play camp or elitist they have to be included. So by logic the act is wrong and I say this as someone who despises them.</comment>


Yes, there really is scientific consensus on climate change - <AUTHOR> http://thebulletin.org/yes-there-really-scientific-consensus-climate-change9332#.Vw2ChZG0_eM.hackernews <comment><USER2> The comments in this article really make me sad.

<comment><USER3> Commiserations - but what is the point of your comment? You have a gut feeling it's correct? I guess you mean that you agree with the proposition. Fair enough but why not confront the hard arguments on either side?

<comment><USER2> You're right, I usually try to have more substance in my comments. This one was a bit knee jerk.

I'm not confronting the argument because I'm tired of it.

I side with the article so the comments make me sad because so many people try to justify why 97% is not really 97%.

I'm of the standpoint that addressing climate change is:

1\. Morally right because of the impact on future generations

2\. Good for the economy (creates jobs and lessons dependency on sources of energy that are not harvested locally)

3\. Something the market demands (just look at Tesla Model 3 sales)

It's a win any way you cut it. The comments remind me that for a lot of people, climate change denying is a religion not a reasoned opinion.

To those who read this who are deniers, please don't be offended and I don't have the energy to defend climate change. But this is my opinion on the matter.</comment></comment></comment>


Google Maps and Earth get new high resolution imagery - <AUTHOR> http://www.slashgear.com/google-maps-and-earth-get-new-high-resolution-imagery-17257468/

<comment><USER2> Barely more than copy and paste from Google's announcement at [http://google- latlong.blogspot.ca/2012/11/imagery-update-tou...](http://google- latlong.blogspot.ca/2012/11/imagery-update-tour-sites-around-world.html)</comment>


Gitbox — Version Control as easy as Mail. - <AUTHOR> http://gitboxapp.com/ <comment><USER2> I have good luck using SourceTree from Atlassian: <http://sourcetreeapp.com/> The price is right: free.

</comment><comment><USER3> Seems pretty elegant. Wish there was a windows equivalent...</comment>


Genius is more common than you think - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/genius-week/genius-is-more-common-than-you-think-c52ac9b7bc88

<comment><USER2> How should the facts of this article (at least a significant portion of inventions have multiple simultaneous creations) inform us with respect to "Intellectual Property"? If, as trends seem to be leading, "Intellectual Property" is less a short term monopoly to incentivize innovations, and more of perpetual ownership of an idea, shouldn't we be granting part-ownership for the other people that more-or-less simultaneously create something? That way we're not dis-incentivizing innovation, there's a chance for part ownership in the next lightbulb or telegraph or whatever big time monopoly turns up as "Intellectual Property".

</comment><comment><USER3> Interesting read. A topic I've thought about frequently as well.

I'm surprised this didn't gain more momentum.. but the timing of exposition here seems to be often more important than content.</comment>