New Mac Pro Tech Specs - <AUTHOR> https://www.apple.com/mac-pro/specs/ <comment><USER2> Still don't understand the justification for this machine, I waited years for a MacPro but when it became clear that Apple actually considered it a dead product and behind the scenes were building the iMac Pro to fill the niche I switched to windows and now run a dual 1080Ti workstation (Uses CUDA for 3D rendering path-tracing) for around half the price of a iMac Pro.

Apple bloggers said time and time again the reason they were not making a tower was that there isn't really a market for one anymore, yet when they finally made it they decided to build something that only really serves the highest of high end video editors.

Completely ignoring 3D, mid range video editors, developers who need high core counts + ECC, deep learning, etc.

Before they made it we kept being told "There isn't enough of you to justify them making it"

They finally make it and the narrative turns into "It's not for you it's for people who edit Marvel movies"

<comment><USER3> Find me a comparable computer that:

\- Ships with anything other than Windows (Linux, OSX, BSD, etc)

\- Has a corporate warranty

You'll quickly find that Apple has this market cornered. To many people, you're not paying the extra money for the goodness of Apple. You're paying to avoid the badness of Windows. There's also some software that works on Macs, but not Linux machines that may be necessary for the job.

<comment><USER4> Apple service is atrocious. Don't they make you book an appointment and turn up at their store just to get someone to look at it? I hear of people who spend more time taking their laptops to the local Apple store than most people with major illnesses spend going to the doctor...

I bought a Dell XPS13 laptop recently which unfortunately had a non functioning motherboard. I contacted Dell and a technician came to my house first thing the next day and replaced it, no questions asked. Totally hassle free. I'd take that any day over having to book an appointment to see a 'Genius'.

<comment><USER5> > Apple service is atrocious. Don't they make you book an appointment and turn > up at their store just to get someone to look at it?

I had a macbook pro with a logic board that died. I phoned Apple, they couriered me a replacement device next day, and that courier picked up my old device. Literally couldn't ask for better service.

<comment><USER6> Seriously? My friend was forced to drag his 27 inch iMac into the Woodfield shopping mall location, which if you've ever been there, is a quarter mile minimum walk from the parking lot to the store.

<comment><USER7> He probably chose to do that. You can't force someone to physically appear in your store. What if they're disabled?

<comment><USER6> Pedantry. They didn't give him an option besides physically bringing it into the store.

Good question about accessibility. I have no idea. But it's not as though our society is a perfect utopia for the disabled. I can only imagine it would have gone far worse.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I think they should include Apple Care for their professional equipment. This won't put any any more money in Apple's pocket but I could see it being another differentiator and a good bit of PR, especially to all of those price arguments. Plus, it's only $300 and I'm sure Apple could suffer that "loss" on a $6,000 - $30,000 purchase.

<comment><USER9> I've always argued that for the prices that Apple charges Apple Care should be included in all its products.

The first Apple computers I bought lasted for years and I never thought Apple Care was necessary, but since the fiasco with the 2011 MBP and the butterfly keyboards I'm not buying another of its products without Apple Care. Yes, Apple ended up doing the right thing in both cases but it took years after the problems started and a couple of class action lawsuits.

<comment><USER10> It presumably is in some areas. In New Zealand we have The Consumer Guarantees Act. Things are expected to have a reasonable life span. What this means is not specified but is generally accepted to be relative to the price paid (eg if it's expensive, it should last). It's a fantastic piece of legislation. I've had a 2.5 year old iPhone covered for example.

<comment><USER11> I believe that the parent meant that Apple charges enough (in the US), so it should have the extended guarantee included there. In NZ, things cost extra due to that law, correct? The difference: is everybody is paying for that extra protection, there's no choice.

<comment><USER12> We do have very high retail mark ups. Perhaps this is due to that law. But it is very nice protection to live under.

<comment><USER13> Aside from the additional taxation and regulations in NZ, it does have some pretty unavoidable issues which drive up the prices of consumer goods. It's a very small market, and very far away. Getting things there is just going to cost more anyway, and the market isn't big enough to invite significant competition, so there's usually a large (or at least larger than a lot of other places) markup on imported goods.

<comment><USER14> Is it really far from China compared to US/Europe?

<comment><USER15> My friend living in NZ has a fantastic quote about the distance:

> NZ is a fantastic place. It takes 24 hours to get anywhere around the world.

Yep, it's that far.

<comment><USER16> It's far but 24hrs is a bit stretching reality e.g.

~12hrs to Santiago Chile. ~9hrs to Bali, Indonesia. ~13hrs to Los Angeles, USA. ~4hrs to Sydney, Australia.

<comment><USER17> Add a layover and you could easily be at 20+ hours (which is common since NZ is small so there aren't that many flights). Europe is well over 24 hours even to the major hubs.

<comment><USER16> Granted, however the flights I listed are all non-stop.

<comment><USER13> There's a non-stop Auckland > Denpasar flight?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> A great machine to be sure for high end content creation but Apple is not chasing the deep learning dev market because of the lack of CUDA. That market is better served by Linux boxes with appropriate GPUs for TensorFlow, PyTorch, etc. support.

<comment><USER19> Nvidia really has the GPU market under their thumb. It would be one thing if their pitch was "We're not as good as AMD for games, but we've got CUDA for professionals and researchers!". At least that way there could be some sort of segmentation and I could tell people shopping for GPUs to "get the right one for what you want to do!"

But that's not the world we live in. Nvidia's pitch is "We make the only hardware that runs the framework used by almost all deep learning research and media creation software, and we're also the only folks operating at our level when it comes to high-end video game graphics, and if our high-end cards are too expensive for you, we have cheaper ones. And when our competitors start to think they can catch up, we'll drop RTX and Tensor Cores on their face."

AMD seems stuck on "We have great value middle-to-high-tier video game graphics cards" at best. I have no idea how they can get out from under that rock. They've been turning the CPU market upside down and smashing Intel's once proud "near monopoly" status. Nvidia seems like exactly the kind of prideful company that would be poised to fall, but I have no idea how AMD could make it happen.

<comment><USER20> I'd guess that within 2 years AMD will be competitive to Nvidia at the high end. Their strategy is a bit different, they're delivering good value at 2/3 the way up the performance graph... not as big a markup as a $1200 RTX 2080 Ti, but the RX 5700 XT is decent, especially for the price.

Most people aren't spending over $500 on a GPU, so they get the volume sales. The better aftermarket cards have been selling out pretty consistently. And the longer term strategies are similar to how they approached Ryzen. So, I'd think that Navi can definitely succeed in that light.

The real lock in for NVidia, is all the existing CUDA development. Intel and AMD will have a lot of work, One API may help there, so long as Intel and AMD can work together, without Intel's often and weird lock in attempts.

<comment><USER21> Yes, because nobody replicated the pragmatism and power of CUDA. OpenCL is much uglier and lower level. So AMD decided to do something about that... and invented ROCm, which is somehow even uglier and more low-level! A reference FFT implementation in CUDA is about 150 lines of code... and it is almost 10 times more in ROCm.

It was always about software. Granted, CUDA is not the best and most elegant platform in the world... but AMD seems not to be able to reach even that level.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> Slightly off-topic, but who here uses a HEDT (high-end desktop) or workstation computer for software development? Does it make a significant difference in comparison with a standard business laptop?

<comment><USER23> I don't have an HEDT but an outdated Haswell i5 laptop (not an Ultra Low Voltage model at least, so it's quite fast). Last year I spotted a bug in Firefox and I though it was time to put a line in the contribution section in my resume.

The contribution experience was a nightmare because a full build of Firefox took 3 hrs and running the entire testing framework took 4 hrs, though it turned out that I needed to run only a part of the testing framework. Changing a single line and building it again still took more than 30 minutes.

That was the first moment that I wanted a HEDT in my life. It feels like devs who work with big C++ projects would want a bigger workstation because of the significant build time.

<comment><USER24> Woof. I wasn't aware compilation times got that long for people who aren't building a whole OS.

<comment><USER23> I wouldn't try contributing if I were aware of it too lol. Imagine that I did it for Chromium. I was told that it takes about 20GB to build Chromium.

<comment><USER25> It's usually more, actually. We have seen 100+ GB build directories when building the "all" target and a non-GOMA build easily takes multiple hours on a desktop i7

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> People here seem to think this is just a random set of components not as good as X+Y+Z. This machine was designed and specced based on talking with the people who will be buying them, not the general public. Complaining its not X+Y+Z is like saying IBM didn't design a mainframe for your needs. Not everything has to build for everyone.

</comment><comment><USER27> 330 Comments, No one asked why was this submitted.

We have discussions on HN [1] when it was announced. The Tech Spec page has been there since day 1, I looked hard and dont see any significant changes, if any changes at all.

[1] [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20087315](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20087315)

<comment><USER28> That was 3 months ago, no one asked because no one remember it was posted.

<comment><USER27> That was not the point though, Its release were widely known and this spec page isn't news. It is generally accepted on HN unless the last submission had little to no discussion, and there is nothing new related to the topic, we mark those as duplicate.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> The starting 256 GB SSD sticks out like a sore thumb on a machine as expensive as this. The barebones Mac Mini comes with 128 GB and 6-core Mini with 256 GB. And upgrading it is gonna cost an arm and a leg.

<comment><USER30> Depends entirely on workflow. A lot of shops will have all of their stuff on a 10G NAS share, so you're actually forbidden from copying to and from your computer because it's just stupid and sometimes slower to do so.

<comment><USER31> Still, it isn't as if 1T of SSD is expensive. So if they set the entry price to 6k, 1T of SSD would be an appropriate minimum.

<comment><USER30> Yeah, that's what they give on the iMac Pro as base, so it's not like they'd never do it. But it's clear they're deliberately under configuring the base to force complete customisation, which is what I assume the kinds of people buying this will want.

I'd go so far as to say they should sell it without a default hard disk if they could - let the buyers make the choice. I'm guessing it's defaulting to the smallest disk just for optics.

This is clearly a start with the skeleton and build it yourself kind of machine, which is as it should be. It just looks odd when the selector defaults to the lowest available option on every selection.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> It is still not shipping so there's not really a reason not to use a Threadripper for lower price AND higher performance. Or even Epyc chips. We know the Titan Ridge Thunderbolt controllers work on AMD motherboards. Alpine Ridge had firmware problems but Titan Ridge is fine.

<comment><USER33> Apple & Intel are _deeply_ entwined, both at a technical and a contractual level. There's a reason Apple has never made an AMD computer.

<comment><USER32> Well, AMD had nothing to offer really especially in the low power space where Apple mostly is but Sharkstooth and Rome so throughly trounces Intel high end it's not even funny. (Yes, Sharkstooth is not yet out but already the Ryzen 3000 chips make a joke out of the lower end of Intel Xeons and leaking benchmarks paint an interesting picture of the upcoming Threadripper 3000s.)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> I wish I could afford these, but I'm really curious to test a hackintosh with threadreaper 3 following what they did on Linus tech tips with a virtualized PC and Mac running at the same time on the same monitor [https://youtu.be/EozeSDeV3Vo](https://youtu.be/EozeSDeV3Vo)

<comment><USER35> Hackintosh allows you to have OS X on better hardware but these days it's really unsafe, due to the possibility of Apple going full ARM in the near future, dropping all the support for x86.

<comment><USER36> Not a chance, the Mac Pro isn't even out yet and it's Xeon, so x86 support will be in Mac OS for at least the next 10 years. There's just nothing from ARM that can compete with Xeon at any price. I wouldn't be surprised to see it in the low-end laptops within 5 years, but x86 is still safe as houses.

<comment><USER37> I'd argue that the software people run on a Mac Pro is a strict superset of the software people run on a MacBook. Combine that with Apple's philosophy of hiding technical details from users (e.g. with fat-binaries in Darwin), so if Apple _does_ switch to ARM for the MacBooks that's not a problem: Microsoft Office for Mac, Chrome for Mac, and the rest (if they aren't just Electron apps like everything is thesedays) will have to be an x64/ARM fat-binary for the Apple App Store - and no-one will complain about specialty pro-only software distributed outside of the store only being available as x64.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> Doesn't a single thread ripper basically slay this thing?

<comment><USER39> Different market segment. The Mac Pro has 64 PCI lanes, and eight PCI slots, along with supporting 1.5TB memory. 3900x for example only has 24 pci lanes and 128GB memory support.

Edit: My bad... I misread thread ripper for Ryzen for some reason

<comment><USER40> The 2nd gen Threadripper has 64 PCI lanes, FWIW, haven't seen specs for 3rd gen yet.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER41> This thing is pulling almost 12 amps by itself. Add a couple monitors and hopefully you have recent vintage wiring in your office...

<comment><USER42> Presumably that's with the dual-GPU, 28-core processor model under full load (and the MPX module drawing its full 500W, among other peripherals). An office with this kind of workload is going to require robust wiring regardless of which particular workstations are installed.

<comment><USER43> And robust air conditioning, too. Source: worked in an office full of dual-GPU deep learning workstations. We had to bring in those gigantic rental portable conditioners in the summer, and re-do pretty much all of the existing wiring in the office, because electricians who installed the first iteration could not conceive of having two dozen ~900W workstations cranking away 24x7x365 in a single open office plan.

<comment><USER44> Why do you have the GPUs inside the office with the people rather than in a server room under temperature control?

<comment><USER43> There's _also_ a sizable server room with temperature control (which was also woefully underpowered when we moved into the office). It's just more convenient for researchers to have a couple of GPUs locally.

<comment><USER44> You can remote GPUs pretty far these days - it's possible to have a local system and have the cards still connected with PCI but on the other side of a wall.

<comment><USER43> You'd need 100GbE NIC and network fabric for that to not be a waste of time though. That costs more than renting an industrial portable air conditioner.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER43> And all of that will be pretty laughable compared to the stuff AMD is releasing later this year.

<comment><USER45> The AMD Vega II appears to be a higher-end Radeon VII except with 32GB of HBM2 (instead of 16GB like the Radeon VII). So not really. AMD VegaII Duo (the dual-Vega II) is going to be far more powerful than anything AMD releases in the near future. 64GB of HBM2, 28+ TFlops single precision, etc. etc.

CPU-wise, probably. Xeon W 28-core is still quite good from Intel however, with AVX 512 support and such.

<comment><USER46> I would think he's referring to Zen2-based Threadripper.

<comment><USER43> Not just Threadrippers, but better EPYCs as well. More PCIe lanes, more cores, cheaper (hence higher profit margin), and the only thing you really lose is AVX512 which hardly any software besides Intel MKL makes use of anyway.

<comment><USER46> Keep in mind EPYC are not workstation CPUs. They can be used like that, but they are not made for that. Different tradeoffs.

<comment><USER43> Yes, lower frequency, more cores, more PCIe lanes, more throughput. Sounds good to me, as long as they use SKUs that aren't too low in frequency.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER47> > 802.11ac Wi-Fi wireless networking

Surprised there's no 802.11ax/wifi 6. Why not use the same wifi chips as the iPhones?

<comment><USER48> perhaps it is not that mobile

<comment><USER49> It does have wheels, which is an upgrade on mobility from the previous generation.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER50> Is this saying that I can have 1.5 _TERABYTES_ of RAM?

That's wild

What's the professional use case for that?

<comment><USER51> Slack.

<comment><USER52> Underrated comment

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER53> I'm bummed out that there's no sign of Navi cards as an option. The 5700 series seems right at home in this machine.

I'm still holding out for a Navi product from Apple. There's some mention of support in the Kexts but alas my 5700 XT does not work in Mojave or Catalina (Hackintosh).

<comment><USER54> > The 5700 series seems right at home in this machine.

Isn't the Navi architecture gaming-focused? Vega might still be superior for the "compute" workloads of pro apps.

Edit: Although I guess the base-spec comes with an ancient Polaris card, not Vega. Cheap bastards.

</comment></comment><comment><USER55> Why do the different processor quantities have different base frequencies (higher for lower CPU count) but the same "Turbo Boost" frequency of 4.4 GHz?

If you ran Folding@Home on one of these, would you get sustained 4.4GHz clock speeds?

<comment><USER56> I guess Turbo Boost works only for short intervals, not continuously.

</comment></comment><comment><USER57> Looks like a company finally listened.

<comment><USER31> Very little. Yes, they finally made a Mac Pro that is extensible and up to date. Basically everything the 2008 Mac Pro already was. On the downside, they doubled its price so for the non-Hollywood customer, there still isn't a desktop machine. Even 3k is much for a deskop machine, but I had set some money aside to get a Mac Pro, if it had started around its predecessor price. There was even a time in the past, when a Mac Pro would start below 2k and consequently was very popular.

<comment><USER58> > on the downside, they doubled its price so for the non-Hollywood customer, > there still isn't a desktop machine. Even 3k is much for a deskop machine

I think there were more benefits to an ordinary user to getting a tower in the past then there are now.

In the past even a hobby or prosumer photographer would see a big benefit from getting a Mac Pro. Nowadays an iMac or Macbook Pro with very normal specs can edit large RAW files without breaking a sweat.

The extra HDD bays on a Mac Pro were great because you didn't have to mess around with USB2 (cheap but slow) or FW (fast but expensive). Now you have USB3 (cheap and fast) or TB (very fast but expensive).

I guess that leaves upgradeable graphics cards, at this point it is easier to just get a PC or try a hackintosh build if you want a beast GPU for the latest games.

> There was even a time in the past, when a Mac Pro would start below 2k and > consequently was very popular.

2006:

Mac Pro base model: $2,199 ($2,800 in 2019 dollars)

30" Cinema Display: $3,299 ($4,198)

Soundsticks (Of course!) $169.99

2019:

iMac 27" 5K base model: $1,799

iMac Pro base model: $4,999

<comment><USER31> Internal storage is a huge thing. I have external storage attached to my 27" iMac, but it is not completely reliable (disks get ejected occasionally) and completely beats the purpose of an elegant desktop machine. So I really would like a machine with several drive spaces, especially if I can access them. I could have lived reasonably by upgrading the internal storage of my iMac, if there was any way for me to access it.

Graphics cards is another thing, but also the plain ability to clean fans when they start to clog up. The limitations of the iMac are amplified by Apple making the interior inaccessible.

Finally, while the screen of the iMac is great, I would like to have a larger screen.

So there are plenty of reasons still to have a bit more than the iMac can deliver.

<comment><USER59> Disagreed.

I've had BlackMagic 1U SSD rack with a few drives connected to my 2013 iMac 27'' via Thunderbolt since like... 2013, and not a single time did they disconnect. It just works.

The rack is under the table so it doesn't "beat the purpose of an elegant desktop machine" either.

<comment><USER31> Lucky for you that you had no disconnects. But getting those limits which files you can put on the external disk if you need them available all the time. E.g. when my external disk gets disconnected, EyeTV stops working as its work directory is no longer existant. Also, I don't see how having an additional large box (which by itself costs as much as many PCs) doesn't defeat the purpose of an all-in-one machine.

I am not arguing that the iMac shouldn't exist, I just listed a few points which can be better addressed with a proper desktop machine. Why I would be willing to spend quite a bit of money for that convenience.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER60> Not impressive. New MacPro hosts only PCIe gen3 when all PC motherboards are on gen4 already. New MacPro is old and it did not come out yet.

<comment><USER61> It's not targeting you.

<comment><USER60> No it's not. I like MacOS and use their laptops, but Apple proprietary approach does not work for me when it comes to desktop. Their development lifecycle must be very long if they missed advancements in the CPU space. Ryzen to the masses.

<comment><USER61> But it does work for many others and/or certain industries, and that's fine.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER62> Surprised no one(?) commented on the case yet - looks like they came to their senses and went back to the "old" case design.

I've been seriously considering a second-hand, early Mac pro - just for the case. Not sure if they fit regular/modern psus - but those cases were very nice.

Good riddance to the trash can design...

Now, if these wouldn't be priced like a car, and came with some proper AMD cpus ...

<comment><USER63> It's the good ol' cheese grater, the case design was known for a while.

</comment></comment><comment><USER64> Still no Nvidia cards?

<comment><USER65> Still no Nvidia drivers.

<comment><USER66> Doubly sad for those for us who like hackintosh.

<comment><USER67> Lots of people are holding out for Navi support.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER68> Please forgive my ignorance but the specs on this are just average in my opinion. Why would I choose this over a custom build pc with almost the same, if not better, components?

My experience with all apple products at work has been quite bad so I might be a little biased.

<comment><USER69> Try to build a custom PC with equivalent specs, paying attention to the expansion options and I/O characteristics, and you'll end up with similar pricing. People who need professional workstations are in a different market than gamers or almost all software developers — the question is kind of like asking why anyone buys a semi-truck when your pickup can beat it off the light.

</comment></comment><comment><USER70> I was very skeptical of this machine and the whole Mac Pro as concept car idea [1] but the Afterburner Accelerator Card has me wondering if I was wrong. Especially if Apple finds a way to support more works flows and applications with it. That could be a real advantage moving forward and it's not hard to understand how it could trickledown to other products.

[1] [http://hypercritical.co/2013/03/08/the-case-for-a-true- mac-p...](http://hypercritical.co/2013/03/08/the-case-for-a-true-mac-pro- successor)

</comment><comment><USER71> The only shocking things here are the lack of ports. Only 2 usb A and 2 usb c ports. Its basically required to use a usb hub on this device since once you plug in a proper mouse and keyboard you only have the usb c ports left

<comment><USER72> I don't think they're expecting you to plug in a "proper" keyboard and mouse since it comes with a Bluetooth keyboard and mouse. Plus it appears you get another 2 Thunderbolt 3 ports on the front as well.

<comment><USER73> Which is insane.. do people really use the wireless capability of their keyboard or mouse? Especially when you can't use your freaking mouse when it's charging? Serious insanity.

Edit to add: of course I know people use those keyboards... I meant are people actually moving with them in ways that makes the wireless capability useful? Do most users not stay in a pretty close proximity the whole time?

<comment><USER44> > do people really use the wireless capability of their keyboard or mouse?

Yes. Why wouldn't you? Why do you think the downsides are?

> Especially when you can't use your freaking mouse when it's charging?

I charge it for about ten minutes every month while I'm out. It doesn't interfere with anything.

<comment><USER73> The downside is requiring charging or batteries. I just have a hard time justifying the hassle when I have no need to make those devices wireless.

And my battery always (when I had one) died mid-day, so it forced a work break, which isn't always bad anyway

<comment><USER44> These devices use so little charge that they basically need no charging. You can literally do it once a month for a couple of minutes.

The justification is not having any messy cables on my desk, where space is a premium and mess distracts me.

<comment><USER71> The problem is you forget every time so once a month you are in the middle of doing something and you have to stop, turn your mouse upside down and then wait.

<comment><USER74> You get a "low battery" warning that pops up when it's got a day or two of charge left so it's fine.

Don't need to stop anything, just plug it in at your next lunch break or when you leave for the day.

It's just not really an issue as far as I can tell.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER75> I like it. You pay the Apple tax for sure but the design makes sense _and_ is nice. I wonder thought when they are gonna to announce the new MacBook 16". It has been rumored a lot.

</comment><comment><USER76> I wonder what a maxed out one will cost

<comment><USER77> The Rolls Royce model of pricing: "If you have to ask, you can't afford it".

<comment><USER78> This is how I feel when boston dynamics released spotty.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER79> "Maximum altitude: tested up to 16,400 feet (5000 meters)"

Does anyone know how or where they do this testing? Seems quite bothersome to do.

<comment><USER80> This made me wonder, why is max altitude a limit? Is it due to cooling (less air)? I'd be glad to know more if anyone has some insights

<comment><USER81> I'm not a specialist, I just read up about it some time ago so take what I say with a grain of salt.

Basically there's two issues affecting electronic chipsets at high altitude : air density and cosmic rays.

The reduction of the air density can mess with the cooling system.

Cosmic rays contain radioactive particles which can cause soft failures to occur in solid state electronics.

EDIT : Found an interesting paper about it with more details : [https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/6046/529f05a65e182ac9323ef8...](https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/6046/529f05a65e182ac9323ef8eb26b2075d0e13.pdf)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER82> I wish Apple would just sell me the damn OS and let me install it on whatever hardware I want.

</comment><comment><USER83> This page would look better if they used high-quality 3d animated renders instead of the simplified 2D-graphics. Someone on the design team thought this was a great idea? It looks unpolished and out of place (in comparison to other well-done Apple product pages).

<comment><USER84> There are already two other pages about the Mac Pro (linked at the bottom) with the more luxurious consumer feel to them. I think the functional look of the flat art is totally appropriate for such a text-heavy page—and the illustrations still animate seamlessly as the user scrolls.

<comment><USER85> > and the illustrations still animate seamlessly as the user scrolls

Not on my computer if you scroll too fast :/

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER86> Imagine having to hibernate a 1.5TB RAM machine :D

<comment><USER87> FWIW by default desktops are configured to just sleep (hibernatemode=0 = suspend to ram).

Laptops default to persisting memory & sleeping (hibernatemode=3, a sleep which falls back to hibernation in case of complete power loss e.g. run out of battery). Both can be configured to regular hibernation (hibernatemode=25, persist memory then shut down).

</comment></comment><comment><USER88> So apart from the pleasure of being able to use MacOS, I presume it will be cheaper to just put these parts together myself, yes?

If the form factor is just a tower, well I can buy a tower myself. What is the advantage of paying for Apple a (presumed) bunch of money to build it for you?

If you don't want the hassle of building a PC (which is fair) there are an endless supply of places that will put PCs together for you, with (I'm presuming) a much smaller cut than Apple.

<comment><USER89> The amount of time I've had to fiddle with my audio/video editing beast of a hackintosh tower is quite insane really.

Both necessary and well worth it, as Apple simply wasn't selling anything appropriately powerful for like five years (also why x99 was so tricky until more recently - no equivalent hardware of theirs), but by any other calculation if you actually put the value of your own time anywhere close to any professional scale (or see it as a hobby) it will very likely end up costing way more to do yourself.

<comment><USER67> I could understand that you would want a proper Mac for work. But I think that time is well worth spending on a personal machine, especially when it is easier nowadays.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER90> For that price, it should come with Apple Care, Final Cut Pro X, and Logic Pro X included.

</comment><comment><USER91> > Configure two MPX Modules with up to four GPUs

That's total, right? Not 4 GPUs per MPX module?

</comment><comment><USER92> Still waiting for my xMac; the spiritual successor to the IIcx/IIci :(

</comment><comment><USER93> What's the best explanation as to why Apple is not supporting Nvidia GPUs?

<comment><USER94> Legal issues. Think they had some clash a while back.

</comment></comment><comment><USER95> So I can easily make a machine with more RAM than hard drive space...

</comment><comment><USER96> What are people doing that require such high-powered desktops?

<comment><USER97> I am working on a project right now where I am rendering atmospheric effects (lots of clouds). Even on a 12-core workstation, it takes a very long time to render a single frame to even be able to get a good idea as to what things will look like, so I'm doing a lot of changing something, waiting… changing something, waiting.

Most of the final rendering can be offloaded to a farm, but being able to quickly and interactively get a good idea of what something will look like is extremely helpful and time-saving. Right now, I'm doing some of the work on an EC2 instance with 48 cores (96 vCPU) to help with this—cost-effective for occasional use, but I can certainly see the appeal of a machine like this. And for task like compositing where you need access to a bunch of huge source files, or where maybe you have a specialized video I/O device you need to use, running in the cloud might not be practical at all.

<comment><USER64> I'm curious, is gpu-based rendering not an option for you?

<comment><USER97> Not for the renderer I am using (Terragen), which has specialized features for rendering skies. I do normally use GPU rendering when it is an option though.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER98> And next to each component, "Market Price"

</comment><comment><USER99> Kind crazy you can't configure this thing with an NVMe drive even if you're ready to drop $30,000 on it.

<comment><USER100> The storage is NVMe, though? All of Apple's recent SSD storage is.

</comment></comment><comment><USER101> Or they can just open up OS X to more hardwares.

<comment><USER49> Handling the burden of hardware fragmentation will reduce their quality and velocity. It's not in their DNA and definitely not in their strategy to make this happen.

</comment></comment><comment><USER102> reminds me of a sun ultra 45

</comment><comment><USER103> What happens when Apple drops Intel and these become obsolete? I wonder if you can even boot Linux and use the internal storage...

<comment><USER31> The Mac Pro obviously shows that Apple isn't planning to completely drop Intel (as in x86) anytime soon. At minimum, new OS releases are going to support x86 for the next 10 years.

</comment></comment><comment><USER104> At the base configuration (single 8-core Xeon W) with 256GB SSD and 32GB RAM for $6000, it's about twice what it should be. I could build a faster dual Xeon Silver series with more cores, Nvidia graphics, much larger SSD and 32GB RAM in a nicer case for around $3000. So, that Apple logo and macOS are the other $3000.

<comment><USER104> I love how any post I make that is critical of something Apple always gets me some negative points here on Hacker News - I actually made a point of showing my tech class this social phenomenon a few weeks back and we had a good discussion that explored possible reasons why it happens.

<comment><USER105> No one is going to disagree that you could build the same thing for cheaper and the point has been made over and over again.

Apple isn't selling for your use case.

<comment><USER106> It's actually reasonably priced compared to other workstations. Plus, I'm pretty sure you get the accelerator card which is pretty amazing.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER107> The biggest new feature im looking for is the removal of the touchbar.

Until then, I'm going to just buy upgraded but used 2012-2013 macbook pros.

It's one of those sounds good on paper but useless in real life. Not only that, it's a hindrance for coders like me who need to be able to hit the escape button and other top buttons quickly with force feedback.

<comment><USER108> There is no touchbar included with new Mac Pro.

<comment><USER109> but there's never a bad moment to complain about the touch bar.

<comment><USER110> This is the frustrating part. The amount of innovation pushed forward in desktop computing in the past 20 years and every once in a while they get some things wrong and people just can't believe it. Manufacturing and component commitments make "Oh just remove the touchbar" comments lacking of substance. Same with removing the headphone jack conversation–no one wants to talk about the trade-offs in making a phone waterproof whether they trade a headphone jack for a waterproof phone. Most people would, probably, which is why it is gone.

Sorry, I'm new here and half the comments I read are bickering about some feature a someone doesn't think it optimal for how they use their device.

<comment><USER111> > Same with removing the headphone jack conversation–no one wants to talk > about the trade-offs in making a phone waterproof whether they trade a > headphone jack for a waterproof phone.

This is not true at all. There are multiple Android phones that have waterproof and they have headphone jacks.

<comment><USER110> What did they sacrifice for that? Nothing is free and those plugs are large.

<comment><USER112> They replaced the headphone jack with a barometric vent which other phone manufacturers just put in a different location. Apple didn't have to get rid of the port. They decided to get rid of the port because they knew that their users would buy the phone anyway and then have more of a reason to buy AirPods. There is plenty of space in that corner though. Some guy wanted to see if he could add the headphone jack back and was pretty successful for a hand crafted solution.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=utfbE3_uAMA](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=utfbE3_uAMA)

<comment><USER113> That is nonsense. He butchered that phone and definitely, 100% ruined the waterproofing function of the phone. Additionally, I'm curious which manufacturers you're speaking of because, the last time this type of comment came around, there was a distinct response of "most other phones don't include a barometric vent".

<comment><USER112> All waterproof phones with barometers would include similar technology. Phones like the Galaxy S7 which was also waterproof and which also had a headphone jack. The video is an individual messing around with a dremel and soldering gun. Of course it's not waterproof at that point, that was never his goal. It's ludicrous to believe that Apple _had_ to remove the headphone jack when other companies showed it can be done just fine without and others have shown just how much space is still available in the phone. Your assertion that it had to be done isn't supported by evidence.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


The Implementation of Functional Programming Languages by Simon Peyton Jones [pdf] - <AUTHOR> http://drop.io/IoFPLbySPJ

<comment><USER2> A scribd thing embedded in a drop.io thing? This is the most idiotic link I've ever clicked on HN.

The actual page on Simon Peyton Jones' website where you can read it online or download it:

[http://research.microsoft.com/en- us/um/people/simonpj/papers...](http://research.microsoft.com/en- us/um/people/simonpj/papers/slpj-book-1987/)

</comment><comment><USER3> I'm not sure why a link to drop.io is used, when you can read online or download this book for free from Simon Peyton Jones' site ([http://research.microsoft.com/en- us/um/people/simonpj/papers...](http://research.microsoft.com/en- us/um/people/simonpj/papers/slpj-book-1987/)).

<comment><AUTHOR> One reason is that drop.io provides an inline viewer also. -m

<comment><USER4> My browser provides an inline PDF viewer (no Acrobat required).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Nice book. I submitted it before, too.

</comment><comment><USER6> oh comon.. this does not fall under news, and anyone actively interested in the subject would find the book with a quick google search

it's kind of getting annoying to see this kind of posting in hn..

<comment><USER7> Not to mention that SPJ's papers require extensive Haskell experience and familiarity with the combinator side of functional programming and not just lambda calculus. It took me weeks just to go through his Spineless Tagless G-Machine paper.

FWIW, I find Andrew Appel's papers slightly easier; Appel is an MLer, meaning he treats strict evaluation much more comprehensively, which appeals to this lisper. Plus Appel is a compiler hacker, not just a functional PL researcher.

[Edit: Ok I will admit, I am bitter and mad at the graph reductionists because I never fully grokked term-rewriting; that fucker is hard, even after months studying advanced abstract algebras and category theory. Now I'm off to go shopping with Barbie.]

<comment><USER8> Do you have a link/title for any of Appel's better papers?

<comment><USER9> I'm not the person you replied to, but I personally liked "A Standard ML Compiler" and "A Runtime System"; they are among his earlier writings and relatively basic. You can find them at:

<http://www.cs.princeton.edu/~appel/papers/>

<comment><USER7> I am the person Oxryly replied to and I agree with your recommendation.

Also at that link are: "SSA is Functional Programming"; a timeless classic.

"Real-time Concurrent Collection" is about a realtime, copying GC algorithm that requires no hardware support and no changes to the compiler.

"Efficient Closure Representation". Back in the old dark ages, closures where stored in the heap and their environment links where two full pointers. Continuation passing style was discovered, complicating things further now, then someone came along and figured out you could break that previous closure representation in half by representing only half of the "rib cage". Another clever fella came along and found a way to store closures on the stack, which was super fast, except they weren't really in the stack but only pointers to them where, i.e. spaghetti stack, and it got annoying super fast. Solutions where found, and problems where found in those solutions .. then came along Appel and Shao and showed you could store closure in _REGISTERS_. (before you read this however you will need to read Dybvig's "Three Implementation Models of Scheme", and go depth first into all the literature it references, also try to find Appel's book "Compiling with Continuations.")

"Run Time Tags Aren't Necessary" was another favorite of mine as well. Before you touch this read the Wilson bibliography/survey on Garbage Collection.

The great majority of his papers are compiler hacks for functional languages. Skip them for now and work through Cooper and Torczon's "Engineering a Compiler"; the Algols are far easier to play with until you know better.

Regards.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Python has turtle built into it - <AUTHOR> http://pastebin.com/7x7SjcTS <comment><USER2> There are a couple of books in German for teaching Python using the turtle module. One of the authors presented at a EuroPython conference some years back, to argue for some updates to the module for better usability. Turns out that a lot of schools lock down the hardware, so putting the basics in Python itself make it easier to get the school IT to set it up - "install Python" rather than "install Python plus learn how to install Python packages."

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> I was helping out at a coder dojo, and it's typically scratch. I was helping a kid with his code in batch (I can't make this up, he was writing a simple game in batch). In talking with him, I mentioned that python would be a good next step. He indicated he installed python, but didn't know how to use it.

I showed him how to run it, and then I showed him turtle. His mind was blown, and that's all he did for the rest of the time.</comment>


C++ Hide and Seek champion, 1983 - 2011 - <AUTHOR> http://www.reddit.com/r/funny/comments/j8tyq/c_hide_and_seek_champion_1983_2011/ <comment><USER2> Clang fixes this. Also fixes most of the the disgusting strack-traces caused by C++ templates.

</comment><comment><USER3> Devoid of content, use clang, typical of why I stopped frequenting Reddit, etc.</comment>


Mighty CPU rival to Intel and AMD set to shake up the market - <AUTHOR> https://www.techradar.com/sg/news/mighty-and-surprising-cpu-rival-to-intel-and-amd-to-come-next-year <comment><USER2> Isn't this just ARM with a european based distributor? I can't really gauge much about what's significant about them from their website other than "Hey, we're in europe".

If their geography is their leading feature I'd be worried.

For instance, If I go to oh I dunno, something random, let's pick Rockchip ([https://www.rock-chips.com/](https://www.rock-chips.com/)) ... they lead with products, chips even, on the front page ... you know, stuff. Should AMD and Intel be worried about Rockchip and Unisoc? Probably more so than SiPearl I gotta admit. But that goes with arm in general.

If it fits in your pocket and you can walk around with it, it's probably running ARM, of course they are sniping upstream - classic innovators dilemma story.

Also the reporters inability to look up SOC really makes me think this is mostly hot air but we'll see.</comment>


When FP? And when OOP? - <AUTHOR> http://raganwald.com/2013/04/08/functional-vs-OOP.html <comment><USER2> Great post!

In Abadi & Cardelli's "A Theory of Objects" they show that you can implement FP using OOP environment, but you can't implement OOP using FP. Of course, the both Common Lisp and Scheme have created OOP frameworks - maybe they didn't read that book :-)

As for PL/SQL: I've found that "transactions" are best implemented using PL/SQL stored procedures, so that the business logic is encapsulated and thus becomes an OO API. However, queries for reports, analyses are best implemented directly in SQL. Of course, writing good reports requires a strong understanding of the underlying tables, their relationships and the available indices.</comment>


Ask HN: Rate my first webapp, tudu.us - <AUTHOR>

http://tudu.us/
Tudu is a dead simple to-do list that doesn't get in your way.
I built this for two reasons:
(1) to learn Rails,
(2) to build a to-do list to my own liking (I've never found one that I liked)
Any suggestion or criticism is totally welcomed. <comment><USER2> Hey there, very neat little application, you've done a great job.

Suggestions: don't ask for an email address/password right from the get go, you can simply use a cookie for the first session, and ask people to sign up once they add a few entries. Then you associate their old entries with the newly created account. Also, give a reason why you need an email address, that's a huge barrier otherwise.

I've been toying around with todo lists as well lately, but you're much further along than I am. (I'm using the todo list concept as a way to try out various frameworks, never thought of actually releasing it to the public).

I like the very clean design and minimalist user interface.

<comment><AUTHOR> This was definitely a feature that I thought about implementing before publicizing the app. It seems that I should get this done ASAP.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> When I show up and am already signed in, I'd like to be taken straight to my lists, rather than the landing page.

</comment><comment><USER4> If you are trying to get people to actually use this, I'd suggest letting anonymous visitors create a list immediately (and then register to save it). As a random web user, I'd need a more compelling reason to register, let alone hand over my email address.

<comment><USER5> Exactly why I visited, clicked around, and then bolted. -1 user

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Thers space or some char before http i can see in Chrome <link href=' [http://fonts.googleapis.com/css?family=Yanone+Kaffeesatz:reg...](http://fonts.googleapis.com/css?family=Yanone+Kaffeesatz:regular,bold) rel='stylesheet' type='text/css'>

</comment><comment><USER7> nice and simple, I suggest you make the difference between the "list adding" and "task adding" contextually clearer, I don't mind registering (it was short enough)

</comment><comment><USER8> Clickable: <http://tudu.us/>

By the way, my McAfee SiteAdvisor goes red when visiting your site.

<comment><AUTHOR> Can you provide more info about McAfee's warning?

<comment><USER9> I get that message too. Here it is: <http://www.siteadvisor.com/sites/tudu.us>

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I the localhost:3000 address in the screenshot will be a little confusing to non-tech people. Not that big of a deal, but I'd change it.

</comment><comment><USER11> Hate it, i have to register to use it.

</comment><comment><USER12> It would be nice to have a multi-line textbox I could paste a list separated by \n's that the site would split into individual entries. I want to transfer my list from tadalist.com, as this seems like a better site.

</comment><comment><USER13> Hot Pink?

Also, no way to delete my account.</comment>


Turkey's Halkbank sells dollars on the cheap, prompting public outcry - <AUTHOR> https://stockholmcf.org/turkeys-halkbank-sells-dollars-on-the-cheap-prompting-public-outcry/ <comment><AUTHOR> Halkbank's own twitter feed confirms this: [https://twitter.com/Halkbank/status/1035854727500767232](https://twitter.com/Halkbank/status/1035854727500767232)</comment>


Ask HN: Help with talk for Non-Profits - <AUTHOR>

Hi HN,
I'm give a small talk to a couple different non-profits. The title of the talk is "Exploring and Evaluating IT Options for Nonprofits," it's basically going to be a survey of cheap and simple IT options for small non profits.
Since startup's operate in a similar manner, I'm interested any topics you think should be covered.
Topics I'll be covering include:
Infrastructure:
   - Email, Calendar, Docs, Backups, basic networking
Websites:
  - purpose, content, needed features, analytics, hosting, CMS
Social Media:
  - facebook, twitter, etc
Online Marketing,
   basic seo and online marketing
I won't be going into a ton of depth about any of these topics. The goal is to expose people to different options, then let them explore which would work.
Do you have any other topics you think would be helpful?
Thx,
   Charlie <comment><USER2> I've worked with a few non-profits and political orgs regarding new technology. Regarding small NPOs implementing new tech initiatives, one of the problems is that the people running them might not know how to implement or execute some of this.

I would recommend that they tap their volunteer and donor network for the skills they need. Some old school NPOs tend to still only use their volunteers for menial office tasks. There is a good chance that they have volunteers that have the skills they need for various projects, they just don't ask. Make your talented volunteers a CEO of something and they will work their butts off for you.

<comment><USER2> Mark Pincus: "Are you a CEO of something"

<http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/31/business/31corner.html></comment></comment>


The Equifax breach may be the worst leak of personal info ever - <AUTHOR> https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/09/why-the-equifax-breach-is-very-possibly-the-worst-leak-of-personal-info-ever/ <comment><USER2> Why are identifiers being treated as passwords? It's 2017 and my mind is boggled that we continue to use SSNs and thumbprints as passwords. These are more akin to usernames. Why is our most important information not protected by passwords, or better yet, 2 factor authentication?

If I try to spend $1000 on my credit card at IKEA, my bank usually calls me to confirm the transaction. However, we don't have such a system when handling our most important information? Why is this allowed to happen? How many people have to be damaged before they stop watching Tom Brady throw touchdowns and get out there to make a difference?

<comment><USER3> > If I try to spend $1000 on my credit card at IKEA, my bank usually calls me > to confirm the transaction. However, we don't have such a system when > handling our most important information? Why is this allowed to happen?

It's allowed to happen for the same reason the US uses credit cards without PIN numbers - a lack of desire to spend money on security/upgrades (it's easier to pass on the cost of fraud via the transaction fees), a weak regulatory structure for protecting consumers, a glacial rate of technology adoption in banking systems, and ignorance/unwillingness to evolve by customers/businesses/executives etc.

<comment><USER4> Don't forget the odd US anti-fed/anti-state bend which led to your identity being smeared across thousands of untrustable private companies linked through a something never originally intended as an identification token (SSN) but having become done so for the sole reason of being nigh-universal.

Had the US implemented a _proper_ citizen's registry it could be managed as _that_ with all the security and personal details isolation that entails, including but not limited to biometric and chipped ID cards.

<comment><USER5> The US cannot implement a proper registry, large sections of the country would freak out.

<comment><USER6> Interesting. What sections?

<comment><USER7> Me. The less sensitive information on me that is centralized, the better for my privacy and security, as very clearly demonstrated by this leak.

If you think Equifax's security is bad, wait until you see what it's like at any government agency that doesn't explicitly focus on security.

It's also pretty unlikely that a credit bureau decides to use vast stores of personal information to prosecute people, but governments have done this several times throughout history, perhaps most notably during WWII.

<comment><USER8> I like to think that fewer try to hack US government services because of the consequences. Attempting to do so would get a black hat chased after by multiple three-letter agencies.

I'm sure the FBI is looking into the Equifax breach but not as hard as if someone breached the Social Security Administration.

<comment><USER9> You have too much faith in the federal government 3-letters:

[https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wired.com/2016/02/hack- brie...](https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wired.com/2016/02/hack-brief-fbi- and-dhs-are-targets-in-employee-info-hack/amp/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I've been saying for a long time. Companies that store sensitive information should be required to insure it. Want my SSN for some inane reason? 5 million^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H 500k dollar insurance policy on each one. Seem excessive? Better buckle down on security or better yet not store extremely sensitive and damaging information for arbitrary reasons. There is literally zero reason or consequences for any company to care about security right now.

<comment><USER11> I understand the emotional appeal of overselling the problem, but you'd get much better response with a $50K insurance policy than an obviously absurd $5M. Even $50K is sort of generous and probably generally more towards the worst case end of identity theft than the average case. It is plainly obvious to everyone that when Bob the upstanding middle class guy is hit by identity theft that Bob may experience great loss of money and time from his point of view, but that identity theft was not the one thing standing between Bob and $5M.

At scale $50K still adds up to a lot, and we'd probably have to cap it some other way too because at-scale breaches don't add up that far, because the system does in fact react to them. This particular breach would be a seven trillion dollar payout if we don't cap it, and the simple reality is that this breach, no matter how much pain it may eventually cause us, is not going to cause anywhere near seven trillion dollar's worth of damage to consumers, or the economy, or anything else. But $50K makes sense for isolated cases that don't get a coordinated response.

<comment><USER12> Why would you cap punitive damages? Sure, it won't be collected, but that's okay--this sort of failure _should_ destroy a company that betrayed the societal trust. It should be a smoking crater when all is said and done.

<comment><USER13> We should go one step further and just terminate consumers that use companies that don't have good security. That way it will never happen again for sure.

<comment><USER14> I can get on board with this as soon as you figure out a way to require security training for the masses as opposed to the handful in charge of security.

If you get it to work, we can then proceed to get rid of police departments.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Another commenter, who now deleted the comment, said: "There's a 44% chance you were affected, but a 100% chance you waive your right to be in a class action lawsuit if you enroll in their ID protection."

I thought it was a good comment, but I wonder if it matters.

How much would you get? I have been a member of these class action lawsuits before, and I get, like, $3 for my troubles at the end of the day, so I never claim the prize because it's another database where my SSN would be stored and stolen from.

I think the best is to freeze your credit report and deal with the troubles of having to unfreeze it when you need a loan.

If there are expert people from the Fin Svc industry here, is the above correct? Is freeze pretty much the only reasonable action now to protect ourselves?

<comment><USER15> Saying it's a 44% chance you're affected is really skewing things away from how severe they really are. At least 22% of Americans are under 18. There are actually 167 million Americans who own one or more credit cards, so this actually affects 86% of all US credit card holders.

Not to shamelessly promote, but as soon as this broke yesterday I brought this to the attention of my firm and we filed I believe this morning.

[http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/classactioncom- files...](http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/classactioncom-files- lawsuit-on-behalf-of-millions-of-equifax-data-breach- victims-300516335.html?tc=eml_cleartime)

<comment><USER16> Could you guys push for free credit freezes and unfreezes going forward instead of some sorta ridiculously small monetary comp. It should be free at all bureaus, with Equifax picking up the bill for unfreezing and freezing at the other two.

<comment><USER17> And. Make it possible to do the process online for all three credit reporting agencies (one of them still requires a phone call). Having to pay and spend at least 20 minutes on the phone to lift your credit freeze because is just ridiculous.

Better yet, lets do away with credit reporting agencies. Why should any oligopoly or, indeed any non-government entity be allow to have the power to cause so much harm to is with effectively no accountability?

<comment><USER18> How do you prove your identity when freezing and unfreezing? Is it similar to how you "prove" your identity when you apply for credit?

<comment><USER19> You would use a PIN that is generated at the time of freezing the account. However, this doesn't prevent a future attack from obtaining the PINs.

<comment><USER18> And if I forget my pin?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> I just used their "check if you've been compromised" tool on their crisis response site and they are using it not only as a notification service for potentially affected customers, _but also as a lead generation tool for their TrustedID Premier service_.

We need a new word, "chutzpah" isn't strong enough in this case.

<comment><USER21> I think the word you are looking for is gall. As in sheer unmitigated gall.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> If we're lucky, this will be the _best_ leak of personal info ever.

The primacy of the SSN in American society is idiotic. It's a "secret" that you have to hand out to dozens of different organizations. I've long thought that we should phase this out by committing to publish all SSNs (and the associated info, obviously, so it's not just a list of most 9-digit numbers...) which would force all these companies to stop treating it as confidential.

The system is dumb and works poorly, but worked will enough that there was no impetus to fix it. Some people got affected by breaches, and it sucked for them, but it was always a small enough group that most people didn't care.

Now that a majority of people's "secret" info is no longer confidential, maybe they'll realize they can't rely on it anymore.

OK, the odds of this actually coming to pass are not great. But I can hope.

<comment><USER23> I advocate something similar regarding _all_ secrets (passwords, private keys, credit card numbers, etc).

Secrecy (and privacy) aren't sustainable, and relying on them will just end up hurting people.

Identity must be solved, not through secrecy, but through transparency.

If AI overcomes us, it will be (in part) because we failed to adapt to this reality.

<comment><USER24> How could we go about not having private passwords or credit card numbers?

<comment><USER25> You authenticate with physical states with enough entropy generation rate, e.g. physical tokens. All security is physical security.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> This is truly low: Equifax gives the affected victims a "special offer" to protect their identities. In the fine print is a waiver to any class-action lawsuit.

[https://twitter.com/wyatt_privilege/status/90612079459342745...](https://twitter.com/wyatt_privilege/status/906120794593427456)

<comment><USER27> I doubt this would be upheld by a judge in the event that a class action were to be taken to court.

Remember, any legalize like this is worthless unless a judge says it's valid.

<comment><USER28> Doesn't make them any less scum for trying it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> I'd like to think OPM employees are reading this headline and thinking "Yeah we'll see!"

The entirety of federal government SF-86s being dumped to a foreign government has diplomatic and economic repercussions that will last for decades.

<comment><USER30> To clarify the OP's acronyms:

 _OPM_ : Office of Personnel Management, where all the 'blackmail' files for cleared gov employees and contractors are stored, in addition to many other more mundane functions.

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

 _DoD_ : Department of Defense, but this also refers to contractors in places like Lockheed and other smaller contrating firms.

 _SF-86_ : Standard Form #86, the form that must be completed to gain any kind of clearance with the gov. These clearance processes can run into the $20k+ range, though not usually, as they have to send agents out to talk to people to verify the applicant.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_Form_86](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_Form_86)

[https://news.clearancejobs.com/2017/05/31/serious- penalties-...](https://news.clearancejobs.com/2017/05/31/serious-penalties- falsifying-sf-86/)

The 2015 data breach of the OPM was a _BIG_ deal in the security clearance world, as it seems _all_ the blackmail files were stolen. The a large issue was that the OPM worked on an entirely separate internet that the gov built, as in they had totally different wires and cables and everything, very expensive. How this happened is yet to be released AFAIK. Also, many people were trusting the gov with their darkest secrets, so as to be un-blackmail- able by others. Now, the gov is not so trustworthy and this then throws a huge wrench into all of the processes, including retention of employees and recruitment of new ones.

<comment><USER29> Thanks; I also had to double back and change DoD to the more accurate "federal government", which includes other branches that used OPM services.

<comment><USER30> No worries! Thanks for putting this up. This Equifax issue is a big deal, for sure, but the OPM was too. In general, these breaches are just getting bigger and worse as time goes on. There has been a lot of talk about the CyberWar, and if there is one going on, it seems that the US is not winning it very well.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> This sort of reminds me of when Wells Fargo called me one day to tell me my card was compromised. I got on the phone with them only to find out it wasn't. Then they tried to hard upsell me on a pay by the month identity protection plan with a 6 month complimentary introductory period.

It seems like it's sort of in Equifax's interest for a breach to happen and have 144 million people freak out and then buy their $20/month service

<comment><USER32> I hope you changed banks after witnessing their sleazeball tactics first hand.

<comment><USER33> Only the absolutely dumbest Americans are Wells Fargo customers at this point. Or, maybe, they can't read the news.

<comment><USER18> I can read. I am not dumb.

Wells Fargo is the biggest mortgage servicer in the United States and you don't have a choice over who services your mortgage- mine was sold to Wells Fargo without my say. I could refinance but that comes with _significant_ fees (>$1,000), I'd lose my amazing interest rate, and there is no guarantee it won't end up back in Wells Fargo's hands again.

<comment><USER34> Not all banks re-service mortgages. BB&T is known to keep servicing mortgages that they originate.[1] Disclaimer: I have a mortgage through Wells Fargo (that was almost immediately re-serviced!), but I work for BB&T.

[1]: [https://www.nerdwallet.com/blog/mortgages/bbt-mortgage- revie...](https://www.nerdwallet.com/blog/mortgages/bbt-mortgage-review/)

<comment><USER35> Exactly. My primary credit union, First Tech, also states that they will service the mortgages they originate.

<comment><USER18> What happens when First Tech gets bought out by [mega credit union] though?

<comment><USER35> First Tech bought out the HP Credit Union (Addison Avenue) and others so in some sense, it has acted as [mega credit union].

Beyond that, this question is an imponderable for me because who can say what the future brings vs. the present. I guess one can refinance with some other credit union were this to happen in the future in a manner that was not desirable for one's mortgage.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> I think $1000 is a lowball estimate for the per-person damage done by this breach. At $1000/head, they would be looking at $137B of liability with a market cap of $17B. Good.

How hard is it to opt-out of whatever class action settlement is offered, and take this to small claims court?

Anyone want to setup a website to automate the paperwork? I'd love to see a not-for-profit do this moving forward when things like this happen.

<comment><USER37> I would love to see something like this happen as well. I'd be happy to setup the website, but we'd need a lawyer to help with the forms.

<comment><USER38> I would be happy to help out as well. I am not a lawyer, but I just filed in GA small claims court today. Contact info in profile.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER39> Consider the implications of this security breach if it's a state actor that did it. I'm going to throw out Russia as an example, but don't take that as me accusing them of doing it.

Cross reference financial information on millions of americans with data breaches from yahoo and linked in, and the social graph data that's freely available from both and you have a serious national security problem. It would be easy to search for employees with serious financial problems at any institution you wanted to target with either blackmail or further intrusions.

<comment><USER40> Consider the consequences if it is the same/cooperating state actors behind the 2015 OPM breach. At that point there would be mountains of blackmail data.

</comment></comment><comment><USER41> Anyone know roughly how useful this debug information is to would-be attackers?

> com.ibm.websphere.servlet.error.ServletErrorReport: > com.ibm.ws.jsp.JspCoreException: Unable to convert string 'uiadmin' to class > javax.el.ValueExpression for attribute basename: > java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: Property Editor not registered with the > PropertyEditorManager > > Caused by: > com.ibm.ws.jsp.JspCoreException - > Unable to convert string 'uiadmin' to class javax.el.ValueExpression for > attribute basename: java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: Property Editor not > registered with the PropertyEditorManager

It looks to me like it's choking on some sort of deserialization, which could lead to execution of EL code.

[https://issues.jboss.org/browse/RF-13977?_sscc=t](https://issues.jboss.org/browse/RF-13977?_sscc=t)

I'm not in netsec, but this looks pretty damning to me. The fact that I was able to go from "I have no idea how I'd begin to hit this" to "hey I wonder if I can hammer on this particular interface and see if I can get it to pop" makes me think this reaaally not something you should be revealing, above and beyond the usual "don't show debug information to the outside world".

[https://www.equifax.com/cs7/faces/jspx/login.jspx](https://www.equifax.com/cs7/faces/jspx/login.jspx)

</comment><comment><USER42> There still doesn't seem to exist the political will do to anything real about this, or to hold accountable in any real way the companies that leak. These stories happen pretty much every week now, often more than one a week. I think companies will continue not caring, simply do a blog post after they get owned about how sorry they are and then proceed with business as usual, unless that changes.

I don't think the issue is SSN, though it is absurd how we treat SSN as both an identifier and a secret at the same time. The problem is we don't really care when secret info gets leaked- even when it's actual secrets and not something sort-of-secret like SSNs.

</comment><comment><USER43> I previously signed up for someone's free Identity Theft Protection service. After the free service was completed my account was charged around $9 per month until I noticed it and fixed it.

</comment><comment><USER44> Is there no way to find out if I am affected without enrolling in their ID protection?

<comment><USER45> This link [0] tells you if they think you are affected (you probably are) and then asks if you want to sign up for protection which you don't have to do.

[0] [https://trustedidpremier.com/eligibility/eligibility.html](https://trustedidpremier.com/eligibility/eligibility.html)

<comment><USER46> Warning: You waive your right to sue Equifax if you sign up for protection using this site.

<comment><USER47> This is crucial. I am concerned that #4 of the Terms of Use for this site does state that you give up your right to sue Equifax or join a class action lawsuit:

[http://www.equifax.com/terms/](http://www.equifax.com/terms/)

I clicked on the "Enroll" button before reading this (after giving my last name and six-digit social), and it told me to come back in a week to enroll. Now I'm wondering, did I just give up my rights?

<comment><USER32> If the hackers have any sense of humor they'll sign everyone up on their behalf.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER48> I don't own any credit cards and I do not use credit. Am I still at risk for having credit taken out in my name if I don't enroll in this "credit freeze" protection racket people keep mentioning?

<comment><USER49> YES!

Most people don't realize this, but credit checks are standard with many employment applications, apartment applications and utility connections (cell phones, electric, gas, etc).

You may not have an open line of credit, but by virtue of the fact that your SSN/PII was queried, it creates a stub profile in the database. Your SSN, address, license number, whatever you provided are now within potential scope of this leak-- you just have no credit associated with your identity.

Armed with the PII the fraudster can have gleaned from this leak, there's nothing stopping them from opening accounts in your name.

(FD: ex-employee. This is not a pitch in favor of their solutions, only an advisement that you should not assume you're safe.)

<comment><USER48> Apologies for my ignorance, but what is the best method of recourse here? If I need to freeze my credit by necessity of covering the asses of other credit companies whose bad security practices lead to being hacked, I'll be damned if I will be paying any sort of fee to freeze my credit. That should be covered by Equifax.

<comment><USER49> I agree with your principles. Unfortunately I don't have a solution to recommend.

As with all cybersecurity incidents there are going to be a lot of vultures circling this mess, happy to Hoover up your money in exchange for nebulous "protection"\-- but even Lifelock got hacked some years ago.

Paying for "credit protection" doesn't also address some of the other things fraudsters can do armed with your PII, such as filing and collecting fraudulent tax returns. Have fun sorting _that_ out.

My own data was leaked. What am I doing? Admitting I'm fucked, refusing to feed the vultures, and for all else I have the number of a good attorney.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER50> David Webb is the CTO. He should get a year in prison for every day he decided not to announce his massive fuck up.

<comment><USER51> pretty sure the responsibility of announcing that sort of thing goes to chief risk officer, or legal -- not usually technology. though clearly they failed in some way (security training, sdlc process, m&a due-diligence, or whatever)

</comment></comment><comment><USER52> Everyone knew these where more or less worthless to begin with, but the people doing things either have to use them or don't have anything better.

I think at this point we should start authenticating anything that ends up on someone's credit report using strong cryptography. People who refuse to use it out of ignorance or disagreement don't have to, they just don't get background checks (which is kind of the way it works now.)

</comment><comment><USER53> Frankly what is necessary here is a version of medical malpractice for the IT industry. If you do something which is far outside what is considered industry best practice and it results in a penetration which harms users, you should be criminally liable in severe cases with strong punishments. People from these companies should also be black balled out of the industry.

</comment><comment><USER54> I've been using a credit checker called Clearscore, who as far as I recall get their credit information from Equifax. Has this breach affected any of their customers outside of the US?

<comment><USER55> > As part of its investigation of this application vulnerability, Equifax also > identified unauthorized access to limited personal information for certain > UK and Canadian residents. Equifax will work with UK and Canadian regulators > to determine appropriate next steps.

Nothing on Equifax.co.uk

</comment></comment><comment><USER56> I'm curious, does the US government offer any way for you to change your SSN after its leaked?

<comment><USER57> Yes, but it can be time-consuming.

[https://faq.ssa.gov/link/portal/34011/34019/article/3789/can...](https://faq.ssa.gov/link/portal/34011/34019/article/3789/can- i-change-my-social-security-number)

</comment></comment><comment><USER58> I've been wondering for awhile: what would it take to implement a revocable identifier to replace SSNs? I've given up hope that companies can secure their data, but people have no options to take back control when their data is inevitably disclosed.

</comment><comment><USER59> Is there a dump available for this yet so we can see just how massively F __*ed we are now?

</comment><comment><USER60> I just want my own info. Like, I need to see it. Problem is: there is no simple way to see my own info in this leak. I either get a third-party involved, and thus make the leak worse, or I .. get everyone elses data and have a look at it, too.

<comment><USER18> You can see all the data Equifax has on you at [https://www.annualcreditreport.com/](https://www.annualcreditreport.com/)

<comment><USER60> Yeah, then I'd have to use a service that has already failed me. I think this shouldn't be the case.

<comment><USER18> This is not a separate service, this is just a unified request to the three bureaus for your credit report. It's run by the bureaus themselves and redirects you to their individual sites. You can choose just Equifax if you want. The other option is contacting Equifax directly by mail - [https://www.equifax.com/personal/education/credit/report/how...](https://www.equifax.com/personal/education/credit/report/how- to-get-your-free-credit-report)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER61> As someone who has no time to deal with lawsuits or anything of that sort, what's the best course of action here? According to their website, it seems I'm affected?..

<comment><USER62> Request a credit freeze on the three major reporting agencies.

[https://www.consumer.ftc.gov/articles/0497-credit-freeze- faq...](https://www.consumer.ftc.gov/articles/0497-credit-freeze-faqs#place)

<comment><USER61> Are there any downsides to doing this? Aside from not being able to get credit when you need it ASAP

<comment><USER63> My experience was that any "Instant Qualification!!" fails instantly, and then you can't unlock it.

After Equifax lost my data in the _last_ (T-Mobile) breach, I locked all three providers. Each of the places charged me $10 for the privilege. I still claim that Equifax should have covered if not for all providers, at least themselves, instead of providing me with worthless credit monitoring. But that's a whole other rant.

I was applying for a credit card. The bank then followed up with, "We killed this because we asked Equifax, and they said no. If you still want a card, you can apply a temporary unlock for us."

The problem is, as is clear from all the other posts here, Equifax is terrible. You need to send your super-secret unlock pin via mail to somewhere and link it up with something and blah blah blah...

It was more trouble than it was worth. I asked the bank if they would consider switching to another reporting agency because Equifax was demonstrably terrible, but they said that once they select an agency for a transaction, they're locked into it.

So, I let that request die. I can try again some time, and there's a 1:3 chance that I'll get screwed all over again, and a 3:3 chance that I'll have to unlock something, and a 100% chance that I will get angry.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER64> I love it when a publication using WordPress dings another site for using WordPress.</comment>


Ask HN: What are some good board games for the office? - <AUTHOR> I'm looking for some holiday gift ideas for my colleagues. Here are the specs I had in mind but I'm not dogmatic:<p>- Less than $30<p>- 3-6 players<p>- Playing time: 30 minutes or less<p>- Mildly strategic or cognitively stimulating. Nothing too intense or competitive (or offensive)<p>Only idea I've been able to come up with so far is Love Letter. Thanks! <comment><USER2> The first version of Metro [0] is on sale now at Miniature Market for $11 [1] (shipping is a flat $5.95 for orders up to $99; after that, shipping is free).

Metro is a tile-laying game by Dirk Henn, who also designed Alhambra and some other well-regarded Queen games. It plays 2-6 and scales well -- I've played it at 2 and I've played it at 6 -- though some point out it may be more strategic at lower player counts, esp. at 2.

The rules are simple -- either play the one tile you have or draw a tile and play that instead. The tiles represent tracks on the Paris Metro and you need to play it so its tracks fit with the tracks on the tiles next to it. You're trying to build routes, the longer the better, since you get a point for each tile that your route takes, including ones you loop through. Routes that end at the central power-station have their score doubled. That's basically it.

The game can be played casually. Some people do make it thinkier, which would raise the playing-time -- if you have such people around, you may have to nudge them to play faster -- i.e. set a 30-second timer for them or the like.

There is also a newer edition of the game, also on sale at MM for $22 [2], that comes with 4 expansions, including a stock expansion -- you don't own a railroad if you play with it, you have 4 cards representing stock in up to 4 railroads and depending on how well those railroads do, you get points at the end. There are 3 other expansions that do other things. This edition is a tad less charming in that it replaces the wooden train pieces with cardboard ones, though in both the pieces just sit on the side of the board, indicating that a train route is unfinished and are removed to indicate that a line is done.

Interesting that the newer edition has only 6 copies left while the original has 20+, meaning they have a lot. On the other hand, I watched a Tom Vasel review [3] earlier today where he basically said the expansions are not really necessary, that the base game is sufficient.

Miniature Market is in the midst of a sale now, which should last till 11/26, and will have another one later this week. They do order-holds, so you can rack up a few orders to get to $100 for free shipping or at least to get a few games shipped together. So you might find some other things too, for the office or yourself.

[0] [https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/559/metro](https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/559/metro)

[1] [https://www.miniaturemarket.com/qng60159.html](https://www.miniaturemarket.com/qng60159.html)

[2] [https://www.miniaturemarket.com/qng10241.html](https://www.miniaturemarket.com/qng10241.html)

[3] [https://boardgamegeek.com/video/147901/metro/metro-review- do...](https://boardgamegeek.com/video/147901/metro/metro-review-double- trouble)

<comment><AUTHOR> That looks ideal. I've added it to my shopping list. Thanks for the detailed response!

<comment><USER2> You're welcome. I don't know if you need more, but here are a few other games that can handle 6 players, can be played in close to 30 minutes and are in your price range. The first set is probably the best for gifting, i.e. they are among the best games and also look nice/substantial (except for Codenames, which comes in a smaller, though not tiny box, but there's a lot of game in there):

 _Codenames_ \-- 2-8, though I think you need 4 min. Under $20. Highly-ranked, highly-popular team vs. team word game. There are multiple versions, including one using pictures, instead of words, one for Marvel, one for Harry Potter, etc. But the base game is fine. Has a strong social component, as one person gives clues about certain words that appear in a grid of word-cards and their team has to guess which words they are being clued about; wrong words may give the other team an advantage, etc.

[https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/178900/codenames](https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/178900/codenames)

 _Sushi Go Party_ : $18.38 @Amazon plays 2 - 8 Highly-ranked and fast card- drafting game. As opposed to the original Sushi Go, it plays more players and lets you create a different deck of cards for every game (i.e. using different foods). Comes in a nice tin.

[https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/192291/sushi-go- party](https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/192291/sushi-go-party)

 _King of Tokyo_ : plays 2 - 6 ($30 and change on Amazon). It's a yahtzee- mechanic dice-chucker where each player is a Godzilla-style monster in or out of Tokyo. It's also by Richard Garfield. This one is a well-known game in gaming circles, with expansions and so on. Comes with large, custom dice.

[https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/70323/king- tokyo](https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/70323/king-tokyo)

 _Treasure Hunter_ plays 2 - 6 ($27-ish on Amazon, though it may go down as Amazon has a history of discounting Queen games during this season -- last year it hit $12.50) Card-drafting game by Richard Garfield (who did another card-drafting game called Magic: The Gathering :-) ). It's in a Ticket To Ride sized box, as it has a board and tokens in addition to cards. Fairly light, despite all the components.

And here are a few others -- mostly card games:

 _Parade_ : plays 2-6, $19.91 @Amzn, $16.99 @Miniature Market. It's a light card game with an Alice in Wonderland theme; it's pretty well-regarded.

[https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/56692/parade](https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/56692/parade)

 _For Sale_ : plays 3-6, either around $30 on Amazon for the regular box or around $16 for the deck-of-cards box "travel edition" which has thinner tokens and the rules printed on cards. The game is a well-known filler in gaming circles.

[https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/172/sale](https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/172/sale)

 _Fantasy Realms_ : plays 3-6, $19.99 @ Amazon -- light card game

[https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/223040/fantasy- realms](https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/223040/fantasy-realms)

 _Cheaty Mages_ : plays 3-6 $16.47 @Amazon -- small-box, light card game

[https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/38194/cheaty- mages](https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/38194/cheaty-mages)

 _Age of War_ : plays 2-6, small, light dice game by ace-designer Reiner Knizia (though this isn't one of his classics). $11.76 @ Amazon.

[https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/155695/age- war](https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/155695/age-war)</comment></comment></comment>


Don't let the Nobel prize fool you. Economics is not a science - <AUTHOR> http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/oct/11/nobel-prize-economics-not-science-hubris-disaster <comment><USER2> Waiting for the follow-up article "Don't let the Nobel prize fool you. Literature is not a science." :)

Joke aside, the argument that "A Nobel prize in economics implies that the human world operates much like the physical world" is not really the best argument I've heard in the "soft vs hard" sciences debate.</comment>


What is "the stack"? - <AUTHOR> http://jvns.ca/blog/2016/03/01/a-few-notes-on-the-stack/ <comment><USER2> It's like "cloud" and "synergy". When you are a consultant these words come out faster than a popcorn machine in full action. :-/</comment>


iFixit is building a repair database for medical equipment, and needs your help - <AUTHOR> https://www.theverge.com/2020/3/20/21187981/ifixit-medical-device-repair-database-guides-ventilators-coronavirus-covid-19 <comment><USER2> We desperately need some tear downs of the Ventilators. The iFixit[1] page only has manuals and very few pictures. If people can get their hands on medical grade ones even if they are broken would be useful. I have found some good ones locally, but they are way too expensive just to tear down(>$1400). There lots of people working on ventilators, and will require a many people evaluating designs since this is a life critical system.

[1] [https://www.ifixit.com/Device/Ventilator](https://www.ifixit.com/Device/Ventilator)

<comment><USER3> On the life critical note, do we need to have a conversation about amateurs repairing medical things?

First, of course, thanks to iFixit and others for defending right-to-repair for consumer gear. If I bork my phone trying to fix it, it's really my fault and my problem.

Ordinarily, the official repair channel would have access to calibration and acceptance test procedures. Part of their obscene cost also includes FDA certification and liability.

So in an emergency such as this, the question is not how nerds on the ground can get the gear fixed, but how to take care of the other chores, like avoiding the worst case: making a sick person worse. The cert and legal stuff issues could be erased by some emergency good samaritan legislation.

<comment><USER4> If the choice is between a self-repaired ventilator and a patient dying I would encourage the self-repair. Otherwise yeah, only use certified equipment that is relatively new and in good condition.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> My unskilled labor is at your service. I have a truck, gas money, a laptop, physical strength, a majority of tools you'd find in a well outfitted shop and a desire to help. If you have skilled work to do and unskilled work that needs doing please get in touch. (My email is in my profile). I can travel anywhere in New England and New York if need be.

</comment><comment><USER6> I'm all for self-service repair, but how would calibration be handled?

If a repaired iPhone were somehow slightly out of spec, it is unlikely anyone will be hurt (sure, it isn't impossible). What if a repaired ventilator, insulin pump, etc is out of spec, though?

</comment><comment><USER7> Ventilators are incredibly simple and can suffer considerable constant abuse without a hiccup.

These are medical grade devices.</comment>