Hangouts now available in Gmail, Google+ account not required - <AUTHOR> http://googleenterprise.blogspot.com/2012/07/video-chat-with-whole-team-with.html

<comment><USER2> Google Hangouts is a surprisingly, truly amazing product, marred by its relationship with Google+.

<comment><USER3> How would it work in your ideal world?

Even if you don't want to use Google+, why can't you think of it as just another account you have to make. Imagine Hangouts was a great stand-alone product made by a start-up. You'd still need a whole different account to use that stand-alone Hangouts product.

So I'd suggest just looking at it like that, if you really don't want anything to do with the whole Google+ part of Hangouts. Plus, it looks like Google wants to make Hangouts work in more of their services than just Google+, and I think that's a great idea. They could probably implement Hangouts in a lot of their other products, to get people to "video socialize" around them, and maybe build fun ways to use it with those other products.

<comment><USER4> Can't answer for the OP, but for me it would be super-convenient if I could launch a hangout from Google Talk.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> ...not quite. The hangout backend will now power all video calls, but to do more than a 1-on-1 chat, you will still need a G+ profile.

Interesting as the old backend was p2p, but it sounds like hangouts are a more standard client/server. Maybe Google needed more voice data to mine. Actually better yet, facial expression data to mine. After all, Glass could live and die by its ability to correctly identify faces.

<comment><USER6> Why would Google want to mine private video streams when they already have a whole library of static content in the form of YouTube? Besides just the privacy concerns, it would be easier to work with content that's sitting on a disk somewhere, rather than trying to operate on data in-flight.

<comment><USER5> Glass needs to operate on data in-flight, what better way to train it? However, you do have a point wrt to Youtube. I think I left my <cynicism> tag out of the previous post.

<comment><USER7> I don't know why you are getting down-voted. It is in Google's interest to have a large training corpus of faces for many machine learning algorithms (face recognition, expression recognition, age detection, etc.).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> > Google+ account not required

I think this is misleading on Google's part...

From outward appearances, everyone that has a Google account (aka. GMail) has a G+ account, and the only thing that changes when you "sign up" (or otherwise activate) is that you can log in to it yourself.

I was on G+ for awhile, but I've now since disabled it in my control panel, and yet people still share crap with me (as I'm still in their "circles") -- it just goes to my email. I think the service is always-on, they just don't let you into the UI if it's not "active".

<comment><USER9> I can share things with non-Gmail people too on G+. There is an option to share by email with people not using G+ yet. So it's not always-on, they just allow sharing via email.

<comment><USER10> It's important to note that those 'share by email' things are something the sharer specifically checked - it's not checked by default. If the shares are unwanted, I would complain to the person sharing them (although one imagines the email must include an opt-out link.)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Disappointing that this doesn't include screen sharing. Our team have been using Google Hangouts for remote code reviews as it seems to be one of the better free options for screen sharing at a 30" monitor resolution (MeetingBurner is probably slightly better though). I'd much rather just use our Google apps gmail interface, rather than having to create a second Google+ account.

<comment><USER12> I use join.me for conducting remote code interviews; there's no Linux client (unfortunately), but for Windows/OS X, it's very nice and extremely readable.

<comment><USER13> Check out screenleap. I've been using it for a week now and love it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> The truly radical change in Hangout is of course the recent addition of an alert sound being played when Hangout warns you they're about to kill your chat for no particular reason.

Long lived hangouts rarely get to stay on screen, so the silent "are you still there" message shortly followed by a disconnect was painful.

I'm still not sure how much money Google spends on maintaining p2p video calls open that makes it worth pushing users to stop using Hangout so darn much.

<comment><USER15> > I'm still not sure how much money Google spends on maintaining p2p video > calls open that makes it worth pushing users to stop using Hangout so darn > much.

Maybe because it's not p2p?

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> Perhaps this is evidence of Google realizing that they're putting too many good products inside of a product that nobody wants to use? Perhaps Google has regained its sanity?

Haha, just kidding. They're just going to use this to try and get more people on Google+

</comment><comment><USER17> Would greatly improve the service...

</comment><comment><USER18> I hope this is the first in a long line of reducing redundancy across Google's messaging platforms. Google+ posts, Google Talk, Google Hangouts, Google+ Messenger, Google Voice. Ahh! I wonder if iMessage's simplicity is motivating it?

I love the power of Google Voice but it doesn't get much love and iMessage is damn simple and pretty.</comment>


Facebook's Wealthy Investors Limit IPO by Pushing $100 Billion Value - <AUTHOR> http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-02-23/facebook-insiders-limit-ipo-by-pushing-100-billion-value-tech.html <comment><USER2> I'm bearish. I suppose it's possible that Facebook turns out to be the next Amazon/Ebay/Google, but this is ridiculous:

>"Facebook is a blue-chip stock and it's not even public yet," said Kevin Landis, portfolio manager for the Firsthand Technology Value Fund..."

Who says something like that? A stock pumper or somebody clueless. According to Wikipedia:

 _a blue chip is stock in a corporation with a national reputation for quality, reliability and the ability to operate profitably in good times and bad._

Does that sound like Facebook to anyone else? I'd buy into the SV hype train a little more if it just lost a _little_ bit of the exaggerated luster. This kind of commentary is what gets us in trouble.</comment>


iPad Mini Web Design and Development Early Best Practices - <AUTHOR> http://www.mobify.com/blog/5-ipad-mini-design-development-best-practices?utm_source=hackernews&utm_medium=submission&utm_campaign=ipad%2Barticle

<comment><USER2> A bit early for that?

        [...] a desktop site won't work on a seven-inch iPad Mini

Why? Sensibly designed 'desktop sites' work fine even on an iPhone.

        [...] sizing up a mobile website will be the best approach

And that's exactly the opposite of what Apple just said in their launch keynote.</comment>


Ask HN: How would you get users for a free service? - <AUTHOR>

I've made a unique file host that allows people to sell digital content for Youtube subscriptions. Now that it's live, there are no users. It's a free service so I can't pay for advertising. In my mind the only thing I could do is spam youtubers with PMs, but I don't want to do that. <comment><USER2> What do you mean by sell digital content for youtube subscriptions?

You mean just as a platform for people to sell videos they've made to youtubers?

Not being sure what you made, I can still say this however:

1\. Did you solve a real problem that exists?

2\. Having a free service doesn't mean you can't pay for advertising, it just means you'll take a loss on it. And it may very well be a good idea to PM some people with successful youtubers and ask what they think. Introduce yourself politely, and get some opinions (I'm still kind of unclear on what your site does)

3\. You should have some sort of money plan. If you grow, your costs are probably also going to grow, at least have something in place to offset that.

4.Post the site on places like HN, Reddit (in the appropriate subreddits), and see what people think

<comment><AUTHOR> I mean you can upload a ZIP or RAR file, and in order for people to download it they will be required to subscribe to your Youtube channel. Thanks for the advice. I posted it on HN before but got no reaction. (I posted it at the worst possible time since I was too excited to wait until morning).

<comment><USER2> Oh OK, now that I see what you're actually doing, that sounds like a reasonable idea that people could definitely want to use.

Especially the people who are looking to add more value to their channels...You should definitely reach out (with a polite, well-worded email) to 1 or 2 high traffic users (I really mean send to a bunch, and maybe some small amount will respond/have feedback for you) - and push your product as a "extended content distribution platform" -- also, make sure it has a good name, maybe one that makes it really clear what it does.

Then, ask them if they're interested -- they can put links to their "spaces" in their videos/profiles, assuming they have extra content to share.

I think your idea is a little different, because you don't need to pitch to other devs, and you don't need to pitch to VCs, but instead you need to pitch to successful/unsuccessful youtube users. Also, don't stop with youtube, offer some Vimeo integration -- alot of early adopters, and generally open-minded people (I'd like to think) post videos there, and even relatively serious ones.

To be honest, I think you should even open this up to a pure content distribution network. A lot of the time, people put up trailers for work they're doing on places like Vimeo/Youtube, and if you gave them a way to sell their final product (and collected VERY low fees), that would be amazing -- I don't know that there's anything like that now. But maybe that's more of a future move, if you choose to, focusing on people with successful youtube channels is a good start.

[EDIT] - Also, be very careful, because a service like youtube could instantly create an integrated competitor that would make it very hard for you to compete. There IS however, value in being multi-platform, that way, no single platform's integrated competitor could take you out of the picture.

I'm no seer, but in the future, I think content distributors will want to distribute content over as much networks as possible. As youtube is rolling out paid channels from distributors, I think the creators of that content (or any content for that matter) will look to even make more money (obviously) by being involved in more than one distribution platform. I don't work in the financial sector, but more platforms pretty much looks like more income for any content creator.

I say that to say this: the more platforms you support, the more attractive your product looks as a general solution to the problem -- "I put my extra content in one place, and all my viewers can access it, no matter how they view my work"

[EDIT 2] - I just took a look at your site (dug through your submissions) -- in my honest opinion, you should build that site out. slap a bootstrap theme on it, and make a proper landing page out of that (though KEEP the super easy upload -- fast examples/usage is awesome, maybe just give people the option of making accounts after you give them the link, if they're going to be doing it often)

I see a ton of places this could go, but it all depends on what you want the service to look like -- I'm just spouting stuff out</comment></comment></comment>


Firebug's Buggy Autocomplete is Fixed - <AUTHOR> http://code.google.com/p/fbug/issues/detail?id=3709#c27

<comment><USER2> Finally! Good to know that somebody else was annoyed by this bug too.</comment>


Handing over Ghcide to the Haskell Community - <AUTHOR> https://daml.com/daml-driven/handing-over-ghcide-to-the-haskell-community/ <comment><USER2> DAML has been an incredible tool for selling and building DLT systems in the enterprise.

Unfortunately I believe I'm still in the minority as a DAML user.

Regardless of what others might say, for enterprise software like this, the value and efficacy is still undetermined.</comment>


Ask HN: What book you used to prepare for a technical interview? - <AUTHOR> Hello fellow HNers.
(Reposting again, hopefully I will get responses this time)
I'm trying to prepare for an eventual technical interview for a programming job. Rather than aimlessly searching for a book to help me do that I would like to know which book you guys used to help you land your next job. If instead you used a site or other resources, that would also be useful information.
I think it would be useful to know the name of the company where you got hired to see if a pattern emerges.
I'm asking this specifically for myself but I'm sure that this info could be useful to other people in the same situation. <comment><USER2> It depends on what you're studying for. For my Ruby on Rails position, I revised my Ruby with two books I can't recall right now, but then I spent so much time on codewars.com, because I knew I was going to get tested.

Could you share doctrine specifics about your interview? What stack do you work with?</comment>


Trump to Embrace Privatization of Air Traffic Control System - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2017/06/05/us/politics/ap-us-trump-air-traffic-control.html <comment><USER2> He's been so successful at everything he's done so far... I'm sure this will go well.</comment>


Ask HN: Top submissions by day/ week - <AUTHOR>

Hi all, I remember a site which displayed popular top posts broken down by day and week. Is this still around? <comment><USER2> are you thinking of this? <http://news.ycombinator.com/lists>

or maybe this: <http://top.searchyc.com/>

<comment><AUTHOR> no, there is one which shows a breakdown by day and week - think it may have been someones weekend project.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Why do banking websites break the web and are generally crappy? - <AUTHOR> This probably doesn't apply to all banks, but it does apply to all my financial institutions:
- browser back/forward doesn't work
- can't ctrl+click to open a link in a new tab
- logging out often gets stuck in a refresh loop forcing a hard reload
- generally required to hard reload at different random times
- session timeouts, auto-logout, etc. never work well
It feels like how things ran in ActiveX in the 2000s. Clearly they are doing this is the name of security, but many modern websites care as much about security (i.e. google).
What is it about banking that seems to force them down this route? <comment><USER2> I assume a bank would say a great banking application is good enough to prevent users from leaving for other banks, i haven't encountered a US bank site that bad (i do sometimes have to disable Adblocker to use bank sites).

I assume a bank would say a great banking application deters the user from calling the bank to talk to someone (bank doesn't want to pay money to staff someone to talk on the phone).

I think banks had to race each other to get online 15 years ago to serve millions of users which explains why a lot of their products feel outdated. If its not broken don't fix it mentality. I assume reeducating users on a new bank site design could force banks to forgo interest/penality payments and things like that.

Considering banks are involved, people are constantly trying to break in, so security is definitely priority over usability.

In the US at least, mobile apps are already used more than desktop apps, so i assume investment will continue to pour more into mobile apps while desktop users will be stuck with more outdated technologies.

</comment><comment><USER3> I think it's a combination of several factors. One is that few people join or leave a bank because of their website. It's usually encountered already after you've deposited your money and it's going to be very inconvenient to leave them.

Another factor is that they typically have a big pile of money budgeted to develop it, which means hiring large teams, which means finding work for many people, which means building a very large complicated website to have something to show for it in the end.

This is where design-by-committee comes into play, which is a third factor, and where all those asinine rules come to play. And don't forget, they are already under the authority of all the regulatory committees, with a committee deciding exactly how to follow another committee's rules.

<comment><AUTHOR> Why does having a big budget or committees make you break back/forward buttons or disallow opening a page in a new tab? In what ways do these even potentially break security?

<comment><USER4> The obvious answer would be caching, if your balance is accessible by (anyone) pressing the back button on your browser it wouldn't be good. Still no excuse for the overall bad design though.

<comment><USER5> I guess they might also have a system that detects if the browsing pattern is unusual, i.e. someone has rooted your machine and has stolen your login cookie and is browsing at the same time as you on their own browser. If you break the back/forward buttons then you can find impossible browsing patterns that could indicate this.

source: total conjecture, I know nothing about these apps.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I have some visibility to a small bank (quite a few branches over a large area but not a mega bank)... and basically they hire a company to manage their individual online banking. They're not provided a lot of options outside of branding and such. Having said that they're secure and that is what matters to them the most.

I have mixed feelings about your description of them though. I've found most of my US online banking to be "adequate". I don't feel like the what you describe is really the worst of what we see as far as "break the web" goes.

</comment><comment><USER7> Your bank just sucks, not all of them are like this: n26 for example got a good application and is now in the US and is big in Europe.

Nubank as well(Latin america).

There are other competitors in that space.

On my home country(I now live in Europe ;-) ), Brazil, there are so many banks that have amazing apps, customer service and are completely free, with an overall modern banking system, that I wonder if North America didn't really manage to get in the XXI century :-).

It's also kind of cheap to build the software to run a digital bank, possibly much more cheaper than the banking license itself.

</comment><comment><USER8> I worked at large bank who decided to give up solid, predictable and reliable html/aspx pages in favor of silly one-pager framework "to improve user experience".

This of course to be accomplished by an army of hit-n-run offshore consultants.

Issues predictably ensued multiplied by losses from users who couldn't tolerate this nonsense and switched their trading and banking activities in favor of competitors.

I raised this question few times but what scolded by mid-management in fear of being put on a spot for bad business decision.

Yet it still keeps happening.

</comment><comment><USER9> If you have to divide your budget between UX and security, a bank focuses on security. Your favorite startup focuses on UX.

<comment><USER10> How much budget do you really need for security though? Banks aren't exactly short on money.

<comment><USER9> Imagine 2 identically sized dev teams...one is a bank, and another is a hot startup like Instagram or AirBnB. During sprint planning, the bank team would likely focus on infrastructure and security tickets. The startup would focus on consumer facing features. A bank's website is not as important a deciding factor as interest rates, number of ATMs, fees, etc.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> It's business application. Not a entertainment site</comment>


Live Webcast of CERN Seminar on Higgs Boson ( begins at 9 am CEST ) - <AUTHOR> http://webcast.web.cern.ch/webcast

<comment><USER2> (the stream is already up, but nothing is supposed to happen before 9 am CEST)</comment>


Pitaya, Wildlife's Golang scalable game server framework - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/tech-at-wildlife-studios/pitaya-wildlifes-golang-go-af57865f7a11 <comment><AUTHOR> I work at Wildlifestudios and I can't be more excited to share the amazing work that has been happening in this company around games, data and #golang.

<comment><USER2> me too, this seems really amazing!</comment></comment>


Instagram Analyzed. Exploring Big Visual Data  Phototrails  - <AUTHOR> http://phototrails.net/about/ <comment><USER2> If you want to dive straight into the results here comes the link to this project's first publication [http://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/4711/36...](http://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/4711/3698)

<comment><AUTHOR> Thank you</comment></comment>


U.S. to Tell Drug Makers to Disclose Payments to Doctors - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/17/health/policy/us-to-tell-drug-makers-to-disclose-payments-to-doctors.html?hp <comment><USER2> They should apply the same rules to reporting all the money they take from lobbyists. Doctors are not allowed to receive even a pen from a drug company any longer but our politicians are in the pocket of all the large multinational companies including the drug companies. What a bunch of hypocrites.

</comment><comment><USER3> good news! this reminds me of "Love and Other Drugs" <http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0758752/></comment>


A Contrary Indicator on M.B.A.'s and Stocks - <AUTHOR> http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2009/11/05/a-contrary-indicator-on-mbas-and-stocks/?_r=0 <comment><AUTHOR> I posted this 2009 story in response to the one here: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6704809](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6704809)

I also posted a comment there which I will reproduce below:

The MBA index truly is one of the greatest contra-indicators I have ever had the pleasure of observing first hand. It's a wonder to behold.

> _When expensively educated, fashionable young graduates start showing up in > your field, you 're in a bubble._

\- Kevin Marks, [http://epeus.blogspot.com.au/2005/12/key-indicator-for- bubbl...](http://epeus.blogspot.com.au/2005/12/key-indicator-for-bubble.html), derived from _Liar 's Poker_ (highly recommended read), by Michael Lewis (brilliant author; read his other books).

> _This year, some 37% of Harvard Business School 's graduate found work on > Wall Street, up from 30% a year ago and 26% for the Class of 2004. The trend > suggests that Wall Street is becoming bloated and the American economy is > ripe for a slowdown.

Mr. Soifer, who retired from Brown Brothers in 2000 and now runs his own consulting firm, appears to be on to something. He advised his friends and colleagues to sell back in 2000, when 30% of the HBS graduating class took jobs on Wall Street. Before that, the last long-term sell he sent was in 1987._

Source: [http://www.nysun.com/business/equities-swing-with-harvard- mb...](http://www.nysun.com/business/equities-swing-with-harvard-mbas/43220/)

> _Mr. Soifer notes that the Harvard M.B.A. indicator has historically been > more prolific as a source of "sell' signals, showing strong results in 1987, > 2000-02, and 2005-08, than "buy" signals. In fact, the last time it reached > the 10 percent "buy" level was in the early 1980s, when the Dow Jones > industrial average traded below 1,000.

The all-time low was reached in 1937, when only three graduates — about 1 percent — braved the market and ventured into the securities industry._

Source: [http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2009/11/05/a-contrary- indicator-...](http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2009/11/05/a-contrary-indicator-on- mbas-and-stocks/?_r=0)

</comment><comment><USER2> I definitely see students in my MBA program heading to tech without an actual connection or passion for the underlying technology or culture of engineering. I saw similar things in 2006 princeton when students who didn't know what they wanted to do defaulted to banking. I really really hope that tech can survive this dilution effect of its culture and commitment.

<comment><USER3> Let me preface this by saying that I in no way mean the following to be insulting or condescending: I think this is a very naive view.

Connection and passion for an industry is not a prerequisite for success. Passion comes and goes, both in intimate relationships and professional ones. Passion in your life is something you nurture and develop over time, and with the right set of mental habits and the appropriate circumstances, you can fall in love with something after you've chosen it. I tend to suspect anyone who discounts business people from the tech industry of not fully understanding what business people do and the value that they provide, and so defaulting to gut instinct based on projections of their own feelings.

As for hoping that tech can survive this dilution effect, what is tech? Do you mean the technology community, which for the most part is very segregated between engineering and sales and operations? An influx of business-minded people isn't likely to affect the engineering side of the community. If you mean technology companies, they will continue to hire the talent they need, and if anything a greater supply of talented individuals is a good thing.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> _Last year, a record 41 percent of Harvard's 2008 graduate M.B.A. class went into market sensitive positions — a major "sell" signal._

And that signal was wrong. If you looked at this last year and sold, you would have missed out on a 20% rise in stock prices. So, another indicator that goes in the "big maybe" pile.

<comment><USER5> This is a 2009 article.</comment></comment>


Firing expected of Google employee who penned controversial memo on women - <AUTHOR> https://www.recode.net/2017/8/7/16110696/firing-google-ceo-employee-penned-controversial-memo-on-women-has-violated-its-code-of-conduct?utm_campaign=karaswisher&utm_content=chorus&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter <comment><USER2> The original "echo chamber" memo was written clearly and respectfully. The message was set out to encourage debate and make progress toward understanding. This wasn't a fox news drive buy, trump rally or some alt right rant. It was a real call for discussion.

Google comes back and makes it clear that this isn't a discussion and isn't discussable. What? Google's response is that this is per se wrong. And what do we do with a valid and stronger position as free people in a free society? We put out our logic, blowing away the other idea with a rational counter argument.

What we don't do is what Google is doing, what our society has been doing and what it looks destined to continue to do for some time - declare we are absolutely right without debate and start using the force available to us to push our point instead of reason.

Yup, Google is a company. They get to do this. Remember when Google stood up to China? Man I was proud of that. Google meant a bigger thing then, a commitment to intellectual discourse.

Why can't we talk anymore?

</comment><comment><USER3> The saddest part about this spectacle is that the author and his detractors are literally talking past one another.

The author did not say that his female colleagues can't do tech. He's saying that the pool of talent in general population might not be the same size across genders. A quick glance at CS graduation statistics shows that is basically true today.

This is the same point that led in part to Larry Summers losing his job, when he dared wonder aloud about why there weren't more female academics.

If you're going to fire a man, you should at least do it for what he actually did.

<comment><USER4> I take it you haven't read the manifesto. Here you go: [https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3914586-Googles- Ideo...](https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3914586-Googles-Ideological- Echo-Chamber.html)

Then read about the law of averages: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_averages](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_averages)

<comment><USER5> What's your point about law of averages.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Wow, it's not enough to even wait for this guy to get fired and then discuss, right or wrong, but they even have to write articles just salivating with the very anticipation of it...

This is a big group of people gathered around the stake chattering to each other in gleeful anticipation of burning a heretic. Even if this guy is wrong about everything, the spectacle is extremely disturbing.

</comment><comment><USER7> > Our co-workers shouldn't have to worry that each time they open their mouths > to speak in a meeting, they have to prove that they are not like the memo > states, being "agreeable" rather than "assertive," showing a "lower stress > tolerance," or being "neurotic."

Ugh, this is not okay. It is almost certain the author meant "agreeable" and "neurotic" as two of Big Five personality traits (others being open, conscientious, extraverted), this is standard terminology in psychology. And it is indeed established that women score higher on agreeableness and neuroticism, across cultures.

I'd think the right conclusion to draw is that Google should be a great place to work even if you are agreeable and neurotic (alternative wording would be sensitive). Instead, Pichai implies Google is not a great place to work if you are agreeable or sensitive, and denies science that women are more agreeable and sensitive. Denying reality is useless.

</comment><comment><USER8> There's an interesting article on the front page that firing this guy might be grounds for a lawsuit in and of itself. I don't think this guy should be fired. Google should make him an example of their willingness to listen, have thoughtful introspection, and consider all points of view. I truly hope this person is not fired. Free speech seems to only work when you're the majority.

<comment><USER9> >Free speech seems to only work when you're the majority.

Also helps when you're not at work.

<comment><USER10> Since when? The github transgender controversy a few years ago was about posts one of the contributors made in a different forum. Brendan Eich was pushed out because of his personal views. If this person posted it on his facebook page the result would likely be the same.

<comment><USER9> >If this person posted it on his facebook page the result would likely be the same.

If ifs and buts were candy and nuts we'd all have a merry Christmas.

Also, wasn't Eich CEO? Different standard there.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> While I can understand Google deciding to fire the author, he's embarrassed the shit out of his company in a very public way, I think it would be sad if they do.

The dude has some serious misconceptions about the world and people, but I think his heart is in the right place. He's working from some bad assumptions and has come to bad conclusions as a result. It's classic Garbage-In-Garbage- Out.

I'd really like to see the Goog take this as an opportunity to really reach out to this guy (and hopefully all the other software bros who give enough of a fuck to pay attention) and help him understand better. If they can get through to him, they will have a very persuasive proponent of reform on their hands.

Also, treating this guy with respect and not firing him outright will demonstrate that open conversation about _important_ issues is allowed at Google.

And, in case it sounds like I agree with Mr. Bro Grammer, "wimmins is soo emotional", I think the gentleman needs a solid walloping with a clue-stick.

<comment><USER5> > "wimmins is soo emotional"

Is that what he said? What are his bad assumptions?

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> > He added: "To suggest a group of our colleagues have traits that make them > less biologically suited to that work is offensive and not OK."

So now the CEO of one of the richest companies on earth is on record blatantly misinterpreting what the guy wrote. This is the wildest dream of every unfair dismissal lawyer the world over, they'll be lining up at his doorstep to take on the job.

Aside from that, it's a text book example of why codes of conduct are such an awful idea, they're a weapon designed to be used against anyone who steps out of line. Usually vague enough that most people will violate it, but only wrongthinkers will be punished for it.

<comment><USER12> > So now the CEO of one of the richest companies on earth

Even more frightening--one of the companies that has the most power in determining the information that people see.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> "he sent across the company that said, among other things, that women just can't do tech."

I believe this statement is lacking truthfulness.

</comment><comment><USER14> I've noticed some people on Twitter, including Susan Fowler and Kara Swisher, saying free speech is only a protection against government intrusion and doesn't apply in the corporate sector. That seems to be mirrored in this article.

The only thing I'd say is that those people should think carefully. Denouncing and shrinking rights such as free speech and normalising their role as negative rights when it is convenient to do so will work against their agenda, and is in common with how people like Trump view other rights

<comment><USER15> I think you missed the point. Nobody is shrinking or denouncing rights because right of free speech never protected against corporate sector sanctions. You are the one who is trying to expand free speech to protect you in places that no one intended.

<comment><USER16> maybe we need to re-evaluate free speech protections to bring them into alignment with today's world, where certain corporations can be (arguably) more powerful than governments

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> > To suggest a group of our colleagues have traits that make them less > biologically suited to that work

Didn't the paper suggest biological reasons for not entering the field and nothing to do with capability?

<comment><USER17> Yes! Men and women are of course _equal_. They're just _different_ , and different people choose to do different things. Why is that so fucking controversial?

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> Good. If you don't see how sharing this in the workplace in 2017 was a terrible idea, look harder.</comment>


To close or not to close – Void HTML elements - <AUTHOR> http://www.colorglare.com/2014/02/03/to-close-or-not-to-close.html <comment><USER2> HTML loves its special cases. XML is overly complex, but at least your editor doesn't need to know anything special about what document type you're writing in order to indent it properly. Throw in HTML's special cases, and now it needs to know that
 is different from <foo>.

I guess since HTML is so common it doesn't really matter, but really? We need 5 differnt types of markup, when one would have been fine?

[https://xkcd.com/927/](https://xkcd.com/927/)

<comment><USER3> This. I wish they didn't do a HTML5 but instead only did a XHTML5.

There are a lot of good ideas in HTML5 but why did there need to be _another_ way of parsing HTML-like documents?

Apparently because it's the one HTML-parser to surpass and replace all other HTML-parsers out there. <sarcasm>Yeah, I totally believe that.</sarcasm>

<comment><USER4> I prefer HTML over XHTML, because it is easier to write. I don't get the reasoning behind closing tags. LIs close before the next LI, or the UL.
 saves two characters over
 and causes no harm. XHTML feels like trying too hard to make the machine overlord happy.

It is plain wrong to make a standard easier for machine-parsing at the expense of humans who are typing it in.

EDIT: Another example. I write some HTML in a text-editor/textarea and send it across to someone. If I missed a
, should the parser reject it? If not, the standard should be accommodating enough so that this is valid.

<comment><USER5> _LIs close before the next LI, or the UL._

But the problem is that you now have a specific behaviour that depends on the tag name. DIV tags don't need to close before the next DIV, but LI tags do. So you've gone from a simple tag parser to one that needs to know the intricacies and rules surrounding every element type.

Personally, I feel that two extra characters per
 tag is worth it.

<comment><USER6> Wouldn't having a reasonable schema specification specification solve this? Its not like you can invent arbitrary tags (there are arbitrary attributes, but an expressive enough schema language could capture that as well).

<comment><USER7> FWIW, inventing arbitrary tags _is_ coming with Web Components / Custom Element :) [http://w3c.github.io/webcomponents/spec/custom/](http://w3c.github.io/webcomponents/spec/custom/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> When xhtml came to replace html4 it was such a huge relief for all OCD developers, and I thought I had seen the last non-xml compliant web page. Now I'm encouraged to write tag soup again because void elements? Humbug.

<comment><USER9> How does 'Tag soup' follow from 'let's not force pedantic XML parsing rules on people'?

HTML5 parsing is clearly defined and in most cases quite sensible. I think it was an excellent compromise.

<comment><USER8> It's the html5 standard that is complex and pedantic, it breaks silently when you violate one of hundreds of rules (e.g lists of void elements that can't be closed).

XML is simple. Sure it's pedantic in the sense that it breaks, but html5 breaks too only subtly.

It's like the difference between java and JavaScript. Java isn't more "pedantic" than JS in ANY way, it just breaks in a more understandable way (break loudly, early and understandably is in my view "better").

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I think the author's recommendations at the end, on making <meta> and  and  so IE wouldn't die when it saw a


Show HN: Humans Did What? - Index of humans.txt files - <AUTHOR> https://www.lonnylot.com/projects/humansdidwhat/

<comment><AUTHOR> The crawler/parser is a little behind so it will take a bit for new requests to go thru. I'm thinking of ways to make this perform better.</comment>


Ask HN: what CDN should I use for my JS lib? - <AUTHOR>

Hi everyone,
here where I work we develop a JavaScript wrapper for our API, to be used by our clients. We want to serve this from some place else than our server, use a good CDN and serve this file from there just like Google does with jQuery and so many other libs, for example.
So, what CDN should I use? Can you tell me why?
Thanks in advance <comment><USER2> I would suggest CloudFlare: [https://www.cloudflare.com/plans](https://www.cloudflare.com/plans)

Their free plan offers lightning fast DNS (fastest I've ever seen) as well as a CDN. Love these guys!

</comment><comment><USER3> [http://jsdelivr.com](http://jsdelivr.com) lets anyone upload their library and serves it through their CDN, free of cost, regardless of popularity of the library.</comment>


FrOSCon Stream - <AUTHOR> http://streaming.froscon.org

<comment><USER2> Here is a link to my presentation on the future of server side JavaScript: [http://www.slideshare.net/olegp/the-future-of-server-side- ja...](http://www.slideshare.net/olegp/the-future-of-server-side-javascript)

Common Node, the project I'm working on, is at <http://olegp.github.com/common-node/>

</comment><comment><USER3> Thanks to whoever posted this. Greetings from the FrOSCon office!

Here is the online schedule, so you know when to watch the streams:

<http://programm.froscon.de>

Note that the time zone is UTC +2

</comment><comment><USER4> FrOSCon is a quite nice conference. Been there since the first year.</comment>


Ask HN: How to make money while studying Computer Science in college? - <AUTHOR> Hello all,<p>Google pays a handsome amount (~$6000) for their summer program Google Summer of Code. While I am aware of it, I can't seem to find other such Open Source programs or competitions to make some money in college. Is there a list available or do you know about something similar? <comment><USER2> Check out your university job board. There are usually some great jobs, working at the computer lab, monitoring things at the physical plant/maintenance, scanning documents, lots of easy fun places to work, some where you are even allowed to do homework while getting paid.

Websites for friends, orginizations. Maybe start building and maintaining a site for a group or club. Then branch out to family friends and small businesses around campus or back home.

Start listening to StartUpsForTheRestOfUs.com podcast. Start at the beginning you can follow Rob from selling drop ship beach towels, to a job board site, to an invoicing app, to an SEO SaaS, to building Drip and having a $XXM exit. Lots of tips and good advice for now and to build on for the future.

Don't work too much College is a lot of fun. Put in the work for your classes, meet people, go out and have fun. Work just enough for the money you have to have. Make the most of being there it's a great 4 to 5 or 6 years.

</comment><comment><USER3> Make websites for your friends or organizations.

Find work at your school (low pay, but easy). I got ~$600-700 a month just to do basic jQuery stuff part time.

Part time internship (full time in summer) or job like most college students do.

\--

You probably will not make nearly enough money as with Google, but that should be enough. Also, focus on your classes + having fun.

</comment><comment><USER4> In the past, Google's Summer of Code program has had varying compensation and paid less depending on where a person lived.

</comment><comment><USER5> Quit the university and find a job, get paid 120k in SF.

<comment><USER6> and pay 40-45k per year in rent... :^)?

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Internships pay very very well at some companies. Behind every website or app you use daily, there's (usually) a company paying their interns north of $6000 a month.</comment>


Infiltrating North Korea - <AUTHOR> http://www.gadling.com/2007/12/06/infiltrating-north-korea-part-1/

<comment><AUTHOR> 19 part series on traveling to N Korea as an American from a few years back.</comment>


First version of Automotive Grade Linux released - <AUTHOR> https://automotive.linuxfoundation.org/

<comment><USER2> glad to hear it.</comment>


Airbus cuts A380 production again as doubts grow over future of 'superjumbo' - <AUTHOR> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/07/27/airbus-cuts-a380-production-doubts-grow-future-superjumbo/ <comment><USER2> Clearly the problem is that it's too small - I'm still hoping for the stretched version.

Joking apart, the cynic in me can't help noticing that European planes that are noticeably superior in some aspect to their US counterparts - like the A380, Concorde - seem to encounter some major roadblock to their success.</comment>


Another Ransomware Outbreak Is Going Global - <AUTHOR> https://www.forbes.com/sites/thomasbrewster/2017/06/27/ransomware-spreads-rapidly-hitting-power-companies-banks-airlines-metro/ <comment><USER2> Maersk is down. Their main site says:

        Maersk IT systems are down

        We can confirm that Maersk IT systems are down across multiple sites
        and business units due to a cyber attack. We continue to assess the
        situation. The safety of our employees, our operations and customer's
        business is our top priority. We will update when we have more information.[1]

Maersk is the largest shipping company in the world. 600 ships, with ship space for 3.8 million TEU of containers. (The usual 40-foot container counts as two TEUs.) If this outage lasts more than a few hours, port operations worldwide will be disrupted.

[1] [http://www.maersk.com/en](http://www.maersk.com/en)

<comment><USER3> Great. Maybe we can finally put a price on lack of security protocol.

<comment><USER4> I dream of seeing a "security first" development process adopted ..

<comment><USER5> Are you sure about that? You do know most organizations will implement that as a huge amount of bureaucracy for every commit, rather than proper man-hours of security-oriented development.

<comment><USER6> Only because most organizations don't know how to be effective at security.

It's not hard. You don't actually have to change much. You just have to schedule regular pentests, ideally every couple weeks.

Pentests protect everyone because it's our job to worry about all of the security flaws that you can't possibly be aware of in your normal day-to-day development cycle. There's just too much for any organization to know about except security companies. This way you can focus on development and we can focus on pointing out how to fix what's broken.

<comment><USER7> "It's not hard."

No, it is not, you just need skilled people working on it. Oh, those people want money for it ...

<comment><USER8> Exactly. It's not hard, it just costs some money.

It's exactly the same as physical security. You build fences and buy locks. You pay people to keep an eye on things. You take insurance to cover the rest of the risk.

Nothing hard, no new inventions required. It just takes some attention and cash. It's part of the cost of being in business.

<comment><USER9> Wait, the hardness of information security comes because it has to be built-in everywhere since everything is connected and so everything is a potential attack surface.

It's not impossible but it requires a somewhat universal attitude change.

<comment><USER6> I want to agree with you in principle, but in practice it's not possible to be secure with just an attitude change. The attack surfaces have grown too large. Keeping track of all possible vectors is a full-time job in itself. You either need a dedicated security person or regular pentests. And honestly, regular pentests are probably more effective.

It's a positive statement though: it _is_ possible to be constantly secure if you just get a pentest every few weeks. Big companies can even afford to make it a requirement of their release cycle.

<comment><USER10> > _Big companies can even afford to make it a requirement of their release > cycle._

Oh man. I have a peer who works for a very large international company. They require pentests in their release cycle. What could go wrong?

Turns out that pentesting isn't in the final portion of their release. They tag a release candidate (e.g. v5.7.0-rc), send that build to the pentesters, then fix other integration and user-acceptance bugs while the pentesters are working. The pentesters may greenlight v5.7.0-rc when it's really v5.7.3-rc that's shipping, and the pentesters are none the wiser.

Security only works when the culture supports it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> FYI to Sysadmins: Paying the ransom at this point will be a waste of money, as the contact e-mail address has been blocked.

[https://posteo.de/blog/info-zur-ransomware-petrwrappetya- bet...](https://posteo.de/blog/info-zur-ransomware-petrwrappetya-betroffenes- postfach-bereits-seit-mittag-gesperrt) (German)

[https://posteo.de/en/blog/info-on-the-petrwrappetya- ransomwa...](https://posteo.de/en/blog/info-on-the-petrwrappetya-ransomware- email-account-in-question-already-blocked-since-midday) (English)

<comment><USER6> It's always seemed like the best way to end ransomware is to launch hundreds of variants that demand money but don't actually decrypt anything. Unethical, to be sure, but eventually people would learn not to give them money.

All the competent ransomware authors are probably quite unhappy whenever a defective ransomware strain pops up.

<comment><USER12> It's like saying best way to fight heroin addicts is to supply market with poisoned heroin. No heroin users - no problems!

<comment><USER13> except that getting malware isn't addictive...

<comment><USER12> Your information is tho

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> This is even more proof how powerful a 0-day in the wrong hands can be.

All of the affected companies' should be considered compromised by the NSA.

Actually, every single Windows PC with an internet connection that has been used before March 14 should be considered irrevocably compromised. Ransomware is much more visible than spyware. Think about all the spyware-infected PCs/networks that nobody knows about.

<comment><USER15> "Actually, every single Windows PC with an internet connection that has been used before March 14 should be considered irrevocably compromised."

March 14 of what year ?

I would say 2000 but I am open to discussion ...

<comment><USER16> People who don't run Windows shouldn't get cocky! There are many, many attacks on Linux:

Here's one in the news from just last week. A ransomware where the victim agreed to pay the equivalent of US$1MM in bitcoin.

[https://arstechnica.com/security/2017/06/web-host-agrees- to-...](https://arstechnica.com/security/2017/06/web-host-agrees-to- pay-1m-after-its-hit-by-linux-targeting-ransomware/)

<comment><USER17> Something to keep in mind. They were running:

Apache version 1.3.36 and PHP version 5.1.4

It's not like a brand new Ubuntu installation connected to the open Internet will suddenly be pwned. The owners of this company were beyond inept.

<comment><USER18> Seeing Apache 1 in the wild makes me a bit nostalgic.

What kind of utter lunatic would use that for their company today?

<comment><USER19> Lord have mercy, Apache 1? That's what you get bro.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> ___(Sorry for the repost but I feel the pain of sysadmins so it might be useful to some people as everything melts down around them this evening)..._ __

Hey, FWIW we had to do some response for ransomware cases recently.

There was a lack of decent stuff out there for how IT teams should deal with it. So we contributed to putting together this quick checklist:

[https://github.com/0xswap/guides/blob/master/ransomware- tria...](https://github.com/0xswap/guides/blob/master/ransomware-triage.txt)

Would be great if more people wanted to add to it.

<comment><USER21> A minor nit: if you convert this over to markdown or ReStructuredText, it'll display more nicely on the page and be easier to move over to GitHub pages or the like.

<comment><USER20> Good idea! Will do that.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> Kill switch has been found: [https://twitter.com/PTsecurity_UK/status/879779707075665922](https://twitter.com/PTsecurity_UK/status/879779707075665922)

<comment><USER23> Why would a ransomware author include a killswitch in their software?

<comment><USER24> Even ransomeware authors accidentally infect themselves and lose keys.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> The Netherlands and various other countries have created laws where either their version of the NSA and/or police can hoard 0days to be used for hacking.

This massive outbreak is so widespread that at this stage it appears that it either was a very recent 0day or something which only recently was fixed by a patch.

Instead of having loads of countries hoarding security problems I highly encourage a focus on security instead. Seems much better for the economy overall.

<comment><USER26> It is basically WannaCry without the kill switch. It is using the same exploits (EternalBlue). Not some recent zero-day, but sloppy patching.

<comment><USER27> Seems like there is a kill switch: [https://twitter.com/PTsecurity_UK/status/879779707075665922](https://twitter.com/PTsecurity_UK/status/879779707075665922)

<comment><USER28> Originally found by: [https://twitter.com/0xAmit/status/879768194545836032](https://twitter.com/0xAmit/status/879768194545836032)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> Can someone provide a simple (but not overly so) explanation of how the current generation of ransomware operate i.e., A) spread and B) lock up the computer? Does it always require human intervention for A. ? Thank you.

<comment><USER30> There are indications that this new version uses a number of ways to spread.

Where attacker == the ransomware executable:

First is the EternalBlue exploit developed by and leaked from the NSA. EternalBlue exploits a flaw in Windows systems on port 445 TCP that can be used to take complete control of an unpatched system. So if an attacker can connect to a vulnerable Windows machine on port 445 tcp they can take control of that machine.

There are also indications that this ransomware sample spreads using legitimate administrative tools in Windows systems such as WMI (execute commands on a remote system if you an administrator account on that PC), and PSEXEC (mount shares on the remote system if you have an administrator account, execute command if ''). These are legitimate (but legacy) Windows components that normally facilitate the management of client PC's when they're connected to a domain at a company or school. So if an attacker can connect to a Windows machine on port 445 tcp (PSEXEC) or 135 (WMI) _AND_ have administrative credentials for that PC they can take complete control of that machine.

These two are probably part of how the ransomware spreads once it gets inside your network. The wcry outbreak a few weeks ago gained access to networks by infecting one or several people via a phishing e-mail with malicious files/links-to-files inside. AFAIK it's currently still unknown/unconfirmed how this outbreak spreads precisely but I'd guess it's either actively being spread by phishing OR it's been present but dormant in these networks for a while after having been installed by phishing over a longer period of time.

If an attacker possesses a 0-day then all bets are probably off, and even step A would not necessarily require any human interaction.

This outbreak is particularly nasty because after it's done encrypting files it supposedly triggers a crash that forces the system to restart. (handy for servers where a user is not normally able to restart the system). Because the system restarts any, artefacts from the encryption process that might be used to decrypt files without paying or restoring backups are gone.

<comment><USER31> Actually, I believe phishing / malicious attachment was debunked as the infection vector. Subsequent research found that WC starts scanning hosts and IP's on port 445 to try to find other machines to infect.

Source:[https://www.us-cert.gov/ncas/alerts/TA17-132A](https://www.us- cert.gov/ncas/alerts/TA17-132A)

"Once the malware starts as a service named mssecsvc2.0, the dropper attempts to create and scan a list of IP ranges on the local network and attempts to connect using UDP ports 137, 138 and TCP ports 139, 445. If a connection to port 445 is successful, it creates an additional thread to propagate by exploiting the SMBv1 vulnerability documented by Microsoft Security bulliten MS17-010."

<comment><USER32> That only happens after the initial infection into the network. Notice that it says it scans the "local network".

<comment><USER31> This is minutiae at this point, but it scans the "local" /24\. My assumption is that it scans the /24 for any interface available, so if a machine is infected with a public IP, it will start scanning machines on the public Internet. Not to mention other variations may decide to scan more aggressively.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> Does anyone know if any tools exist on Linux which can be used for early detection of ransomeware?

Something that monitors file access, disk activity, etc. for suspicious behavior and can trigger some action or alert?

I think I remember some discussion about using a 'canary file' \- some innocent looking file with known contents which should never be modified. If a modification is detected, you know something fishy is going on.

<comment><USER34> Aide is a popular utility to monitor for changes to files on Linux systems.

[http://aide.sourceforge.net](http://aide.sourceforge.net)

You could also use the built in audit subsystem if you wanted to watch a specific canary file, directory, filesysyem, etc. [https://www.linux.com/learn/customized-file-monitoring- audit...](https://www.linux.com/learn/customized-file-monitoring-auditd)

<comment><USER35> what a horrible interface

      aide
      Couldn't open file /var/lib/aide/please-dont-call-aide-without-parameters/aide.db for reading

      aide -i
      Couldn't open file /var/lib/aide/please-dont-call-aide-without-parameters/aide.db.new for writing

<comment><USER34> I suppose, but it's not really made as a one off run-a-command type tool. It needs set up so that you can compare now to then.

Having no parameters specified doing something real is probably not desired, as it would overwrite the DB that your aide Cron job is running.

That's why your Linux distro (not aide) picked those funny defaults.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> This isn't yet the cyberattack "the world isn't ready for" ([https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/22/technology/ransomware- att...](https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/22/technology/ransomware-attack-nsa- cyberweapons.html)), is it?

<comment><USER37> no.

you will know when the big one hits because you won't be able to ask this question online and get an immediate answer.

</comment></comment><comment><USER38> A friend sent me the bitcoin address, they've already collected 2600$.

[EDIT] Now 3230$

Source: [https://blockchain.info/address/1Mz7153HMuxXTuR2R1t78mGSdzaA...](https://blockchain.info/address/1Mz7153HMuxXTuR2R1t78mGSdzaAtNbBWX)

<comment><USER39> What a clickbait headline. A paltry $3k and yet the article calls this a "MASSIVE ransomware outbreak". I would be curious to see what a "minor" outbreak is.

<comment><USER40> There are reports of hundreds to thousands of machines infected across multiple firms in multiple countries. I'd bet >99% of people are never gonna send the $300 in bitcoin to decrypt their machine, instead they'll just clean and restore as much as they can. The $3k is 11 people desperate to restore all their data now, more may come in the future after people have exhausted other options, but the vast majority will never pay unless their backups were hit too.

<comment><USER41> Seems like a better approach would be to have the ransom increase higher after every person that paid. Just so you'd have some competetion to pay sooner.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER42> Interestingly, WPP mandates all it's employees to shut down their computers – irrespective of the OS.

> As a precaution, WPP is mandating that everyone immediately shut down all > computers, both Macs and PCs. This applies to you whether you are in the > office or elsewhere. Working on an office computer remotely is not an > option. Please leave your computers turned off until you hear from us again.

> Many thanks for your co-operation and patience.

> Best regards,

<comment><USER43> How do they plan on contacting the employees en masse if the computer is off?

<comment><USER44> Probably via their smart phones

<comment><USER45> So a smartphone is not a computer anymore? The world we live in..

<comment><USER46> I think is a matter of semantics, not of functionality. A smartphone is a computer per design, but no one is calling it like that.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER47> Public analysis is tracked here [https://otx.alienvault.com/pulse/59525e7a95270e240c055ead/](https://otx.alienvault.com/pulse/59525e7a95270e240c055ead/)

Seems that payload servers are in Germany, France, and Malaysia.

[https://securelist.com/petrwrap-the-new-petya-based- ransomwa...](https://securelist.com/petrwrap-the-new-petya-based-ransomware- used-in-targeted-attacks/77762/)

</comment><comment><USER48> > with WannaCry it was alleged a nation state was likely responsible for > spreading the malware: North Korea

Is there any evidence for this? Looks like another fake rumor.

<comment><USER49> There's an article on it in NYT which provides a short list of the reaons: [https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/22/technology/north-korea- ra...](https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/22/technology/north-korea-ransomware- attack.html)

It basically comes to it looking like Lazarus Group

 _The WannaCry attacks used the same command-and-control server used in the North Korean hack of Sony Pictures Entertainment in 2014, which wiped out nearly half of the company's personal computers and servers._

...

 _Other digital crumbs linking the North Korean group to WannaCry include a tool that deletes data that had been used in other Lazarus attacks. The hackers behind WannaCry also used a rare encryption method and an equally unusual technique to cover their tracks._

<comment><USER50> Then WikiLeaks published CIA's Marble Framework

[https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/cms/page_14588467.html](https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/cms/page_14588467.html)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER51> i said this before and it was met with mostly hostility, but im still wondering... bitcoin has enabled ransomware, so its a boon to crooks. what has it done for non-crooks? i dont mean conceptually (no fed! decentralized! etc. etc.), i mean since its come into being, what has it done for you personally? for me: i bought a vpn subscription, anonymously. probably not able to do that as easily without btc. but, i would personally trade that for _not_ having ransomware attacks. thoughts?

<comment><USER52> Bitcoin is a neutral technology, think of it like cash. Buying illegal things is always done with cash but it doesn't mean we should get rid of cash altogether.

Regardless even if we came to the collective decision that we wanted to get rid of bitcoin, its not feasible due to its decentralized nature.

<comment><USER53> > it doesn't mean we should get rid of cash altogether

I can't remember the last time I saw physical cash. The only ones I know who are still using cash are drug dealers. Not saying it should be banned but it's almost gone in my country already.

<comment><USER54> > The only ones I know who are still using cash are drug dealers

I was about to say "that's not true, the pot stores are cash only too", before realizing that from the perspective of the Feds that's the same thing.

So I guess my real answer is non-business transactions, like buying things on craigslist, or paying my cat sitter.

<comment><USER53> > like buying things on craigslist, or paying my cat sitter

In my country you send money to other people with an app using their telephone number. It's developed as a joint venture between all banks.

<comment><USER55> ISTM that's a group that already have more than enough power to screw us over... Has this app been audited?

<comment><USER53> No idea. The convenience is more important to me personally than the risk of being screwed over but since everyone is using it I presume there are people putting pressure back.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER56> Kaspersky wrote about Petya 16 months ago. [https://blog.kaspersky.com/petya- ransomware/11715/](https://blog.kaspersky.com/petya-ransomware/11715/) Has the delivery changed causing it to resurface again?

<comment><USER57> Yes, it is a "petya variant" [0]

[0] [https://isc.sans.edu/diary/22560](https://isc.sans.edu/diary/22560)

</comment></comment><comment><USER58> Maybe this is the year of Linux on desktop.

<comment><USER59> (You may or may not be joking; let's assume you're not for this response.)

This is a dangerous argument.

I'm a free software activist, and I firmly believe that security without free software is a facade, but that doesn't mean that free software is more always more secure; it's an open source argument that's been fairly easily refuted lately with high-profile bugs in software like OpenSSL.

It's easier to hide secrets in proprietary software, but most security vulnerabilities are bugs, not explicit backdoors. So even bit-for-bit reproducibility won't defend you against that.

I'm not saying you shouldn't use GNU/Linux---I think that every user deserves an operating system that is fully free, and hope that people will use it (or another free/libre OS). But my argument is on the basis of freedom, which still stands _regardless_ of security. It just so happens that I believe that strong confidence in the security of a system is not possible with proprietary software.

<comment><USER58> So far this year, Windows leads the scorecard regarding mass infections and business downtime due to them.

So while indeed, open source is not a guarantee for better security, the results are in its favor. It might also be because it's not such an attractive target to hackers due to its low share in the desktop market. But still there millions of linux servers online 24h/24h and I assume they have a bigger potential for monetisation.

<comment><USER60> Windows also leads the score card in installation base, which I think is the real causal relationship. If Linux was installed on 90% of desktops you better well believe there'd be a similar number of exploits for it. Something similar happened to Mac OSX not too long ago, as they grew in popularity more and more exploits were found for the operating system.

<comment><USER58> That's what I tried to express above. I was also wondering what is more profitable in the ransomware economy: infect many, almost worthless machines? Or infect an order or two of magnitude fewer machines, but with a higher chance of paying?

I'd say with a higher chance of paying because people administering them are more likely to know how to buy bitcoins, how to send them and what to do with the decryption key.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER61> Note that having a good multi-generational backup system in place for all machines, servers and laptops, would render this kind of ransomware harmless.

But the state of IT has deteriorated so badly these days because management doesn't care any more. After all why care when you can just take your severance pay and get an increase in salary and more responsibility at another company. Rinse and repeat.

It used to be that the primary job of system admins was to keep the data safe from loss. That was more important than keeping the systems running. How did we lose this?

</comment><comment><USER62> Idea: What if the purpose of these WannaCry style ransomware attacks isn't to get people to pay in Bitcoin, but to drive up the price of Bitcoin?

<comment><USER63> WannaCry caused the price to drop, rather sharply. If anything, the purpose would be to buy cheap Bitcoins and hope the price later corrects back upwards after the news has blown over.

I suspect the price drop is due to some trading algorithms using sentiment analysis. They see all the negative press around these ransomware, see the included word Bitcoin, assume the negative article is about Bitcoin, and automatically sell.

But that's just my theory, since I have a hard time imagining human traders seeing news like this and selling because of it.

<comment><USER64> I doubt wannacry was the reason for the price drop. Rather extensive media coverage about bitcoin hitting $3k which probably woke up some people who realised that it might be the time to cash in.

<comment><USER63> This was long before $3k. The price tanked immediately on May 12th and remained depressed until the 17th which was shortly after the initial outbreak was halted by the domain registration.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER65> If you're infected, don't pay the ransom. The email address that's used has been blocked by the email provider.

[https://twitter.com/HIBC2017/status/879747282173911040](https://twitter.com/HIBC2017/status/879747282173911040)

</comment><comment><USER66> As someone affected by the ransomware - did anyone else notice empty console windows popping up from time to time the days before the ransomware triggered the encryption?

<comment><USER67> This is most likely due to the Office bug: [https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/here-is-a-fix-for- mi...](https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/here-is-a-fix-for-microsoft- office-command-prompt-issue/)

<comment><USER68> Agreed. Previously following the steps here removed the problem for me on 3 different Windows 10 computers.

(PC gamers were particularly impacted by this, as the command prompt flickering would minimize full screen games...)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER69> Those attacks are still "gentle" as if you have (and you should) a read only backup you can resolve it with near 0 dataloss.

What I fear are cancer like virus, not wiping or encrypting data at time T, but introducing subtle errors on a longer period. You would be contacted by hackers saying your last 6 months of data contain error. That's scary.

</comment><comment><USER70> Wonder if they manage to disable the UK's Trident Nuclear Submarine this time.

"Windows for Warship" [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Submarine_Command_System](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Submarine_Command_System)

"Want to Nuke someone, please send Bitcoin to unlock the systems."

[https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/06/27/hms_queen_elizabeth...](https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/06/27/hms_queen_elizabeth_running_windows_xp/)

<comment><USER71> The news here was reporting earlier that the Chernobyl monitoring computers were compromised.

Edit: No link, but it was on ABC (Australia) live news, which is pretty reliable. Here is a less reliable source:

[https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and- tech/ne...](https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and- tech/news/hack-cyber-attack-ukraine-russia-wannacry-petya-security-internet- broken-computer-not-working-a7810626.html)

<comment><USER72> Is there a public link for that?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER73> Your own fault if you didnt patch out eternalblue. No sympathy for hacked orgs.

<comment><USER74> Also uses a client side exploit in Word/Wordpad, although that was patched earlier this month:

[https://portal.msrc.microsoft.com/en-US/security- guidance/ad...](https://portal.msrc.microsoft.com/en-US/security- guidance/advisory/CVE-2017-0199)

<comment><USER75> Moronic design of the microsoft page. It requires you to acknowledge some bullshit T&C on first visit, then redirects you to the website home page. Which means that someone clicking on the CVE to check if there is anything important will be redirected to a home page with no information. Most sane people will go back to the original link, but if there were only sane people in this world, this second wave of malware would be toothless. That's not exactly helping awareness of the vulnerability.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER76> My friend's work laptop is a victim of this same attack... all the way here in the Philippines.

There was a company wide email blast to disconnect all workstations from the internet at once.

Fascinating development

<comment><USER77> A literal case of 'in case of cyberattack break glass'

[https://i.imgur.com/fHhkdxX.jpg](https://i.imgur.com/fHhkdxX.jpg)

</comment></comment><comment><USER78> >Cyberattack hits entire Heritage Valley Health System, shuts down computers

>A cyberattack is affecting the Beaver and Sewickley hospitals and all other care facilities in the Heritage Valley Health System on Tuesday.

[http://amp.wtae.com/article/cybersecurity-incident- heritage-...](http://amp.wtae.com/article/cybersecurity-incident-heritage- valley-health-system/10228015)

</comment><comment><USER79> Could someone write a whitehat worm or virus to get into all those vulnerable Windows systems and close the door behind them by patching the hole?

<comment><USER80> Software virus vaccines - I like it. Can't believe I've never run across the concept before. Must be a thing, no?

<comment><USER81> [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti- worm](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-worm)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER82> Looks like people are paying the ransom:

[https://blockchain.info/charts/balance?address=1Mz7153HMuxXT...](https://blockchain.info/charts/balance?address=1Mz7153HMuxXTuR2R1t78mGSdzaAtNbBWX)

<comment><USER64> Not a lot though. Given the huge number of infections, $9000 seems a pretty bad return.

</comment></comment><comment><USER83> I always replay the end-game of Uplink [0] in my head when I read news like this.

Great game with great music.

[0] [https://www.introversion.co.uk/uplink/](https://www.introversion.co.uk/uplink/)

</comment><comment><USER84> > Ukraine's government, National Bank [..]

Now there's a new attack target: the central bank. Send 100 BTC to this address and I will decrypt the balances stored by your central bank, so you, again, know how much money you own.

</comment><comment><USER85> Does anyone know if this decrypt app still work?

[https://github.com/leo-stone/hack-petya](https://github.com/leo-stone/hack- petya)

</comment><comment><USER86> Is anyone aware of an entity that attempts to objectively quantify the economic impact of an event like this (ransoms paid, data lost, labor hours lost, new security costs, etc)?

<comment><USER87> I wouldn't say new security is a cost - unless it's fake security, like antiviruses.

</comment></comment><comment><USER74> On a related note, I don't understand the reason behind transactions like this:

[https://blockchain.info/tx/9778c698f3f2a2c9b9e9f0fdea3c96e8f...](https://blockchain.info/tx/9778c698f3f2a2c9b9e9f0fdea3c96e8fe200b19cd4db382642178dd08405f4d)

Is there something special about using numerous senders like that?

<comment><USER88> That just means someone's got a wallet containing the private keys corresponding to a lot of addresses. So when they want to move some coins, they just sign all the various transactions and send the money to new addresses.

</comment></comment><comment><USER89> So.. ransomware authors want payments in Bitcoins. The obvious counter-attack from the governments would be to target and shut-down all services exchanging bitcoins (or other digital money) to real money. Heck, they can _hack_ them and delete all data, so they shut down on their own.

</comment><comment><USER78> >We have confirmed U.S. cases of Petya ransomware outbreak

[https://twitter.com/Bing_Chris/status/879713682242117634](https://twitter.com/Bing_Chris/status/879713682242117634)

</comment><comment><USER90> store important stuff on external hard drives

never download suspicious stuff specially from emails

<comment><USER91> That's not enough anymore: good ransomware will look for backup systems and wipe those out before proceeding. You need read-only, airgapped backups before you can consider yourself safe.

<comment><USER92> That doesn't help for targeted attacks, which corrupt the backups as they are being written. Not sure how to protect against that though.

<comment><USER93> They can corrupt one backup but not all backups. And a good backup software should do integrity check.

<comment><USER92> I wasn't referring to corrupting the backup directly -- but corrupting the data as it is written to the backup server. This can be done by compromising the backup client, through a rootkit, etc. If this is undetected for a year before the attacker pulls the final trigger, you have a year's worth of bad backups.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER94> Why Ransomware authors are not yet in jail? /cc FBI CIA BND MI5 FSB

<comment><USER95> FSB lol

Even if FSB found hackers, they would take a share of profit and close the case.

</comment></comment><comment><USER96> I remember reading something about a guy warning about intrusions on his company during Wannacry to steal company data and install malware. Now we have this. This is giving me goosebumps.

</comment><comment><USER97> How can one check quickly if his OS is vulnerable ? I know MS pushed updates, but sometimes updates are stuck, or fail to install or are delayed by the user .. so

<comment><USER16> Just do a Windows Update -> Update History and see if you have a cumulative update after 5/24.

[https://imgoat.com/uploads/2e74f10e03/26813.png](https://imgoat.com/uploads/2e74f10e03/26813.png)

</comment></comment><comment><USER98> Do these attacks affect anything else beyond Windows?

<comment><USER99> They can supposedly be manually run in wine on non-windows.

</comment></comment><comment><USER100> FYI, looks like this is still using EternalBlue.

</comment><comment><USER101> One of my clients got some strange emails around 12:00 GMT with links to probably infected websites. Is this related to ransomware?

</comment><comment><USER97> Did these ships are also oil tanker ?

<comment><USER102> The little boat tipped over

<comment><USER103> LOL! [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PxcDyfKV90](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PxcDyfKV90)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER104> I'm afraid that this attack demonstrates that the old PC architecture: Side- loading any app, userspace, privilege escalation, low level file sharing functionality just isn't for purpose.

If malware can exploit a 0-day, 100-day, 1000-day security hole in a corporate network of 2000 machines, its too easy for that malware to share itself across the network and send emails attachments to AllUsers (every single company I've worked for still allow Everyone to send anything to Everyone).

Microsoft's next XP patch should be to remove SMB functionality or just outright disable it (and probably remove IE and other nonsense installed by default too).

And when Windows 7 expires the final patch should be a severe lock down too..

<comment><USER75> It's clear that nothing bad can happen on a machine where you can't do anything.</comment></comment>


Perkins suggests rich should get more votes - <AUTHOR> http://www.msnbc.com/politicsnation/billionaire-rich-should-get-more-votes

<comment><USER2> This guy has jumped the shark. He can't seriously want to roll back a hundred years of progress on universal suffrage.

<comment><USER3> There are plenty of rich and powerful folks who have been working hard to undo the Constitution and Bill of Rights, which is even older.

This clown just isn't playing as deep of a game.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> why not let the richest person have complete power. if your going to throw democracy out the window at least do it right. none of this half a*ed plutocracy crap.

</comment><comment><USER5> They already do.

Money determines who gets on the ballot. Money determines who wins. Then money determines what they do when they're in office.

</comment><comment><USER6> Isn't this an obvious troll ?

</comment><comment><USER7> So it's not enough that they get to buy the two candidates that the rest of us have to vote on. It's not enough that they basically get to choose who is going to be our Senators and Representatives. Basically, he wants the power to run completely roughshod over the rest of us, not just mostly-roughshod. Why even bother with the illusion of the elections in the first place, then?

</comment><comment><USER8> It really doesn't matter how many votes you have if you're dead.</comment>


Thoughtcrime in Britain - <AUTHOR> http://azizonomics.com/2012/11/12/thoughtcrime-in-britain/

<comment><USER2> There have been a number of troubling free speech cases in the UK over the last few months.

In July, a 17-year-old was arrested during the Olympics for tweeting abusive messages at diver Tom Daley.

In August, a 22-year-old man was arrested for posting racist tweets aimed at footballer Carlton Cole.

Also in August, a 44-year-old man was arrested for posting a message on Facebook praising Anders Breivik.

In September, a 22-year-old man was arrested for setting up a fan page on Facebook for Dale Cregan, shortly after Cregan was arrested by police, suspected of murdering two female police officers.

In October a 19-year-old man was sentenced to three months in prison for posting jokes about the missing five-year-old April Jones.

Also in October, a 20-year-old was given a community order for making an online post stating "all soldiers should die and go to hell"

<comment><USER3> Decisions seem to be based on public pressure or context. The man posting the picture of poppy's burning was arrested because it was Remembrance Day. Because of common law these cases are each setting precedence. Although many may believe it wouldn't go farther than this. There's nothing stopping judges ruling that publicly disagreeing with a political party or common held belief is a form of defamation.

If people rally around a case the police and courts are forced to react with harsh sentencing. Morally these people are in the wrong but a moral justification is different to a legal one.

Paul Chambers was found guilty for sending menacing electronic communication. He tweeted that he would blow up Robin Hood Airport when it closed after heavy snow. I've seen worse sarcastic tweets than this in my stream before, after the listed cases these tweets could result in legal action.

<comment><USER2> > Decisions seem to be based on public pressure or context.

That in itself is quite alarming, that the justice system seems to be bowing to the whim of the mob.

More worrying is that, in each of these cases, there were people who initially brought the communications to the attention of the police. In each case there was some busybody, with nothing better to do, who thought some hijinks on the Internet was worthy of a police investigation.

I have no doubt that the number of these cases being reported in the national news (at a rate of one every 1-2 weeks over the last six months) is re- enforcing the view that reporting offensive content to the police is an appropriate and proportionate action.

> Paul Chambers was found guilty for sending menacing electronic > communication.

Chambers' conviction was quashed in July, in a rare display of common sense.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Grossly offensive apparently.

I despair of this country, I really do. The whole system around speech laws is a mockery of justice. People with no connection to the country sue each other here because the material may have been available in the UK. People are arrested, prosecuted and imprisoned for little more than being insensitive buttholes.

We desperately need a first amendment in our own law. Freedom of expression is supposedly guaranteed under EU law but these cases never seem to make it that far.

</comment><comment><USER5> This article misses two important points:

1) Britain has never had free speech.

2) This was not a thought crime. It was a deliberate insult: an act of insensitivity and rudeness intended to give offence.

You cannot walk onto a cinema and shout fire and you cannot legally call someone a cunt to their face in public (with the deliberate intention of causing offence) without attracting the attention of the law.

While I'm sure there are many more pressing things that the UK's police force could (and should) be dealing with, calling this a thought crime is both naïve and stupid.

<comment><USER6> "You cannot walk onto a cinema and shout fire". That's actually an interesting analogy you make given the context.

The "theater/fire" metaphor was first used by US Supreme Court Justice Holmes, to justify the imprisonment of anti-war protestors in World War I for distributing leaflets. It's exactly because such a broad justficiation can be so appealing and so easily misused that the US rejected that decision in favour of a far more narrow description of prohibited speech.

I realise that the UK can make a different stance on free speech, but it seems ironic to pluck as your standard the very language that was used in the United States to quash opposition to the war and mass deaths that the poppy is intended to commemorate.

<comment><USER5> US Supreme Court Justice Holmes was using it as an analogy. I was not. I was using it as an example.

US Supreme Court Justice Holmes was wrong. His analogy was bad one that was thankfully rejected.

I may be wrong in this case about whether the freedom to insult people for no reason should be protected, I am still mulling it over, however I was not wrong and a free society is not wrong to sanction shouting "fire" in a crowded cinema.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Although this isn't the act under which the guy was arrested, it is another example of ...vague and thoughtcrimey law in the UK.

<http://reformsection5.org.uk/>

Also, and probably importantly, there's a large public (and legal - see the various judicial outcomes) reaction against the stupidity of laws like this.

</comment><comment><USER8> Americans aren't in much position to complain about free speech in Britain. The US government just imprisoned a man for his connection with a video deemed "offensive" by that government -- if there was any criticism by anyone but a few right-wing cranks I missed it.

The man's nominal offense was a parole violation. Whether the government's pursuit of the violation, or the sentence given, were typical for such violations is beyond my expertise.

However the government went out of its way to see to it that his arrest (pardon, "brought in for questioning") was known to and photographed by the press. This was an obvious effort to communicate to elements abroad the distate of the government for the video. Maybe he had to prosecuted on the parole violation -- if so, that could and should have been done much more quietly.

No one seems to regard this particularly important, which I find very strange. One, anyone in the US who might want to say something "offensive" now has cause to wonder what opportunities they present to discretionary prosecution.

Two, and more important, the US government has just validated censorious behaviors of a great many governments. How exactly are we going to complain to the Chinese or Egyptian government for jailing dissenters when we have made a point of doing just that? Worse, we've just told all those dissenters that they cannot be sure that we will be supporting them if they get into trouble.

I don't really much care that his offense was nominally related to an international incident, or that he said means things about someone else's religion. The whole point of ignoring such problems is to deny the government _any_ excuse for censorship. Because once a government gets in the habit, it becomes quite easy to find excuses for the censorships it finds in its interests.

This was a shameful episode for Americans. Joined to a cultural squishiness on speech "offensive" to one religion in particular, it is disturbing. Join it with a few more episodes of government action and the lot will begin to become dangerous.

<comment><USER9> > Americans aren't in much position to complain about free speech in Britain.

The author appears to be British. So what does this have to do with anything?

<comment><USER8> It has to do with any Americans who might be reading or commenting on this topic, on this board. I expect there are enough such to merit noting events in their own country.

That is so obvious I have to wonder why you are looking for arguments against even mentioning the matter.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Well, that's certainly disturbing. Arrested for burning a paper poppy. I always thought Great Britain was rather more progressive than us colonials.

<comment><USER11> Unfortunately we don't have an equivalent of the First Amendment in the UK, so people aren't quite as used to Free Speech being thought of as an unalienable right.

Whilst generally speech is fairly free, and we have a pretty diverse media, there have been numerous laws impeaching upon Free Speech, particularly recently, generally in terms of avoiding obscenity and protecting children. It's a worrying trend, and one I wish we could revert.

I've been wondering a lot recently what the best way is that I can help campaign against this - it's my biggest bugbear with UK politics currently, far more than the economy or other social issues. Any suggestions?

<comment><USER12> The UK and most of the colonies have legal systems that are based on common law. Which means precedent is everything.

If you _really_ want to do something about this problem, break the law, get arrested, and defeat the law in court. Or make friends with somebody who did that and assist that in their legal fight, assuming they decide to fight.

Of course, your probability of success is slim, but that's a quick way of getting rid of something profoundly stupid by a sole individual.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I don't think you can really blame the state/police for this.

The overwhelming majority of the British public see these kinds of things as grossly offensive and in cases have created petitions _wanting_ stuff like this to be illegal.

This first blew up when the group "Islam4UK" demonstrated in Luton against the royal anglian regiment's homecoming parade. This spawned the EDL group to counter-protest.

They later threatened to demonstrate in Wootton Basset (where dead soldiers are repatriated) and the uproar against this was huge with major newspapers all calling for the march to be banned.

It is now illegal to be a member of the Islam4UK group, so they have had to change their name a bunch of times.

<comment><USER14> > I don't think you can really blame the state/police for this.

This could come down to your view on the role of government, but I personally don't see that the majority opinion should be how a society is defined. There are dangers both ways, though I feel the government should always be pushing a more progressive social agenda. Gay marriage is a great current example. Obama is doing it right by pushing for it. Gillard in Australia is doing it wrong by saying "the people don't want it" and axing any proposals. Obama is fighting upstream for what is right and Gillard is basically saying "look, my hands are tied b/c the people don't want it". It's a cop-out for making an unpopular but right decision.

In the case of free speech, there is little wiggle room, IMO. People need to be free to say what they want. It may not be popular, but that isn't the point.

Long winded way of saying, the mass opinion shouldn't be the way we define civil societies. We need to do what is right. "Right" might be gray at times, but it is usually pretty clear when you get the smart people together and have them hash it out.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> Why hasn't Britain adopted some sort of free speech law in the spirit of the US's first amendment? They've had over two hundred years to do so. Can anyone provide insight into why?

<comment><USER4> There seem to be a large number of people (lets call them dumbasses) who are quite happy with the status quo, and rather like the idea that people can be put away for saying the wrong thing.

This is (of course) because in their minds they are part of the in-crowd and people caught by these unjust laws are part of the out-crowd and are therefore 'other'. Many humans do not care about what happens to anyone that can be defined as 'other'. It never seems to occur to them that it could be used against themselves or their relatives. They also seem to trust government implicitly.

Perhaps it's a generational thing. I hope this changes.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> All speech, including that inciting violence or dissent should be protected. If a populace allows imprisonment over utterances, rebellion against tyranny becomes impossible. Imagine Thomas Paine was imprisoned for "Common Sense" or the First Continental Congress was imprisoned for discussing independence, or that Martin Luther King was imprisoned for expressing the extremely unpopular and offensive notion of equality for all races, or Pope was imprisoned for his satire of slavery or Joyce for his depictions of people going to the restroom. Socrates was willing to go to death because of his ideals. The least of us should be willing to decry the suppression of opinion of any form at the risk of being offended or verbally injured or even incited to violence against the forces that support the suppression of Speech, lest we find ourselves the member of an oppressed, unpopular, and thus imprisonable or executable minority. To fail to protect the Speech of those with whom we disagree is to fail to live as free people. This was the salient theme in Orwell's 1984. Newspeak was an attempt not to remove offensive Speech, but to make impossible the act of expressing any thought through speech that may move the populace to action to throw off the shackles of tyranny that chained them to a life of slavery.

Britons have a right to be angry, and a right to express their anger at these arrests. They are an assault on the human rights of all citizens of the UK and the willingness of some on this topic to accept these assaults is both unsettling and unexpected.

</comment><comment><USER17> He may of had a right to free speech, but there again so did those who's memories he was offending. It is also worth noting that free speech realy offers not extra right to utilise match's with regards to burning things to cause offence. Be him burning religious fiction or paper flowers, it is the way that free speech is expressed that is the crux of the issue and as a rule free speech does not advocate match's or fire. I feel that last point is important on many levels.

</comment><comment><USER18> 1984 was not a guidebook.

</comment><comment><USER19> I'm not voicing my true opinion here because i'm worried i might get in trouble. I can't afford some lawsuits at this point in my life. maybe when i level up from my social class when my raise comes through... maybe.

<comment><USER4> If you level up enough they won't touch you anyway...</comment></comment>


Inside Radio Shack's slow motion collapse - <AUTHOR> http://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2015-02-02/inside-radioshack-s-slow-motion-collapse

<comment><USER2> > And then there are the tinkerers, who once served as RadioShack's core > constituency. They're back and thriving and now known as the maker > community. But the company has failed to capture that market

It's not even like it would be hard. Carry the stuff we want to buy. I want to buy 7400-series chips, and I'll pay a crazy markup in order not to have to wait for Digikey. But you'd rather sell overpriced headphones.

</comment><comment><USER3> Since when has bloomberg been using geocities' style sheet?

<comment><USER4> A gradient fill with hot pink is always a good fit for business analysis.

<comment><USER5> They're pretty clearly doing it as part of an 80s theme associated with RadioShack's boom times.

edit: I'm so wrong. I just tried out a few other Bloomberg articles. They all have the same theme. Holy crap.</comment></comment></comment>


The New Instagram Logo Is Amazing, and Nobody Is Happy - <AUTHOR> http://www.ymedialabs.com/new-instagram-logo/ <comment><USER2> "That's why they're posting on the app in the first place. They want to be noticed!"

Not entirely true - for me, it's just the easiest, lowest friction way to share photos to multiple endpoints at the same time (and has been for years - no-one else has even approached the same ease of use.)</comment>


Show HN: Simple Covid-19 Dashboard - <AUTHOR> https://coviddashboard.eugenectang.com <comment><AUTHOR> Hi!

I made this website to present COVID-19 data in a clean and simple UI.

Many websites show similar data, but I found they often require a lot of clicks or scrolling to find the information I want (e.g. plot case counts for every state in the U.S.). Wanted to share in case it would be useful to others as well.

Happy to hear any feedback / feature requests!

\---

Pages:

* Case Counts: [https://coviddashboard.eugenectang.com/casecounts](https://coviddashboard.eugenectang.com/casecounts)

* Treatments: [https://coviddashboard.eugenectang.com/treatments](https://coviddashboard.eugenectang.com/treatments)

* Vaccines: [https://coviddashboard.eugenectang.com/vaccines](https://coviddashboard.eugenectang.com/vaccines)

Data Sources:

* Case counts from Johns Hopkins University

* Vaccine and Treatment data from the Milken Institute

<comment><USER2> Hey, this is really cool, for sure! Any chance we could also be able to see Case counts per pop plotted like this? I would love that.

Thanks

<comment><AUTHOR> For sure! I've been wanting to add that as well. I'll try to add it in the next day and update here.

<comment><AUTHOR> Added!</comment></comment></comment></comment>


56.000+ Tweets in 3 Days. I think one of the best Twitter Campaigns. - <AUTHOR> http://thenextweb.com/socialmedia/2011/05/30/a-turkish-telecom-companys-brilliant-and-simple-twitter-campaign/ Please let me know, if you know other popular low budget campaigns on twitter or post them here on hacker news. thx and enjoy the video. <comment><USER2> Why is "we reached 3.6million people" a legitimate statistic, when all they did was end up in 3.6 million peoples timelines? They can't measure actual people reached, it would be like saying "I sent 100,000 emails, therefore I reached 100,000 people".

Looking at Lady Gagas twitter (10m followers, average celebrity) when she tweets a link it gets ~100,000 clicks, 1%, so to suggest 3.6 million timelines is 3.6 users "reached" (where reached means actually engaged) is silly, it'll be closer to 36,000 assuming Lady Gaga is a good example.

<comment><USER3> _Looking at Lady Gagas twitter (10m followers, average celebrity) when she tweets a link it gets ~100,000 clicks, 1%, so to suggest 3.6 million timelines is 3.6 users "reached" (where reached means actually engaged) is silly, it'll be closer to 36,000 assuming Lady Gaga is a good example._

I have ~600 followers on Twitter and when I tweet a link, it usually gets ~80-100 clicks on it, well over 1%. Just because _Lady Gaga_ doesn't have a high rate of people clicking links, doesn't mean that it applies across the board.

<comment><USER2> Yes, but the largest portion if the people involved (that make up the 3.6 million) _were_ celebrities. I personally see a similar conversion rate to you, I have 300 followers and get ~50 clicks.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> please share similar campaigns below in the comments or post them on hackernews. would be great. thx.</comment>


A Big Data Startup Gives Away Its Software to Make It More Valuable - <AUTHOR> http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/09/27/more-open-source-for-big-data

<comment><USER2> The above link doesn't work for me, but this appears to be the same story:

[http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/09/27/more-open-source- fo...](http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/09/27/more-open-source-for-big- data/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0)

<comment><USER3> Thanks; changed.</comment></comment>