Why undefined behavior may call a never-called function - <AUTHOR> https://kristerw.blogspot.com/2017/09/why-undefined-behavior-may-call-never.html <comment><USER2> I think this case shows one of the pitfalls of compiled languages. If it can't be optimized at compile time we're out of luck so we aim too far.

<comment><USER2> I once wrote an optimizing brainfuck compiler, it ended up running the bf code (if no input) and just printing the output in a single instruction :P</comment></comment>


DB2 Express-C helps Russian ISV improve performance 5-10 times - <AUTHOR> http://freedb2.com/2009/09/23/db2-express-c-helps-russian-isv-improve-performance-5-10-times/ <comment><USER2> DB2 Express-C is a really excellent piece of software (it's an RDBMS developed by IBM), and it is freely available. I'd love to see it getting more traction.

</comment><comment><USER3> "You can find 1C:Enterprise in just about every Russian company from a street vendor to the largest corporations..."

Wow. Their street vendors are WAY ahead of our street vendors.

</comment><comment><USER4> 5-10 times compared to what? A flat file DB with no index performing joins as nested loops? I like DB2 express, but this is not an informative article.

<comment><USER5> I agree: "the time required to process financial month close transactions was reduced from 4-6 hours to 10-11 minutes" doesn't give any insight into how this was done, how it was set up before, etc..

On a side note, I had installed DB2 Express-C on an Ubuntu machine, did a distribution upgrade, and DB2 refused to work again. In fact, it broke in such a way that apt-get couldn't remove DB2.. and I couldn't find any information on how to fix it. It could be 10x faster than MySQL, but at least MySQL is well documented and supported and has an active community. To me, that counts for a lot.

<comment><USER6> Did you try asking about it on the community forum? [http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/forums/forum.jspa?forumID=...](http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/forums/forum.jspa?forumID=805&start=0)

<comment><USER5> Nope, but I was an IBM employee at the time (on DB2 nonetheless) and tried internal channels to no avail.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Shell stops Arctic activity after 'disappointing' tests - <AUTHOR> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-34377434 <comment><USER2> I think it's a combination of net cost, net energy, speed of development, infrastructure required to transport it efficiently to refineries, and the prohibitive cost of drilling safely. PR is a concern, but not much more than PR in any other spill. The largest problem is spill damages will cost an order of magnitude more to prevent/stop/clean because the arctic is so remote and all effort there is less efficient.

PR is not the only cost of the Deepwater Horizon. BP also paid a significant fraction of their market cap to clean up the wide-reaching effects of the spill.

There are behavioral costs. Everyone knows _which_ major oil company was to blame for letting a drunk ship captain navigate the Valdez oil tanker. I was in grade school at the time and I still remember the images of birds, fish, and other wildlife caked in oil slowly dying and the name of the oil company was forever etched into my mind next to those images.

The Arctic is some of the most inhospitable weather in the world. Everything costs more to develop, transport, and maintain there. The seasonal weather prevents ships from making the trip there without an ice breaker escort (or more than one if the ice breaker is stranded on ice). The energy required to perform much of the work (keeping machines above freezing temperatures, keeping oil/gas warm to transport in pipelines) isn't insignificant. Oil platforms may need to be re-engineered to withstand the weather and floating ice sheets.

The costs associated with drilling are high until the drillers find the largest pockets.

It's also worth noting that Royal Dutch Shell is among the only major oil companies that actively and openly admits that climate change is an issue, that people are at least partly to blame, and that the oil/energy companies have a responsibility to both factor in the risk factors as well as work on mitigating the contributions of oil/gas to climate change.[1]

[1] [http://www.shell.com/global/environment- society/environment/...](http://www.shell.com/global/environment- society/environment/climate-change.html)

<comment><USER3> Chevron (US) seems to agree that Climate change is man-made, though they aren't nearly so direct about it and certainly don't express support for a carbon tax. [http://www.chevron.com/globalissues/climatechange/](http://www.chevron.com/globalissues/climatechange/)

Exxon (US) seems to take it as a given that human-emitted greenhouse gasses cause climate change and emphasizes the need to avoid needless cost in solutions. They explicitly support a carbon tax, offset by lowering other taxes: [http://corporate.exxonmobil.com/en/current-issues/climate- po...](http://corporate.exxonmobil.com/en/current-issues/climate- policy/climate-policy-principles/overview)

BP states that human GHG emissions cause climate change and supports putting a price on carbon, but one that is equal across sources. [http://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/sustainability/the- ene...](http://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/sustainability/the-energy- future/climate-change.html)

Total (France) touts some of initiatives for addressing carbon emissions but [http://www.total.com/en/society- environment/environment/comb...](http://www.total.com/en/society- environment/environment/combating-climate-change) They also talk here about the role of methane flaring in greenhouse gas emissions [http://www.total.com/en/media/news/press-releases/total- comm...](http://www.total.com/en/media/news/press-releases/total-commits- three-major-international-initiatives-combat-climate-change) I don't read French, so cant summarize their main page.

ConocoPhillips also recognizes human-emitted GHCs as the cause of climate change. [http://www.conocophillips.com/sustainable-development/our- ap...](http://www.conocophillips.com/sustainable-development/our- approach/living-by-our-principles/positions/Pages/climate-change.aspx)

I've got to run, can someone else do Statoil, Rosneft, Petrobras, etc?

<comment><USER4> It should be noted, from the dates of these policy papers, that they are only a year old.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> There are many cheaper sources of oil right now. Drillers will be back in future decades, but right now, it's not worth it.

Saudi thinking on the future of oil is interesting. They're worried about solar, wind, natural gas, electric cars, and US oil reducing demand for their product. And at some point, they'll run out. When a middle-east oil autocracy runs out of oil, Government leaders are usually killed. Egypt and Syria peaked in the mid-1990s, and look what happened. Saudi Arabia claims to be a long way from that point, but it's hard to tell.

</comment><comment><USER6> > Mrs Clinton's tweet revealed that political risks were still substantial

I love that major policy signaling is accomplished via tweets nowadays.

Also interesting how several Republican candidates responded directly to the tweet,

[https://twitter.com/hillaryclinton/status/633629814713397249](https://twitter.com/hillaryclinton/status/633629814713397249)

Though Twitter's reply threading is the worst implementation I've ever seen it does do a good job surfacing Jeb and Christie's responses.

<comment><USER7> Twitter is the perfect fit for the Republican intellect. What does Jeb's reply even mean? "More anti-energy than Obama" is totally meaningless, unless his point is that a +50% increase in crude oil production was achieved in spite of Obama's anti-energy policies, whatever they are.

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> I submitted this because I'm very curious what HN thinks. Clearly USGS thinks there's a heck of a lot of oil in the Arctic. I'm personally glad we're not drilling for oil because that's not an environment we can screw up and fix and there's no need to do so except for profit - but why would Shell's tests come back "disappointing" or is that really then owning up to not being able to drill without mishaps (and damage to their PR) in the region?

<comment><USER8> The key thing to remember is that if we burn all the oil we've already found, we'll exceed safe levels of atmospheric carbon. So there is no point exploring for more oil or opening new reserves.

<comment><USER9> > ...if we burn all the oil we've already found...

Plastics and inorganic fertilizers are two of the things we can make with oil. Both of these things are pretty damn important.

I suspect that -one day- burning so much of our oil supply just to produce electricity and locomotion will be regarded as a rather poor decision.

<comment><USER10> Oil is just big long gooey hydrocarbons that we can make by other means, if we have energy. I'm not too worried about it.

If you're desperate you can always squeeze a peanut or scrape a duck.

<comment><USER9> > If you're desperate you can always squeeze a peanut or scrape a duck.

That sounds _terribly_ expensive. A 1,000% increase in the cost of plastics and lubricants won't be fun for anyone.

> ...we can make by other means, if we have energy.

Hopefully we gather together the political will and launch the anti- misinformation campaigns required to get _some_ form of very-high-capacity non-fossil-fuel-based electricity generation system long before we need to seriously consider "scraping ducks" to get the hydrocarbons we require.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> The really big news is shell think the entire basin is low yield which means others are unlikely to want to go there in future.

</comment><comment><USER12> They stopped because of disappointing tests? Greenpeace told me it was because of me. (Not sure what I did, though.)

<comment><USER13> You must be a heck of a disappointment!

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> I don't believe Shell. I believe this is a PR tactic to throw off their opponents. I've seen other companies do so. They'll find some way to keep exploring and doing whatever they can get away with.

<comment><USER15> Not really. Hiding activity in the Arctic isn't exactly easy and if Exxon wants to know what they're up to, they can just check Shell's filings with the EPA and State of Alaska.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> The "disappointing" part is likely the recent drop in oil prices. Higher revenues from a commodity like that can finance all kinds of risk.</comment>


The New Breed of VC - Ludlow Ventures? - <AUTHOR> http://techcrunch.com/2011/11/28/a-new-deal-flow-startup-raps-for-angel-funding-venture-firm-responds-in-kind/

<comment><USER2> Lame title. That's why you didn't get many votes. Just saying.</comment>


Can you have a comma before because? - <AUTHOR> http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=3338

<comment><USER2> An interesting article that reflects on the question of "Good Style" in writing code:

What rules are rules, what rules are guidelines, what guidelines are good?

What constitutes "Good Style"?

The writer of the article says that:

        A good writer will think about the structure and
        rhythm of a written sentence, and make decisions
        about where to place the very slight pause for
        thought or breath that a comma intuitively signals,
        or to separate words or phrases that ought not to
        be run together.

What similar things can be said about a good coder?

I do feel included to point out the following:

        Now, do you really fell inclined to say Lewis Carroll couldn't write?
                           ^^^^

Oops. (it doesn't detract from the main thrust of the article, that it is difficult and dangerous to try to capture style with rules.)</comment>


Businesses can't use the word "olympic" because of congress - <AUTHOR> http://www.philly.com/philly/news/20120711_Reading_Terminal_shop_gets_Olympic-sized_reprimand.html <comment> jack-r-abbit _But in its email, the organization emphasized the need to "protect the rights of companies who financially support the U.S. Olympic Team," such as McDonald's and Coca-Cola._

 _"We believe using the name 'Ravelympics' for a competition that involves an afghan marathon, scarf hockey and sweater triathlon, among others, tends to denigrate the true nature of the Olympic Games," the letter from USOC said. "In a sense, it is disrespectful to our country's finest athletes and fails to recognize or appreciate their hard work."_

Uhhh... and McD's & Coca-Cola's sponsorship is not an insult to athletes?

</comment><comment><USER2> The problem is the hypocrisy. Every other organization in the U.S. can trademark their name, but only in their industry. The USOC does not sell gyros, meat, wine or movies.

I really would like to know how this organization has gotten so much power.

EDIT: I'm curious how this paint company has kept the name: <http://www.olympic.com/> Were they granted the trademark earlier? Plus the paint brush is a play on the torch. They have the domain name, so someone at the usoc must have seen them.

<comment><AUTHOR> "how this organization has gotten so much power."

Some how congress has seen that the US Olympics are a source of national pride and a treasure to be protected by an act for the good of everyone. This is way more than trademark protection.

[http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-2010-title36/html/USCODE...](http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-2010-title36/html/USCODE-2010-title36-subtitleII- partB-chap2205-subchapI-sec220506.htm)

While I'm sure it's been done in other places the only other case I know of is something similar with the Red Cross.

In contrast, in years past, I was able to use the words "IRS" on a product and even received clearance from IRS legal council in writing as confirmation.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> This is a little spun. Certainly "Olympic" in the context of the games (e.g. "Ravelympics", which was clearly related to and synchronized with the summer games) is a plausibly trademarkable term. And the circle logo (which the sub shop was actually displaying!) absolutely is. The difference here is mechanism: instead of a private entity inventing and registering a trademark, congress granted a trademark to a pre-existing mark to the USOC after the fact.

I tend to agree that they'd be better served by not enforcing it so strictly. The games, after all, are a shared party for all of humanity. I think there's a strong case to be made for simple, celebratory use (for things like knitting more than for gyros, I'd say though).

But legally, there's just not much here. Clearly the marks are protectable, and someone needs to manage them. Congress picked the USOC.

<comment><USER4> > Clearly the marks are protectable, and someone needs to manage them. > Congress picked the USOC.

The marks don't need to be protected. Congress could treat them as part of the public domain, just like (say) photographs taken by government employees as part of their job. But unfortunately the Olympics are a money making venture, and the sentiment

> The games... are a shared party for all of humanity

ceased to govern the Olympic committee a long time ago.

<comment><USER3> I suppose it could be public domain. Would that be better? It seems like that opens an entirely different sort of abuse. Without trademark protection, how do you prevent people from offering "Olympic" tickets to non-official events, for example? No free lunch. Trademark is the tool society has decided to use for this. And the only difference between this and any other trademark dispute (like putting an "i" before a product name or calling a music distribution company "Apple Computer") is in the technicalities of how the mark was awarded.

Sorry, I just don't find that interesting. It's OK to whine about the USOC being jerks, because I agree that they are. But trying to hold this up as an example of the evils of government is just silly.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> "In a follow-up letter June 18, the USOC said it "sympathizes with your position," so Voulgaridis was given until the end of 2013 to "come to a resolution.""

This is a key move on the part of the olympic committee no doubt in order to not give any legs to a story that might not play way in a year that the games are going on. In a sense they are taking the wind out of his sails by appearing to be fair and reasonable.

</comment><comment><USER5> First off, this story is pun central! "... has not exactly advanced with the speed of Usain Bolt." Zing!

OK, with that off my chest...

What struck me first and foremost is that the interlocking ring logo is probably the source of the issue. That has to be copyrighted and owned by the USOC. That being said, the word "Olympic" has been around for long enough that saying, "Hey, we own that word in any context" seems ridiculous, especially in areas where local features are similarly named (@bcl).

Referring to a contest as the XYZ Olympics (or variant thereof) seems to be slightly more reasonable as a case for infringement, but the term has become so common use that I think you could argue that it's public domain (e.g., fridge). Maybe they're stepping up enforcement for that reason.

No one's going to confuse the Beer Olympics with the 2012 Games, and no one's going to confuse a delicious gyro with Usain Bolt.

<comment><USER6> > First off, this story is pun central! "... has not exactly advanced with the > speed of Usain Bolt." Zing!

How is that a pun?

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> What scotus thinks (1987 case):

<http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/483/522/>

(Edit: Posted link for background cases are not similar..)

<comment><USER7> I don't think the two situations are analogous in any way. In the case you posted, the SFAA were looking to run a sporting event using the word 'Olympics'. This is clearly going to cause an element of confusion to the public in terms of who is organising the event.

On the other hand, in the case posted by the OP, the likelihood of confusion is to my mind, non-existent. No reasonable person would be confused into thinking the body responsible for holding the Olympics was branching out into gyros.

<comment><USER4> As pointed out by emarcotte, the claim is not that anyone would think that the Olympic committee was making gyros but that the gyro makers are benefitting off the Olympic trademark without paying sufficient money like Coke or McDonalds.

<comment><USER7> Good point. I can see more clearly the need to protect large corporate sponsors from actual competitors (e.g. Burger King, Pepsi) where there is likely to be a diversion of profits, but in this case, I am fairly certain that there will be no diversion of profits.

I suppose it could also be argued that the usage is detrimental to the trade mark but that point is undermined by the approved association with fast food/sugary drinks.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> This has happened to a number of local businesses here in Kitsap County. We live near the Olympic mountains in Western Washington. The USOC has gone after multiple local businesses in the past - <http://web.kitsapsun.com/news/2001/march/03202namegame.html>

<comment><USER9> they ought to try and sue the mountain

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> On a related note, LOCOG, the UK equivalent of USOC, has been enforcing sponsorship rights very heavily. Just today the sale of chips to contractors working on the site was banned at the behest of McDonalds, unless, they were also sold with fish.

[http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/tomchiversscience/10017011...](http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/tomchiversscience/100170114/london-2012-olympics- mcdonalds-is-watching-you-and-your-chips/)

They have also been taking action against small businesses in a similar manner for using the logo without permission.

</comment><comment><USER10> It's ironic that the government used "olympic games" as a code name for the development of Stuxnet.

</comment><comment><USER11> Trying to come up with something funny to write about an idea for a website featuring pictures of tree limbs (Tree Limb Pics), but I got nothing.

</comment><comment><USER12> This is why the Robolympics is no longer called that.</comment>


Android app for end-to-end encrypted calls - <AUTHOR> https://ostel.me/

<comment><USER2> [Edited to add: on reflection, this is a bit negative; it is a really cool app, and I guess if you're worried about security, latency may not be your highest concern. ]

I've put off getting an android device because of the appalling audio latency[1][2]. Given that telephony is the most demanding application as regards latency, I suspect this sadly may not sound very good, depending on the android device. Unless someone has found a cunning workaround?

[1] <http://www.musiquetactile.fr/android-is-far-behind-ios/> [2] <http://code.google.com/p/android/issues/detail?id=3434>

<comment><USER3> The CSipSimple solved the latency issue by utilizing the native PJSIP C library for all heavy lifting: <http://www.pjsip.org/>

<http://code.google.com/p/csipsimple/>

<comment><USER4> Unless it binds directly to the alsa device (which I think you need to have a rooted phone to access) it still uses audioflinger. So the terrible latencies (into the hundreds of milliseconds) will still be there.

<comment><USER3> From a user standpoint, it is not terrible, especially considering what it is doing. It is definitely not as real time as a standard phonecall, but if you are not in the same room, you hardly notice it.

<comment><USER4> It is just on the edge of being bad. You can tell if you talk and the other person talks over you because they didn't yet get to hear that you started talking. This happens more in a faster paced conversation, and you might notice if it you talk with someone across a low quality, high latency connections.

I think it is pretty terrible if you try to use android to synthesize audio. Say if you want it to be used for realtime performance. iOS has about 5ms and Android has 100->300ms. There is a huge difference and makes Android completely useless for that kind of purpose (even fast paced games with sounds effects have this if you notice).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> This wiki entry has more information on it: <https://guardianproject.info/wiki/Ostel>

</comment><comment><USER5> From my last job working on SIP and encrypted SIP I found a flaw in the PJSIP library where they were generating keys using only ASCII characters and not the full range of the unsigned byte type. I found this in a client application phone using PJSIP, informed the developers of the application; I don't know if it ever got back to the PJSIP developers. This was about 3 months ago and I don't know if this has been resolved in PJSIP, but I would be worried about SRTP key strength in this application.

<comment><USER3> Perhaps we should audit:

[http://trac.pjsip.org/repos/browser/pjproject/trunk/pjmedia/...](http://trac.pjsip.org/repos/browser/pjproject/trunk/pjmedia/src/pjmedia/transport_srtp.c?rev=3191#L352)

and

[http://svn.pjsip.org/repos/pjproject/trunk/third_party/srtp/...](http://svn.pjsip.org/repos/pjproject/trunk/third_party/srtp/include/srtp.h)

?

<comment><USER5> Might be a good idea. After a quick look at the first link, the key is passed in the opt structure. It's generated before the call to pjmedia_transport_srtp_create. I'll keep looking and see if I can find where it's actually generated.

<comment><USER5> Might be a good idea. I took a look at the latest 1.* and 2.* version; they look to be using the libsrtp prng for their key generation, so it should be good. The behaviour I was seeing was that the keys coming from the client I was testing with did not _ever_ have any null characters in them, which lead me to believe the keys were only in the ascii range. I'm not sure what type of freedom pjsip gives for key generation; maybe it was a problem with the client I was testing. Looking over the pjsip code it looks to be ok (see generate_crypto_attr_value in trannsport_srtp.c to see the key generation using crypto_get_random).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Great! I think moxie's RedPhone has been shut down for awhile now, since twitter hired him. Any word on whether this is a solid replacement?

<comment><USER3> RedPhone had some nice optimizations like tying into your existing public phone number (perhaps a privacy issue depending upon your view), and using SMS or Google's Push service to ensure your device is not sleeping when you get a call. OSTN/OStel has no custom modifications, but alternatively then is pure open-standards based.

Voice quality wise they are about the same... the goal is for you to be able to run your own server as well. There is already some info available today on how to do this: <http://freeborn.devio.us/doku.php?id=freeswitchfreebsd>

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Cool. Is an iOS version comming?

<comment><USER8> As soon as you write one!

<comment><USER3> Actually, it works just fine with a variety of iOS, Linux, Windows and Mac clients: <https://guardianproject.info/wiki/OSTN#Client_Software>

It is just SIP over TLS, and RTP media with ZRTP encryption - all open protocols.</comment></comment></comment>


How a password changed my life - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/@manicho/7af5d5f28038

<comment><USER2> I'm guessing this is a form of neuro-linguistic programming.

<comment><AUTHOR> Right, or some sort of positive reinforcement. Hardly secure though</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Will Hackernews be changing it's firebase API to the new console URLs? - <AUTHOR> I visited https://hacker-news.firebaseio.com/v0/topstories and noticed that the dashboard is legacy and will be shut down on March 15 [1]. Will HN be moving the console soon?<p>1: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/firebase-talk/DGktiekFNeY <comment><USER2> Probably the only informed answer would come from the mods. They can be reached using the |contact| link below.</comment>


SideTweet : Find who's Tweeting about what you're reading - <AUTHOR> https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/dcmhmegkmkfhdjfdmcfllilppcaondea

<comment><AUTHOR> New version available : Tweet & Retweet directly from the ext and dismiss follower suggestions you don't like!

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Feedbacks are more than welcome!</comment>


RonPaul2012.com under cyber attack - <AUTHOR> https://www.facebook.com/ronpaul/posts/10150283778541686

<comment><USER2> I wonder if this is actually real, or if it could be Paul supporters trying to garner sympathy. On other sites, such as Reddit, they've been heavily pushing the "Ron Paul is being suppressed!" message, and a cyber attack would fit right in.

Lots of fairly new accounts are showing up on Reddit, too, and posting comments like "Ron Paul is America's only chance!" that get voted way up, and commentators who ask serious questions about Paul's proposed policies get voted way down, so it looks like the Paul Sock Puppet Army, 2012 Edition, has formed.

<comment><USER3> Ron Paul's extreme-right position definitely attracts its fair share of loons, but to write this off as a stunt by his supporters is a double-conspiracy sandwich. The Reddit crowd aren't the only ones who have noticed the apparent blackballing by the mainstream media. Jon Stewart did a bit on the topic the other night.

[http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/08/16/ron-paul-he- wh...](http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/08/16/ron-paul-he-who-shall- not-be-named/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I would've thought the more controversial Republican candidates to be more likely to be attacked by hacktivists.</comment>


Facebook begins testing new real-time "Happening Now" feed - <AUTHOR> http://thenextweb.com/facebook/2011/06/10/facebook-begins-testing-new-real-time-happening-now-feed/

<comment><USER2> This is the kind of lame post Facebook was looking to avoid when they blacklisted certain blogs from receiving these pre-release features.</comment>


Show HN: Cloudboost.io – open-source BaaS platform just like Firebase - <AUTHOR> https://cloudboost.io <comment><USER2> Beware: See previous discussion about their others products [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20798831](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20798831)

</comment><comment><USER3> Looks like it's significantly more expensive than Firebase, and doesn't have a free tier.</comment>


Announcing Rust 1.9 - <AUTHOR> http://blog.rust-lang.org/2016/05/26/Rust-1.9.html <comment><USER2> _The time complexity of comparing variables for equivalence during type unification is reduced from O(n!) to O(n). As a result, some programming patterns compile much, much more quickly._

I love this. Not just my code compiling more quickly, but the underlying implementation is super interesting.

<comment><USER3> Is this something seen frequently in user code, or just an edge case? I'd love to get even faster with my libraries compiling, but honestly the continuous improvements in compile speed over the last half a year have already made me happy :)

<comment><USER4> Indeed. It's hard to miss just how much better rustc performance has become recently. As I've watched this I been left wondering; is it just the blood and sweat of the compiler developers doing this or is the language somehow inherently efficient to compile? I know there are other, much older languages that seem unable to deal with their compiler performance problems.

<comment><AUTHOR> It is a combination of both. We took performance into consideration when designing all aspects of the langauge, and so we've laid a lot of groundwork. The gains have come because the compiler had so much technical debt; imagine a hundreds of thousands of LOC codebase where the language changes out from under it on a weekly/daily basis. So every since 1.0, and even before, really, it's been paying off debt, and doing things in better ways. And there's more coming. Incremental recompilation will make after-the-first compiles go even faster. But all of that takes tons of work.

<comment><USER5> On the other hand, niko has described trait resolution as "basically prolog", so that's something you can push to perform as degenerately bad as you want (the recent addition of specialization only making things worse).

The issue is just how degenerately bad "most" code is -- and I think that hinges a lot on how excited the word "higher" gets you vis-a-vis expressing your programs. If you think C# is a pretty cool type system that doesn't afraid of anything you'll probably be fine. If you think scala or haskell with All The GHC Extensions is where it's at... watch out.

<comment><USER6> > I think that hinges a lot on how excited the word "higher" gets you vis-a- > vis expressing your programs.

You are the best Gankro. <3

What's nice about coherence is that there's little risk in modifying the constraint solving algorithm to optimize for the common use cases (because it can't be backward incompatible). What's nice about crater is that it's comparatively easy to test that optimization.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Excited about unwinding becoming stable. I am hacking on postgres- extension.rs, which allows writing postgres extensions in rust. This will mean that postgres could call into rust code, then rust could call back into postgres code, and that postgres code could throw an error, and rust could safely unwind and re-throw. Cool!!

<comment><USER8> Very much pleased to see you working on this. I've been thinking that Rust would make an excellent language for those of us that want to get a bit closer to C-like backed functions and such, but aren't really C programmers. While Rust has it's own learning curve to be sure and isn't magic, the compiler can save those of us familiar with less systemy languages from mistakes we wouldn't otherwise be sensitive to.

<comment><USER7> By "hacking on" I mean "submitted a pull request to Daniel Fagnan's project". I didn't mean to take credit.

But I do plan to keep improving it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Progress on specialization is good.

 _> Altogether, this relatively small extension to the trait system yields benefits for performance and code reuse, and it lays the groundwork for an "efficient inheritance" scheme that is largely based on the trait system_

</comment><comment><USER10> Looks like a great release. Controlled unwinding looks very interesting. #GreatJobRustTeam

</comment><comment><USER11> I don't understand the announcement on panics. Hasn't it always been the case that thread boundaries (via spawn) could contain panics?

It's also used to have the incorrect default that such panics were silently ignored. .NET made this same mistake: background threads could silently die. They reversed and made a breaking change so any uncaught exception kills the process. I'd imagine Rust will do so by encouraging a different API if they haven't already. (I opened an RFC on this last year, but I didn't understand enough Rust and made a mess of it. But still a great experience, speaking to the very kind and professional community. In particular several people were patient, but firm, in explaining my misunderstandings.)

<comment><AUTHOR>
      > Hasn't it always been the case that thread boundaries (via spawn)
      > could contain panics?

Yes. This lets you catch an unwinding panic from inside the thread itself, rather than observing it get killed from the outside.

In Rust, they're not silently ignored: `join()` returns a `Result`, which has a `must_use` attribute, which will warn if you don't do something with it.

<comment><USER11> Thanks for the clarification.

On thread panics: Suppose you have a long-running thread that's updating shared variable. You don't call join on it; just drop it, so it's detached, running in the background. If that thread crashes (and isn't in e.g. a mutex so it can't poison), your process will continue on in an invalid state. Yes, you could add code to notice the panic and abort the process, but by default, it'll silently fail, right?

<comment><AUTHOR>
      > and isn't in eg a mutex so it can't poison

Well, Rust makes sure that you have _some_ kind of concurrency primitive in place to make this safe.

It's also worth mentioning that Rust is concerned about preventing memory safety bugs, not every single kind of bug ever. I mean, we want to encourage robust code, but we don't make the claim that Rust solves every kind of bug possible with the type system.

<comment><USER11> I understand. It just seems like a very odd default, allowing threads to silently crash. Is there ever a good scenario for this? Flip it around: if the default was thread crash->panic, would any users be upset? Are there people _intentionally_ depending on silent panics?

It is the opposite of robust, more toward "on error resume next", to be rude. Just feels like an odd choice, that's all.

Edit: As an example: Suppose a background thread opens a file and writes out its pid and date every minute. If there's any panic on that thread, then the process will just go on, oblivious to the error. I find it hard to believe that's remotely close to the majority of intentions when spawning a detached background thread. For the few cases when you want "fire-and-forget-and- don't-care-if-it-fails", explicitly stating so seems wise.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes, one of the reasons that catching panics was even stabilized in the first place is because in many scenarios, aborts are not acceptable. Embedding Rust in other languages and runtimes is an important use case, for example, and a bug in your Rust extension bringing down your whole Rails app is not great.

The idea is not to make panics silent, but to be able to go from "this process is crashing" to "here's an error code".

<comment><USER12> > Embedding Rust in other languages and runtimes is an important use case, for > example, and a bug in your Rust extension bringing down your whole Rails app > is not great.

It's not, but it beats it silently ending up in a bad state.

<comment><USER13> The failure case in mind here is not silent data corruption, it is merely having your in-process performance monitoring service go offline.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I'm really looking forward to the next stable version after this, which will hopefully stabilize the new '?' syntax for 'try!'.

<comment><AUTHOR> I can guarantee you it will not. ? is still unstable, and since the release of 1.9 means that 1.10 is in beta, it will not be in 1.10.

<comment><USER14> What's the remaining work needed to make '?' no longer unstable?

<comment><AUTHOR> Well for one, there's a huuuuuge unresolved question: should it work for Option as well as Result? If we stabilized just the Result version, would we lock out the possibility of extending it in the future?

Just in general, it is a huge, and widely debated new feature that only landed recently. It needs more time before we can consider stabilizing it. One of the longest-running and most-commented RFCs in Rust history deserves to not just be made stable as quickly as possible, but to take it slow and make sure we get it right.

<comment><USER14> I've read the RFC and quite a bit of the surrounding debate, and I knew that most of it would take longer to stabilize. I just didn't realize that the '?' notation in particular was still under debate.

Why would stabilizing the Result version of '?' lock out the possibility of supporting it on Option or other types in the future?

In any case, I look forward to it whenever it becomes available in a stable release.

<comment><AUTHOR>
      > Why would stabilizing the Result version

Well, because in stabilizing something, you have to declare exactly what is stable, and what the semantics are. "? only works with Result" is not a detailed enough semantic, so you have to dig into details. Is it based on a trait? If so, and the trait gets designed incorrectly, it could cause problems. Is it not based on a trait? Now the language needs to know about Result, specifically.

      > I just didn't realize that the '?' notation in particular was still under debate.

Well, we have never had a case yet where an accepted RFC failed to end up actually being stable. We have had some RFCs that have had final details take a very long time. But in theory, it could happen.

<comment><USER5> Uh... That doesn't seem true at all? Unstable stuff gets deprecated all the time (the libs team basically _defaults_ to delete-everything), and I assure you that some of that stuff was accepted in an RFC. There's also the case that the design is significantly changed in inplementation or as an ammendment RFC (e.g. maybe ? becomes ?? or ?! to let ? be used like swift/c#). Entry API is the most obvious case of this kind of change happening to me. BTree range api will literally never be stabilized as-is. The defaults-affect-inference design has been dead in the water for months, for an example from the lang team.

<comment><AUTHOR> So, when I think about this, all the stuff that was unstable and therefore deprecated landed pre 1.0, but I _guess_ that was still RFC'd? Maybe my timeline is a bit off here.

I guess, my ultimate point is this: we have not made very many significant language changes in this first year of Rust. Now, we're starting to. It's new territory. Things can happen that may not have happened before, including these significant new features not actually landing.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> I don't know how this unexpected vs expected errors philosophy gets propagated, but to me it always looked suspicious. Take array bounds for example: what if you have an API that lets users send a list of image transformations, and the user requests a face-detect crop, followed by a fixed crop with a given x, y, w, h.

Clearly your code can get out of (2D) array bounds with the fixed crop (if the image is such that the face-detect crop ends up small enough). Suddenly the thing that was "unexpected" at the array level becomes very much expected at the higher API level.

So the API provider can't decide whether an error is expected or not. Only the API consumer can do that. Applying this further, a mid-level consumer cannot (always) make the decision either. Which is why exceptions work the way they do: bubble until a consumer makes a decision, otherwise consider the whole error unexpected. Mid-level consumers should use finally (or even better, defer!) to clean up any potentially bad state.

I think Swift got this right. What you care about isn't what exactly was thrown (checked, typed exceptions) but the critical thing is whether a call throws or not. This informs us whether to use finally/defer to clean up. The rest of error handling is easy: we handle errors we expect, we fix errors we forgot to expect, but either way we don't crash for clean up because finally/defer/destructors take care of that.

<comment><USER16> This is why almost every panicky API has a non-panicky variant.

Non-panicky APIs can be used in a panicky way via unwrap() or expect(). There are _very few_ panicky APIs, reserved for things where 99% of the time you want it to panic and it would be annoying to have to handle errors all the time. Array indexing is one of these cases, where it would be super annoying to handle errors on each indexing operation.

But if you're in a situation where you expect an index to fail, just use `get()` which returns an Option instead.

APIs do not make the decision for you. At most they decide if the panicky API is easier to use than the monadic error one. Which is where the fuzzy notion of "unexpected" and "expected" errors at the API level comes up, it's good enough to be able to determine what the default should be. Callers still have the power to do something else.

<comment><USER17> I would kill to have a monadic slicing API for Vec<T>, though. It seems like the one significant exception to the "use whichever works better for you" argument. Of course you can bounds check yourself first and return Err if there's a problem, but there's also no get_unchecked() for slices so you'd pay for the checks twice.

<comment><USER18> > but there's also no get_unchecked() for slices so you'd pay for the checks > twice.

Yeah there is[1], unless I'm being really stupid...

[1]: [https://doc.rust- lang.org/std/primitive.slice.html#method.ge...](https://doc.rust- lang.org/std/primitive.slice.html#method.get_unchecked)

<comment><USER17> Rather, there's no get_unchecked to get a slice from a Vec. Unlike index, get_unchecked can't take a range as input.

<comment><USER18> Ah gotcha, sounds like it could be a good first RFC for someone.

<comment><USER17> I'll add it to my long list of rust projects I wish I had time to do :).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> _Unexpected problems are bugs: they arise due to a contract or assertion being violated._

Speaking of which, DBC [1] would be an awesome feature for consideration. It's one of relatively few areas where D is superior to Rust IMO.

[1] [https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/issues/1077](https://github.com/rust- lang/rfcs/issues/1077)

</comment><comment><USER20> Wow, almost 2.0 already. Any major features reserved for 2.0 or will it be just another typical release like 1.8 or 1.9, more or less?

<comment><USER21> Next release will most likely be 1.10. As per semver.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> _catch_unwind_

Exceptions, at last! Not very good exceptions, though. About at the level of Go's "recover()". If this is done right, so that locks unlock, destructors run, and reference counts are updated, it's all the complexity of exceptions for some of the benefits.

I'd rather have real exceptions than sort-of exceptions.

<comment><USER23> So much snark.

Error handling is something Rust does really well. Having used exception languages quite a bit I much prefer the forced handled return values.

Exceptions don't map well to the type of handling patterns like and_then(...), or_else(...) and the like which I find much more ergonomic and clean.

<comment><USER24> Exceptions can also be a pain to deal with in lazy Iterators. Either every lambda needs to be a try statement, or you need state.</comment></comment></comment>


Day 1 of political experiment, minor success - <AUTHOR>

I started a liberal news aggregate site a few days ago (basically its Drudge Report but for left-wing news) and noticed I was getting way way way more hits than my actual start-up which provides free legal documents and information.  (www.palinverse.com)
I was wondering why a political page would be more popular than documents and legal info that are worth thousands of dollars.
Then I wondered if hardcore Republicans would be more likely to buy into the news aggregate BS than the Democrats, so I launched a hard hard hard right website and decided I would conduct a study on the matter.  (www.patriotsforjesus.com).
Day 1 result:
I quoted Hitler on my Republican website landing page (something about Jesus and patriotism) and attributed the quote to Thomas Jefferson.  (I thought it would be hilarious to have a major Republican standard-bearer quote Hitler, and it would prove their inability to verify claims or facts).  A Republican FB group has taken that quote with Jefferson attached and disseminated it to their 2,000 fans and now their fans are sharing it to their page.  Also, I've noticed I'm getting far more hits on the Republican page than the Democrat page.  It seems like conservatives react much quicker and disseminate information much more rapidly than liberals do. <comment><USER2> The Hitler trick might make you feel superior, but do this a couple of more times and you'll have destroyed a potentially valuable asset just because you want to feel smug.

If you want to do A/B testing, do A/B testing. Don't pee in your own swimming pool.

<comment><AUTHOR> I genuinely wasn't doing it to feel superior. The goal is to collect enough data to conclusively verify that the hard right values rhetoric and propaganda over facts and that they are more susceptible to propaganda than the left is. In the process I've also learned that the hard right is more likely to make something viral than the left is.

Regardless, it is an ongoing experiment so I will update it accordingly and probably publish something once I have enough data.

Also, I can probably make some money off the Republican website (more than the Democrat website) but I don't view it as a valuable asset. No matter how big it gets at the end I will dismantle it because it is a net-negative to our society.

<comment><USER3> _I genuinely wasn't doing it to feel superior._

Yes you were. The whole tone of your post is "lol, look at those right-winger idiots!". Remember, you thought it'd be "hilarious".

For what it's worth, I've seen left-wingers also brainlessly forward untruths and non-quotes the same as the right. It's not a political spectrum issue, it's a general issue with people in an information-dense environment.</comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: What to do when your side-project takes off? - <AUTHOR> Very curious to know how things change when you have hyper growth. How do you deal with priorities? Do you reach out to get seed-funding? Who do you speak to? Do you sell?<p>I am asking because I read a lot of stories of people getting #1 on HN or PH and suddenly their servers are down because of heavy traffic. What do you do after that? It seems super crazy <comment><USER2> For B2B, HN and PH users rarely convert, so you would do nothing, because it's not "taking off" \-- it's being flooded with tire-kickers. I think people put too much focus on launching on HN, Reddit, PH, etc. And you also shouldn't expect "hyper growth." I went nearly a year without a paying customer. Growth is a slow thing, not an overnight thing (I know, I know, you hear about these romanticized stories a lot and it's hard not to expect it for yourself). Expecting hyper growth from these channels will result in you giving up early due to unrealistic expectations of bad marketing channels. You're not going to get seed funding because you got a sudden spike in bad traffic.

For B2C, I'm not sure on conversion rates, so I won't comment on that.

</comment><comment><USER3> The death hugs I have seen have usually been products that are on shared hosting, which is never a good thing, even when testing an idea. The few that are hosted somewhere like DigitalOcean or Linode, they didn't scale the VM before getting hugged.

Based on the small handful of times a post of mine has hit #5 or higher, you can expect between 20k and 40k visits. How many conversions you get completely depend on your product.

My blog has had 4 posts that have taken top marks. A total of 150k visits (during those days) and I have had 0 newsletter signups, 0 contact form submissions, $0 in advertising revenue, and $0 in attributed business.

<comment><AUTHOR> You know its funny this reminds me of one of the videos I posted on YouTube which went viral and got 2 million views ($0 from advertising)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> It's a "good problem". At that point it's easier to raise money at a good valuation.

Everyone is energized. Strap on, put it the fires. If you did your architecture right (e.g. put it somewhere like AWS), scaling up the servers is no problem.

We were so energized that we built the whole customer management system in one day, something that takes others weeks to build.

If this is happening, customers usually need whatever you're selling and are much more fault tolerant. At peak, we had 10 crashed a day per user. But it was a good sign that they kept logging on despite the crashes. If you have too many customers to handle, a rule of thumb is to deal with the latest ones first because you've likely already lost the ones who were in the queue for a week.

The biggest threat IMO is that you can actually overestimate yourself. We tried to push at a valuation that is too high, because we got our hockey stick early, but it was much more than investors were willing to take.

<comment><AUTHOR> This is very valuable info. Never thought of focusing on the latest ones first thats a new perspective

Thank you for your post!

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> HN traffic is not sustainable

</comment><comment><USER6> build a side project you think is good. Then worry about this.

<comment><USER7> I don't think OP is asking so that they can get hyper growth, they are just curious about peoples experiences.

<comment><AUTHOR> That is correct I was mainly referring to peoples experiences</comment></comment></comment>


Coming soon: Fedora on Lenovo laptops - <AUTHOR> https://fedoramagazine.org/coming-soon-fedora-on-lenovo-laptops/ <comment><USER2> I don't believe it. They said the same thing more than a year ago, it is still announced in their website for the P models (the choice for ubuntu or fedora), but yet they are impossible to buy. I have harassed the lenovo sales people for months and I have given up in buying a P laptop with linux installed. I do not understand why do they play this kind of stupid games. The only thing that they offer is to buy the laptop with windows, then renounce the windows licence, then follow an online guide to install linux. Honestly, to buy a few laptops for 4000 EUR each, it is fairly insulting to be told that.

<comment><USER3> As you said, finding any laptop with linux is near impossible. Coincidentally I have become friends with a guy at a large reseller near me, so every time I want a new laptop, I call him up, tell him which ones I've set my eyes on, then I go with a live USB to see which one works out of the box.

Manufacturers are obsessed with shoving some half-baked proprietary hardware on their higher end laptops, rendering them unusable for anyone but Windows users.

What really rises my eyebrow is the "fedora" part here. I haven't used Fedora since 2015 and for the time being I don't intend to switch to anything new/old. I can't recall a single time I've seen a linux-out-of-the-box laptop that has anything other than Ubuntu(which I truly hate). It would be nice to see someone putting something else and shipping it like that for a change.

<comment><USER4> > As you said, finding any laptop with linux is near impossible.

For you, maybe?

I can go on Dell's website and buy a laptop with Ubuntu on it right now. I'm looking at it in my cart as we speak.

System76 is a reputable company that _only_ ships systems (including laptops) with Linux on them. I don't own one but most reviews that I've read are quite positive. (Both regarding the hardware and the System76 Ubuntu-based OS.)

Here are at least a couple dozen more: [https://linuxpreloaded.com/](https://linuxpreloaded.com/)

<comment><USER3> I've had very bad experiences with Dell's in the past so I'm staying away from them. My previous laptop was a Dell and it caused me more problems than all other laptops I've owned combined. And they are a tad... Overpriced imo. I mean an xps is around 25-30% more expensive than an equivalent zenbook for instance as a direct competitor. Currently I'm on a zenbook and it's been incredibly reliable. I intend to switch laptop soon and I'm between one of the newer zenbooks(yes, I'm aware of the bullcrap that is the screenpad, though apparently now it even works on linux out of the box) or an hp envy x360 which also apparently works out of the box.

I'm aware of System76 but I want to avoid buying a product that isn't that mainstream outside the US market. I can't recall even seeing one out in the wild anywhere. If something goes wrong with it, I'd need to ship it half way across the world to get it fixed. Not a very solid plan on my end.

I generally need a smaller form-factor laptop, otherwise I'd even consider something like cadnetwork because they too claim to have full linux support and even though they are a small manufacturer, in normal conditions(covid-19 aside), Cologne is a 3 hour, 40-50 euro flight away from me.

<comment><USER4> It sounds like our experiences and locations are very different.

In the US, it's very hard to beat Dell on price. The only ones who can are budget manufacturers and rebadged Chinese products, which usually gets you underwhelming design and longevity.

Dell's lower-end consumer line products can be just as bad. I bought a cheap Inspiron once that was the bane of my existence. But my last two business- class laptops (a Latitude and now a Precision) have been pretty much flawless despite heavy use and rough handling. I run Ubuntu on them both.

In the US, when you buy a business or enterprise product, my understanding is that Dell will send a repair technician to your location. Sometimes you can get them to just send you a replacement part, if you are very persistent.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Huh, I've been using Fedora on my personal T460 for a few years (now on 31) without any major breaking issues. Performs well, upgrades well, bought refurbished for ~$500 of Amazon, bought it extra RAM and an SSD, good life w/standard battery, I can't remember ever hearing the fans run medium/high, uses the standard Thinkpad docking station just fine, and more I'm sure. I'll edit my post if I remember anything worth mentioning.

A few minor issues that seem to get resolved by software updates within weeks of breaking installations:

\- The touchpad goes out, so I'll use the red keyboard nub or reboot the machine.

\- Sometimes can't use the touchscreen (between larger upgrades) but I don't use this often, it wasn't supposed to have one!

\- Screen can flicker in GNOME when bouncing between workspaces (Windows + Page Up/Down)

Even then, these issues may just be my own machine/configuration!

Others have mentioned being wary of pre-installed Lenovo support, and I can agree. While I'd still replace their Fedora for my own install, they'd certainly help my confidence that the laptop was built to fit Linux expectations.

<comment><USER6> I had the same issue with the touchpad going out on my Thinkpad, running Ubuntu. This would always happen after coming out hibernation so I wrote a systemd service[1] that runs a small shell script [2] after coming out of hibernation.

[1] [https://gist.github.com/briandeheus/bfa498000f52fbf1b581b9a0...](https://gist.github.com/briandeheus/bfa498000f52fbf1b581b9a0cfad0e82)

[2] [https://gist.github.com/briandeheus/3c765d520680053da54b680d...](https://gist.github.com/briandeheus/3c765d520680053da54b680d808e89ae)

<comment><USER5> Thank you!.. I'll keep your gists in-mind if I ever come across this trackpad issue again. Thinking about it, since Fedora 30 or 29, I don't actually remember encountering this problem - I know where to come back to if I do though! Thanks again!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> That's great news. It looks like Fedora will be available on the P series (powerful workstations) and X1 Carbon. I hope it will soon be expanded to other laptops. I am really interested in T series with AMD Ryzen 4000 line (should be released later this year) and would love to avoid paying the Windows tax.

I just wonder if the fingerprint reader is finally supported on Linux. Also the LTE modem on my X1 Carbon (6th gen) has no support.

<comment><USER8> The fingerprint reader is not yet supported on 6th gen X1.I never tried to get the LTE modem working. Funnily, I didn't even realize that the slot existed for almost a year after purchase.

<comment><USER9> I don't know which model of fingerprint reader is in the 6th gen, but on the 7th gen, enabling the beta firmware made it work perfectly.

      $ fwupdmgr enable-remote lvfs-testing

If you temporarily enable, apply the Prometheus fingerprint updates then disable you won't need to worry about installing unstable firmware that will affect the system more widely.

<comment><USER10> fwupdmgr / LVFS is such a breath of fresh air compared to the various old vendor specific fw update procedures!

<comment><USER9> The novelty of updating firmware via a GUI on Linux still hasn't worn off.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> This is great news, even if you don't plan to use Fedora or if you plan to buy the same laptop with Windows pre-installed instead of Linux. It means some Red Had people were paid to make sure all the hardware in the laptop works. Even if the patches are not all upstream at the time of release (and I'm 100% sure the Fedora people will try to upstream as much as they can), you know they exist and you will be able to use if needed.

I recently got a Thinkbook from my employer and the touchpad doesn't work and there are no patches available for it. I'm stuck with having to use a mouse because my employer didn't care consult me before buying a laptop...

The areas where Linux shine are the areas where people are paid to get open source stuff done. And I am thankful for the existence of companies like Red Hat, Suse and Canonical. Because HW manufacturers and OEMs clearly have no clue about how to write and ship software...

<comment><USER12> > It means some Red Had people were paid to make sure all the hardware in the > laptop works.

IIRC, I've heard from former RH engineers that RH _already_ runs mostly on either Thinkpads or Dell laptops, so this could easily have been an internal push to make their own rollouts easier. It certainly makes provisioning faster if the guy preparing the Lenovo laptop doesn't have to start with blowing away the OS, loading Fedora, and then applying a dozen patches or other config changes to make the laptop happy w/ Fedora.

<comment><USER11> I understand what you say, but this is different because there is official support from the OEM now. If something doesn't work the Red Hat engineer won't have to reverse-engineer stuff, they will officially contact Lenovo, which will officially contact the manufacturer of whatever component is not working, and they are going to work to a solution the proper way. Much better and faster than the alternative.

Source: I worked doing exactly this many years ago.

</comment></comment></comment><comment> sh-run This is a really good sign. I hope this means more corporate IT support for Linux desktops. This is the first year I've been able to use Linux (Fedora 31) on a corporate owned machine (T490s) and I don't think I could go back. For my work, it really is a better experience.

I've also been using Fedora as the primary OS on my personal devices since 2011 (T410 -> x220 -> T470s and a couple of custom PCs). I stay on fairly standard hardware and really haven't had any major issues in the past 9 years.

<comment><USER13> > I hope this means more corporate IT support for Linux desktops.

Admittedly I'm biased by my own experience, but my understanding is that many software-engineering-heavy companies already primarily use some flavor of Linux for their corporate engineering workstations, including many of the FAANG companies (and excluding, for obvious reasons, Apple).

Of course, I doubt many non-engineering workers are using a traditional desktop Linux, but I recently noticed that my kids' pediatricians' office does use a form of desktop Linux (something Gnome based) for their scheduling/reception system computers.

<comment> sh-run I'm at a FAANG for the first time, but was previously at a big financial company with a relatively large IT org. It would've been nice to have an option to use Linux there. I think FAANGs are the exception not the norm.

Edit: or maybe I haven't been picky enough with my employers.

<comment><USER14> My last two employers (300-7000 employees) have both offered linux as a first class citizen for support (along windows and macos). The hardware for linux has been both very good and bad though, so the support does not count for much if the hardware sucks.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> I prefer Ubuntu. If I buy one of these models, does it mean that there are drivers/support for all hardware in Ubuntu as well? Are some of the divers proprietary or Fedora-specific?

<comment><USER16> I bought a Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 7th gen a few months ago. And almost nothing worked with Ubuntu 19.10 out of box. (Also tried Debian and archlinux and had _worse_ driver problems). Wifi driver doesn't work; audio driver doesn't work, pulseaudio is buggy (since volume up/down changes master and not PCM so it does not change actual volume output); hibernation doesn't work properly (still drains battery even when laptop lid is closed); wifi does not connect to 5G even after driver starts working, screen tearing on fullscreen, audio doesn't output as loud as Window even if it claims it's running software amplification (150% volume)...

Most of these were fixable, but took about a week of research on random forums, stackoverflow, kernel mail list (for wifi driver), Archlinux wiki etc...

I never had any issues with linux before. Never. Zero. i was very excited when I first bought this $3000 laptop since this is the first time I bought an expensive electronics. It was absolute shit show from beginning to end.

I'm still dealing with screen tearing and audio being quiet (compared to Windows running on the same machine, and my Macbook Pro playing the same song). I decided last night, I'll try another distro such as Fedora. I feel completely stuck. I hate using Windows. My macbook is work computer so I can't use it for personal stuff. I'm just stuck in this $3000 computer that requires hours of research every time.

I sure hope Lenovo get their act together and have a "Recommended" linux image for these machines.

<comment><USER17> This was my experience with Lenovo laptops.

The thing is, I am pretty sure it's not uncommon. I'm pretty sure if you buy completely brand new hardware, there's a good chance it won't be ready to run Linux out of the box. Lenovo sure isn't putting in all the work to make it happen.

On the flip side, if you're a developer it may not be outside the realm of possibility to fix some of the problems yourself and contribute. If that's not what you want to be doing with a new laptop, totally understandable, but I have found some unexpected joy in doing so myself. Well OK. As long as nothing is wrong with the WiFi.

After about a year, pretty much any Lenovo laptop should be working well out of the box, at least that's what I've experienced.

<comment><USER18> And then when it comes time to refresh the operating system in a few years, get ready to do it all over again.

If you want hardware that is actually supported, buy System76 or Purism. I have two Meerkats, a Thelio, and a Librem 13. Everything just works.

<comment><USER16> Our niche is very small. Most people are frustrated by linux, and switch to Windows or OSX. I CANNOT do that, because Windows frustrates me even more, systematically; at least on linux it's tremendous amount of frustration the first time, then it just works. I suppose what I should have done was to buy an older laptop, instead of a cutting edge one. Oh well. The more you learn...

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Really glad they decided to launch this with Fedora. Nothing against Ubuntu per-se, but I - and many others - prefer Linux from the RHEL / CentOS / Fedora family. And there already are, or have been, OEM's shipping Ubuntu. Nice to see somebody go with Fedora.

</comment><comment><USER12> Any grey-beards wanna weigh in on the state of current ThinkPad models? There usually seems to be quite a bit of nostalgia for the IBM-owned days, where _everything_ was modular/replaceable and the laptops had a 10-year lifespan.

I've seen some murmuring that the more "ultrabook" they become, the less dependable. In which case, I would probably just stick with the Dell XPS line, which I've been pretty happy with so far.

<comment><USER20> My beard isn't completely grey yet but I've been to redhat offices in Stockholm and most people there use Lenovo laptops.

I've enjoyed them for many years too. My first Lenovo "ultrabook" was X1 Carbon. It was quite obvious that there were very few (perhaps none) CRUs on it. But it has served me for 4 years and still works. The battery discharges faster now of course.

So late 2019 I got an X1 Yoga to replace it, 2nd Lenovo Ultrabook. So far so good.

I work in Fedora every single day, very extensively. I find these laptops and Fedora to be very dependable. But of course that means little because people who run OpenBSD make the same claims.

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> One of the things that has kept me from trying Linux in earnest (and yes, I'm very lazy) is concerns about which hardware is supported by which flavors, and how much.

<comment><USER22> System76 just released the lemur pro:

[https://system76.com/laptops/lemur](https://system76.com/laptops/lemur)

You can option it up to 40GB of ram, it comes with a banging CPU and it weighs less than a macbook air. System76 makes sure that PopOS and Ubuntu both work flawlessly with their hardware.

I bought one the day it was released to replace my Carbon X1 (gen 6) and it has been perfect. In particular for me, USB-C charging + monitor works flawlessly when I disconnect and reconnect, and the power button is on the side, which is great because I use my laptop as a workstation most of the time.

Highly recommended if you want a linux machine.

<comment><USER23> Really tempted by the System76 machines but my worry is the screen res. My MBP (2014) has 2880x1800 and I really don't want to go down to something less crisp than retina.

<comment><USER23> Also would love to hear about the keyboard compared e.g. to the older MBPs and the Thinkpads.

<comment><USER22> I plug in to a big monitor and full size keyboard for getting work done, but...

Regarding the monitor, I find the 1920×1080 resolution fine at 14 inches. Super high resolution monitors this small ended up being annoying to me.

Regarding the keyboard, I prefer the Carbon X1, which has deeper keys and more key travel. The Lemur has keys similar to the macbook keyboard, very low profile and very short travel.

<comment><USER23> As in, the post-2015 unusable MBP keyboards or the nice ones? That might be enough to push me towards the X1 instead of the Lemur although I'd love to get a System76 just to have something from an independent shop from whom I might expect decent service.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> Fedora has been the only distro that seems to work with my ThinkPad Yoga immediately after install. I battled against Ubuntu and other distros for ages trying to get the screen rotation to work and eventually just made scripts to convert between portrait and landsacpe and even with that the touch controls failed to work properly.

</comment><comment><USER25> Red Hatter here. I have a Thinkpad T470s with Fedora as my daily driver and I have to admit it works pretty flawlessly

<comment><USER26> Interesting. My daily driver portable machine is a T470 so I may try that this weekend. I run out of a docking station with two monitors so have been scared to try it TBH. It works pretty flawlessly on windows though.

<comment><USER27> I have a T470p with a docking station and an external monitor and I have no complaints much like the other user.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> Still, you'll get a machine that's not pleasant to look at. Funny that GNU/Linux OS has been advancing greatly the past decade, outperforming Windows and Mac, but without proper hardware match. Lenovo laptops are so ugly and battery performance usually not more than 6h. My work laptop used to be Dell 7000 series, which is perfect on Fedora but with one drawback: calling Dell support to change motherboard every 6 months. Now some companies come to fill the gap, one of them is Purism. I was so happy to see them operating. Well, after paying 1300$, for a really modest processor, the whole laptop fell apart in less than 6 months. It was even worst than any Ascer laptops I've used!! You finally, with all the shame, go back using a Macbook. Fedora on MacBook is the future; but long way to go to get everything working properly.

</comment><comment><USER29> Now Lenovo please step up your laptop game. 16:10 screen, small bezels, HiDPI screen with sane resolution (like 3200x1800) -> good trade-off between battery life and sharpness, and perfect for 2x integer scaling (better performance). Good speakers and microphone.

</comment><comment><USER30> This would be a major game changer. Fedora does things the right way Linux support wise (not relying on proprietary drivers). Combined with the high build quality of a thinkpad, this may become the go-to developer laptop.

</comment><comment><USER31> This is very good. Manufacturers will make sure that the hardware is fully supported. There is also System76 and I think you can buy laptops from Dell as well w/ Ubuntu preinstalled

<comment><USER32> My precision 5520 pre installed with Ubuntu was riddled with issues, had garbage audio compared to the windows version (tried all kinds of eq programs and tweaks), and the battery life was terrible... Was not a good experience

</comment></comment><comment><USER33> Lenovo (IBM) has been an active supporter of Linux since around 2006. The Thinkpad T43p had a lot of Linux enabled for the workstation users. I recall when I was at ATI involved in their effort, we worked closely with the engineering team in Japan to make sure that suspend/resume and hibernation worked well with the graphics portion.

It's good to see that this has continued.

Don't underestimate how much use of Linux on high end PC hardware happens within the Workstation market.

</comment><comment><USER34> Sounds great. From the major hardware vendors, I heard only of Dell, to offer laptops with Linux preinstalled. Sadly my personal experience with an Dell XPS was so bad (hardware, quality-wise) that I do not want to buy their hardware again.

The big thing here is not that you don't have to install Linux yourself, but that they care about the driver support. Not having to install a Linux yourself is a nice bonus though.

<comment><USER35> What was your problem with the Dell XPS hardware?

<comment><USER34> It started with minor annoyances like the touchpad looking greasy at the center after a few days (cleaning didn't make a difference). After a few months, the touch screen didn't work anymore. I tried different OS and after a while, I contacted the support. I had a call for about an hour during which they updated the BIOS, but it didn't help. So they sent a technician, who found out, that the Touchscreen didn't work, but had no replacement at hand. So a few days later another technician came and replaced the display. I didn't use the laptop very often at that time, but after a while, I noticed that the display flickered sometimes now, I tried to track down the root of the issue but to this day I don't know what causes it (at least it doesn't seem to be an OS issue). However, by the time I found out that the flickering was not related to the OS, the warranty period was over.

In addition, to the screen issues, the touchpad is just not good. In the beginning, it was okay, after a while you couldn't press it properly anymore (didn't came back up). Some time later, the opposite effect was present: the touchpad popped out about 1mm and you can't press it again.

However, those are just the aspects in which I would categorize the issue as low build quality. For example, other aspects are, that I like the keyboard layout very much and learned that I hate glare-type displays even more than I thought I would.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> This is great news.

I use Fedora on a Thinkpad X1 Carbon (7th Gen) and it works flawlessly. Enabling beta firmware even made the fingerprint reader (historically a problem area) work perfectly.

I'd definitely have bought it with Fedora if it'd been available at the time, the Windows 10 install was gone within twenty minutes of me opening the box.

</comment><comment><USER36> Why should I trust their Linux installation any more than their Windows installations, which have been preloaded with backdoors, malware and all kinds of phone-home nasties at least several times over the years? It'll be nice if it ends up being cheaper than the Windows version, but I'll still be wiping it.

<comment><USER4> Linked article states that all software installed on the laptop comes from the Fedora repos.

</comment></comment><comment><USER37> This is awesome news with Fedora 32 right around the corner. I'm also in the market for a new laptop pretty soon.

</comment><comment><USER38> As with most posters here:

* I love Fedora, use it as my primary OS for more than a decade

* also love Thinkpads, have used on and off for 25+ years

But I have mixed feelings about this announcement and hope it is just more vaporware (as Fedora on Thinkpad has been announced before).

Part of what I love about Fedora is that it is _just_ on the other side of the river from corporate RHEL. So it inherits a ton of the infrastructure and the process and so forth, but it doesn't have to pay for it.

Instead Fedora gets shiny new things pretty quickly and sometimes, not often, things break. Support is- whatever you can find. That's great.

Once you get into the world where stuff _has_ to work because sales and support contracts- the dynamic changes. Fewer new things, less speed, more conformity.

It's not Fedora any more.

We could see this looming in the acquisition. Hope it takes yet still longer for the bureaucracy to chew through.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> A bit more information: [https://blogs.gnome.org/uraeus/2020/04/24/a-bold-new- chapter...](https://blogs.gnome.org/uraeus/2020/04/24/a-bold-new-chapter-for- fedora-workstation/)

</comment><comment><USER19> Righteous!

I had heard vague rumblings that something like this might be in the works, back when I was at Lenovo. Glad to see them actually take this step.

Now more than ever, I could see my next new laptop being a ThinkPad.

</comment><comment><USER39> Holy crap yes. I don't care for Fedora, but it beats having to scrape Windows off, and hopefully it means these laptops will be engineered for Linux/open source from the start.

</comment><comment><USER40> I have a ThinkPad P1 Gen 2 with Ubuntu 20.04 LTS installed. It works fine. By contrast I had gotten a Dell Precision 5530 with Dell OEM Ubuntu, and after a factory reset the GPU couldn't be detected afterwards. Unless they get things like battery management or fractional scaling or a fingerprint reader working properly, you already have the freedom to install Linux on your machine and honestly you might do a better job than what a manufacturer might do anyways.

<comment><USER10> I also have a P1Gen2, though I'm still on Ubuntu 19.10, haven't updated to 20.04 yet. For the most part it works fine:

\- Haven't tried the fingerprint reader \- Multimonitor with the docking stations is extremely flaky. With various messing around with connecting/disconnecting cables, closing/opening the lid etc. I've occasionally gotten it to work, but not reliably. \- Fractional scaling is reportedly not working with the nvidia driver in 20.04. In 19.10 it does work, though it's not enabled by default, you have to set an option on the cmdline to make it appear in the GUI. \- And yeah, the entire multi-GPU thing is klunky, as you have to run the prime-select tool and reboot when switching.

</comment></comment><comment><USER41> I hope this won't be US-only, does anyone know more details?

<comment><AUTHOR> Looks like someone asked in the comments over there.

– Will it be available globally? I.E in the U.K?

>> As I understand the plan, yes, it should be globally, although there is some amount of regulatory red tape that needs to be cleared everywhere so I have no idea on timing. This is great for individuals around the world, of course, but it's also important for companies who want to standardize on a Fedora OS and on the same laptop models worldwide

</comment></comment><comment><USER42> Neat. I've already been running Fedora on my ThinkPad for a few years and it works great. All devices are working, BIOS updates from boot USB. One issue was with that Intel security thing that needed updates and it was impossible to do on Linux. If someone is worried about backdoors or malware, you can easily wipe whole drive and install fresh from trusted source.

</comment><comment><USER43> I couple of words of warning.

1\. _Lenovo has a bit of a shady history_ , with Superfish and Service Engine/Center being the main pre-installed malware or data leaking things that come to mind. Those were windows focused, but if they'll do it there, why wouldn't they do it on linux?

2\. Often manufacturers who ship linux will add really stupid EULA/TOSs to the system. A few years ago I bought a Dell linux system only to be greeted by one that had all kinds of things like arbitration clauses I did not agree to, so _I highly suggest not using pre-shipped linux versions!_

3\. _Be prepared to distro-hop to find the right one_ , regardless of "linux compat" tags. Each batch of production even on the same laptop line will have small variations, and after many years of testing linux on many laptops, my general advice is you really have to distro-hop to find the right linux for the laptop you have. I know this isn't ideal, but it is the state of things. For example, I have a newer Ryzen laptop 2-in-1. Every single major distro including arch with newer kernels had major, showstopping issues... On a hunch I tried Devuan... and I have now been running a non-systemd system for half a year with no major issues at all. (and it helps me stay on top of sysvinit land since I still manage some non-systemd boxen) On other systems I've had to distrohop and the one that works ends up being something else. For example in 2015 I had a MBP on which Ubuntu seemed to just work better than fedora or debian or arch. In 2017 the MBP I had Manjaro ended up being what worked over the others. (the Manjaro hardware detector is the best in linux land imho)

4\. _Consider different desktop environments and window managers_. One of my pet peeves is someone trying out Ubuntu with KDE/Gnome with something and when it doesn't work throwing up their hands. I think far too often what people blame linux for is really the fault of the DE/WMs. Consider going outside the norm, try XFCE, i3, or my favorite, Awesome. (there are many more)

5\. Finally, while I understand we all want things to just work on the practical side, remember that computing is inherently an ideological choice, at least in my opinion it is. (I am excluding work computing because sometimes you don't get a choice on that / _stares at work Macbook menacingly_ ) I believe in the four freedoms as posited by RMS and try to match my actions to that, for example almost everything I use is gpl+, with only a few exceptions which I am always looking for alternatives to. I've sacrificed some things to get here (gaming w/ friends on some games that don't work in proton/wine, for example) but it is worth it to me.

</comment><comment> blaser-waffle Don't tease me like this son. Currently running Fedora on an old Thinkpad.

If this was truly serious I would be interested. Dell has had a tenuous relationship with Ubuntu, but it was enough that I seriously looked at their business line a few months back.

</comment><comment><USER44> I have mixed feelings here. On one hand, more hardware makers supporting Linux is good. On the other, I don't really feel like I want the kind of pre- installed "support" software Lenovo has given Windows to come to Linux.

<comment><USER45> Good news! The people we are working with at Lenovo have no interest in this either. We don't have any special deal here: they're shipping Fedora under the standard open source licenses and [https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal:Trademark_guidelines#OE...](https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal:Trademark_guidelines#OEM_pre- loads_of_unmodified_Fedora_software), which means there's nothing added (except their docs in /opt/lenovo).

</comment></comment><comment><USER46> Interesting. I wonder if this will help bring better eGPU support. I have a Thinkpad 25 Retro with an NVIDIA 940MX and it doesn't play well with suspend and resume, optimus, etc.

</comment><comment><USER47> Oh wow! I think I could finally be tempted to get an X1..!

<comment><USER48> Don't even bother.

I have an X1E and the whole dual GPU situation is still a mess under Linux.

Of course it depends on your use-case, but stuff like running external displays or using fractional scaling on the 4k internal display never seems to work. nVidia drivers are buggy a/f, Nouveau is a pain to get working properly.

<comment><USER36> I had a hard time getting Fedora to run reliably on the P53 models we recently bought. Of course, NVIDIA turned out to be the culprit once more. Things improved after installing the proprietary drivers, but it sure would be nice if things would Just Work out of the box.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER49> Honestly, ever since i moved from a pure linux environment, to just using Windows 10 pro, I have had 0 issues, and have spent a significantly smaller amount of time tweaking my environment settings.

I get why some people would want a bare-metal OEM install of linux for technical reasons (some languages/tools just run better on linux, or are only available on linux), but I really don't understand the hate people have for Windows 10. With the WSL, I've actually got a linux shell I can pop into whenever the need comes up, as well.

<comment><USER50> I don't hate Windows 10 by any means, I just find Linux works better for me.

I use a Thinkpad and all the drivers work fine without tweaking, so that's not an issue for my setup.

Personally, I just really like the little features I get with Linux.

For example, I have a little script that recognizes when I insert a certain encrypted SD card, and automatically copies over some config files from my home directory.

There may be a way to do that on Windows, it's just so much easier on Linux that Windows doesn't seem worth the trouble.

<comment><USER49> All of your statements make perfect sense. I was more addressing the comments that were acting like Windows was some kind of toxic sludge they had to swim through to get to a linux install.

<comment><USER51> Much of that stems from the days when Microsoft used to threaten OEMs that offered an alternative to Windows.

I don't want to use Windows. That's not because Windows is bad it's because I like Linux and want to have good Linux experience. That Microsoft has previously used try to stop that leaves a bad taste in the mouth.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER52> omg, is it true! finally!! i have to get a new lenovo in soon, and this is _really_ good news! I will skip the windows backshis :)

</comment><comment><USER53> Bought a used ThinkPad 420 and stuck arch with lxqt on it. My teen child is quite happy with it!!

</comment><comment><USER54> Great. Do they come without hardware backdoors as well?

</comment><comment><USER55> Finally!</comment>


Patagonia Stops Selling Vests To Some Finance Firms - <AUTHOR> https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/katienotopoulos/patagonia-power-vest-policy-change <comment><USER3> Um, you guys... the PR firm that uncovered this alleged plot is called - <USER2> for it - "Vested".

"Kim, president of the communications agency Vested (the reference is to the finance term, not the sleeveless layer), attempted to place an order for a client..."

Their website is www.fullyvested.com and their recruiting page is titled In- Vested. Get it? In Vested.

Scroll down the article to the satirical Instagram post with a new definition of "Divest" involving "guys named Chad."

Announcing it yesterday would have made the prank too obvious.

Hats off to the creative director at Vested for pulling off a masterful stroke of guerilla marketing. Now they are on the radar of tons of finance firms who know that this firm "feels their pain," so to speak. Well played on all fronts.

<comment><USER4> Nothing here indicates a prank to me. The Instagram post was from half a year ago and is from an account that semi-famous in NY for making fun of finance bros. The author just included it as an example of how the vest is associated with finance culture.

<comment><USER5> Midtown uniforms?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Well it's a smart move. They are simply protecting the integrity of their brand. They built a reputation based on a set of corporate values that are not necessarily aligned with those companies that embroider their logo in those vests. They probably don't make a lot of money from those corporate sales either. Any risk of damaging the brand by association is not worth it.

<comment><USER7> That whole April Fool's thing kinda went over your head.

<comment><USER6> I think it actually went over yours (from the article):

>"A representative for Patagonia confirmed it has recently changed its policy, but declined to say exactly when this change happened. Here is the company's statement:

"Our corporate sales program manages Patagonia's sales to other companies, non-profits and other organizations. We recently shifted the focus of this program to increase the number of Certified B Corporations, 1% For The Planet members and other mission-driven companies that prioritize the planet. This shift does not affect current customers in our corporate sales program.""

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Don't think I can take Ms. Notopoulos seriously when she doles out dreck like this:

> The Power Vest flaunts a very cruel male privilege: being comfortable.

> The Power Vest is a form of male privilege, a hideous fleece totem of the > patriarchy's oppression of non-cis-male people in the workplace.

Seriously? It's just a vest.

[https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/katienotopoulos/i-wore-...](https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/katienotopoulos/i-wore- a-vest-like-jeff-bezos-for-a-week-to-see-if-id-be)

<comment><USER9> >Don't think I can take Ms. Notopoulos seriously

i'm not entirely sure you were supposed to.

<comment><USER10> Well, that's the thing, isn't it? It's Poe's Law but with reputational damage if you guess wrong in the wrong situation. Take it seriously and it wasn't? You're a buffoon. Take it as a joke when it's serious? You're an insensitive asshole and a bigot, and nobody can make the case you were acting in good faith and made a mistake.

<comment><USER11> The dangers of engaging with satire are very real. However the costs paid are generally short-lived and to the open-minded and those able to find humor in themselves, repaid in full if not in excess.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I am so happy to see this. I have supported Patagonia as a consumer due to their commitment to corporate responsibility, specifically their (more) ethical clothing manufacturing practices.

When I'm in the Bay Area and see every private equity bro wearing a Patagonia fleece, it makes me wonder if they are supporting the brand for the same reason.

Ultimately it shouldn't matter. But I'd rather be associated with the responsibly sourced clothing brand than the financial engineering brand.

<comment><USER13> I find it odd that excluding religious groups is now considered good ethics.

<comment><USER14> Can you explain what you're referring to with "excluding religious groups"?

<comment><USER15> The tweet in the article states that Patagonia is now excluding religious groups [https://twitter.com/binnaskim/status/1112731360244961283](https://twitter.com/binnaskim/status/1112731360244961283)

<comment><USER14> Oh thanks for the heads up. Seems entirely reasonable to exclude religious groups who promote anti-environmentalism.

They're not blanket excluding religious groups.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Lots of finance meme accounts reflect the "Patagucci" culture of finance - check out these - they frequently showcase "sleds" \- $300+ (frankly, tasteless) Gucci and Ferragamo shoes that are sort of a "post-intern" status symbol. I follow these accounts to try and have a pulse on when the next recession will hit.

[https://www.instagram.com/hoeingforyield/](https://www.instagram.com/hoeingforyield/) [https://www.instagram.com/finance_god/](https://www.instagram.com/finance_god/)

I could absolutely see why Patagonia wants to distance itself from these sorts of fratty, money-focused business cultures. Same with Venture Capital.

<comment><USER17> This thread is worth it just for the instagram links above!

<comment><USER17> For ex. [https://www.instagram.com/p/BvH3sS1FuPy/](https://www.instagram.com/p/BvH3sS1FuPy/)

</comment></comment></comment><comment> munk-a Bravo!

I hope this (and Nike with Kaepernick) is the start of a wave in society calling companies to task over advertising shilling.

Personally, and I've expressed this numerous times, I find advertising to be absolutely devastating on the efficiency of modern society so... let's de- brand everything wee!

<comment><USER8> In Soviet utopia, only _one_ toothbrush. Very efficient, yes?

<comment><USER18> Contrary to the misconceptions of many people who have never actually lived in the Soviet Union, there were multiple, competing brands of consumer goods, all the way from radios, to automobiles [1] and refrigerators.

[1] Off that list, of course, automobiles were very difficult to obtain.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Here we have a company that has cobranded with others in the past, but over time there has been a sentiment shift and now it wishes to distance itself from what this particular area of society reflects.

It's interesting because it is sort of a rebrand for Patagonia to move away from this market. I have no idea if the numbers of cobranded vests are large and material on their revenue. If I had to guess I would probably say no. However, the public sentiment on this and seeing these vests on wall st and in VC circles could be actually a potentially damaging blow to the brand. One that was originally self inflicted.

Based on them looking to move away from this I would have to guess that they aren't really happy with this direction. Kind of like the Colin Kaepernick ads with Nike, though on a much smaller scale.

</comment><comment><USER20> Oh come on, don't drag Jared into this, he's one of the good ones! And his vest isn't even co-branded.

</comment><comment><USER21> From what I have gathered, reason vests are popular in SF is due to daily weather fluctuations since they are light weight. I did not know they were popular in other cities/metros too. Especially in finance sector.

<comment><USER22> One of the only interesting observations in the (awful, just awful, I cannot emphasize enough how bad it is) sequel to _The Prep Handbook_ is that synthetic fleece had, since the first book, became a hugely popular exception to the usual prep-set rule of "no synthetics", largely for practical reasons (at least at first). I wouldn't be surprised if it's a bit of dressed-down prep fashion being expressed or imitated, at least by a certain set of the folks wearing it. Finance'd be the right crowd for that.

[EDIT] that is, _The Official Preppy Handbook_. The sequel's called _True Prep_ and is, again, awful, do not read it, it has none of the fun, well- voiced humor of the first, it's bad, bad, bad.

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> Maybe this is because I'm not in that particular tech scene, but is this a thing? Between that and the linked article:

[https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/katienotopoulos/i-wore-...](https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/katienotopoulos/i-wore- a-vest-like-jeff-bezos-for-a-week-to-see-if-id-be)

I am honestly not sure.

<comment><USER24> I don't see vests that much but see black Patagonia puff jackets everywhere, both branded and unbranded.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> big opportunity for Summit Ice

</comment><comment> smith-kyle "All those evil hedge funds and "Uber-for-X" tech startups can go pound sand."

Why are "Uber-for-X" startups and hedge funds lumped into the same category? Is the "Uber-for-X" business model unethical or does it bring no value to consumers?

<comment><USER26> Uber for x usually means "let's break laws and 'disrupt' an industry where workers had a reasonable quality of life and further push the gig economy" I'm fully okay with calling that out for being detrimental.

At least a hedge fund invests money for clients and pays taxes (sometimes)

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> This is epic. I actually received one of these at a event last week. I actually thought it was horribly tacky, living someplace not California where jackets need arms to prevent frostbite. I had no idea that they were a part of the culture wars.

</comment><comment><USER28> Why doesn't someone just take this to the next level and make one of these with an _FYIFV_ logo?

</comment><comment><USER29> I saw this on @litquidity and thought it was still an April fools headline

</comment><comment><USER30> Yes, and the clothing industry is well known to be employee friendly and to generously share revenue with the whole supply chain.

The day they publish _their_ margin and cost breakdown, I may listen to their PR BS.

<comment> seedless-sensat Patagonia are absolute pioneers of sustainable clothing, and significantly pushed the industry in the right direction. Please spend 30 seconds on their corporate website, or go read _Let my people go surfing_ before making unsustaniated critiques.

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> Outstanding.

And of course, on-brand.

</comment><comment><USER32> More for L.L. Bean, I guess.

</comment><comment><USER33> Love it.

</comment><comment><USER34> Vests make a corporate comeback!

</comment><comment><USER35> They're free to do business with whomever they wish to, of course, but this seems an odd choice.</comment>


Firefox Nightly: network monitor added to dev tools - <AUTHOR> http://firefoxnightly.tumblr.com/post/47460334547/a-network-monitor-landed-in-the-dev-tools-of Screen: http://cl.ly/image/2q2s450r2B43 <comment><AUTHOR> Screenshot: <http://i.imgur.com/9XWKo4p.png></comment>