Krugman: The Madoff Economy - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/19/opinion/19krugman.html?hp <comment><USER2> _"The answer, I believe, is that there's an innate tendency on the part of even the elite to idolize men who are making a lot of money, and assume that they know what they're doing."_

This strikes a chord with me. Stop chasing money. Chase changing the world.

</comment><comment><USER3> He's mistaken. There is a real structural difference between a Ponzi scheme and an investment fund.

And as for the high incomes of money managers, it seems reasonable to pay someone a lot to manage a huge fund. So much is at stake that it would be a false economy to hire someone cheap.

<comment><USER4> But what Krugman is highlighting here -- and Nicholas Taleb has done in more detail previously -- is that fortunes have been made pursuing strategies that are net losers for investors and society.

All you have to do is make sure the giant losses occur just 1 year out of N. It doesn't matter that the one year's losses wipe out the other N-1 year gains; you've already collected your fees and quite possibly retired, and there's no claw-back of your cut.

A reasonable aim of financial technology is to ameliorate the risks that could obscure or destroy truly productive activities. But the same tools can easily be used to do the opposite, construct net-wealth-destroying strategies which enrich only money managers.

To cook up such a strategy purposefully is a crime, and the classic ponzi scheme is the blatant extreme case. But many other strategies based on collecting fees during the upswing of an unsustainable bubble, while being insulated from the downswing, are close cousins of the full ponzi. That the loot is laundered through ostensibly legitimate investments (like mortgage securities this time around) is a convenient consensus cover story; it helps even the perpetrators believe they are providing valuable investment services rather than just a scam.

This view doesn't indict all investment activity/funds as being similar to ponzi schemes. But an awful lot of this most recent financial-services boom appears to have been like a ponzi skim.

(Despite the truth I see in this column, I would not trust Krugman's suggested solutions, which are likely to be heavy on new regulation. Ultimately capital has to learn to protect itself, with novel compensation schemes that disincentivize the 'year N explosion' pseudo-ponzi strategies.)

<comment><USER3> _fortunes have been made pursuing strategies that are net losers for investors and society_

That seems unavoidable. It's the same in most industries. You have to pay top baseball players high salaries, even though there's no guarantee they'll do well after you hire them.

 _To cook up such a strategy purposefully is a crime_

Is it, actually?

<comment><USER4> There are no guarantees, of course. Sometimes chance breaks the relationship between results and rewards. And, sometimes crime pays.

But the degree matters. If looting and destruction is occasionally rewarded, it can be a manageable expense. If it dominates the industry, even if not via conscious malice, we've got problems. What if every high-paid 'top baseball player' for 10 seasons running was a bust? Then something in scouting or compensation would have to change, a lot.

 _Is it [a crime], actually?_

Yes. A manager who promises investors the possibility of positive return, but knows he has purposefully designed things so that the investors are guaranteed to ultimately lose, while the manager gains, has at the very least engaged in criminal fraud.

So to pull off net-losing strategies within the law, a manager should deceive himself as well as his investors. Fortunately for this class of managers, a whole industry of external rationalizations was spawned by the potential profits.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Why is anyone who doubts the overall integrity of then investment industry is getting downmodded here? The HN crowd is usually smarter than this. First of all, downmods are for spam so stop treating this board like diggiotic censorbots. Second of all, educate yourselves about the truth of the investment industry. Or better yet try trusting your own money with it and learn the hard way. Big brokerages buy large blocks of a stock which sends the price up, then they call affiliated brokerages to advise all of their clients to buy the same stock because the price is going up which sends the price up more, then the big brokerage dumps their shares and keeps the profit. Pump and dump. It's one of the many price manipulation games the finance services industry plays against its own clients, it's illegal, and it happens every trading day in full view of the SEC. Madoff proved the SEC are the Keystone Cops. Suckers believe that brokers are paid according to the success of the client's profile because that's what their brokers tell them. Dead wrong. Brokers are paid according to the number of sales, transactions, and new clients (suckers) they can reel in. So go ahead and downmod me. There's one born every minute. Always more sheep to be shorn.

</comment><comment><USER6> Krugman is missing the elephant in the room. The most obvious comparison to Madoff's scheme is Social Security. New funds fuel current payouts, and the entire system rests on the addition of new members (population growth) which is why its insolvent as our population levels off in the next 30 years.

Luckily the government isnt crazy enough to promise extraordinary returns on your social security contributions, however once the funds run out for the current recipients, watch our forced contribution be raised sky high to keep paying it out.

Bad times ahead. But thats the predetermined path for a Ponzi scheme, no matter what the size.

<comment><USER7> Are you talking about medicare or social security? If we took a little under half of the increase in defense spending in the ~2002-2006 period, social security could be made solvent for the next 75 years: [http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6514572148606053094...](http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6514572148606053094#18m55s)

It isn't exactly out of our capacity to do. We just have to stop blowing things up and destroying wealth.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> It's interesting that Krugman, a Keynesian, is so down on Madoff. During a recession, I would think that Krugman would want some form of economic stimulus that causes people, in the aggregate, to spend more money compared to how much they save. What better way to do so than a ponzi scheme, wherein Bernie spends the money he knows he's stolen, and his investors spend the money they think they've earned?

</comment><comment><USER9> Thank God someone finally said it. We need to take 95% of the financial services industry and ship them off to a desert island.

</comment><comment><USER10> I feel like he wrote the whole article just to get in his clever one-liner at the end.

</comment><comment><USER11> _is Mr. Madoff's tale from the story of the investment industry as a whole?_

This is a statement one might expect from a pure juvenile. No, Mr. Krugman, the investment industry serves a viable purpose, in deep contrast with a Ponzi scheme. There are good and bad methods in the investment industry, but Ponzi schemes, in every instance, are indelibly insolvent, unproductive, and unprofitable.

<comment><USER12> I normally disagree with Krugman, but he's closer to the truth than you think.

A Ponzi scheme is defined as an operation "that involves paying abnormally high returns to investors out of the money paid in by subsequent investors, rather than from the profit from any real business. "

In 2007, the dividend yield of the S&P 500 was 1.5% People were not buying stocks to obtain the cash flow of a real business. People bought stocks under the assumption that eventually they could sell to someone else for a higher price.

<comment><USER11> The "S&P 500" is not the same as the "investment industry" which is the subject. Buying an asset with the expectation that it will increase in value is not the same thing as a direct system of payments between clients with no underlying assets. You're not really addressing my comment or Krugman's article.

But that's not the point. The point is that Krugman's objects of comparison share almost no correspondence. Even Lehman Brothers was substantially profitable when brought down by one class of securities, the creation of which was largely a government affair. It is important for everyone to understand that Krugman is the worst kind of shill.

<comment><USER12> _The "S &P 500" is not the same as the "investment industry"_

It's a big part of it, and the rest of the industry was operating in much the same way.

 _Buying an asset with the expectation that it will increase in value..._

People expected the asset to increase in price. The only way an asset can increase in price is if new buyers are willing to pay more money for it. If this increase in price corresponded to an increase in the underlying cashflow, that would be healthy. But the price of stocks were increasing at a far greater rate than dividends were increasing. Therefore it was not healthy at all.

Another way of putting it: if you bought a share a S&P 500 ETF, and knew you could never, ever sell it, what kind of dividend yield would you demand? I would demand at least a 5% dividend, maybe more. By that metric, the S&P in 2007 was overpriced by about 70%. That premium is based on the idea that someone else would be willing to pay that price or more.

The S&P is not really a ponzi scheme. When a ponzi scheme is big enough, and it is legal, we have a new name for it: money. S&P stocks were essentially trading as private currencies. See my longer comment on this here: <http://www.newmogul.com/item?id=2587>

_It is important for everyone to understand that Krugman is the worst kind of shill._

He is a shill, but it's important to criticize him for the right reasons. The elephant that Krugman misses is that from 1995-2008 the dollar was diluting at ~10% a year. When that happens, holding any asset other than the dollar - stocks, real estate, gold, oil - starts looking like a great idea.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Counter argument: [http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2008/12/madoff_as_metap....](http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2008/12/madoff_as_metap.html)

<comment><USER4> I hardly see that as a counter. Both Kling and Krugman are right! The government is a ponzi scheme, _and_ lots of the financial sector has been ponzi-like, too!

(And a point that Kling might make but Krugman tends not to: much of the financial-sector ponzi-ism was propelled by government policy, which inflated the housing bubble with tax benefits, Fed-lowered interest rates, government- sponsored mortgage-underwriting, and regulatory favoritism for dubious mortgage-lending. And policy which then further insulated finance institutions from existential risk with the implied promise -- now delivered -- of giant bailouts.)

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> I'm more inclined to agree with Krugman than mises.org or reason.com, but I don't want to see any of them here.

<comment><USER3> It's one thing to conclude one specific article is offtopic (in which case please just flag it instead of commenting), but are you really saying that nothing Krugman could ever write would be interesting to hackers?

<comment><USER14> I think a great deal of what Krugman says is interesting (perhaps minus the Bush bashing, that just gets old), and occasionally something on reason.com, too, for that matter. I also like to read Kling, Thoma, Cowen and Mankiw, as well as The Economist's Free Exchange, and a few others from time to time. I suspect that I'm not alone in those interests.

However, I very rarely submit the articles I find that I like. My fear is that the ensuing discussions tend to be very much about ideologies and create lots of heat, but little light - they're about 'firm beliefs' rather than something that can ever really be proven in an internet discussion forum. These sorts of discussions, in my opinion, attract people that want to talk about politics and economics, which are sort of low-hanging fruit - everyone, not just hackers, has opinions on them. Also, there is so much written about those topics that it would be extremely easy to crowd out hacker/startup topics with economic ones, even restricting economics/politics postings to relatively good ones. My gut feeling is that if these articles prosper, this site will, with time, decline. Your site, your call though - if you say economics and or politics go, I will no longer comment or flag them. Maybe I'll even submit a few of my own.

BTW, one of my favorite articles of Krugman's is this one:

<http://web.mit.edu/krugman/www/smokey.html>

<comment><USER15> You're very protective of this community, David, and I appreciate it. But this economic crisis is not only a once-in-a-lifetime event, but it has tremendous consequences for start-ups.

It's better just to flag what you don't like. Personally, I find this article to be both insightful and important.

<comment><USER14> > You're very protective of this community,

Heh, I suppose I get a bit wrapped up in it. Living in the middle of the Tirolean Alps, and not speaking much of the local language (German), I don't really interact much with hackers outside of this site, or pretty much at all in real life, which is less than ideal - I'm a fairly social person. Hopefully we'll be back in Italy in a few months and things will improve.

> But this economic crisis is not only a once-in-a-lifetime event, but it has > tremendous consequences for start-ups.

Sure, but plenty of real, serious economists are still discussing the great depression too, so I am quite sure that there will be enough discussion about current events to last at least a generation. This article wasn't really all that directly related to startups, either. I thought it was pretty evident he wasn't talking about plain old stocks and bonds, but a lot of the wackier things going on (CDO's, CDS's, hedge funds, etc...). Even there, though, he was doing it in sort of a facile way that probably doesn't add much to the debate.

<comment><USER15> Prague isn't that far away, and remember that you and your family have a free place to stay here anytime.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


3 Reasons AWS Lambda Is Not Ready for Prime Time - <AUTHOR> https://www.datawire.io/3-reasons-aws-lambda-not-ready-prime-time/ <comment><USER2> These arguments seem to be mostly related to Amazon API Gateway rather than Lambda. (Handling errors on invalid input, returning response codes other than 200.) Lambda was also first available for JavaScript before Python, so probably the JSON event and callback model is a more natural fit for Node.js apps.

I would claim that deployment tools like Serverless are relatively safe to use even in production, because once the application is deployed, the tool itself is no longer in the critical execution path. Risks are mostly related to the development process being slowed down if the tool starts failing for some reason. In such situations you can still use Amazon's AWS Console or CLI tools.

</comment><comment><USER3> In production we're using Lambda to generate thumbnails of user uploaded images and it works like a charm.

I've got another function that executes on a schedule to generate statistics from our production database and send us a Slack message with the roundup.

So yes, it may well be the case that the API Gateway + Lambda solution is not ready for prime time however there are other use cases that certainly are.

</comment><comment><USER4> misses one more reason: landa is utterly inflexible. as soon as you try to serve pages and data you need to jump a load of hops to get what you want out of it, and sometimes it's not even possible.</comment>


Ask HN: What are good resources to learn dynamic programming? - <AUTHOR> I understand the basic ideas behind dynamic programming (and I think it's really cool and very useful tool to understand), but I struggle with DP programming on Leetcode and in interviews.<p>Are there any good resources out there for DP? Multiple sources have said that DP feels like "magic" when you don't get it, but once it "clicks" DP problems become very easy. I'm still waiting for it to click. <comment><USER2> What is dynamic programming. First, you need know what's recursion for better understanding. If yes, you can make step #2 :)</comment>


Apple's mini lessons - <AUTHOR> http://weiranzhang.com/blog/2013/3/apples-mini-lessons

<comment><USER2> I don't discount the idea that Apple will release a new low-end smartphone. However I find the logic in this article lacking. The idea seams to be that because Apple released a iPad mini they will release a new low-end smartphone. That's a little like saying Apple released the Mac mini and thus they will release a new low-end smartphone.

Over time I've learned that Apple will do what Apple wants to do and it's no indication of what they will or won't do in the future.</comment>


Florida mom gets 20 years for firing warning shots (2012) - <AUTHOR> http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57433184/fla-mom-gets-20-years-for-firing-warning-shots/

<comment><USER2> The sentence is excessive, but some sort of penalty definitely should be assessed. The stand your ground/castle laws provide for someone to defend themselves and others in their house with deadly force with a firearm when they are in imminent danger.

If you are firing warning shots and not shooting the center of mass to disable and/or kill, then you don't need to be discharging your weapon at all. Guns are not toys and they aren't meant to dissuade someone from a course of action. They are meant to end the life of someone.

In short, if you're not threatened enough to kill, you're not threatened enough to fire your weapon.

<comment><USER3> > In short, if you're not threatened enough to kill, you're not threatened > enough to fire your weapon.

This doesn't make any sense to me. Obviously, the discharging of a firearm should never be taken lightly. But the sound of a gunshot is an extremely effective deterrent, and I don't see why that doesn't make it a legitimate form of self-defense.

> Guns... aren't meant to dissuade someone from a course of action

Isn't that exactly what they're for? Police don't (usually) draw their weapons for the express purpose of killing. They do so to force a violent attacker to stand down, ideally without having to fire a shot.

<comment><USER4> Warning shots are illegal everywhere. It's considered use of deadly force when it is not required. Any firearms training course will tell you this. It just so happens Florida has very harsh mandatory minimum sentencing for this offense. In Vermont they'll just give you a fine.

<comment><USER5> That's wrong (you may mean "in the US", though, I don't know about that). And incredibly stupid.

Of course it is desirable to give the attacker a chance to retreat by firing a warning shot. If he continues and you're in imminent physical danger, you shoot at the legs.

And only if that did not help you go for the torso.

(If there is enough time, if the killing shot is the only one you're ever going to get to fire, then that it is)

<comment><USER6> Sorry, but echoing Casseres, you've demonstrated you know little to nothing about the legal use of lethal force in the US or practical self-defense with a gun. If you own a gun, please get a book like this classic [http://www.amazon.com/In-Gravest-Extreme-Personal- Protection...](http://www.amazon.com/In-Gravest-Extreme-Personal- Protection/dp/0936279001/) before you end up being convicted of a serious crime.

Extending his remarks, if you hit the femoral artery in someone's upper leg, they're going to quickly bleed out unless they get serious first aid.

<comment><USER5> Well, but I know about what German courts require in cases of self-defense with a gun.

I'm sorry to hear that the US have not developed some sensible framework of self-defense.

<comment><USER6> Ah; the US has 50+ frameworks of self-defense, given our federalism.

What do you not find sensible about Florida's? If you accept Zimmerman's account of the incident, which we presume the jury did, he only resorted to lethal force after he was in legitimate fear for his life, and he never had an opportunity to retreat (states vary greatly on duty to retreat vs. stand your ground).

What do German courts require?

<comment><USER5> I find the Florida system eminently sensible, even not going far enough. Maybe just because I'm kind of used to it.

German self-defense law is even stronger than all those Stand Your Ground laws in the US.

I guess only here law professors can write about the "ignominious/dishonorable flight" when discussing options against an attacker.

"Justice does not have to yield to injustice" is a very common saying.

But even if the law allows you to strike back, it's usually still a good idea to retreat. :-)

<comment><USER6> " _But even if the law allows you to strike back, it 's usually still a good idea to retreat. :-)_"

Indeed; the good thing about Stand Your Ground (SYG) laws is that they presume the citizen without fault will make a good decision on that and don't allow the state to second guess him along with everything else it will be questioning (i.e. SYG doesn't touch on biggest question of "is this use of lethal force justified?", which should be the real focus).

I've seen some horrible abuses of duty to retreat _from your own home_ in Massachusetts when the courts were negating as much of every legislative reform as they could; you should never have to decide between abandoning your children to the tender mercies of a thug and going to jail (real case, followed contemporaneously in the _Boston Globe_ in the early '80s).

<comment><USER5> A saying from an aquaintance who works as a public prosecutor in capital cases:

"Generally it's preferable to discuss the limitations of self-defense with the prosecutor, than having the family discuss with the undertaker."

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> The behavior this little cul-de-sac of law incentivises is clear. Say you missed.

<comment><USER6> Since she was convicted of attempted murder, that would have only sped up the verdict.

<comment><USER7> Had she simply stated "I was in fear for my life so I tried to shoot him. I guess I missed", this would have gone down quite differently.

She probably said something like "I was afraid of getting beaten again so I fired some warning shots to scare him." So jail then.

There's no part of this thats right.

<comment><USER4> There's a lot missing from this article's account of what happened. The woman left the house, went to her car, got her gun, came back inside and then fired the gun, multiple times. Other articles go into more detail. It certainly doesn't seem like she was in any immediate danger after reading the other accounts.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Any gun-owning Floridians here wanna comment on this?

</comment><comment><USER9> There should be a law governing all verdicts requiring them to abide by a rule of common sense law.

<comment><USER5> That is equivalent to abolishing rule of law.

And leads to an immediate race to the bottom of human sentiments and emotions.

Feel free to google for "Gesundes Volksempfinden" (~"healthy people's perception"). The central pillar that allowed German jurists in the Third Reich to distort the existing law at will.

The German civil code has been changed often, but fundamentally it's the same now as it was in 1900. Pretty fascinating how it's now seeing the fourth totally different political system.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> That is so fucking wrong.</comment>


No, iPhone 6+ does not bend - <AUTHOR> http://www.businessinsider.com/bendgate-truthers-claim-to-have-found-the-real-story-behind-the-flexible-iphone-6-2014-9

<comment><USER2> > Reddit user "tittywagon" was one online commenter who is skeptical of > BendGate: "The hoodie, glasses, backwards hat. The guy is a side-show idiot > who blew it way out of proportion for YouTube views."

This is some high-quality reporting. /s</comment>


Deadline Sues The Hollywood Reporter For Copyright Infringement - <AUTHOR> http://www.deadline.com/2011/09/breaking-deadlines-parent-company-files-lawsuit-against-the-hollywood-reporters-parent-company-for-copyright-infringement/

<comment><USER2> The exhibits show the code copying [http://www-deadline-com.vimg.net/wp- content/uploads/2011/09/...](http://www-deadline-com.vimg.net/wp- content/uploads/2011/09/PMC_vs_THR_Exhibits110914164154.pdf)

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> The actual linked headline is more accurate but I had to truncate it for here.

</comment><comment><USER2> The interesting part of this is the copying of code from the website. It is interesting to see how the lawyers do the "look and feel" versus "source code" copying.</comment>


My open-source, do-it-yourself cellphone (2013) - <AUTHOR> https://blog.arduino.cc/2013/08/12/diy-cellphone/ <comment><USER2> The actual "phone" part is what's difficult about doing this, and I'd be _very_ impressed if someone did manage to write a full GSM stack and produce working --- if not completely legal due to all the regulations --- hardware themselves (I believe Fabrice Bellard has done something similar), but then again, most of the large manufacturers don't design and produce the GSM hardware in mass-produced phones either. As this project shows, taking an existing GSM modem and building an interface around it is not very difficult in comparison.

A comparison with a mass-produced product of similar functionality 3 years ago yields some interesting datapoints:

[http://www.bunniestudios.com/blog/?page_id=3107](http://www.bunniestudios.com/blog/?page_id=3107)

<comment><USER3> OsmocomBB has a complete GSM mobile station Stack. But as a firmware for a traditional Phone (motorola C123 for example).

[http://bb.osmocom.org/trac/](http://bb.osmocom.org/trac/)

<comment><USER4> The phone is only a dumb modem in that setup, all the processing happens on a connected PC. It's really impressive, and a cool project to play around with, but it's not a replacement firmware you can load on an old brick phone and have a functional mobile.

<comment><USER3> [http://bb.osmocom.org/trac/wiki/mobile](http://bb.osmocom.org/trac/wiki/mobile)

I could imagine that this could be integrated in the firmware.

<comment><USER4> Yes, that's the program I was referring to. It's _way_ too large and heavy to fit in a phone. It would be a significant project to slim it down and optimise - many have started, none has succeeded yet.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> This is great! Here's my (more retro) take on it:

[https://www.stavros.io/posts/irotary- saga/](https://www.stavros.io/posts/irotary-saga/)

I'm looking to make a PCB for it, as the Arduino Uno + shield is way, way too big for this. Does anyone know of a good way to do that? I looked at the SIM900 module but I was a bit intimidated by all the pins.

The OP's build seems to be using the Quectel M10, maybe it won't be too hard to get that running...

<comment><USER6> Your project and trailer was awesome. Love that you brought back the experience of slamming the phone on some prick. Especially after all the work the user goes through dialing the number. Outrageous that the other party didn't appreciate the call! Haha.

Also, what was once ancient is now innovative. :)

EDIT: Rewatching the trailer, I just noticed a new feature you can add to your marketing material. The Redial button gives the prick a second chance with one press. Still a prick? _Slam_! Again! Redial-slam should be considered an extra feature given it's used for specific situations & hard with regular rotary.

<comment><USER5> Haha, thanks! I actually need to add the redial feature to my post, with that exact use case. " _redial_ Hey, I just called again to see if you're still an ass. Yes? _slam_ , _redial_ Oh, also, screw you for having three zeroes in your phone number! _slam_ "

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> By looking at the photos of people bent over their Arduinos, I think we have lessons to learn from clock repair people and their high standing tables.

[http://www.michlmayr.com/images/gallery/gallery-15-big.jpg](http://www.michlmayr.com/images/gallery/gallery-15-big.jpg)

<comment><USER8> Everything about this interview is amazing:

[https://www.hodinkee.com/articles/interview-meet-dan- spitz-a...](https://www.hodinkee.com/articles/interview-meet-dan-spitz- anthrax-guitarist-turned-master-watchmaker)

Jump down to "Why did you design a watchmaking bench?"

<comment><USER9> The bench itself is impressive too.

[http://danspitz.com/spitz-bench/](http://danspitz.com/spitz-bench/)

<comment><USER8> oh thanks, I forgot to include that page. That's the really amazing one.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> If anyone would like to give it a try, you can get a kit including PCB and parts at AISLER [https://aisler.net/damellis/cellphone2hw/diy- cellphone](https://aisler.net/damellis/cellphone2hw/diy-cellphone)

Please note that the kit does only include parts which are available from the major distributors. You may check the Bill-of-materials at [https://aisler.net/damellis/cellphone2hw/diy- cellphone/bom](https://aisler.net/damellis/cellphone2hw/diy-cellphone/bom)

Disclaimer: I'm one of the founders of AISLER

</comment><comment><USER11> I don't understand how it is a PhD project, at MIT nonetheless. From [http://web.media.mit.edu/~mellis/cellphone/index.html](http://web.media.mit.edu/~mellis/cellphone/index.html) I get it is not much of a technical projet, more like a sociological one (how hard can it be for a layman, is that useful, why, etc.), but I don't understand what the challenges are.

Can you explain how it useful as a research project ? What are you expecting to learn overall ?

Thank you.

<comment><USER12> Doesn't the third sentence in the article you linked to answer your questions?

<comment><USER5> Not really, I think I agree with the GP. This is a pretty easy project, and even though the author spun it well, it's still nowhere near PhD level for even unrelated fields.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Maybe I was just looking in the wrong place, but I cound't find much info about the baseband processor. Is it open or proprietary?

<comment><USER14> It uses the Arduino GSM shield, which itself uses the M10 by Quectel, which I believe is a proprietary design.

<comment><USER15> I know they call it hardware because it's hard, but is it possible to do maybe GSM/Edge with a common SDR, disregarding license and legalities?

<comment><USER16> SDR -> Software Defined Radio -> receiver. You'll need a transmitter too.

Though I'm sure some clever person somewhere hacked one to do just that.

<comment><USER17> SDR transceivers have been on the market for quite some time; have a look at the HackRF, for instance.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18>
       "a laser-cut wooden enclosure"

You've redefined the 'burn' phone. Awesome project! I wonder if something similar could be done with a Raspberry Pi?

<comment><USER19> It's been done a few times. Here's a good example:

[https://www.raspberrypi.org/blog/piphone-home-made- raspberry...](https://www.raspberrypi.org/blog/piphone-home-made-raspberry-pi- smartphone/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> Looks cool, but also a solid way to get held up at airport security. ;)

</comment><comment><USER21> If you want something even easier try Telit. They include Python interpreter (an ancient one) and are not too reliable, but everything can be done onboard :)

Rant: as I come from EE backround, wiring up a QUECTEL does not sound DIY to me.

</comment><comment><USER22> Ohh shut up and take my money!

Really. If you sold them (for a reasonable price) I would totally buy one.

</comment><comment><USER23> What a great idea. I'm thinking of combining this with a 3D printer to make a custom housing. Some privacy enthusiasts will love this. Cool project.

<comment><USER24> Is this really any more private than some phones that are available for purchase?

<comment><USER25> Not much.

It uses GSM, which can be listened to by a RTL-SDR or any other software defined radio.

[http://www.rtl-sdr.com/receiving-decoding-decrypting-gsm- sig...](http://www.rtl-sdr.com/receiving-decoding-decrypting-gsm-signals-rtl- sdr/)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> Questions that come to mind:

* how long does the battery last compared to other types of phones?

* can you tether a laptop to it for data access?

</comment><comment><USER27> Just want to say:

Please don't breathe solder fumes.

That picture of everyone hunched over their PCB boards while soldering makes me cringe.

Use some form of protection via a fume extractor or face mask and when possible solder in a well-ventilated area.

I've met people who've completely destroyed their lungs and ended up with nasty lung cancer after years of day-to-day solder fume exposure.

<comment><USER28> There's a useful device which is a muffin fan in a shroud, with a charcoal filter on the back. Put this next to your soldering station and it sucks up the fumes.

Lead-free solder is the way to go now. I know, it's a pain because of the higher melting point, but it's the future. Also, you can get the kind with a little silver in it to bring the melting point down. Unless you're running a large production shop, the slightly higher cost won't matter. The student electronics labs at Stanford now have a No Pb sign - no leaded solder allowed.

<comment><USER29> I'd be more worried about the smoke from rosin based flux than the presence of lead. Not that either one is some kind of health benefit...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> Um.. is it really necessary to make every letter a capital one?

<comment><AUTHOR> Edit link expired. HN wont let me do that.

<comment><USER31> Hopefully, moderator dang will edit the title for you.

<comment><USER32> DONE

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> WHY ARE WE SHOUTING?

<comment><USER34> BECAUSE THIS IS GREAT.

</comment></comment><comment><USER35> (2013)

</comment><comment><USER36> OH MY GOD I LOVE OPEN HARDWARE AND LOCK CAPS</comment>


Ask HN: What hobbies do you have? - <AUTHOR> There was a similar thread 10 years ago:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1349927
But given that life and technology have changed a lot over the last decade, I was wondering what other fellow HN'ers do nowadays to wind down? <comment><USER2> I build worlds: [http://www.rikweb.co.uk/kalieda/index.php](http://www.rikweb.co.uk/kalieda/index.php)

</comment><comment><USER3> I picked up a 1000 piece Jigsaw puzzle during the lockdowns. Now I'm on my third one. It's a great way to decompress after a long day.

</comment><comment><USER4> Mountain biking is the only form of exercise I enjoy

</comment><comment><USER5> 3D printing</comment>


Video: Kindle 2 as slow as the original - <AUTHOR> http://www.crunchgear.com/2009/02/09/video-kindle-2-as-slow-as-the-original/

<comment><USER2> The release clearly stated that the Kindle 2 was 20% faster (now corrected on the page). The video demonstrated that this figure was certainly within reason.</comment>


Ask HN: KidFriendlyPlaces.org - Feedback, opinions, guidance sought - <AUTHOR>

I have launched what used to be my side project/hobby. I am brand spankin' new to all of this startup stuff, so any and all advice any of you might have regarding what I have built would be very much appreciated!
http://kidfriendlyplaces.org/
Thanks! <comment><USER2> I think you should get rid of the word Beta. It's a "kid friendly" site that a bunch of moms are going to find through search. None of them are going to know what that means. That said, it probably won't hurt anything. I just think people go out of the way too often to let people know that their site should be treated like an unfinished toy. It's not a toy. You made something you think is useful. Tell them it's useful and see if they tell you otherwise.

Any plans on how you're going to make this a startup? Making money etc?

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks. Beta isnt necessary, you are right.

Money... not sure yet.

Thinking of charging a couple of bucks for people to post events/extra curricular lessons (festivals, summer camp, karate). Also thinking of charging a couple of bucks for businesses to run promotions in the popup info window of a their place in the map. Maybe later on the data will be useful for real estate, kinda like Walk Score. (??) Im more nerd than business, so I am having to think in new ways on the money question!

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Mommy and geek here. I like the site! But is there any chance we can have the data declared open, or made available through GeoJSON or things like that? If we're going to take the time to contribute new data, I'd like to know that it's not just ending up proprietary for your site.

Also, FYI, "nursing spots" may be state-law dependent in the US. In California, for example, every public spot is a nursing spot. :-)

<comment><USER4> Agree that making the data open is something that it makes sense for savvy users to ask for. Do you think it would make sense from PencilAndPaper's business perspective, though? Regardless of open vs proprietary, there will be some users willing to contribute, so the data can probably be collected either way. If the data is open, there's an opportunity cost of a significant competitive advantage.

<comment><AUTHOR> >>If the data is open, there's an opportunity cost of a significant competitive advantage

I think I get what you are saying, but if you could elaborate on what you mean by this, it would also be helpful!

:)

<comment><USER4> Well, as I see it... suppose you can collect the data regardless of whether you consider it open or proprietary. Under the "open" model, you get the advantage of (at least from some perspectives) doing the right thing by the community. The downside for you is that emerging competitors can take your data as a starting point rather than needing to go through the effort of building their own data. If you choose to keep the data proprietary, it could be one of your competitive advantages.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> It's hard to scroll down without zooming out on the map because there is no max-width for the container the site is in.

Logo could use some work. The word (BETA) is too big for my taste.

Either geotarget the location and zoom in there, or start zoomed out more because I live nowhere near where the map is zoomed in at.

These are just a few of my opinions.. nice idea overall.

<comment><AUTHOR> Awesome, thanks!

Were you on a mobile device?

It does/should prompt you to share your location so that it can zoom to your area accordingly. Did it not prompt you? (uh oh)

<comment><USER5> I just noticed the top bar says it wants to use my location [allow/deny], sorry about that! :)

I'm in Chrome on a 13" MBP. I allowed it, but I think it zoomed in a little too far, you should try giving a wider outlook in the general area the user is located in.

<comment><AUTHOR> will do</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Future UI Design Without Buttons - <AUTHOR> https://www.toptal.com/designers/ui/future-ui-design-without-buttons <comment><USER2> I keep seeing more and more of these "UX" tips that are completely braindead ideas.</comment>


Are Inventions Inevitable? A Note on Social Evolution (1922) [pdf] - <AUTHOR> http://www.jstor.org/stable/2142320

<comment><USER2> Interesting read. Inevitable if preconditions are in place, unknowable in advance, and not dependent upon single inventor. Based largely on a list of 148 inventions with multiple independent inventors more or less at the same time.

[http://www.jstor.org/stable/985546](http://www.jstor.org/stable/985546) is a closely related 1961 paper by Robert Merton, whose work is mentioned in [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_discovery](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_discovery)

Would love a pointer to a current literature summary on this question!</comment>


Ask HN: Learning stack to get a job anywhere in the world Java vs. C# (+JS?) - <AUTHOR> Imagine you want to find a job around the world and you need to learn the stack that is more or less in demand everywhere.
Would you choose Java? ( runs good almost everywhere (linux,windows, others) and can be used for Android development. Would you choose C# ? ( with .net core while being immature also can run anywhere + xamarin for mobile development.
Would you choose JS ? ( increasingly becoming also adopted by larger companies due to its flexibility and large pool of developers.+ react native and only viable option for frontend)
All of them require significant investment and i would say have similar learning curve.
I have seen java being occasionally used in MS "only" shops but i have rarely seen C# being used at small / mid sized companies running on Linx and developing with java.
We all can agree that learning algorithms and concepts is way better than just stick to a single language. But the objective is to stick to a widely used platform and get a job almost anywhere. <comment><USER2> they are very similar. i would say js is easier for beginners.</comment>


The Discount Airline Model Is Coming for Europe's Railways - <AUTHOR> https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-08-17/the-discount-airline-model-is-coming-for-europe-s-railways <comment><USER2> I hold grave fears for the outcome. Continental European trains are my go-to for high service outcomes. UK ex-national rail, now segmented, privatized and bastardized into a mess, is where I suspect this will head.

the UK experience is that de-nationalization and reduction in capital investment in track, signals and rolling stock go hand in hand: The outcomes? massive price rises for worse service delivery.

unbundled LCC models are based on very bad economics (in my opinion) which reduce the human experience chasing profit by allowing lunatics like Tony Ryan to joke about coin-in-the-slot lavatories, and stand-up flights.

Don't do it. Please. I'll stop whining now, but seriously, just don't. I don't want to go back to straight-drop toilet holes and closed carriage models.</comment>


Sharing an office over the internet: An experiment in video portalling - <AUTHOR> http://www.hanselman.com/blog/VirtualCamaraderieAPersistentVideoPortalForTheRemoteWorker.aspx <comment><USER2> This is one of the only ways I know of to develop real camaraderie with remote offices, especially if people were not very good friends to begin with. There's something about the "wormhole in space" that makes them part of the team, in a way that IRC and conference calls do not.

I've seen this in use at large companies, and it really works but it's expensive. If there's now a cheap option, that's good news.

</comment><comment><USER3> This totally reminded me of something posted to Twitter by Cisco yesterday - <http://twitpic.com/b5tl3>. Obviously the Cisco setup is _a lot_ more expensive but it looks incredible.</comment>


How to prove 0.999… = 1. - <AUTHOR>

The meaning of 0.999… is a tricky concept, and depends on what we allow a number to be. For non-math persons, you will probably disagree with the equality, but there are many elementary proofs that could show it. http://mathema-tricks.blogspot.com/ <comment><USER2> That borders on impressive: Four of the five statements leading into the "proofs" are wrong (and the fifth needs a lot of charity), and all three of the proofs are meaningless in exactly the same way.

</comment><comment><USER3> The one I remember is .333 (repeating) = 1/3. .333(3)=.999. 1/3(3)=1. Therefore, .999=1.

</comment><comment><USER4> I use tell me a number between .999... And 1</comment>


New book Kevin Kelly: What Technology Wants - <AUTHOR> http://www.kk.org/books/what-technology-wants.php

<comment><USER2> Kevin Kelly's TED talk is well worth watching: [http://www.ted.com/talks/kevin_kelly_tells_technology_s_epic...](http://www.ted.com/talks/kevin_kelly_tells_technology_s_epic_story.html)

</comment><comment><USER3> I haven't read the book yet, but presumably you can get a taste of it from his blog: <http://www.kk.org/thetechnium/></comment>


Why copying Apple just doesn't work - <AUTHOR> http://www.edibleapple.com/why-copying-apple-just-doesnt-work/

<comment><USER2> Why doesn't it work? Because everyone is trying to copy the FORM not the substance.

Apple doesn't make computers or phones. They make tools for computing, and tools for communication/socializing.

While dell tries to compete with a quad 2.8ghz thingy in a shiny red case, Apple will make a beautiful tool for getting your work done. Same with phones, LG, Google and Nokia sell you features, Apple will sell you a tool that lets you do what you need to.

Features are involved, but the mindset and orientation couldn't be farther apart.</comment>


Racket v5.3.5 - <AUTHOR> http://blog.racket-lang.org/2013/06/racket-v535.html <comment><USER2> Has anyone here tried Realm of Racket yet?

<comment><USER3> A couple, see [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5900067](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5900067)</comment></comment>


CSS Utility Classes and "Separation of Concerns" - <AUTHOR> https://adamwathan.me/css-utility-classes-and-separation-of-concerns/ <comment><USER2> @adamwathan thoughts on so-called 'silent' extends in scss, ie, the whole '%class-name' thing? Could that work as a sufficient substitute for the LESS class mixins?

<comment><AUTHOR> The big issue with extends in my experience is that it changes your source order which can cause unexpected bugs.

I'd stick with regular Sass mixins, and if you want to mix in an existing utility, extract a mixin from that utility and mix it into both the component and the utility.</comment></comment>


Goodbye, Prima Books (2018) - <AUTHOR> https://www.wired.com/story/rip-prima-books-strategy-guides/ <comment><AUTHOR> via Carmack ([https://twitter.com/ID_AA_Carmack/status/1238892794497970176](https://twitter.com/ID_AA_Carmack/status/1238892794497970176))</comment>


Ask HN: What has been your experience working at a large consulting firm? - <AUTHOR> <comment><USER2> In what respect? I work for a Big 4. YMMV, a lot (depending on the org, your location, the team you work in, etc). I am not a dev, but work in a role where I get to use my technical background to help clients get done whatever it is they need.

\- The hours range between great and terrible (if it's quiet there's a fair amount of flexibility, if it's busy then you work like a dog).

\- I get to work on a range of clients, doing different things. There's plenty of scope to try new things if I get sick of whatever I'm doing at that stage.

\- Pay can be good or terrible, depending on what you do and how good you are at it.

\- I work in a role where I don't have sales targets (thank god), but you can get pure sales roles as well.

\- The people I have worked with are amazing (internally, client facing can be a different matter). In 5 years, there's literally only a handful of people I wouldn't work with again, and some of them are now some of my best friends. Most people are driven, incredibly smart, and hard-working.</comment>


Machinery of an Energy Dream: How to Keep Fusion Going Long Enough - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/18/science/the-challenge-how-to-keep-fusion-going-long-enough.html

<comment><USER2> The question of sustainable fusion receives a lot of press regardless whether it is a Tokamak or laser-ignited fuel pellets. However, the question I'd always love to see get some attention is the engineering required to make it a successful power plant -- will it use heat transfer and neutron thermalization like traditional fission reactors to heat a coolant? How will that interface look, and what kind of maintenance issues are going to go along with that?

I'm waiting especially eagerly in the case of laser-ignited fuel pellets, as to me it's like harnessing the power of a multitude of miniature discrete hydrogen bombs.

<comment><USER3> Laser-ignited fuel pellets is all about nuclear weapons testing to validate computer models not net energy generation. It's even paid for by "the 'Nuclear Weapons Stockpile Stewardship' program, and the goals of the program are oriented accordingly" It's possible to scale the idea to the point where it would generate energy but Tokamak's are far cheaper and much further along. As in we could build one that generates net energy today it's the material science stuff as in how long do the wall last under heavy neutron bombardment there still working out.

"ITER's goal is to produce 10 times as much power as is required for break- even" but what there going to be doing with it is testing different material blankets and magnetic control schemes plasma heating methods etc. There is also some concern about trying to stabilize as self heating plasma. (Of interest it's supposed go generate 500MW of thermal energy for ~10+ minutes so dissipating that is rather important.)

After that DEMO is supposed to be a working prototype fusion reactor.

PS: Jet reactor built in 1982 was reasonably close to break even. It was assumed we could build a working reactor next but it was simpler and cheaper to scale ITER down as much as possible which removed the energy generating side of thigns which is both expencive and well understood. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_European_Torus](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_European_Torus)

<comment><USER4> "we could build one that generates net energy today". That's a pretty broad claim, considering the article linked itself notes that we've only hit a Q factor (output/input) of 0.7 with a test reactor measuring all the available energy. We still need a Q of 5, or a little under a factor of 10 (7.14) jump to be able to even have sustained fusion, as we specifically need the energy of the alpha particles, and need an estimated Q of 10 (factor of 14.3 jump, "Indispensable Truth") to be able to extract useful power. Any engineer will tell you jumping the efficiency of almost any system enough to get a 14.3x jump is not trivial.

We are making steady progress, and we're at least getting near break-even, but we're still a ways from rolling out Tokamak's as the one true solution. Frankly, I think the final solution may be a combination of strategies (magnetic confinement, inertial confinement, electrostatic confinement, and / or maybe one of the other ones, like sonofusion or the z-pinch).

<comment><USER3> Q is only the first problem. Tokamak's are considered the front runner because they scale ridiculously well so getting something as small as JET to 0.7 briefly means something with 10x the volume is easy to hit a Q of 10. Jet's was design work started in 1973 we simply have never built another device that large again.

However, the Tokamack confinement record is only 6 minutes 30 seconds. The neutron bombardment at scale is insane and grid power needs a steady and dependable energy supply, nobody has a ready supply of Tritium so they need to breed it somehow etc etc.

Worse even if we built something that was clean and net energy positive so are windmills so the reactor also needs to be cheap. Also, while far safer and cleaner than fission fusion still generates a fair bit of radioactive waste due to all that neutron bombardment.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Nothing to see here. The story is just a "where we are now" update with nothing new or significant to add for anyone casually following progress on controlled fusion.

</comment><comment><USER6> Of all the various fusion approaches out there, I believe that dense plasma focus fusion (dubbed by one group pursuing it as 'focus fusion') is the most promising. Considering the ridiculously small budget they've had to work on it, the Lawrenceville Plasma Physics team has worked wonders. If I had the money I'd show no hesitation in investing. [http://www.lawrencevilleplasmaphysics.com/](http://www.lawrencevilleplasmaphysics.com/)

</comment><comment><USER7> "Awesome science story, but there's a zero percent chance that a fusion laser scientist named Dr. Hurricane isn't a supervillain"

</comment><comment><USER8> I got a pay wall...

<comment><USER9> 10 free articles per month.

You could either pay or bypass it. [https://www.google.com/search?q=bypass+nyt+paywall](https://www.google.com/search?q=bypass+nyt+paywall)</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Time to change my job? - <AUTHOR> I work at a startup in SF, and it's been almost three years. I like this company and like what I'm doing but my manager often makes me frustrated.
Reasons: - He has some temper, whenever I do mistake often yells at me saying 'why is that', instead he could give me clear reason that what I've done is wrong where I can learn in positive way. He is very talented but his management just don't fit to me. - Often IM me in the middle of the night or weekend for job request. - Not fun at all, all he does is work so nothing to talk about + doesn't drink beer or coffee at all.
I'm trying to stay till this Winter for stock options but these kind of frustration happens too often, makes me want to quit.
This is my first job, so I don't have experience quitting or changing my job. <comment><USER2> A couple things:

\- Every job will have some level of frustration, so don't expect changing jobs to completely remove that from your life. That said...

\- It sounds like your expectations don't meet that of your employer. If you meet to talk it over and it doesn't seem like it will get better, then you should probably start looking.

\- Staying for stock options is almost never worth it unless you have a significant chunk and you're 100% convinced there will be a positive outcome. Since you're not a founder, it's highly unlikely they're worth staying for.

\- If you choose to look around, be professional. Interview as much as possible before or after normal working hours and make sure to give two weeks notice once you take another position.

<comment><USER3> > Staying for stock options is almost never worth it unless you have a > significant chunk and you're 100% convinced there will be a positive > outcome. Since you're not a founder, it's highly unlikely they're worth > staying for.

Out of curiosity, what constitutes "a significant chunk"? Furthermore, what falls under positive outcome, other than being acquired? Does becoming self- sufficient count?

<comment> UK-AL 90% of business stay small. What's the point in owning illiquid shares? You might get small dividends maybe?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Probably time to start freshening up your resume, LinkedIn and Dice accounts, and looking around. Nothing makes it easier to find a new job than still having an existing one. Seeing how green the grass is somewhere else may add a lot of perspective to either how content or dissatisfied you really are where you are now. You may also find you're eligible for a 50+% pay raise by bailing- the odds of getting pay raises of that magnitude at existing positions is near nil, which is why the bay area has such rampant turnover and poaching.

As to the stock options, calculate what they're worth to you, factoring in:

X: Odds of you being able to convert them to cash someday through a company liquidity event such as an acquisition (this often doesn't ever happen)

Y: Odds of management not finding a way to fire you the day before they start to vest or do other shady things to deprive you of their value (additional stock issuances that dilute you, etc.)

Z: How much they are likely to be worth if only good things happen (your percentage ownership multiplied by market cap)

X * Y * Z = Future Value F. Using an annual interest rate of 5% and number of years until exit N, Present Value P = F ÷ (1.05)^N.

You may find after running those numbers that you're considering staying on for a net present value P of a few thousand dollars. Little reason to stay if that's what's keeping you on.

The numbers seldom lead away from a good decision.

</comment><comment><USER5> Don't ever quit something simply because you are getting pushed around. Fight back and quit on your own terms. Don't be a wimp, because nobody likes to hire a wimp.

This will happen everywhere, you can't just run. Eventually, you will run out of places to hide.

1) Always own up to your mistakes and find the common pattern and be ready to justify your decisions. Write some damn tests. 2) Yell back at him, get mad, show your passion. I am assuming you are not stupid, so there must have been some decision making process that led you to what you did. SCREAM those reasons at him, I mean it. Confront this guy!

Don't quit over a bully. Quit because you have better gig or are tired of the company in general.

</comment><comment><USER6> At this stage in your career, don't quit a job until you can line another job up. That said, if you can line another up that progresses your career, don't hesitate to quit.

As the old saying goes, you have to look out for #1 (you): no one else is going to in the working world.

While I'm all for moving on and up, though, when your career is just beginning, gaps between jobs don't look great, even if you have a good story for why they exist. Thus, don't leave until you have a new place to go.

And remember another age-old saying: "the grass is always greener..."

</comment><comment><USER7> How long have you been frustrated?

That is, when you decided to make this post was it in response to a few weeks or months of frustration? Or was it like one day you realized that you haven't been happy with your job for what seems like a long time (6 months, a year, longer)?

</comment><comment><USER8> Most startup jobs in SF have similar management styles and work demands. The main reason to change is to make more money and/or work on a cooler project. The weird managers, midnight IMs and weekend work requests never go away.

</comment><comment><USER9> Almost impossible to find a boss who doesn't bother you. There are certainly better jobs out there for you.. but ultimately I think the solution is to work for yourself.

</comment><comment><USER10> Have you tried talking to him?

</comment><comment><USER11> Not a beer drinker? Drop him yesterday.</comment>


Microsoft releases tool to spot abuse images - <AUTHOR> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-33567981

<comment><USER2> So apparently, it's a cloud only service -- you have to upload all images to Microsoft to use it.

Also to be able to use the service you have to apply as a business and be approved manually.

This would have been more useful as a software that runs directly on your server and checks at the time of upload (or to run against existing local user-content) instead of requiring re-uploads of the content to their cloud, not to mention the privacy implications.

Another puzzling thing is that they say MS doesn't retain the images and that they're converting the content to hashes immediately and comparing against known abuse hashes. Wouldn't it be more efficient for everyone if the hash were generated locally and only the hash sent up to their cloud?

<comment><USER3> I agree that sending the hash is the best implementation if it works as you have described, but that is a system that would be trivial to circumvent (make the .png into a .jpg for example). Maybe they convert all the images to a similar file type and then hash it?

<comment><USER2> The hash they use is more complicated than that:

      converts images into a common black-and-white format
      and uniform size, then divides the image into squares
      and assigns a numerical value that represents the
      unique shading found within each square. Together,
      those numerical values represent the "PhotoDNA
      signature" or "hash" of an image

\- [https://www.microsoft.com/en- us/PhotoDNA/FAQ](https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/PhotoDNA/FAQ)

What I was suggesting was that the hash generation tool they use be distributed so the hash can be generated locally before sending to MS. This way MS can continue to keep all known hashes to themselves while making it easier for businesses to bulk check images without huge bandwidth charges or privacy issues.

<comment><USER3> It appears we are in agreement. The only reason I can think of for them doing this is maybe they want to keep the PhotoDNA stuff private? Imagine the overhead on their end as well. The best way might be downloading the hashes to each server and comparing them like a virus scanner.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Gdb: Debugging with the natives - <AUTHOR> http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~srk31/blog/2016/02/25/#native-debugging-part-1 <comment><USER2> Lately I have been very interested in putting faces and voices to words. After reading this article, which was over my head but I got a little out of it. I ended up reading Stephen Kell's homepage, which is crazy intense as far as academics go. He had a link to a video of his and I appreciated the quality and now have a face and voice to attach to the article, therefore will probably remember it better.

tldr; Here is a video of the same guy who wrote this article ==> [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LwicN2u6Dro](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LwicN2u6Dro)

p.s. 5 minutes in and the talk is pretty good.

<comment><USER2> Damn, just over 5 minutes in we have a working live demo that you can also try. You attach gdb to a running process, in this case a GUI clock called xclock.

The video I linked to above is a great compliment to the linked article.

<comment><USER3> You can even program in Python in GDG. There is an embedded version of it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> > When you start a program in a debugger like gdb, it does a variation of the > usual fork()–exec() trick

It would be helpful if there was a link explaining the 'usual' fork()–exec() trick.

<comment><USER5> It's pretty simple, really. The process first calls fork() to create a child process. The child process then calls exec() to replace itself with another executable. This is the typical way you'd launch a process on any UNIX-like system. For example, it's how the shell will create a process when you issue a command.</comment></comment>


Mike Elgan: Why Nokia is toast - <AUTHOR> http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9209198/Mike_Elgan_Why_Nokia_is_toast

<comment><USER2> Nokia pioneered (essentially) the strategy that Google is using with Android. After all, Series 60 sure looks a lot like Android in terms of positioning, roll out, and ecosystem. It was a winning strategy for Nokia that saw their Symbian based software on hundreds of devices from many different manufacturers.

Nokia's issue isn't strategic, it's a huge problem with execution. Series-60 succeeded as much as it did in spite of itself. I was personally involved in (as an outside company) several S60 projects that simply failed. The number of manufacturers who took a run at making a S60 phone is a really impressive list. The number who succeeded at it, is far less so.

I've been confident in predicting widespread for success with Android largely because I see the parallels between S60 and what Android is doing. The difference is that Google appears to have the talent to actually execute on the vision. They're pushing a quality product forward with the agility to compete favorably with Apple, RIM, and everyone else.

If Nokia fails it will be a failure of a broken engineering culture. The lack of apps on their platform can be placed firmly at the feet of their development platform. My failed startup involved an attempt to build a S60 app. It took my partner and I 6 months to get the thing built (it wasn't a large or particularly complicated app) thanks to all of the idiosyncrasies of that platform. This despite having spent the previous 5 years working with S60 on a much larger and more complicated project (which was also a nightmare).

To succeed in the mobile space you need a strong platform, with strong UI concepts, and strong developer tools that help them get their job done quickly. Apple and Google both have that, Nokia does not.

</comment><comment><USER3> > There is huge, unmet demand in the world for a phone that does nothing but > make calls.

 _The Nokia 1100 [...] is a very simple GSM mobile phone produced by Nokia [...] the world's best selling phone handset as well as the best selling consumer electronics device in the world._ (<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nokia_1100>)

IMO the author has a point about the smartphones, but completely misses the mark here.

It's very possible that low-end smartphones will take over the dumphone market soon and/or that cheap Chinese phones will overrun it, but what the author proposes doesn't address that either.

<comment><USER4> _It's very possible that low-end smartphones will take over the dumphone market soon_

Unlikely. There's a few elephants in the room here, the biggest being battery time. You'd be surprised how many people would give you a blank stare if you told them their next phone needs to re-charged almost every night, in exchange for being able to play angry birds...

Also take a close look at the issues of your (presumably) high-end smartphone. Now, when was the last time you tried to use a _low-end_ smartphone?

<comment><USER5> _There's a few elephants in the room here, the biggest being battery time. You'd be surprised how many people would give you a blank stare if you told them their next phone needs to re-charged almost every night_

There's no fundamental reason Android devices won't emerge that have awesome (or at least, way better) battery life. We haven't seen demand for that in western markets simply because the high end phone space is dominated by flashy hardware and high end features. Android is _very_ flexible and scales down to surprisingly low end device specs.

<comment><USER4> Well, there's only so many trade-offs you can make on a cheap phone. A touchscreen is not only a big cost-factor and battery-drainer but also impairs usability of the core feature (making calls) significantly.

You can't read it in bright sunlight, you can't make calls "blind" because there's no keypad/tactile feedback, and even my high-end android has nasty input-lags - whereas all my old dumbphones respond _instantly_ to any keypress.

Sure, you could cut out the touchscreen and still run android but that's hardly a smartphone then...

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> The article says pretty much what I've been thinking: too many choices, consumers have no idea which Nokia phone is any good.

However, I'm not so sure that this thinking is any good in the long run for Nokia, everybody says that company X should emulate Apple, it is just the easy thing to suggest because Apple is currently winning.

<comment><USER7> > everybody says that company X should emulate Apple, it is just the easy > thing to suggest because Apple is currently winning.

That's like saying "it's the easy thing to suggest that Johnny will only win the foot race by emulating Jimmy, who is running instead of taking a bath then playing video games." As though there's more nuance to it than that.

Apple is doing what is necessary to win. If someone says a company should emulate Apple, it's a shorthand for saying that Apple has consistently won in the markets they've entered for the last decade and their approach is excellent for selling consumer electronics.

Apple wins through focus. Is there any argument against having focus? What is the benefit of avoiding focus and smearing your efforts around a dozen different projects?

Apple wins through quality. What would be the argument for making shit instead of quality?

Apple wins through integration. What would be the argument for making devices that weren't well integrated, from software/hardware perspective or a user experience/ecosystem perspective?

Want to know who is emulating Apple, proving the value of its example? Look at Amazon and the Kindle. Supreme focus: Maximum of two hardware variations so far. Excellent quality: great hardware, decent software. Incredible integration, with Whispernet allowing you to buy any Amazon content anywhere in the world, tied to your existing Amazon account, _which is pre-loaded onto your Kindle when you open it_.

Kindle is now Amazon's best-selling product.

<comment><USER8> But if you look at the whole of Amazon, not just Kindle, the company is all over the place. It sells an e-book reader! It sells books! It sells other consumer products! It provides a marketplace where other people can sell products, _even books_! It sells cloud-computing services!

If Amazon had a few bad quarters, I could imagine business pundits looking over this list, clicking their tongues, and saying that Amazon's "lack of focus" was its downfall.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> All of this 'Nokia is doomed because of their Microsoft partnership' talk reminds me of when Apple announced something similar back in 1997. Anyone remember this Steve Jobs talk from when Apple was on the financial ropes?

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxOp5mBY9IY>

If you think Nokia is doomed, you might want to re-watch that video. Things didn't turn out quite so bad for Apple.

<comment><USER10> Except Apple didn't put NT on its computers.

<comment><USER9> But Apple did make Microsoft Internet Explorer the default browser on the Mac, which was Microsoft's battlefield at the time.

<comment><AUTHOR> The browser is not part of the core of the operating system. And it was far less an important part of the user experience at that time.

<comment><USER9> "At that time" Microsoft ruled everything except for the browser. The public internet was emerging as a surprisingly powerful force against the desktop and the argument before the courts was that the browser WAS part of the core operating system and could not be removed.

From <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft> :

 _Microsoft stated that the merging of Microsoft Windows and Internet Explorer was the result of innovation and competition, that the two were now the same product and were inextricably linked together and that consumers were now getting all the benefits of IE for free._

It doesn't look like much now, but installing IE as the default browser on Mac was a pretty big deal at the time. Microsoft won the 'browser wars' due to this and other key moves.

Today, the 'wars' are in the handheld o/s and default search engines. Microsoft is again making shrewd moves in those battles and their partners are far from guaranteed to die as a result of their alliances.

Somehow, despite their Microsoft partnership, Apple managed to do a bit better than simply scrape by. I'm sure Nokia will see a similar recovery over the next few years.

<comment><AUTHOR> Well... At least IE wasn't an integral part of MacOS...

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> If offering user choice is a bad idea, why is Android doing so well? I believe they're out-gunning apple in market-share now, and there are tons of Android phones to choose between.

<comment><USER12> No single Android phone does as well as the iPhone. You're comparing two completely different things.

<comment><USER5> He's comparing the only thing that matters any more - ecosystem mindshare.

<comment><USER7> Try something with your non-technical family members:

"What do you think of the iPhone?"

then

"What do you think of the Android ecosystem?"

<comment><USER5> What about:

"What do you think about Google?"

<comment><USER7> I think, given the below link, it's a bit of a stretch to believe that Google's brand association is having any sort of halo effect on the idea of Android (an operating system) or Android phones (the hardware):

[http://googlesystem.blogspot.com/2009/06/browser-is- search-e...](http://googlesystem.blogspot.com/2009/06/browser-is-search- engine.html)

Much like browsers and search engines, most people don't even know what an operating system _is_. How Google fits into the picture is extremely murky from that worldview.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Summary: Nokia is the General Motors of the cellphone industry.

</comment><comment><USER13> "There is huge, unmet demand in the world for a phone that does nothing but make calls."

Correct.

I personally need something like that. I need a phone that has great connection quality, lightweight, has long battery life and has MP3 player. I do not need touch screen and smart features. Is anybody going to produce such phone for me?

<comment><USER6> My current phone is slowly breaking and I've been searching for something along those lines. Samsung E2370 seems to fit the bill, though even it has some extraneous features:

<http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_e2370_xcover-3152.php>

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> B E S T article about Nokia/Microsoft. And actually, I am quite sure they will follow the strategy mentioned by Mike Elgan.

</comment><comment><USER15> I went into this article deeply skeptical because every tech journalist out there is trying to make their mark on this story. But I think Elgan is exactly right about what strategies can win the mobile market, what Nokia has done wrong, what it can do in the future.

All that remains to be seen is which way Nokia chooses to go.

</comment><comment><USER16> Oh look, an American talking about Nokia.</comment>


KeePass 2.14 released - <AUTHOR> http://sourceforge.net/news/?group_id=95013&id=295786

<comment><USER2> I recently remedied a problem that I was having, which was importing my Chrome bookmarks into Keepass. I figure that this could also help some of the folks on HN, so here is the info:

writeup: [http://alanp.ca/blog/2011/01/01/export-google-chrome- passwor...](http://alanp.ca/blog/2011/01/01/export-google-chrome-passwords-to- keepass/) Github: <https://github.com/alanpca/chrome2keepass>

</comment><comment><USER3> I really like KeepPass and I use it on all of my computers (Ubuntu and MacOSX). It's so awesome that it's available on all three major platforms including Windows. What I'd like to see, though, is iPhone, Android and webapps - all syncing through a remote server (Dropbox, maybe?). That would make this thing absolutely awesome.

<comment><USER4> There already are versions of KeePass available on Android and iPhone (and windows phones too it seems). So I guess the only thing missing at this point is a webapp version.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Did they ever add a way to make it not clear your clipboard after pasting? I know you could delay the clearing but that just resulted in randomly losing stuff from the clipboard while working, even more annoying than the original problem.

</comment><comment><USER6> KeePassX has been available for Linux for a while now. <http://keepassx.sourceforge.net/>

I may try running kepass on Mono now to get all the features of version 2

<comment><USER7> Mono and keepass has been working great for me on linux, you do have to install a few extra things to get it working on ubuntu and xdotool with a higher version than is supplied by 10.10 if you want autofill.

<comment><USER6> I am seeing buggy behavior on Ubuntu- the File drop down isn't droppping down. It also won't import my version 1 db, telling me that must be done from Windows.

I will probably stick with KeePassX- there isn't anything wrong with it and none of the Keepass version 2 features seem look like game changers.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Why not use something very simple like SuperGenPass? <http://supergenpass.com/>

<comment><USER9> There's a thread on StackOverflow about the safety of SuperGenPass:

[http://stackoverflow.com/questions/554224/is-the- bookmarklet...](http://stackoverflow.com/questions/554224/is-the-bookmarklet- password-generator-from-supergenpass-com-safe-to-use/)

I thought the criticisms by "Mike" were pretty convincing, although I'm not an expert in software security or cryptography.

Starting with the source of a simpler JavaScript password generator:

<http://www.angel.net/~nic/passwdlet.domain.html>

I did a little noodling around and found it's perfectly practical to use even several thousand iterations of a newer hash algorithm (SHA2-256) to produce passwords, rather than a few dozen iterations of an obsolete one. That should address some of the cryptographic concerns. It's also perfectly possible for the script to accept the master password through a JavaScript popup rather than from a text box inserted into the current page. That should address concerns about a "malicious webmaster" type attack.

So some of the most important criticisms of SuperGenPass (which is undeniably very slick and pleasant to use) are at least addressable.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> other sysadmins - don't you hate how all your users end up using very simple or duplicate passwords on everything, causing you eventual security problems?

If so, why isn't this, or something like it, preinstalled on all the client computers you have?

<comment><USER11> Because most users wouldn't use it. How do you access your passwords on a computer that doesn't have Keepass installed? I think only LastPass has a way of doing this. And sysadmins don't like trusting 3rd party services.

<comment><USER12> _How do you access your passwords on a computer that doesn't have Keepass installed?_

\- By keeping the pw database in a Dropbox folder, along with a standalone version of keepass itself. No need to ever install. \- By using a phone version of keepass to access the Dropbox pw database, thus always ensuring access to passwords. \- In emergency situations, by downloading the above- mentioned db and software through the dropbox website, ready to use on any machine.

(all of the above are made more difficult by the switch of 2.x series to .Net, a switch without a good reason, too, so caveat emptor etc. Keepass once looked like a great project but this dichotomy is a disaster.)

<comment><USER11> > By keeping the pw database in a Dropbox folder, along with a standalone > version of keepass itself.

This causes the same problem as LastPass - reliance on a 3rd party service.

<comment><USER12> Well if you're that worried about Dropbox going away and needing access to your passwords in between the point it shuts down and you noticing and setting up a replacement, use webdav with your own server, or hack up an rsync/cron- based concoction that will do roughly what Dropbox does in this context. There are 100's of ways to synchronize a file across computers, it's just that Dropbox is by far the most conveniet at this point in time.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Made Airbnb a video because I'd like to join them. Help me get their attention? - <AUTHOR> https://vimeo.com/123060460

<comment><USER2> If you think getting a job as a marketer is accomplished by setting stock photography to music and adding quotes, you need to get some more experience.

Great marketing is 90% data analysis, 10% creative. I know you weren't trying to create a real-life ad here, but let's say that you were. How do you know that relating Airbnb to being at home is what your users want?

For me personally (Millenial, travel only for pleasure), that isn't appealing at all. I want something more like an adventure. But for a consultant, who travels for work all the time, they'd probably want something like home.

A great marketer will find the mix and figure out how to target each type of person. The creative part isn't nearly as important as figuring out who the audience is, where their attention is, and how to get their attention inexpensively.

My suggestion is this: find a company that needs marketing help, get some money for AdSense/FB ads, and get creative. See what works and what doesn't. Learn data analysis. Great advertising is built on great numbers.</comment>