Re: Gmail's new look: Do Not Want - <AUTHOR> http://groups.google.com/a/googleproductforums.com/forum/#!category-topic/gmail/managing-settings-and-mail/uibBsFy2-ig

<comment><USER2> Dealing with nasty user feedback like this is one of the most painful parts of running a product. It still amazes me how many people refuse to consider the fact that there are humans on the other end of the computer. Instead, a lot of these arguments turn into accusatory conspiracy theory threads, as though things changing is a sign of some "secret plan". Is it that hard to believe that a product team is just trying their darndest to create the best product they can? Sometimes they'll get it right, and sometimes they won't, but constructive feedback always goes further than angry fist shaking. There's something about feedback for products on the internet that brings out extreme paranoia in people, and I don't get why that is.

<comment><USER3> Some of the people trying to foist changes like this off on their users should "consider the fact that there are humans on the other end of the computer."

<comment><USER2> You seriously think they don't? I refuse to believe that design decisions like this are made with absolutely zero feedback or human input. Google is an incredibly data-driven company. They always have been. Design changes can serve a multitude of purposes for a company. They can be trying to make a dated interface look better, make it easier to use for "average" users, or a combination of both. The thread was very informative in terms of explaining the rationale behind the design changes, and the fact that Google was so open about this leads me to believe that they _do_ consider the human factor. With all due respect, your comment makes you sound exactly like the people I'm describing.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> The CYA response from Google at that link mostly focused on how many people hadn't switched back to the old look.

I loved the response someone gave: "Failure of someone to make it out of a burning building shouldn't be interpreted as them enjoying the heat."

<comment><USER5> It's a self-serving simplification to make that criticism. There are lots of ways for a team to assess if users want to switch back to an old look beyond simply counting how many find that setting. In-house usability testing, user panels, customer feedback, etc. And they're all more objective than a forum thread.

Any product with millions of heavy users is going to have a subset that are upset by any change, no matter how positive it is. And if you make no changes, people complain that the product isn't being updated.

It's easy to be snarky and whiny. Sometimes it's hard to remember that not everyone may see the world the way you do.

<comment><USER4> Oh, no doubt; the plural of anecdote is not "data", and that's all a forum thread of complaints is.

And yet...while Google can fairly easily find out how people really view their changes, this does require them to _want_ to assess that. And it's always been a little unclear why their app rewrite required a new UI. You'd think it might be easier to do that in two seperate passes...

A suspicious person might suspect that the app rewrite and the UI revamp were purposefully tied together in order to ward off poor customer feedback. But as you say, it's easy to be snarky and whiny. :)

<comment><USER5> Given how much of the app is tied into the UI, a full rewrite would seem to be _exactly_ when you'd want to make any major UI changes. I've been in that spot a few times myself and the _last_ thing you want to do is re-create the old UX on a new codebase before implementing the UX you'd "like to have".

In a perfect world you might even want to do the UX change _first_ then rewrite the back end, but in reality if you did that you'd probably worry about losing support for the rewrite of the underlying plumbing once the new look has been deployed, since management often thinks of front-end refreshes as "delivery" of a new system.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Kind of ironic that the Google Groups interface has also been G+-ified, this page actually brings up the "Stop script?" dialog on Firefox for me.

<comment><USER6> Yeah, I don't mind the Gmail change at all, but the new Groups UI is really awful. Will have to start re-training my fingers to use Gmane.

<comment><USER7> Does anybody know how to opt out of the new Groups UI?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I just want to stick up for the new Gmail interface here. I find it to be both more aesthetically pleasing and more functional.

<comment><USER9> Some people I have spoken to didn't realise you could switch to compact mode.

I for one would prefer they retired the old UI and made the new UI more awesome.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> I know there are a lot of arguments for why the user owns a completely free interface that revolutionized electronic communication. I know that many of them will be stated below. I acknowledge that these arguments have weight and validity.

However...

This is a business decision. MaysonL stated that '...people trying to foist changes like this...should consider the fact that there are humans on the other end of the computer.'" Why exactly should they consider this? Has there been a vast migration? Are the people using the service paying them?

Has anyone noticed that Google is moving to enterprise platforms. More importantly, has anyone noticed that Google has an active branch pursuing RFPs an IDIQs in the federal space?

Google is looking for paying customers. This is how it goes. This is Hacker News for pete's sake. If you don't like GMail, make a product that works better and post it here. You'll probably get a lot of customers. (By which I mean freeloaders to whom you will have to provide massive memory and bandwidth)

Edit: fixed quotes

<comment><USER11> >> Google is looking for paying customers. This is how it goes.

That's the way it should go. I am very glad to pay 50 bucks a year for my google apps.

I want to pay for it because I want the company that is storing and backing up my data to be profitable. I want them to have the mindset of having paying customers so they have to take care of their's customers data. I want them to focus on the product being good, ever evolving, and profitable. And gmail is exactly that.[1]

[1] Ok, I don't know if Gmail as product is profitable, but I do hope they go in that direction

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> <http://vimeo.com/29965463>

At 18:00 it's revealed that Larry Page initiated the complete redesign the day he became CEO.

</comment><comment><USER12> All these design changes are done to increase revenue. When they talk about streamlining the experience, it's about giving ads a more prominent position across all their products and not just search.

<comment><USER13> Proof?

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> hardcore lovers of old interface vs reduced complexity and increased maintainability of codebase

sorry but you guys are never important. you are not even 1% of user base and you will be abandoned and that is good

</comment><comment><USER15> Thank god for the "basic" interface.

</comment><comment><USER16> There will always be people who hate redesigns. People hate change. At my company, every time we've made something that we know is better than what came before it, there are people who bitch. After a while you learn to ignore that, which can be dangerous in itself. If everyone listened to these people we'd all be using Windows 95 still.</comment>


Ask HN: what is the hardest role to hire for? - <AUTHOR>

I was just looking to do a quick straw poll in to what positions people are finding it hardest to fill in their company or who would be most desired if you were looking to hire.
1. Developer 2. Designer 3. Growth Hacker
I know there are plenty of other choices so please leave them in the comments. <comment><USER2> [https://news.ycombinator.com/newpoll](https://news.ycombinator.com/newpoll)</comment>


JS stacktraces. The good, the bad, and the ugly. - <AUTHOR> http://blog.bugsnag.com/2014/01/12/js-stacktraces/

<comment><USER2> Please mind that wrapping code in a try-block will send (at least some) JS- engines directly into interpreter mode (no compile-mode, no JIT-mode) and this will have severe effects on the execution speed. I would not recommend this for production!

<comment><AUTHOR> Do you have details on which engines will have this issue?

In the actual Bugsnag notifier we avoid adding try/catch in Chrome/Opera because they don't need it (it also breaks "stop on unhandled exception" in the console).

<comment><USER2> To my humble knowledge this (interpreter mode) also applies to FF (which would be handled in the case of this application by the error-event anyway). I would consider it at least as a "legacy behavior". I think there is no JIT with try- blocks with any JS-engine.

I would suggest to do some speed tests with and without this wrapper.

Generally I would recommend to use a try-block only for some very small portions of code, if at all ... don't use them as a general tool ...

\----

Some references:

* "In particular, the optimizing compiler [V8] currently bails out on functions with try {} catch {} blocks!"

[http://www.html5rocks.com/en/tutorials/speed/v8/](http://www.html5rocks.com/en/tutorials/speed/v8/)

* JIT, try, catch, see the "Browserscope" at end of page (mind the extreme performance gain for normal functions without try-catch with Chrome 31/32 -- yes, named functions are still the speediest):

[http://jsperf.com/try-catch-jit/2](http://jsperf.com/try-catch-jit/2)

<comment><USER2> Thinking a bit further, but this is pure speculation (and quite over my level of insight into JS-engine-interna):

window.onerror gives you essentially a post mortem dump, as gives you the error message in the console (which now seems to be routed to the error- event). try-catch is essentially different in that it allows you to stay in the same execution context (call-stack, scope-chain, etc). It may well be that there is also a difference, when defining an error-eventListener inside a closure, as this would result in the same contextual necessities as a try- catch-clause (not in every aspect, but in some). Again, I would recommend some performance tests.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for your input :). I'll definitely do some more rigorous testing — so far I've just run a few test suites and gone "looks about the same".

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> I'd like to try this, but not having a TypeScript definition file is a barrier.

<comment><USER4> James from Bugsnag here, our notifer is fully open source ([https://github.com/bugsnag/bugsnag-js](https://github.com/bugsnag/bugsnag- js)) would gladly merge a pull request!

<comment><USER3> Good, if I do it I'll put it on Definitely Typed and send it your way to.

[https://github.com/borisyankov/DefinitelyTyped](https://github.com/borisyankov/DefinitelyTyped)</comment></comment></comment>


Learn to Code, It's Harder Than You Think - <AUTHOR> http://mikehadlow.blogspot.rs/2015/12/learn-to-code-its-harder-than-you-think.html <comment><USER3> I coded in high school as part of a class that was offered in school but didn't enjoy it then. Then our teachers said things like its like math - <USER2> are better at it than girls. I totally stayed away from coding till a few years back when I needed to use statistics packages to analyse my data. I had to write for loops and functions to make my models work on larger datasets. I learnt to code and was driven by more than 'it's a good career choice'. I know a doctor who learnt to program in C because his programmer did not understand the model the doctor was trying to create.

</comment><comment><USER4> I have to disagree. OP might be right, but before we establish that conclusion, we have to try these things first:

Teach coding from young age. Are you really surprised that 18 year old CS undergraduates fail their intro to programming when they have to learn in 11-22weeks what probably took me say 6 years to learn between the age of 11 and 17? I have a CS degree, but I'm also self taught.

We have to acknowledge the vast breadth of the field and split the teaching to different paths. There is a reason we have chemistry and biology and physics, although it's all just physics. And we start splitting super early on. The same is needed for coding.

And I agree with OP that the perception of the field is selecting (self- selecting), and again we have to change that before we assume that people are born to be programmers.

Also, they didn't add up the numbers, it's over a half with a CS degree (gotta count masters).

<comment><AUTHOR> Well that's exactly the OP's point. Do you need to start learning to be a surgeon at the age of 11? Or architect? Or electrical engineer?

If you say that you need to start to learn programming at the age of 11 then you acknowledge that programming is like music or painting or mathematics, the earlier you start the better you will be but only if you have aptitude for it. If you don't you'll always be a mediocre musician or painter or mathematician or programmer

<comment><USER4> But sergeons have been learning biology, chemistry and physics from early on (and they have like 10 years of secondary schooling, no one expects them to know how to cut people after two trimesters), architects have been learning math and doing arts (arts take time as you say), ees physics, math again. Even lawyers have been taught how to read and critically assess text from young age.

I am not sure this is a good argument, to be good at something you always have to do it for a long time.

There are things like "how to swap the value in two variables", that are trivial, but we should "teach" them way earlier, it's the way of thinking (and both functional and imperative is needed to absorb). Plus it will have great impact on people not following this career, because they will more often realize that they're doing repetitive tasks which could be automated. We would have much more pressure on software companies not to produce shitty software if people were as lazy as us programmers.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10676206](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10676206)</comment>


Ajit Pai doubts Elon Musk's SpaceX broadband-latency claims - <AUTHOR> https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2020/05/elon-musks-promise-of-low-latency-broadband-meets-skepticism-at-fcc/ <comment><USER2> Ajit Pai is irrelevant to technical arguments. He has a plausibly deniable ulterior motive. "Ajit Pai is proposing limits on SpaceX's ability to apply for funding from a $16 billion rural-broadband program."

I struggle to see how the American federal government is incentivizing innovation in any capacity. American innovation today stems [p.i.] entirely from the universities, startups and liberal society.</comment>


How to get a merchant account - a series of hoops - <AUTHOR> http://danieltenner.com/posts/0006-how-to-get-a-merchant-account.html

<comment><USER2> I just recently had very good luck with <http://paysimple.com/> They acted as the "friend" wheb applying to the bank who has been there and done it before. They took a look at my website before submitting it and warned me that banks would not go for an annual subscription - keep it monthly among a couple other pitfalls.

</comment><comment><USER3> That was pretty interesting, but left me wondering, if you're selling web services, why would one get a merchant account, versus signing up with Amazon Simple Pay or Google Checkout or Paypal? It seems like there, all you need is a bank account to dump funds into, and a little button on your site to send people to give their CC details to A/G/P.

I haven't processed CCs before, but I'd love to hear people's stories about it.

<comment><USER4> Paypal, Google Checkout, ASP aren't really professional enough. You can offer them as options, but you need to have a legit merchant service to gain user confidence.

<comment><USER5> I would like to hear more on this. Amazon and PayPal have similar published fee structures for low volume accounts. Over half the things I buy online use one of the big 3 or 4 "gateways". My feeling is that by buying through them I am getting more protection. I certainly like the fact that my credit card info isn't sitting around on many small mom and pop biz mysql DBs.

Are there any metrics showing my intuition is not correct?

<comment><USER6> That's what the article is saying if your storing it on "small mom and pop biz mysql DBs" they won't let you get a account.

You may buy through Paypal; but, most buyers don't.

<comment><USER5> That's what I'd like most substance on: most buyers don't like PayPal. This is counterintuitive to me as PayPal, et al. is adding an extra layer of assurance to the buyer on top of their credit card.

I am very interested in any metrics that show using a well known branding like PayPal, Amazon, Google, etc.. gets less transactions than having your own Vias/MC gateway.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I've been trying to obtain a merchant account for a US business I've started. Problem is, I'm a UK citizen, not a US one. Although I've got a US company and bank account, I've found every merchant requires a Social Security number (because of the Patriot act). I'm wondering what to do next - and whether I have to set up a UK company just to do the payment processing!

<comment><USER8> A federal tax id can usually be used in place of SSN.

<comment><USER9> The banks I've talked with want the SSN of someone who can qualify for a revolving line of credit equal to your transaction volume. ie, you want to do 30K of money per month, you have to be wealthy enough to swing a $30,000 unsecured bank loan. The "reserve balance" thing is no longer being offered.

<comment><USER7> The standard is to require a signature (or two) of a guarantor. I don't think they actually check the guarantor's bank account or credit limit though. That said I've only gone to dedicated merchants, and not banks.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> We got our merchant account from Chase Paymentech, and I wish we'd have just gotten it through PayPal directly. It's a two-step process. First, sign up for Website Payments Pro: [https://www.paypal.com/us/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_wp-pro- overvie...](https://www.paypal.com/us/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_wp-pro-overview- outside) That comes with something that looks like an internet merchant account. Then sign up for Payflow Pro (the former VeriSign gateway): [https://www.paypal.com/us/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_payflow-pro- ov...](https://www.paypal.com/us/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_payflow-pro-overview- outside)

Here's their FAQ on the matter: [https://www.paypal.com/us/cgi- bin/webscr?cmd=_payflow-pro-fa...](https://www.paypal.com/us/cgi- bin/webscr?cmd=_payflow-pro-faq-outside#Does_Payflow_Pro)

PayPal won't support you against chargebacks, and they cost more, but if you want to get set up without the headaches of applying to a bank, they're a great option.

</comment><comment><USER11> In past I've applied for merchant account through a middle party(there are tonnes across the web) that deals with the bank and authorize.net. It hasn't been a problem.

I wonder what the process is like if you directly go through a bank.

<comment><USER8> I work at a payment processor (PowerPay) and we typically approve or deny applications within a day as long as we have all the required information.

<comment><USER12> That's great to know!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> If you _don't_ store CC numbers -- i.e. you use your gateway to store that information -- does it make the merchant account application process any easier?

<comment><AUTHOR> Both yes and no.

In my experience, the bank _will_ trust you if you say that you've implemented a secure, PCI-DSS way to store credit card details. They'll also trust you if you say that you store the numbers on the gateway.

The important thing is to convey that you're aware of the issues, and you've dealt with them.

There is a liability issue with storing card numbers on your own servers, which, iirc, is that if you are breached, the numbers are stolen, and you are subsequently investigated and found not to be in compliance with PCI-DSS, you could lose your merchant account.

<comment><USER14> ..additionally to losing your merchant account, you may also pay heavy fine to visa and mastercard from what I've read

I've been looking at those things lately since I'm working on an ecommerce platform and it will be my server dealing with the my customers (who sell on my platform)' gateway... It's rather complicated..

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> What's the best way if you're a non-profit? Are there any banks or credit card processors who would waive fees for non-profits?

</comment><comment><USER16> If I am interested taking pre-orders on selling an item, but don't want to go through the hoops of a merchant account, what is the other options for accepting payment?

<comment><USER15> PayPal, Amazon's payments API, or Google Checkout. And possibly others I don't know about.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> Great post! I specifically like how it is written non-regionalised :) so the advice applies pretty much anywhere.

+1

</comment><comment><USER14> "Do you pay commissions to affiliates? You're automatically a higher fraud risk." Why is that? I can understand the reason for the other fraud risks but I don't see why paying commissions to affiliates is a fraud risk....

<comment><AUTHOR> Because then there is an obvious way to make "clean" money out of stolen credit card numbers via your service.

This is not an insurmountable problem, but it does mark you as a likely target for all sorts of internet fraudsters that would otherwise not be bothered about yet another project management application.

<comment><USER18> Even with your own merchant account, I would strongly advise against trying to run your own affiliate program (I've tried). There are just a host of legal and tax issues that will consume your time. Many of the largest sites (among them Netflix) still outsource their affiliate programs.

<comment><USER14> What company do you recommend for outsourcing my affiliate program?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Also: [http://stakeventures.com/articles/2009/03/24/how-do-go- about...](http://stakeventures.com/articles/2009/03/24/how-do-go-about- getting-a-credit-card-processor)

</comment><comment><USER20> I use cdgcommerce.com. I've tried a few different providers and they have been very helpful in answering my questions and you have the option of using their gateway or authorize.net

</comment><comment><USER21> I think at least for the initial startup period it would be a good idea to rely on Paypal or some similar service. The hassle of getting a merchant account might in some cases eat up too much of the founder(s)' precious time. Some successful retailers (like this indie game one: <http://2dboy.com/games.php>) continue rely on Paypal though they have a large user base. I think the best time to get a merchant account would be once the sales start rising above something like 10K/month or so. In that way, you'll (hopefully) have an account before your sales (again hopefully) hits 100K or so.

</comment><comment><USER12> In terms of merchants, who can you say has been the best and easiest to do deal with?</comment>


Show HN: 99designs of travel, experts compete to plan your vacation - <AUTHOR> http://battletrip.co/

<comment><USER2> how to join as a travel advisor??

<comment><USER3> Send us a quick email at contact [at] battletrip.co and tell us a bit about why you'd be great as a BattleTrip expert! :)</comment></comment>


Opting-out of Google Plus - <AUTHOR> http://scripting.com/stories/2011/06/30/optingoutOfGooglePlus.html <comment><USER2> I don't understand why in the middle of the article the author presents his political views and then links to them, unless this is a SEO bait using Google+ (Google Plus) as a keyword to drive page hits.</comment>


Ask HN: Could you ever hear a core dump? - <AUTHOR> Were there computers for which core dumps were a physical process? <comment><USER2> Computers with actual magnetic core memory were also really loud, so it would have been hard to hear any other detail.

Generally, the only noise you'd hear in response to a core dump was the programmer, screaming. Go Team S0C7!</comment>


Star Wars effect in Spotify - <AUTHOR> https://community.spotify.com/t5/Content-Questions/Star-Wars-Lightsaber-effect/m-p/1258862#M3377 <comment><USER2> awesome</comment>


Show HN: L2 – An untyped, unsafe, and unhygienic programming language - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/murisi/L2 <comment><AUTHOR> I designed a programming language, L2, a while ago by stripping C down to a minimal core and adding Lisp-style procedural macros to it. In addition to the original bootstrapping compiler written in C, I've now built a self-hosting compiler for it.

<comment><USER2> Well done. It looks awesome! I like how you can build it from C before doing a self hosted build. Do you have any further plans?

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks. No, no further plans at the moment. I just wanted to see what a program in L2 might look like.</comment></comment></comment>


Save Your Eyes on Chrome - <AUTHOR> https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/hacker-vision/fommidcneendjonelhhhkmoekeicedej/details?hl=en-US I am sure there are similar fixes for firefox, IE, etc. users.
But for Chrome, I just started using 'Hacker Vision' extension and it seems to work nicely: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/hacker-vision/fommidcneendjonelhhhkmoekeicedej/details?hl=en-US
I also have the 'Nicer Inverter' extension running simultaneously (https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/nicer-inverter/oichlckdgnbjkmhaebnnhibamjgpndkm?hl=en-US) -- this is actually my primary (always running) extension. I run 'Hacker Vision' for pages that 'Nicer Inverter' doesn't work on, e.g., Codeacademy.com).
Just thought it was a worthwhile tip to share with my fellow hackers. Save your eyes! <comment><USER2> High Contrast extension --- on the chrome store - works the same way.

</comment><comment><USER3> This just inverts the colors, so it really only works on plaintext.

</comment><comment><USER4> Thanks, I've been looking for something like this.</comment>


Plant-based "meat" is so tasty that Europe's meat industry has to bite back - <AUTHOR> https://www.economist.com/news/business/21731869-dutch-vegetarian-butcher-latest-come-under-attack-its-labelling-plant-based-meat <comment><USER2> So this guy has cracked the secret to mouthwatering meaty goodness, where others have failed?

Excuse me if I seem extremely skeptical. I'm sure his products are tasty, but they're not fooling anyone.

"Indistinguishable from the real thing!"? Yeah, no. Maybe for overly-processed charcuterie products that are mostly potato starch anyway. But absolutely not when it comes to actual cuts of meat.

It's basically all soy, and I'm sorry, but I've tried a ton of soy "meat substitutes", and they don't even come close.

<comment><USER3> In the Netherlands, the pastry section in Albert Heijn features "sausage rolls", and I tell you, the meat-substitues ones taste good, and very close to the ones that contain actual animal protein.

It's not because their product is incredibly meat-like, it's because the meat product doesn't taste much like meat. If there's not much difference, why not opt for a more environmentally friendly option?

The veggie butcher's chicken nuggets, hot dog sausages and mince taste delicious. It's hard to tell the difference between actual meat based chilli beans and the ones based on meat substitute mince.

I can't vouch for other meat alternative products. Most of them taste like crap. Heavily spiced carbs that only slightly resemble the product they try to imitate. The veggie butcher's produce is nutritionally (at least macros) very close to meat. Around 20% of protein. Carb heavy meat substitutes is my pet peeve and if it's not high in protein, it's not entering my body.

<comment><USER4> Agree

Most people tend to overestimate the quality of the majority of meat consumed - it's not filet steak

It's ground beef, sausages, pressed shredded chicken, thin strips, etc, etc

<comment><USER2> I'm sure it's perfectly adequate for processed meat, where you're not really tasting the meat itself as much as the salt, sugar and other spices added to it.

If they can make a schawarma meat substitute that tastes the same as actual schawarma meat and has similar mouthfeel, I'm perfectly OK with that.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> If it were really better, they wouldn't have to give it a deceptive name to get people to eat it.

<comment><USER6> "better" is a vague word and depends on your goals. Is a 3-wheeled car still a car? It does pretty much the same thing. Will people be confused as to whether it's a "real car" like the 4-wheel cars? No.

Likewise, nobody is being fooled by this vegetarian meat. And seriously, given that it is more expensive than meat, the "average" person isn't going to accidentally buy vegetarian meat without realizing it.

This is the usual protectionism a desperate industry that is already headed for (self) destruction. Whether it's a bird flu that causes the culling of millions of chickens (happens here in NL every few years), or the problem of having nowhere to put the enormous amounts of manure from the dairy and cow industry, or the problem of antibiotic restrictions, or so on and so on, the change is inevitable.

True vegetarians don't really care too much about these products. They're quite expensive, and many of us have a particular love of good vegetables and cooking techniques. The meat is not really missed. But for new vegetarians or people who have been told by their doctors to shift their diets to less meat, these products are nice to have around.

<comment><USER2> "True vegetarians don't really care too much about these products. They're quite expensive, and many of us have a particular love of good vegetables and cooking techniques. The meat is not really missed."

Just because you've chosen to willfully deny yourself the flavor and texture of meaty goodness, that doesn't mean that other people don't still crave it, whether animal- or vegetable-sourced.

And no, I do cook a lot of veggie dishes (my girlfriend is a strong proponent of traditional German veggie dishes) and every single one that has been touted as "so meaty and satisfying" has definitely been found lacking in that area.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER2> I don't want my previous comment to seem like I'm 100% against this, but there are some significant issues. The biggest one is availability, closely followed by price. I live in Denmark, not the Netherlands, so can I even buy these products? I've tried Quorn and a number of other meat substitute products available here, and I'm sorry, but they're simply bland or even downright repulsive.

Secondly, what is the price difference when compared to actual meat? And I don't mean the absolute cheapest possible meat option, I want to compare with good quality organic meat, something where at least some significant steps have been taken to improve conditions for the animals.

<comment><USER7> I've heard Quorn has gotten better since I last tried it a decade or two ago...

<comment><USER2> It's acceptable in something like a lasagna, but the "chicken" fillets leave a lot to be desired.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> There's a big increase in other vegetarian alternatives too in store selections. Even in microwave meals. Even MacDonalds.

</comment><comment><USER9> While a case can be made for whether the products taste equivalent to real meat, the controversy is on whether a non-meat substitute can actually use a meat name. I personally think if they are famous for what they do, then there is no deception. In which case the Dutch politicians are acting foolish.

<comment><USER10> This has happened before. When the herbal crowd started putting 'tea' in the name, but there was no actual tea in the product, there was some politicking. But the relevant committee decided that herbals were helping people buy more hot-water-based products across the board, so they relented.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> Of late it's been said that one of the most detrimental things to ingest, from a healthy eating perspective, is highly processed foods, things like most flour, canned goods, etc.

Would this be considered a "highly processed" industrial food? If so, would people consider it a healthy alternative?

</comment><comment><USER12> I've recently switched to a mostly-vegetarian diet and have been enjoying Beyond Meat and Gardein products. The only thing that worries me is the "closed source" nature of such products. Tasty plant based protein is a tough problem to solve and people are doing that these days with a lot of hard work and investment but i think for something as basic as food the process of making them should be more open.

I know that the companies need to make money and the investors need to get their returns but maybe we should have more oversight/openness in how these products are made.

</comment><comment><USER13> I preferred to eat meat every day since I remember. I tried once lately for a couple of days to not eat meat. Mainly eating tofu as a substitute with some lentil.

On third day of such a diet I was feeling very bad. I was feeling weak, nauseous and a bit shaky. I tried to eat sugar in form of candy bars. It passed after I have eaten a few sandwiches with lots of meat.

Was it wrong what I did? Is my body programmed to digest meat and can't easily switch to other sources of protein? When I'm not eating meat I feel weaker.

<comment><USER14> That's rather strange. It really depends on what your original diet consisted of. You might have done a complete 180 without giving your body time to adjust. This is not the typical experience of cutting meat out of your diet as you should have gotten more energy and less fatigue after a meal.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> Great. So someone figured out how to make a product that looks like and tastes like meat, and it likely is hydrolized soy protein with a nice mixture of artificial flavors and colors. Yeah, why not harm humans instead of animals.

I think a better approach to the problems that come with our "out of control meat consumption" is to drastically reduce meat consumption and eat it consciously. Much better than getting lost in the artificial flavors of frankenfoods .. No one really needs to eat meat more than once or twice a week.

<comment><USER2> Have you got any sources to back up your claims of deleterious effects on human health? Any at all? I will remind you that the claims of phytoestrogen interfering with human reproductive ability have not been proven, despite rigerous study.

<comment><USER15> No, nothing other than my personal experience (and of my partner) while eating a vegetarian and later exclusively vegan diet for almost 2 years. We ate a lot of fake foods, highly processed "health foods", most of them soy based and looking back at that time I can't say that we felt very good and healthy.

I believe we, as humans, do best with foods, which ingredients we can pronounce and source ourselves and put together without a lab and complicated checmical processes.

If you are ok with consuming foods of questionable "nature" because nobody could yet prove to you that they can be bad for human health, go for it. But I am going with my guts here, because that works for me.

<comment><USER2> That is probably more a case of bad nutritional choices, and not the fault of the soy products themselves. Most highly processed "health foods" are anything but. They're usually loaded with sugar.

Instead of trying to replicate an omnivorous diet by substituting all the meat you ate with substitutes, you should try branching out into an actual primarily vegetarian diet instead. Instead of substitute beef in your hamburger, try a portobello mushroom instead.

You sound like one of those paranoiacs who rail on about "chemicals in food!", without actually knowing what you're talking about.

<comment><USER15> I can assure you that the highly processed health foods I ate back then, were not loaded with sugar, because I consciously tried to eat as little sugar as necessary.

You are quick to judge, calling me a "paranoiac" that doesn not know what he's talking about, based on a handful of sentences I wrote. I studied nutrition and I have experienced my body on many different diets. What I can say for myself, is that there is one important factor, that matters way more than the food taken in.

> Instead of trying to replicate an omnivorous diet by substituting all the > meat you ate with substitutes, you should try branching out into an actual > primarily vegetarian diet instead. Instead of substitute beef in your > hamburger, try a portobello mushroom instead.

Ehm. So you are writing this as a response to me saying, that replicating an omnivorous diet with some secret mixture which resembles real meat so closely that it is difficult to distinguish from it, might be a bad idea? Maybe should have told me 10 years ago when it mattered and not after I just said the same thing.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> ground meat needs to fight back.

I don't think "meat" is at the level that can replicate ribs, roasts, bone-in steaks, barbecue brisket and burnt ends yet.

when they do, then real meat better start fighting hard.

</comment><comment><USER17> The amount of farming land destroyed for plants is far worse than grazing land however.

<comment><USER18> care to back that up with some facts? Off the top of my memory a beef cow requires at least 2 acres of land and an average of about 60 litres of water a day. Granted plants require more water per acre but 2 acres grows a lot more food per acre than any cow.

looking at your post in another way, the reason more land is used for plants is because of feed for the cattle such as soy and corn, not for human consumption.

<comment> King-Aaron Yeah, even an arbitrary ten-second glance at google will let you know that it's substantially worse to have grazing land for cattle than it is to have cropping land.

Beef, on average, requires 16726m^3 per ton of product, whereas wheat requires 1437m^3/ton

[http://waterfootprint.org/media/downloads/Report12.pdf](http://waterfootprint.org/media/downloads/Report12.pdf)

Not to mention that to successfully raise cattle year-round, you need to rotate feed crops for them as well. So you require not only land and resources for the cattle themselves, but also for their feed.

<comment><USER19> Not to disagree, but raw tonnage of food product is only one measure of food value. Nutritional composition and density is at least as important if not more so.

Meat and wheat serve different nutritional roles.

<comment> King-Aaron Very true.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


iPhone 7 could be WATERPROOF, new report claims ahead of Apple launch this week - <AUTHOR> http://www.mirror.co.uk/tech/iphone-7-could-waterproof-new-8775339 <comment><USER2> So innovative! Nobody else ever came up with this, Apple again at the cutting edge! (Typing this on a 2014 Samsung S5. Guess what: IP67 certified, just as the Completely Groundbreaking iPhone that is yet to launch now, two years later)

<comment><USER2> And, of course, _fewer_ features. That's unique, at least.</comment></comment>


My Experience Busking in San Francisco - <AUTHOR> https://stevetjoa.com/busking/ <comment><USER2> From the article:

 _While I 'm playing, I'll routinely see a policeman ask a person sleeping on the ground to sit upright. I'm not sure if that's because of the civil sidewalks ordinance or to "prevent obstructions"._

I don't know about San Francisco specifically, but in some cities police forces use this sort of instruction to identify people who need medical assistance: If you're able to respond to the police, you're probably fine, but if you just lay there then you're probably incapacitated by alcohol, drugs, or some other medical condition.

<comment><USER3> In NYC (and I think San Francisco) it's illegal to sleep on the sidewalks. NYPD enforces this pretty consistently, SFPD on the other hand I'm pretty sure they just do it to make sure the person isn't dead.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Years ago, there was a man who would stand on Market St. wearing a suit and just kind of dance back and forth singing "Gotta keep smiling". It wasn't a song as such, just a refrain that he would roll around over and over, and he would shuffle and sing and point at passersby and smile, encouraging them to smile.

One day my dad stopped and asked him, "You seem sane and well-educated, why do you do this?" (I'm paraphrasing here.) The man told him, "Sir, I make a hundred dollars a day, tax-free."

(My dad saluted him and walked on.)

<comment><USER5> Plus it beats working your ass off in most professions...

<comment><USER6> Especially given that post-tax you would be making only a little bit more as an entry level software engineer.

<comment><USER7> I doubt that very much. $100/day post-tax = $36500, pre-tax is't about $42000. If you're making anywhere close to $42000/year as an entry level software engineer in SF, you're doing it wrong. Even entry level folks should be able to start at double that.

<comment><USER8> Commenter _therein_ did not specify the locale of the entry-level software engineer. Busking is much, much more reliant on locale than programming.

<comment><USER7> I was keeping it in the same context. The buskin therein was in SF, so I made a comparison with a software engineer salary in SF. If the busking was in Alabama, I'd expect the busking revenue to be quite different, and so would a comparable engineer's salary in that locale.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Here is a video of Joshua Bell ([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joshua_Bell](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joshua_Bell)) playing a 3.5 million dollar violin in the subway for 45 minutes and making $32:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hnOPu0_YWhw](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hnOPu0_YWhw)

<comment><USER5> Well, obviously it doesn't matter how expensive your violin is, or how good you are at your music genre -- it's about how popular the genre/tune is, and when busking, how likable you are (plus, putting on a good entertaining show, with emphasis on the "show" part, e.g. not subtle classical skills).

<comment><USER10> And location.

<comment><USER5> Yeah. He would have faired better in some Vienna subway station around Christmas time...

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> The earnings surprised me. I know a decent software engineer whose effective hourly rate is embarrassingly close to the lower limit of Steve's reported $15–50 range. On the other hand, that's busking in SF.

<comment><AUTHOR> Steve here. Thanks for reading! Those earnings are certainly not sustainable over eight hours in a day, nor over every day of the week. But they are attainable in strategically timed bursts. Some earnings are also skewed by a very few who donate $20.

<comment><USER11> Thank you for sharing your experience!

Doubly interesting to me since I'm thinking of performing as well.

The kind of performance I'm considering, though, would be of a more obscure style and requiring some electronic gear (worth $xxxx), so I'd probably go for a collaboration with a friend at least to have a sense of safety.

Regarding eight hours a day, as a software engineer most days I personally pull off about 5 hours of actual focus tops, though maybe that's just me.

<comment><AUTHOR> I think that's a great idea. Electronic aids, despite the overhead, have a higher ceiling than a feeble acoustic violin. It can be more unique, more exotic, and more easily heard.

My focus on software is also 0-5 hours a day, and those hours are only before noon and after 10 pm.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I usually give a dollar or two to performers, especially if they look homeless, unless they are horribly out of tune, in which case sometimes I still tell them the useless advice to get in tune and give them a dollar.

</comment><comment><USER13> Back in the late 80s, my brother (baroque cello), a friend and I (Baroque Violins) started busking in Harvard Square for fun.

One of our favourites was the Mozart Organ Sonatas. We generally made enough money to buy beers at the end of the evening.

I guess my biggest memory was the time we started playing in front of Au Bon Pain when we just started out. I thought we were doing OK until some guy, with a grim fierce smile, took out a fistful of pennies and chucked them, one at a time, into the violin case. Apparently we had taken over the spot where a much-loved group regularly played. He made it more than obvious that we were not welcome there. We had no idea there was politics involved!

We moved on quickly, with our tails between our legs.

One of the nicest things we got was a sketch by a local artist. It's still got pride of place in my violin case.

</comment><comment><USER14> I used to busk, playing guitar and singing in Bradford (UK) city centre in the early 1990s. I wasn't very good, but it was funny. £30 on a good day? Not bad for a couple of hours.

</comment><comment><USER15> I busked in Covent Garden in the middle of the summer for about an hour and made something like £100. That's literally my only experience though so it's probably an anomaly.

<comment><USER16> What instrument and music?

<comment><USER5> Bassoon and Miami Bass style hip hop.

<comment><USER17> I encounter too many buskers to feel like paying on a regular basis, but I'd have dropped some cash in your case if you were even remotely able to pull this off!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> I wonder if those impeccably dressed Jehova's Witnesses in SF subway stations collect data on their pamphleteering/conversion efforts

<comment><USER19> They use pamphlet a/b testing as a service for continuous improvement of user acquisition

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> I used to busk with a friend on NYC subways. We each made $100 a day for 6 hours of singing consistently.

<comment><USER21> That seems incredibly low, was it a while ago? Considering how much money I see people connect sitting silently with a cardboard sign, I would think performing in NYC would net a lot more.

<comment><USER20> Its actually a lot more than most random beggars make - and at $17 an hour, more than many New Yorkers.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> Just sent a week in SF staying on Union Square loving the trumpeter who played every night. Amazing tone, clearly a professional.

<comment><USER23> Some years ago I was in Boston. Walking through a park somewhere near the Boston Park Plaza hotel, or Legal Seafoods, on a sunny afternoon, I saw a large man with a bald head, playing a trumpet, surrounded by a few admiring kids, listening. Reminded me of the Wizard of Oz or some such fairy tale. I also listened to him play for a while before getting back to my meeting.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> > And I fully understand the picture of inequity created when someone donates > to a musician while homeless people are on the ground yards away.

"Inequity"? Yea, right. I sure feel inequitably about those who make our public spaces more vs less pleasant.

</comment><comment><USER25> My son would play his bagpipes at Penguin and Pirates games. The people of Pittsburgh are quite generous. Perhaps partly because of their Scottish heritage--there's even an endowed chair of Highland piping at CMU.

</comment><comment><USER26> Steve - how do you feel about people taking photos or video of you?

<comment><AUTHOR> I welcome it. I enjoy the challenge of staying focused when I notice out of the corner of my eye a crowd forming or people filming.

Sometimes I cope by playing with my eyes closed. Violinists have options where to position their eyes: on their bow, on their fingers (rare, but helpful sometimes in practice), out into space, or closed. For example, James Ehnes and Hilary Hahn look at their bows, but Itzhak Perlman and many others play with their eyes closed. I focus on the bow, but when someone is taking a video, I might close my eyes to remove the distractions.

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> I find it saddening that so few people care for culture that he and his peers have even had to consider busking, instead of playing formally at a concert.

<comment><USER28> I don't understand why you think that even in a place where lots of people care about culture one can simply decide to play at a concert whenever they want, especially if they are still students. And he specifically says he's busking as an alternative to practicing at home, not as an alternative to playing at a concert.

In my limited experience, places where there is more interest in erudite music also have _more_ people busking, not less, since there are more players overall.

<comment><AUTHOR> Steve here. Indeed, I already play at least four orchestra concerts per year and a number of chamber performances. Busking provides a performance opportunity of a different sort by playing solo music which is more exposed and musically dense.

And yes, you're also correct that for some instruments, concerts are not easy to come by. Our orchestra has a wait list of 70 flutes! Our #1 organizational challenge is figuring out how to provide more performance opportunities to more people in a financially sustainable way.

(Incidentally, I have seen one solo flautist busking in Powell Station. He was a high school student.)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> Since I can't give some coins as I live in another timezone - if you have Paypal I will donate a few bucks.</comment>


The Web Marketer's Guide to Reddit - <AUTHOR> https://builtvisible.com/web-marketers-guide-to-reddit/ <comment><USER2> > By participating, Reddit helps you develop a feel for what will work on the > Internet, which obviously benefits your content ideation. By accruing Karma, > you're really evidencing the fact that you understand the site and can find > your way around. In doing so, you'll develop that all important sixth sense > for "what works on the Internet".

Hah. That's not how Reddit works, although that's a better sentiment than the "post linkbait" that I was expecting.</comment>


Google and Amazon are now in the oil business - <AUTHOR> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3n8txX3144 <comment><USER2> Hear me out, this is not a defense or attack, only a thought made aloud...

We need to reduce our carbon emissions. Even if/when we do, or die trying, it appears we will need oil for non-fuel petroleum products (at least temporarily) [1]. The process for extracting and transforming that oil should be as efficient as possible. Therefore, providing ML tech to oil companies is not necessarily "bad". However...

Time and time again, we are reminded that we should not ever leave morality up to businessmen. Ethics cannot be outsourced. Get out and vote for leaders who will keep tech from being used in damaging ways.

1\. [https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=41&t=6](https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=41&t=6)</comment>


Confnow - Painless 24/7 Free Conference Calls - <AUTHOR> http://confnow.com/ <comment><USER2> Just tested this out with a friend. Mad simple. Great service.

Are there plans for more numbers to call?

Also I'm a little confused, when I "Secure" a custom pin, I just enter that in at the prompt on the phone? Instead of the one it shows on the steps list?

<comment><USER3> Yo! Thanks for giving it a test.

If you add a security pin, then after you enter your conference room number, it'll prompt you for the pin you entered (think of it like a conference room password).

Also: we're in the process of getting more numbers. :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Where are these calls terminated? I ask because I am always concerned that these sorts of services are being monetized by pumping traffic[1] into Iowa.

[1]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traffic_pumping>

<comment><USER5> Pennsylvania, which you can tell from their area code. It doesn't look like traffic pumping.

<comment><USER4> > It doesn't look like traffic pumping.

What makes you feel confident about this? The assertion that "We get paid from termination" strikes me as very much that sort of arrangement. Perhaps I'm abusing terminology.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I tried calling the number from Google Voice but it couldn't complete the call. I get maybe one ring before it disconnects. Anyone else having this issue?

<comment><USER3> Google voice blocks our exchange numbers in Pennsylvania for some reason :( We're currently expanding into multiple datacenters--so we'll have new exchange numbers shortly. But it seems that our 610-XXX numbers are all blocked by Google.

<comment><USER7> "In order to avoid paying high connection fees to traffic-pumping carriers, Google Voice has blocked calls to some of these carriers." - <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traffic_pumping>

Looks like you are traffic pumping after all.</comment></comment></comment>


Next Windows 10 update triggers outrage by continuing to promote Edge - <AUTHOR> https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/09/next-windows-10-update-triggers-outrage-by-continuing-to-promote-edge/ <comment><USER2> who the heck at Microsoft when reviewing that feature thought "no problems! Green light!"??</comment>


Apple's new Objective-C to Javascript Bridge - <AUTHOR> http://www.steamclock.com/blog/2013/05/apple-objective-c-javascript-bridge/ <comment><USER2> > The most interesting possiblility would be that this is the start of Apple's > evolution away from Objective-C into promoting a higher-level language for > their platform

The thing is: Why would they want to transform away? As it is now Obj-C is pretty sane. The memory management is now a non-brainer so that even people who come from managed languages can grasp it. GCD is great for concurrency. And using C and C++ based 3rd party libraries is trivial.

The existing developer base is fine with Obj-C.

So maybe Apple wants to attract new developers? But why now? If they really wanted to attract new developers to their platform they would have chosen a different language for the iPhone SDK back when they released it first. But nowadays Apple's platforms have more than enough developers.

Also: Why JavaScript? JS itself is a terrible language with many inconsistencies and is unfit for larger projects - which most native applications are. There are far better and saner languages to base a new SDK upon.

<comment><USER3> Maybe I've just swallowed the Kool-Aid, but I don't see the putative benefits of Apple's switching platforms. I'm also not clear on how many people there are who a) can write non-trivial software and b) can't learn a C derivative language who c) would actually write software for Apple's platforms. It just seems like a pretty small set.

And, if Apple were to switch, why would they pick a language as shitty as _Javascript_?

<comment><USER4> Closures + Lexical Scoping + Prototypical Inheritance makes for a pretty great language IMHO.

<comment><USER5> Those things are indeed nice, but they can't defend against the other insanities that come in the box with them.

<comment><USER6> Only a subset of Javascript is useful, just like how only a subset of C++ is useful, just like how only a subset of Objective-C is useful, just like how only a subset of Haskell is useful, ...

<comment><USER7> Wasn't there a saying: "90% of everything is crap"?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> This just seems like an evolution of the existing Obj-C/JS bridge (namely, WebScriptObject [https://developer.apple.com/library/mac/#documentation/Cocoa...](https://developer.apple.com/library/mac/#documentation/Cocoa/Reference/WebKit/Classes/WebScriptObject_Class/Reference/Reference.html#//apple_ref/doc/c_ref/WebScriptObject) and WebScripting protocol [https://developer.apple.com/library/mac/#documentation/Cocoa...](https://developer.apple.com/library/mac/#documentation/Cocoa/Reference/WebKit/Protocols/WebScripting_Protocol/Reference/Reference.html) ).

The main (very welcome) advancement seems to be that they've pushed this capability down from WebKit into JSCore. Today you can basically already do everything that's being shown in OP I think, you just were required to create an invisible WebView to host your JavaScript environment. You can easily expose classes to WebKit/JSCore (using KVC), and interact with JS objects from ObjC, and arrays, strings, etc. are auto-converted. The WebKit requirement is pretty annoying though, and as V8 has shown us, having a drop dead simple way of throwing JS into an app has some huge benefits.

<comment><USER9> Totally agree it's more like an evolution, and I doubt it will be exposed on iOS at all, which means the same developer rules will apply and downloaded JS will have to be running inside a UIWebView.

The fact is that after thinking about the iOS developer rules and what is currently available in iOS, it's totally doable to write a true Javascript bridge that respect all the requirement from the iOS rules and still let your JS code access all the ObjC runtime, in a totally transparent way aka I am able to write the following:

      var userName = userNameTextfield.getText();
      var helloMsg = "Hello " + userName;
      messageLabel.setText(helloMsg);

The first line will directly get the text value of a UITextField (no callback used here), and it will end up calling directly the 'text' property on the UITextField. So the JS bridge works transparently where JS code call native ObjC code directly (without using callback) and obviously ObjC can directly access the JS side... there are a few gotcha but the full system works beautifully and surprising enough performance are quite good. It took me a few years to come up with the cleanest solution and implementation.

I am currently working on integrating such piece of code into some of my apps and have them released on the AppStore. In fact if anyone good in JS is interested I would really appreciate some help to get that bridge off the ground since I truly believe there is a lot of great opportunities with a JS bridge to ObjC that respect all iOS rules. My contact info are my HN profile.

Edit: minor typo fixed

<comment><USER10> I accepted a pod to cocoapods recently that does most of what you're after: <https://github.com/marcuswestin/WebViewJavascriptBridge>

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> My guess is that this would be fast enough to build almost any Mac app and many iOS apps. The bigger question for me is, how gross would it be to deal with the "Objective-C-ness" of the Cocoa APIs through JavaScript?

<comment><USER12> Functionally, this appears to be identical to JavaScriptCore's longstanding C bridge [1]. If Objective-C isn't your preference, there's nothing stopping you from calling into the C bridge from C++ or just plain C.

On iOS, developers have had to compile their own version of JavaScriptCore to use this API. That's the basis for HTML5 game engines like Impact [2], and some HTML5-to-Objective-C middleware platforms.

Unfortunately, until Apple says otherwise, this version of JSC is still subject to Apple's App Store review guidelines [3]. Thanks to guideline 2.8, you can't have your app, running JSC, execute any JavaScript that doesn't ship within the bundle of your app.

I'd like to see that rule change, someday. Exposing this Objective-C API in a future iOS release isn't going to change the status quo.

[1] - [http://developer.apple.com/library/mac/#documentation/Carbon...](http://developer.apple.com/library/mac/#documentation/Carbon/Reference/WebKit_JavaScriptCore_Ref/_index.html)

[2] - <http://impactjs.com>

[3] - <https://developer.apple.com/appstore/guidelines.html>

<comment><USER11> All good points. The big difference with the bridge going to Objective-C, though, is that I believe it is now possible to build a native UI by calling right from JavaScript to Objective-C. Impact is interesting for games and canvas-like rendering, but what I'd love is to be able to build the models and controllers of a highly performant, native-UI iOS app using JavaScript and UIKit. Sort of like Appcelerator with a layer removed.

<comment><USER12> That's fair. This does save one ugly, extra step that I didn't mention, which would be to call into the Objective-C runtime's C API [1] to dispatch messages and introspect Objective-C classes.

Should make it easier for developers to build their own middleware platform without getting too deep into reams of C boilerplate.

[1] - [https://developer.apple.com/library/ios/#documentation/Cocoa...](https://developer.apple.com/library/ios/#documentation/Cocoa/Reference/ObjCRuntimeRef/Reference/reference.html)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> The "Siracusa County" reference refers to this Hypercritical episode: <http://5by5.tv/hypercritical/15>

<comment><USER14> Completely off-topic, but those (who like me, liked _Hypercritical_ very much, but aren't active on Twitter to learn these things there), Siracusa has a new show here: <http://atp.fm>

It's not as good as Hypercritical, but is better than nothing!

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> > The most interesting possiblility would be that this is the start of Apple's > evolution away from Objective-C into promoting a higher-level language for > their platform

That seems like an enormous leap of speculation.

</comment><comment><USER16> A fast objc/javascript bridge that works on iOS and OSX today: <https://github.com/marcuswestin/WebViewJavascriptBridge>

</comment><comment><USER17> This has already been done by JSCocoa. <http://inexdo.com/JSCocoa>

It's only interesting because Apple is officially doing it themselves.

</comment><comment><USER18> I never had a big problem with Obj-C. It felt like any other language other than having to manually manage memory. The problem I struggled with was Cocoa as a whole. It may no longer be the case but not too long ago, there was a lack of consistency between the different APIs / SDKs. Most would written and accessed with Obj-C. A few would still be in Ansi-C. For someone who isn't a C expert, this just killed me.

Does this bridge help fix that?

<comment><USER19> Yeah, like the iOS contacts API. I really like Objective C. (I better since I write it full time, lol)

<comment><USER18> Geez that's still a problem? They really need to change that.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> This will probably be Mac-only. It will not appear on iOS unless Apple also ships BridgeSupport on iOS. BridgeSupport is needed for binding all the Obj-C parts that don't have introspection capabilities (like the C parts).

This is how most of the other full feature bridges work, PyObjC, RubyCocoa/MacRuby, LuaCocoa. Otherwise you are hamstrung anytime you need to deal with something like a C struct (e.g. NSPoint).

<comment><USER12> As I recall, BridgeSupport created indexes to C symbols, enumerations and functions by producing XML files [1] that corresponded to C APIs like CoreGraphics, and code you produced yourself.

You don't necessarily need BridgeSupport to call out to Objective-C.

Speaking of BridgeSupport, does anybody know where the most recent source code for that project went? It seems to have been removed from Apple's Mac OS Forge after Laurent Sansonetti left Apple. A shame.

[1] - For example, <http://merbist.com/2011/02/19/bridgesupport-build/> . The chapter referenced from O'Reilly's excellent MacRuby book does a better job of explaining the whole process.

<comment><USER17> BridgeSupport also supplies .dylibs containing inline functions/macros that don't have symbols/linkage in the main framework.

While it is possible to workaround the lack of BridgeSupport, if Apple doesn't supply it, most developers are not going to go through the effort of using it. And if Apple doesn't supply it on iOS, they aren't going to make life nice for developers doing this (continue bans on dynamic libraries for loading the .dylib containing missing symbols, on mprotect which is horribly useful for things like subclassing and block generation and JIT).

I don't know where the source went. I'm sad to hear that. If you find a copy, let me know.

<comment><USER12> You may be in luck, sir or ma'am. It looks like the one man army behind Mobiruby found a copy;

<https://github.com/mobiruby/BridgeSupport>

Which he found from a really neat looking archive for popular open source projects, at that. Bookmarking.

<http://code.metager.de/source/>

Just made a few fixes to get the BridgeSupport framework to compile on 10.8. Might issue a pull request.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Cue the typical and tiresome language-wars snark. (And time to burn some karma.) This kind of behavior is often just a shallow and distinctly anti- intellectual "irrational jingoism." If you read between the lines, so much of it just comes down to "I don't like X. I don't understand X. Doing X in the programming I do wouldn't work. It just must be bad."

That's so often just about outward signs. Programming is complicated, and the fields of programming and Computer Science are vast. If you're not aware of how miniscule a sliver of the whole thing you command, odds are you're just another unwitting Dunning Krueger victim.

Don't judge a language by what you find strange. Don't judge a language just because it wouldn't suit what you do. Figure out what makes it powerful and why it works. Until you do that, please just _shut up_ and don't add to the noise.

</comment><comment><USER21> What does this mean for tech like Phonegap/Cordova?

</comment><comment><USER22> So with this marriage of Objective-C and JavaScript:

How much longer until we can develop native applications without Objective-C entirely?

A polygot/trans compiler for xcode would make me melt.

<comment><USER23> _> How much longer until we can develop native applications without Objective-C entirely?_

You already can --

Lisp: Nu

Ruby: MacRuby/RubyMotion

Basic: Objective-Basic

<comment><USER17> Python: PyObjC

Lua: LuaCocoa, LuaWax, TLC

JavaScript: JSCocoa

Perl: CamelBones

More: <http://cocoadev.com/wiki/CocoaBridges>

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> The future is arriving- slowly. Hopefully soon we will be able to make the core of our apps cross-platform by leveraging languages like Javascript, and only resorting to platform-specific code for UI layers.

Here's hoping.

<comment><USER2> Uhm, why 'soon'? Just write the core of your application in C++ and marry said core with platform specific languages for UI code.

<comment><USER24> C++ is a lot less accessible than JavaScript, though.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> How does this compare to cocos2d/zynga's JSB? The JavaScript Bridge

<comment><USER26> Cocos2d uses SpiderMonkey, not JavaScriptCore.

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> Are the interpreted code download app store rules still in place? ie can an app download additional JS at runtime or does everything still have to bundled?

</comment><comment><USER28> You can already use this with cycript on a jailbroken iPhone: <http://www.cycript.org/>

</comment><comment><USER29> Every HN post that happens to mention Javascript:

         "Javascript is so shitty though!"

         "I agree!"

         "Javascript isn't so shitty once you get used to it"

         "It's like lisp!"

         "No it isn't. Javascript is terrible and everyone who likes it is a moron"

         "No they aren't!"

         "YES THEY ARE"

I don't know, should we expect more from the discourse here than just rehashing the same argument over and over again?

</comment><comment><USER30> great for people wanting to script games and don't want to get into LUA :)

<comment><USER20> _> great for people wanting to script games and don't want to get into LUA :)_

Beware of people who are portraying themselves as "savvy" yet don't know how to spell Lua.

<comment><USER30> Wow...

<comment><USER20> Beware of people who make "Wow" conclusions on very little data.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> Thank god, obj-c is horrendous... I'm not sure what the point of using JS would be over something like MacRuby/RubyMotion...

<comment><USER11> Well for one, modern JavaScript engines are considerably faster than Ruby.</comment></comment>


A Language for Embedded Developers - <AUTHOR> http://whitequark.org/blog/2012/12/06/a-language-for-embedded-developers/

<comment><USER2> Reference counting in general has been an interest of mine since even when I'm writing server-side software it's usually pathological-case latency rather than raw throughput that really matters.

It's a pity that it's mostly C++ (smart pointers) and Obj-C (ARC) that have access to this.

( I say this realizing Python is hybridized. )

Edit: Most of my hesitations regarding using the JVM have to do with how incredibly finicky tuning it can be.

<comment><USER3> Reference counting comes with a huge toll on interoperability. Forget one Py_INCREF(Py_None) in a tight loop, and you're up to a segfault in a place very, very far away.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I'd be interested to hear what a ruby core dev has to say about this, aren't they working on an embedded version of the MRI? Otherwise, I'm not in favor of not being able to manage memory, some might think its a pain but when you have no memory, then you want to be able to crunch every byte when you need it. I think it could be interesting though, ruby is a very HL abstracted language, and if it gave you enough control it could make writing embedded programs a lot easier.

<comment><USER3> See this: [http://whitequark.org/blog/2012/12/06/a-language-for- embedde...](http://whitequark.org/blog/2012/12/06/a-language-for-embedded- developers/#comment-729723522)</comment></comment>


Yahoo's brutal corporate re-alignment - <AUTHOR> http://www.businessinsider.com/yahoos-brutal-corporate-re-alignment-2015-2 <comment><USER2> What an awful thing to do. That will be a story talked of in every Yahoo office. #ClimateOfFear

That erosion of trust had better have a good RoI.</comment>


9 ways Zuckerberg says Facebook will do a better job of protecting elections - <AUTHOR> https://www.fastcompany.com/40471672/9-ways-zuckerberg-says-facebook-will-get-better-at-protecting-elections <comment><USER2> I don't know how many elections across the globe have been effected this way. Will it ever be known?

Heads should roll at Facebook. Nine months to figure this out.

If Hilary had won who knows how long Zuckerburg's narrative in Dec/Jan, of there is no such thing as Fake News would have continued.

</comment><comment><USER3> Heaven forbid his favorite lost. Don't worry, they'll censor it next time around.</comment>


So, YC backs startup clones now? - <AUTHOR> We've been noticing Backpackbang is scraping our entire site, daily + linking to all our images.
Also, they ripped off the exact design of the explore page design. Nice.
We've seen clones before, but pretty crazy to see this from a YC-backed company. Disappointing. <comment><USER2> Maybe you should add watermark to your images & start blocking their scrappers for now.

<comment><AUTHOR> Done. They'll probably just start saving the images, but at least there's a 404 for now.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> The traditional debate in accounting is " _Make_ , or _Buy_?"

 _Theft_ is cheaper than either.</comment>


Marvels of Things Created and Miraculous Aspects of Things Existing - <AUTHOR> http://publicdomainreview.org/collections/marvels-of-things-created-and-miraculous-aspects-of-things-existing/ <comment><USER2> You know, I can see the appeal of this, and I live in an age of television, radio, video games and printed books. If I were a bored person a good long time ago, this might have been the one exciting and wondrous thing in your life.

</comment><comment><USER3> The first thing I thought is "this is prime meme material". What has the internet done with me?

</comment><comment><USER4> > The text is probably the best known example of 'ajā'ib or 'jā'ib al- > makhlūqāt literature, a genre of classical Islamic literature that was > concerned with "mirabilia": cosmographical and geographical topics that > challenged understanding. Al-Qazwini's treatise explored an eclectic mix of > topics, from humans and their anatomy to strange mythical creatures; from > plants and animals to constellations of stars and zodiacal signs.

So... a medieval "Ripley's Believe It or Not"?

</comment><comment><USER5> The 8th image has a thing like a bird with a cat's head. My first thought was that it looks like a bat after a few rounds of the telephone game.

I quite like the thing that's a complete fish, head to tail, with a surplus top-half-of-a-woman sticking out of the middle of its back. Not quite the traditional mermaid...

</comment><comment><USER6> The title ajaip al mahlukat means "strange creatures". Not "Marvels of Things created". Gharib also emphasizes "weird" so the other part of the title is better translated as "weird existences"</comment>


Lockout-Tagout - <AUTHOR> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockout-tagout <comment><USER3> After working in mining for a long while, where this kind of isolation procedure is standard and is taken very seriously (pretty much any breach of procedure is an instantly firable offense) it's terrifying coming back home and seeing people working on house wiring etc. with nothing more than a turned-off circuit breaker protecting them from electrocution or other injury. I've seen some trades start to pick up isolation procedures but they're generally still far behind industry best practices.

<comment><USER4> How would you recommend people working on their own house implement anything more than turning off the circuit breaker? (I'm not doing anything electrical in general, but sometimes small fixes are necessary for home owners.)

<comment><USER5> What I learned when doing electrical work in germany, the procedure for safe electrical working is as follows:

\- Switch off (at circuit breaker)

\- Prevent switching on (lock the breaker)

\- Check voltage free (multimeter cleared for 230V/120V operation with long, isolated test leads)

\- Ground and short (put a plug into the socket connecting earth, live and neutral, you can DIY that at home safely by cutting open an unused cord and soldering all three wires together)

\- Cover nearby powered equipment

<comment><USER6> > Ground and short (put a plug into the socket connecting earth, live and > neutral

Hmm. Given that breakers in the US don't disconnect the neutral, grounding the neutral can introduce potentially unpleasant stray currents.

On the flip side, as far as I can tell, it's entirely possible for a code- compliant installation to give you a moderate zap if you touch the neutral with the breaker off: if you have a long feeder to the panel, and someone turns on a big, single-phase load on a different breaker, the voltage drop on the feeder neutral could zap you. Imagine a 50A inrush current a across 1 ohm. That's 50V for a few cycles.

<comment><USER5> Atleast in germany the standard breakers don't either but the GFCI does and 3-phase breakers need to interrupt all phases. The neutral is also somewhat regularly grounded in the building's I've seen and atleast one grounding point is required at the distro point. Plus the breakers will trip at 50A inrush anyway.

(From experience, 50V AC won't kill you unless you are standing in a bathtub and covered yourself in conductive gel, you'll just get some minor pain in most cases)

<comment><USER6> > The neutral is also somewhat regularly grounded in the building's I've seen > and atleast one grounding point is required at the distro point.

Hmm. Are phase-to-neutral loads permitted? If so, does this mean that the building and ground are allowed to carry neutral currents? This seems like a bad idea.

I'm not an electrician, but I've seen enough problems caused by "objectionable current" (the US code name for currents through what is supposed to be ground even in the absence of a fault) that I think that neutral should be treated as a hot wire whose voltage to ground just happens to be quite low. This would involve all breakers switching the neutral as well as having a reliable mechanism to detect neutral-to-ground faults.

Newer US GFCI devices are supposed to detect neutral-to-ground faults, so that's a start, but I don't think any of them will actually disconnect the neutral if such a fault is detected. They do this by inductively coupling a low voltage 120 Hz common mode waveform on hot + neutral, or maybe just on neutral. It's a cute trick.

<comment><USER5> Any building since 2007 has a GFCI installed (TAB2007-6.1§10 in Germany). Not as is common in the US in the sockets but in the breaker box itself. GFCI sockets and plugs are very rare and only exists for legacy installation that cannot be upgraded (insurance is expensive without one).

We use the TN-C-S system, wherein before the GFCI you have 3-phase with a PEN that is shorted to ground when it enters the building, then it is split into PE and N wires. The GFCI is 3-phase with only 1 phase being put into the building (usually, though multiple phases aren't uncommon in larger housings). The PE wire is connected to the heating system and various other ground potential points (either to provide ground or obtain ground potential). The N wire is shorted to PE before entering the socket (or the socket itself shorts these two). Once it leaves a socket the entire thing becomes unpolarized, so to speak, so devices after the socket can't short PE and N without polarized plugs.

This avoids problems with the inrush since the inrush voltage against ground will be grounded away shortly after entering the socket (and trip your breakers). It also means that it's less likely that a single broken wire results in the entire GFCI becoming useless, though if neutral is broken it can become somewhat dangerous (but the device stops working).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Always verify the equipment you are working on is still physically LO-TO. I heard a story about one person who LO-TO a breaker on Friday, and Monday it had power when he went to work on it. The guy went to check the breaker, and the breaker was sitting on the ground with the lock still attached, and a new breaker in its place.

<comment><USER8> Hooo boy. I think there might be a few more breakers on the ground if that was me.

<comment><USER9> You misspelled 'teeth'

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> When I started at the Lawrence Journal-World (the company who Open Sourced Django) I was forced to watch a really old cheesy video about Lock-Out Tag-Out which at the seemed stupid for a web developer. Then I was walked to the office past some of the biggest machines I'd ever been near to that point in my life. Then I got it.

It definitely saved a few peoples limbs at that company alone.

<comment><USER11> In software development the closest equivalent I can think of would be locking files in older version control systems like SVN.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> I started up a piece of industrial equipment that some one was working on just out of site. He didn't lock it out or even disconnect the power at the switch right next to him. He screamed at me when his arm almost got ripped off. It's an amazing mix of terror for having almost hurt someone and rage at that same person for putting you in that position.

</comment><comment><USER13> This is unofficially gaining a 3rd step: "Try out". Sometimes people fail to properly lock and tag, and it's usually worth physically testing that the equipment is actually disabled before someone is injured or killed due to incorrect locking / tagging.

EDIT: This is obviously mentioned in the article! Mea culpa ;-)

<comment><USER14> Hey, it definitely won't kill anyone to reiterate it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> Ex oil and gas health, safety, and environmental advisor, turned software engineer. This was a critical turning point for safety in almost every industry. Here's an unfortunate, but memorable example of its real-world importance: [https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/aug/12/bumble- bee-f...](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/aug/12/bumble-bee-foods- settlement-man-cooked-death-tuna)

#edit: Oxford comma ocd

</comment><comment><USER16> Side note: The most secure locks that Master makes (in regards to being pick resistant) are their LOTO padlocks, and they are usually about $10. Most of their other consumer locks are pretty easy to bypass with basic picks, but get marketed as being the "best" in security and cost a lot more.

<comment><USER17> In my experience this is not true. Some LO/TO locks even have plastic shackles and bodies (for the obvious electrical work). They're not supposed to be pick proof and super secure—they're a visual and physical reminder that the system is secured for worker safety. If a lock needs to be removed by someone other than the lock owner there is an OSHA process to remove out that involves cutting and discarding that particular lock.

<comment><USER18> I recommend watching LockPickingLawyer's video on the lock the parent comment is talking about: [https://youtu.be/y4XGY0_cwcM](https://youtu.be/y4XGY0_cwcM). Master used a very pick resistant core for their LOTO locks but skimped out on the higher priced general-use models.

<comment><USER17> That _is_ baffling as he says in the video! I've never seen anyone on any worksite I've been on trying to pick a LO/TO lock, so I just assumed the cores were just as insubstantial.

<comment><USER19> I suspect it is very deliberate.

Their normal cores are so shitty that there is a reasonable chance that the wrong key will work to open the lock, especially if somebody is trying to open it quickly.

With LOTO locks, Bob could die if Alice's key works on Bob's lock. (e.g. both on working on equipment powered by different circuit breaks, and Alice confuses the breakers, and removes the lock from BOB's breaker, because her key happened to work on it).

A few reports of that happening, and their LOTO locks could be banned from many worksites due to unions rightfully insisting on it.

So it actually is worth having better cores to ensure only the correct keys will work.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> [https://www.oregonlive.com/silicon- forest/2018/10/intel_sued...](https://www.oregonlive.com/silicon- forest/2018/10/intel_sued_for_1_million_in_wo.html)

Pretty recent death caused partially by not following this procedure.

</comment><comment><USER21> Too lazy to include a link, but I believe when work is done on electrified train rails, they attach a huge bar across the power rails to short them. If they're inadvertently powered, breakers elsewhere trip. (Or, worst case, the bar melts?)

<comment><USER22> I'm not sure how this works for electrified rails (i.e. a third-rail that provides power to the engines), however for a standard rail line (i.e. just 2 tracks, with either an overhead providing electricity, or diesel engines) is used as a method of safety using the track signalling.

Specifically, in many rail signalling network systems, a signal will turn red when it detects a short between the two rails in its section (i.e. an axle rolls into it). It will then turn back green when that short disappears. Workers can therefore clip something between both rails, which triggers the signal relay and makes the signal light green.

This is absolutely not isolation & lockout though, because it doesn't actually remove the energy source. That's not to say it's not a valuable process though, but an isolation & lockout for this sort of circumstance either involves locking the track switches to direct traffic away from the worksite, or installing a derailer [1] on the track that phyiscally throws the train off the rail into the dirt so it stops well clear of the work site.

The above obviously doesn't work if you're working on a running system, though (which does happen, occasionally). In that instance, the track clip lets trains stop at the red light, radio to the worksite, have the worksite clear, then remove the clip, let the train through, then resume work. It's different levels of safety for different perceived risks.

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

<comment><USER23> Track circuit operating clips are used for the system you're talking about, they're just a pretty simple arrangement of giant spring clips with a deliberately short lead between them, workers are trained to apply the clips starting with the side away from the third rail, the lead is too short to make it possible to connect the third rail to the running rail if you've done it this way.

The big metal bar is different, as the poster explained it will short the (supposedly dead) power circuit in a third rail system, taking several hundred volts at quite a lot of amps until the short is detected, hence it can't just be a couple of metal clips and a cheap cable like TCOC. If some idiot re- enables power to the circuit or a fault elsewhere re-energises it despite it notionally being switched off, the bar will turn that into a full short and everybody will know there's a problem, although I'm not sure that would save anybody who happens to actually be touching the now surprisingly live rail at the time it's energised.

On overhead systems there is similarly an arrangement where a worker - <USER2> confirming that the power is supposedly dead - ensures this is true by physically grounding it. Again it's a failsafe.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> John Ward recently did a video on various lockout-tagout devices for electrical systems: [https://youtu.be/3fMueAINzcI](https://youtu.be/3fMueAINzcI)

</comment><comment><USER25> I've spent many career years in sysadmin / process automation for manufacturing companies, and LOTO is one of many pieces of proper procedure and process that really impresses me about that industry. I worked at a big steel recycling plant, and the zero tolerance effort put toward safety and generally ensuring that this type of stuff was upheld was impressive. Not locking out a machine, or forgetting your lock on a machine was a fireable offense with like, one warning I think. You certainly didn't want to be the guy who was working on a machine that morning, and left your lock on it when you went home while someone else was working on it. They'd call you and get you out of bed real quick if it meant the machine couldn't start up because your lock is on there and you weren't accounted for.

SRE's and operations people can pick up good habits from manufacturing gigs. A lot of the same concepts like uptime, good documentation, procedure, discipline are really important to the business at all levels. When lives are at risk good companies put a large sum of time and money in making sure everyone is on the same page.

</comment><comment><USER26> Any software patterns comparable to this?

(Would help to have a use-case example. And how the pattern helped Vs. what was being done before)

<comment><USER27> "Lock" as in mutex? Although those don't come with a tag, which could be very handy when debugging.

<comment><USER28> Depending on the system, I think you can find out who owns the lock.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> I'm a mech engineer working with heavy machinery, and isolation & lockout rules everything around me. It's probably the most important method of implementing safeworking at an operational level [1]. I was responsible for rolling it out at the first site at my company, implementing the process and documentation, and then seeding it across to other sites.

There's a concept called the hierarchy of hazard control [2]. At the top is eliminating the hazard - just removing it completely. It goes down through substitution, engineering controls, admin controls and then protective equipment is right at the bottom as the least effective method of protection. I&L aims to address the hazards right at the top by eliminating them, which is by far the most effective means of ensuring safety.

It does this by following a process: First, isolate the energy source. Secondly, lock that isolation out so it cannot be reactivated. Third, test for dead by showing that a) the isolation cannot be removed, and b) that there is no residual energy source remaining.

For example, an electrical isolation point might be a switch, which when thrown firstly breaks the circuit, but then also drains out any capacitors or other residual energy storage. The isolating person throws the switch, locks it out, tries to throw the switch back against the lock to show it's secure, then tests the system for dead by trying to power it up or by testing terminals for a voltage to prove that the energy sources have been drained. Once that's all done, they'll then complete the rest of the process and let others lock on to the system.

When someone locks on to an isolated system, there should be sufficient documentation and indication to show that the system is isolated and safe. It might mean that if a mechanical latch is rotated to the 'safe' position, there's a sign that rotates into view from the isolation point so the protected person who is locking on to the isolation can see it, whereas when it's not locked out they cannot. The protected person can in theory go and test the lockout to ensure it's in place, but usually (where I'm at) it's controlled by a dual sign-off process when the above can't be achieved. Then the protected person throws their lock on the isolation point, and that ensures that none of the isolations can be released until they remove their lock. Critically, those who place the isolation are generally a controlled set of people who are trained more highly than the protected person level who just has to know how to verify isolations are in place and then lock on. In general, the people working on the isolated system don't place their own isolations unless it's a simple system/process.

The whole process essentially provides a method of accounting for every person working on a system, and letting them be confident that it can't be powered up whilst working on it. It's not supposed to be secure locks. Mine, for example, have plastic casings, and ones designed for electrical work have a plastic bolt which I could probably easily remove with a bit of percussive persuasion. However, you also realistically generally can't stop a malicious person bypassing those safety measures, e.g. by wiring around a circuit-breaker or by undoing some bolts to remove a latch. So it's not intended to stop malicious parties, but it prevents the vastly more frequent case of were someone starts a machine when someone else is working in it.

It gets far more complex than all that too, for example covering how you pass secure isolations between shifts, or how you chain together layers of an isolated system to a single isolation point, but the above should hopefully provide some insight into why this stuff exists and why it takes the form it does.

[1]: I would consider the concept of 'safety in design' higher overall because that's about removing the hazard from existing at the design stage, but once it exists then I&L is generally the gold standard for dealing with it.

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

</comment><comment><USER29> [https://www.osha.gov/laws- regs/regulations/standardnumber/19...](https://www.osha.gov/laws- regs/regulations/standardnumber/1915/1915.89)

</comment><comment><USER30> This is a large part of my job because all equipment must be locked out before it is serviced.

</comment><comment><USER31> Can we talk about how bad that lockout hasp graphic is? It looks like a drunk person broke the last crayon drawing it and just decided to have Inkscape run a trace on what they had.

<comment><USER32> I noticed that too. It's like bad, stylized clip-art. They even have an image of a real one further down the article.</comment></comment>


Stop All Important FCC Votes Until There Are the Required 5 Commissioners - <AUTHOR> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/stop-all-important-fcc-votes-until-there-are-the-required_us_58e9ede3e4b00dd8e016ece0 <comment><AUTHOR> As well as everything the author mentioned, keep in mind that business data services circuits are what keep many competitive phone carriers and the big four wireless providers connected. Eliminating the regulations he talked about would effectively allow incumbent telcos to price these people out of the market</comment>


Ask HN: Is it worth switching to a Dvorak keyboard? - <AUTHOR>

I'm a web developer, so the majority of my typing is PHP code. I've read multiple times that a Dvorak keyboard layout is more efficient than Qwerty. Is it worth making the switch? <comment><USER2> Web development is best practiced in the Python framework Django, on an Apple MacBook Pro with the Dvorak keyboard using the TextMate editor. Left-handed, of course. (Just kidding about Django, Rails will do as well.)

<comment><AUTHOR> Haha, thanks for the advice. Was the learning curve steep? (referring to Dvorak, of course).

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> I made the switch about 6 wks ago due to oncoming CTS. It's tough to do, for sure - I type slower today, no doubt - but my wrists hurt less.

If productivity is your main goal, I just don't think switching would help. Let's say that someone tells you that a Dvorak keyboard can helkp you type 5% faster. Fine - but it will take 4-6 months to get to that point and, during that adjustment period, you will have have been 5% less productive.

</comment><comment><USER4> Naw, it's way wacko different and relatively hard to switch back to a QWERTY when you need to.

Check out the Kinesis Ergo Contoured keyboard instead, <http://www.kinesis- ergo.com/>. While it looks daunting, it's easy to pick up and it's surprisingly easy to switch back and forth to a normal QWERTY keyboard.</comment>