BusinessWeek:  Tech's Best Young Entrepreneurs - <AUTHOR> http://images.businessweek.com/ss/08/04/0418_youngtech_entp/index_01.htm?chan=technology_special+report+--+best+young+entrepreneurs_best+young+entrepreneurs <comment><USER2> First off, congrats to the guys who made the list. It's hard work being an entrepreneur, and I'm glad that you guys are getting some good press.

But, I do have a problem with how it seems that these businesses are being selected. It seems that the level of funding that these people raised is used as a hallmark of how good the entrepreneur is. Isn't the mark of a good entrepreneur how much they can do with how little?

I can understand why a video company like Video Egg might need a high capitalization. Bandwidth charges for video streaming are high. But, I'd still balk at taking $27 million in funding.

Etsy--31 million in funding. Granted, the company has 1 million users and 75,000 sellers. But really, 31 million dollars! What does an e-commerce site need 31 million for?

I've actually begun to see taking large sums of VC money as a competitive disadvantage. If these companies take $20-30 million in funding, the VC's are going to push for a 10x return. That means that their investors are wanting a $200-300 million exit. And, even at those rates, I'd imagine that the founders shares are quite diluted by that point.

And, I'd guess that the chances of getting a $200-300 exit are a lot slimmer than getting a $5-6 million exit. For details Google "Digg acquisition": [http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=active&clien...](http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=active&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en- US:official&hs=Ess&sa=X&oi=spell&resnum=0&ct=result&cd=1&q=digg+acquisition&spell=1)

<comment><USER3> Yeah, it's like BW is blinded by the numbers--that money's not a personal gift to the founders (from "holed up alone in a room for 100 hours a week" to "Funding: $17.5 million"). Regardless, it's a validation of their efforts.

True success will be determined years from now based on the outcome of these investments.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Congratulations Drew!

<comment><USER5> Congrats to dhouston! [http://images.businessweek.com/ss/08/04/0418_youngtech_entp/...](http://images.businessweek.com/ss/08/04/0418_youngtech_entp/source/5.htm)

(One of the founders of SFP07 company Dropbox, for those not in the know).

The article failed to mention his rock band skills.

<comment><USER6> Does anyone know if Drew is related to Chris Houston of Amp'd Mobile fame? Just curious... I used to work w/ Chris...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Apparently I am no longer a "young" entrepreneur. (sigh)

<comment><USER3> The hook seems to be tying "kids" to "millions"--must draw lots of eyeballs (like the last time around).

Maybe AARP has a business publication that would like to profile all these young 30- and 40-something upstart entrepreneurs.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> RockYou? Really?

<comment><USER9> F Me. $15 mil for adding tinsel to your MySpace? And _"RockYou is lining up a new round of funding to stay sharp."_.

Etsy: $31.6 mil for a swapmeet just for _handmade crafts_.

When people take that much buck for so little bang it doesn't seem like they are interested in ROI or making it big so much as having a jobs program for them and their buddies.

Auctomatic sold for what probably amounts to a few months' burn rate for these suckers and still made their founders millionaires. How are these guys with 20 or 30 mil invested going to find a buyer that makes them a profit?

By the strict definition of entrepreneur (assuming the risk), that title goes to the VCs. When the venture tanks it's not going to be the founder who's out $30 mil.

Not a lot of technical wow in that list. Drupal probably leads by a good margin.

<comment><USER10> I won't argue against RockYou. That's just silly. But Handmade crafts are a huge segment of the market, especially with women as soon as they graduate college and start nesting. There's a much bigger upside to Etsy.

<comment><USER9> > _especially with women as soon as they graduate college and start nesting_

Nesting? What are they, ducks? As a feminist I'd like to say that's some pretty idiotic stereotyping. Female college graduates overwhelmingly enter the workforce, not nests.

<comment><USER11> 'Nesting' is a common term for the set of behaviors that makes a home more compatible with a family than a single person. Are you unfamiliar with it?

Is it really idiotic to suggest that women are more likely to do handmade crafts than men? I know many women who knit as adults, or make small crafts as kids.

However, there's an easy way to settle this. If etsy is going to underserve the vast market for men who knit adorable mittens and hats for their kids, you can certainly be successful with a startup that targets that market. Or we could just bet that the online craft market with a higher fraction of male sellers will be more successful than the one dominated by women.

Or we could concede that -- whether due to biology or the patriarchy -- gender correlates with some behaviors. That shouldn't be hard to admit.

<comment><USER9> > _Are you unfamiliar with it?_

Yeah, I totally thought you were talking about ducks!

> _Is it really idiotic to suggest that women are more likely to do handmade > crafts than men?_

Now you're trying to change the subject.

Your actual idiotic suggestion which I refuted quite specifically is that as soon as women graduate college they start "nesting". In fact women college graduates are pushing back starting families by record amounts.

I know a lot of female professionals and I can't think of any without kids that spend any appreciable amount of time on handmade crafts.

<comment><USER11> Are you thinking of this person: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=167383> ? I didn't say that.

Unless you're addressing an autistic audience, it is acceptable to say "Women do X" when you really mean "Women do X more frequently than non-women, although of course some women do not do X at all, some have never heard of X, some hate X, etc." For example, I am rarely corrected if I say "Five-year-olds are taller than four-year-olds," even though it's trivial to demonstrate that this isn't true. If your argument is that the statement in question is not _literally_ true, you are correct. But if you use that to conclude that the _tendency described_ does not exist, you're stretching things.

The statement was not "Women are nesting more than they used to," but "Women tend to nest." Whether they start nesting immediately or a bit later than they used to distracts from the point that they do it more than men regardless of timing.

>I know a lot of female professionals and I can't think of any without kids that spend any appreciable amount of time on handmade crafts.

I know female professionals who don't, female professionals who do, full-time parents who don't, and full-time parents who do. Perhaps, given your admittedly limited circle of acquaintances and your previous admission of bias, you should leave this discussion to people who have more data and less of an axe to grind. That is, you should do so if you want to know the facts -- if you want to defend your prejudices, proceed.

<comment><USER9> > _Are you thinking of this person_

Yes, apologies. I hardly got any sleep. Change "your" to "the" as in "the actual idiotic suggestion which I refuted" and the rest applies.

But you actually thought I was talking about ducks. So we're square.

<comment><USER11> >But you actually thought I was talking about ducks. So we're square.

That's a very strange thing to say. You acted shocked that someone would suggest that women tended to 'nest', and then brought up ducks. I have no way of knowing your intended tone. It would be very rude to assume that you were being sarcastic if you were actually a non-native speaker who was legitimately confused about the idiom. Perhaps, whether you are a native speaker or not, it is considered acceptable to make fun of people for using words when the meaning is apparent but another definition could be used where you are from. So one could say "The music was haunting," and someone in your social circle could respond "Ghosts are a silly superstition!" I bet it's a blast.

Did you have a response to the content of the comment, though?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> am i reading this right? dropbox does the same thing as the shared documents folder in windows?</comment>


A Solar Powered Backpack for Every Child Needing Light - <AUTHOR> https://www.thesoularbackpack.com/ <comment><AUTHOR> Forbes did a whole feature on this product: [http://www.forbes.com/sites/viviennedecker/2016/09/09/the-23...](http://www.forbes.com/sites/viviennedecker/2016/09/09/the-23-year- old-behind-soular-is-bringing-solar-powered-backpacks-to-children-in- africa/#6e015006978a)

The founder Salima has applied to YC in the past, so I'm sure she'll be here answering questions

<comment><USER2> Thanks for the shoutout Khallil!

Visit www.thesoularbackpack.com to watch the video and buy your 1:1 backpack!

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Very cool mission. Education is truly the light for young minds, so it's fantastic that Soular has a literal way to help fuel their learning. Inspiring - kudos!

<comment><USER2> Thank you! Hope you'll help us spread the word!

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I recently purchased one of their "one for one" backpacks. It's of excellent quality, and the founder, Salima, truly cares about the company's mission.

<comment><USER2> We hope you enjoy using your 1:1 backpack! :) Thanks for making the world brighter!

<comment><USER4> :)</comment></comment></comment>


How to Design for the Modern Web - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/commitlog/how-to-design-for-the-modern-web-52eaa926bae2?source=friends_link&sk=74828fa5c51e051238ae1f986c72186d <comment><USER3> Does anybody actually think that developers build these kind of "features" without a huge amount of self-loathing? They _know_ it's going to ruin the experience but they have to do it because someone above them said so.

I also really hate how the article takes these obviously _good_ examples of dark patterns and makes web developers feel bad for being web developers, just because some web developers are made to employ these dark patterns.

<comment><USER4> Maybe this is an age or generational thing, but I, at 49 years of age, tell my customers that if they want <thing which is guaranteed to annoy site users>, then I'm usually quite blunt and tell them they really, really should think again, as annoying their existing and potential customers isn't a good thing.

Like I say - perhaps it's a generational thing, perhaps it's just me, but I'm not going to just passively go and do something which is going to make me feel bitter and resentful.

Seriously, try it. Be honest and straighforward with the people you are doing work for and tell them that <annoying web thing> is probably going to be detrimental to the users of their site - and detrimental to the numbers of users of their site. In my experience, the people you are doing the web work for appreciate honestly felt, straightforward, blunt opinion and advice - <USER2> the ones who don't appreciate it aren't worth becoming bitter, self-loathing, and resentful for.

The very fact that one might start to feel bitter, self-loathing, and resentful, is your mind's way of saying to you "now hang on a moment, you know doing these things is wrong - you need to reconsider".

If more developers started to give some good, honest, and blunt feedback on these dark patterns to the people who desire them to be included in their sites, then that would in my opinion go a long way towards these dark patterns being used less - although that probably won't stop the more cynical site owners because they'd be more inclined to cynically use dark patterns anyway, but hey at least you tried and also you might wish to reconsider doing work for them in the first place, in favour of better clients.

<comment><USER3> I've been lucky enough not to be asked to implement stuff like this, but I also don't work at a B2C business. Maybe that's the secret.

I've reached out to many sites though that what they're doing is distracting and annoying but the only response I've ever gotten to that was that they would hire and I could do it better. Yeah right, as if they'd let me remove all the popups.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> It's so frustrating as a web developer because you know that it doesn't have to be this way. Friends that don't work in web moan about how annoying the web, but you know that it doesn't have to be annoying. It can be good.

</comment><comment><USER6> Posted on Medium :)

<comment><USER7> Recognizing there is a problem and having the means to deal with it are two very different things. Medium is worse than a proper personal website, but better than nothing.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> I wouldnt mind using Reddits mobile app if actually supported native browser features like searching for a specific keyword in a page.

<comment><USER3> The good thing about reddit is that it has a good API, allowing for 3rd party clients. There are a couple great ones for both iOS and ANDROID.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> Obligatory xkcd: [https://xkcd.com/1174/](https://xkcd.com/1174/)</comment>


Lisp Deserves a Fresh Look (2006) - <AUTHOR> http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Application-Development/LISP-Deserves-a-Fresh-Look/

<comment><USER2> "Martian question 3: Arent your machines getting faster much more quickly than your programmers are getting smarter?"

I found this to be a nice quote for high level programming.

<comment><USER3> Excellent point to consider.

But I would like to ask a different one also:

"Are your machines getting faster more quickly than poorly written programs can slow them down?"

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> The article states that Lisp has "not been thought suitable for mass-market applications due to difficulties in packaging the executable bits and running them on end-user hardware." I'm not sure this is really what has prevented Lisp from being used for "mass-market" purposes. I think it has more to do with the fact that (despite some notable exceptions) it's not what's typically taught to most programmers in school.</comment>


What's The Point Of Promises? - <AUTHOR> http://www.kendoui.com/blogs/teamblog/posts/13-03-28/what-is-the-point-of-promises.aspx <comment><USER2> > since I don't throw errors very often

I call shenanigans. Maybe you don't _intentionally_ throw exceptions very often, but that's hardly the point of exceptions.

Javascript is an interpreted language. _Everything_ is an exception. Do you ever fat-finger a function name during development? That's an exception. Ever accidentally try to use "this" when it's pointing at "window"? Exception.

Those simple, natural mistakes can be lurking anywhere. They're far easier to detect and correct when the failure is propagated backward correctly to the right callers.

<comment><USER3> Also, the DOM. It's a sort of blackbox that has a mind [implementation] of its own, and if you don't treat it as such and/or if your code isn't bullet-proof (and honestly, most code isn't) then you'll get exceptions from even routine and mundane operations.

<comment><USER4> You guys are talking about things that should be discovered during development, in which case, I'd rather have the exception thrown and showing in the console than to try to write a function to handle them.

<comment><USER2> Even in that case, it's easier to understand the exception if you have a meaningful stack trace. A good promise implementation gives you that.

Also, I guarantee you will always get exceptions in production that you didn't see in development. Browsers are different, users do things you didn't think to test. If you care about quality, you need a system in place for reporting those exceptions back to the mothership, again including meaningful traces.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> For a more in-depth example of the way that Promises/Futures should work, check out the implementations in Scala or Haskell. The concept of a delayed computation is actually nothing new - the idea has been around for quite some time. I'm actually a little surprised that it's just becoming popular in the Javascript world. From what little experience I've had with reading and writing javascript code, it seems like you are forced by the language into heavy usage of callbacks/continuations. Promises are really the only way to elegantly manage and reason about heavily async code.

<comment><USER6> Are you talking about monads?

<comment><USER5> Not exclusively, since a Future doesn't necessarily have to be monadic to be useful - the Scala version of a Future is (of course) monadic, but you don't necessarily need to know about that to use it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Can someone correct me if I am wrong. But why do I feel like promises are basically just semaphores in disguise?

I'm a big fan of semaphores, that being said I am aware of how many people shoot themselves in the foot. It requires discipline.

Have a couple of asynchronous operation queued behind each other?

Setup a semaphore before each one. Signal when previous operation is done.

Could have different semaphores for fail and success operation even.

<comment><USER8> The concepts are similar. However:

\- Promises don't block the caller. You don't wait, you provide a method to call on completion.

\- 'Signaling' a promise (completing it) causes all callbacks to run, instead of just one.

\- Promises never transition from completed to not-completed. They settle.

\- Promises naturally propagate values.

Semaphores can be useful for implementing a promise, but they're not quite the same.

<comment><USER7> 1) Yeah I guess that's what semaphores are for, but the way to mitigate that is to block in a different queue. :-) Not saying this is the right way, I am saying this is part of me refactoring deep nested blocks. It's the middle ground before doing it properly.

2) Not sure what you mean here. A semaphore has a counter. You can signal for one run and only one if you want.

3)Not sure what this means, I suppose I gotta' read up

4) Yeah, this is where semaphores get ugly.

Thanks for taking your time. Appreciate it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Unfortunately, due to JavaScript's single-threaded nature, you don't get what I consider to be the most useful part of Futures on other languages: ability to block on async calls while work happens in a different thread. In JS, if an async operation rears its ugly head into your synchronous code, you're still in for some rewriting.

<comment><USER10> I'm not sure the two are related. The reason you need to rewrite your code in JS is because it lacks coroutines of any sort. That's not related to blocking using threads.

As a concrete demonstrate, in ECMAScript 6, which has generators (= shallow coroutines), you'll be to do transforms like this:

      function logUserName() {
        var user = getUserSync();
        console.log(user.name);
      }

      // oh no, getting a user became async!

      var logUserName = Q.async(function *() {
        var user = yield getUserAsync();
        console.log(user.name);
      });

Note that the language is still single-threaded, and `getUserAsync()` doesn't block execution.

A vivid example of this is at <http://taskjs.org/>.

<comment><USER11> Generators haven't bought you much here. This example isn't realistic because logUserName() is screwing over its caller. It has no way to report errors, nor can the caller tell when the operation has completed. It's just fire and forget (and hope it was successful).

A better logUserName() would let the caller handle that either by taking a callback or returning a promise. But now you've passed the buck to the _caller_. And now it has to be async too, all the way up the callstack.

This is the worst thing about async code regardless of whether its callbacks or promises: going to sync to async requires you to transform all code all the way up the callstack.

<comment><USER10> The second `logUserName` does return a promise.

And yes, you always have to keep inserting `yield` all the way up the stack; you can't "hide" the asynchronicity.

I think this is good. It's important to explicitly call out the asynchronous points of execution in your code. But at the same time, the only transformation you end up needing to do is inserting `yield`.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I adore promises, as they make some very complex situations a lot easier to develop for.

They also make me even less likely to use any code that makes use of node- fibers (such as MeteorJS).

</comment><comment><USER13> Promises and Deferreds are anti-patterns, in my book. They pollute the call stack and explicitly introduce uncertainty. Why would you want to code against an object representing a thing that may or or may not be complete? Good software strives for determinism. Passing around "maybes" is the opposite of that.

Promises are a poor solution for people not willing to properly model their tasks.

A far better way is to actually think about what you are trying to achieve and stick with a simple sequential control flow, rather than using some sort of overwrought API hammer to bash nails into your codebase everywhere.

Don't nest inline callback functions. When you pass callbacks, pass references to object functions. Model these asynchronous flows as objects. Don't pass around uncertainty. Embrace events.

<comment><USER14> All your criticisms can apply to events as well, except for the "model" comment.

On the model comment, modularity definitely makes writing code easier, but it reduces locality of code. It makes control flow harder to understand (and thus code harder to read). Promises 'solve' that by being explicit about the callflow schematic.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> I wrote a pototype helper class that makes using promises super easy for node.js (<https://github.com/icodeforlove/node-promise-object>)

</comment><comment><USER16> Hmm came here thinking we were going to talk about the philosophical implications of keeping/breaking promises and how deals are still made with handshakes over Ommegang Iron Thrones.

</comment><comment><USER17> Thanks. I hadn't gotten around to learning about these yet, but this was a very nice read.</comment>


Show HN: PaidGrowth.com – Gigster for Paid Marketers - <AUTHOR> https://paidgrowth.com <comment><USER2> I might be one of your possible customers. I'm assuming you want some feedback?

\- This: "Paid Acquisition experts" — I'm a newbie in this area, and to me, "acquisition expert" is an a bit complicated tech term. It's someone who helps me find more customers, right? Maybe "startup growth experts" would be a simpler word. Or, to avoid ambiguity, "Customer Acquisition experts". I actually googled for _" what is an Acquisition expert"_ and the same job title, "acquisition expert" is apparently also used for financial consultants that helps out, when one company _acquires_ another.

\- This is slightly confusing to me: _" Work with leading startups and brands."_ — are the acquisition experts _startups_ they too? That's fine, I'm just feeling a bit surprised.

\- The "Apply" button looks disabled. Bright gray. Change to Yellow? Like the Lighting above?

This looks fairly nice I think: (for the Apply button)

        background: hsl(48,96%,52%);
        color: white;
        font-weight: bold;
        border: none;
        font-size: 124%;

I applied. It's hard to get past the step "Are you a connsultant or part of an agency". I'm neither, but seems I have to select one, before continuing. People might give up here. ... eventually I noticed I can just scroll down though.

... Oops I clicked _the wrong button_. I clicked [Apply] but should have clicked [Start Growing]. ... This to me indicates there's a UX problem.

The homepage in general is focused on _startups_. Not people who want a job at your company. So Apply is confusing.

Rename it to "Apply for a job here" instead?

And place the "Start Growing" button _first_ because that's what the main title is about, right.

Ok. Whilst filling in the fields ... "Shift + Enter for newline" is hard to see. Maybe let just Enter be newline, and let Tab be "next form field" — that's what people are used to? at least I.

.. Submitted :- ) (for this: [https://www.effectivediscussions.org](https://www.effectivediscussions.org) ) I wonder what'll happen now... and how interesting I will be to you — I selected < $5000 per month.

* * * * *

If you want feedback from other people than me, feel free to submit PaidGrowth to [https://usability.testing.exchange](https://usability.testing.exchange) (I'm developing it, but my main project is the other one, which I submitted to PaidGrowth.)</comment>


Startup Advice: How To Survive The Coming Drought - <AUTHOR> http://www.alleyinsider.com/2008/3/startup_advice_how_to_survive_the_coming_drought_ <comment><USER2> "People with cash will be in a much stronger position in 12 months than those without"

People with CUSTOMERS will be in a much stronger position in 12 months than those without</comment>


Myspace's music purge is the latest careless cultural loss we'll regret - <AUTHOR> https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/apr/10/myspaces-music-purge-is-the-latest-careless-cultural-loss-well-regret <comment><USER2> unpopular opinion:

who really cares. they are tons of things lost to time and accident... we move on. i doubt that there was anything worth wild on myspace that someone hasn't migrated over to another platform already.

also this is a HUGE reason for supporting projects and collaborations like The Archive Team ([https://www.archiveteam.org](https://www.archiveteam.org)) and the WayBackMachine ([https://archive.org](https://archive.org)). we don't give credit and congrats to these groups enough. i can only imagine how much of the internet these groups has rescued directly cause of their efforts.

<comment><USER3> Your comment seems rather contradictory with "who really cares." soon followed by "also this is a HUGE reason for".

If nobody cares, why would it be a reason for supporting anything?</comment></comment>


Google invests in e-commerce start-up Pixazza  - <AUTHOR> http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-10203588-93.html?part=rss&subj=news&tag=2547-1_3-0-20 <comment><USER2> Though I like the concept..a lot! I actually think that the little images on the pictures is going to become annoying... real fast. It was due to come though.

<comment><USER3> They could easily only have the tags show up when a user hovers over the image or some other trigger. Just a few more lines of the javascript...</comment></comment>


Comprehensive overview of New Tab alternatives - <AUTHOR> http://newtabalternatives.com <comment><USER2> The correct content for a new tab in a browser is a blank page.</comment>


Ask HN: Why Had Skype Been Removed From The iOS App Store? - <AUTHOR>

I just recently noticed there was an update from skype, with various new features added. Of course, I decided to download the update, so I tapped on the "update" button. However, a message pops up saying "This Item has been removed". I wondered if it was some sort of glitch (I changed from one Apple ID to another recently), so I decided to delete the app and re-download it. Surprisingly, it wasn't there in the App Store at all. What would cause Microsoft to remove it (perhaps temporarily, perhaps permanently) from the App Store? <comment><USER2> Apparently it's only temporary, they're about to launch a new version:

"We have removed the Skype for iPhone app from the Apple iTunes store in some markets, as we begin rolling out the latest version. Skype 5.0 for iPhone will soon be available worldwide for download"

[http://blogs.skype.com/2014/06/09/skype-5-0-remastered- for-i...](http://blogs.skype.com/2014/06/09/skype-5-0-remastered-for-iphone/)</comment>


Wired demo their iPad App - <AUTHOR> http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2010/02/the-wired-ipad-app-a-video-demonstration

<comment><USER2> The iPad wasn't mentioned at any point in the video. I believe it was an Adobe Air application running on some other device. The video looks like it was co- produced by Adobe and Wired. That said, the demo did look pretty decent.</comment>


Women Engineers on the Rampant Sexism of Silicon Valley - <AUTHOR> https://www.wired.com/video/2017/06/women-engineers-on-the-rampant-sexism-of-silicon-valley/ <comment><USER2> I have to ask this, but isn't it possible that the media's obsession with sexism in the tech is backfiring? I think the best thing we could do to alleviate sexism would be to bring more women into the industry. How do we expect to do that if the impression they're getting is that it's filled with mysogynistic pigs and creeps? I'm not saying this stuff should be swept under the rug, but many tech companies have gone to great lengths to accommodate women (as they should), much more than in other industries dominated by men. If women continue to get the impression that the tech industry is hostile to them, then they're going to continue to prefer (possibly less lucrative) careers in other industries already dominated by women, which is just going to make the problem worse.

I know it sucks that women sometimes have to deal with people telling them how great it is that they're an engineer, or with people asking them about their family's background (I'm joking, I know it can be worse than that), but the tech industry can still be a really great place for women to work.

<comment><USER3> I try to talk about what can be done constructively to move things forward. I try to blog about such issues in an even handed way. My blog gets very little traffic.

Drama sells. You want traffic for your writing, getting up on your high horse and looking for the dirt will get more eyeballs than writing something more evenhanded.

Additionally, someone like you saying something that sounds very reasonable is just another way to signal that women need to shut the fuck up. If you really want to see progress on this issue without all the mudslinging, you could proactively try to engage women, promote their work, etc. But most men won't do that. I don't know why they won't do that. I have some guesses, but I don't actually know why.

As someone who tries hard to talk in an evenhanded way about these issues and tries hard to further a constructive path forward, I get really tired of hearing the kinds of criticisms you are making because it reads to me as just another means to preserve the status quo. You aren't likely to jump on the news that I am doing something different and excitedly start tweeting my blog posts or something.

So, since you probably won't do anything actually constructive, we all get to continue to sit around listening to women whine about the status quo because that is all that gets press right now. I wish to hell and back I knew how to get people to actually pay attention to the constructive stuff. I don't. So I muddle through as best I can, writing blog posts that hardly anyone reads and fantasizing that some day it will make a difference.

Edit: To the joker asking for my blog URL, if you are serious, it is in my profile.

<comment><USER4> Your blog URL please? Thank you.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> _" There are these tiny microaggressions that happen when people know you're a person of colour, they wanna know your origin, they wanna know your [...], they wanna know a bunch of things about you that don't really matter when it comes to work"_

Or maybe, you know, someone just tries to get to know their coworkers better with small talk, because getting along with people, being friendly and knowing a little bit about their background improves the interactions at work dramatically. I'm not gonna lie, calling this a microaggression alienates me deeply.

To be honest, I wouldn't hire someone who thinks they are being 'microaggressed on' when the most ordinary of conversations happen.

<comment><USER6> You don't sound particularly interested in understanding the perspective of others, but in the event that you are, this is a remarkably good analogy that may help you understand the reality of the situation: [http://ask.metafilter.com/149204/creepy-filter-Is-it- normal-...](http://ask.metafilter.com/149204/creepy-filter-Is-it-normal-to- become-this-distracted-from-seeing-an-attractive-person-in-public#2137452)

<comment><USER5> I already know and read this link. That alone should prove that I am more than equipped to participate in this discussion and willing to understand other people's viewpoints. I regularly force myself to read opinions I strongly disagree with. In this case, however, my disagreement remains firmly.

<comment><USER7> Your continued use of the word disagreement betrays a fundamental misunderstanding about the term "perspective." A Perspective is not an arguable or comparable thing, it's how a person views the world through a lens that is constructed from the sum of their lifetime of teachings, experiences and personal biases. It is not something anyone else can 100% understand, and therefore especially is not something that be compared between people, let alone argued.

<comment><USER8> I disagree with Hitlers perspective on Jews, even if I don't understand it.

Of course one could come with arguments that weaken/counter my disagreement, but I will still disagree.

If you see the world as good and I see it as evil, we have opposing perspectives and I would say I disagree with you.

<comment><USER7> Hitler's perspective on Jews is irrelevant and not really a topic of debate. His actions in being the figurehead for those who orchestrated the holocaust are objectively terrible, arguable and measurable.

I don't see the world as good, I see it as a collection of billions of people who all see things slightly differently which is why I don't attempt to seek truth in a viewpoint. There is truth in facts, truth in science, truth in that which is measurable and objectively quantifiable. The rest is entirely open for interpretation by everyone, and the best way to entire you have the most complete interpretation is to get as many viewpoints from as large a variety of people as possible, which is the fundamental idea behind diversifying, for example, a marketing team. That way you don't do something stupid like use an important, high ranking member of a Native American tribe as a football mascot.

<comment><USER9> By your definition, what Hitler did wasn't "wrong". Moral relativism is a slippery slope.

<comment><USER7> In my mind, you're free to think whatever you want, no one should ever be punished for thought-crime. If you go your whole life thinking Jews are the scum of the Earth that's your business, as long as you keep it in your own head. If you speak those opinions and lose a job, well, that's the consequences to those beliefs. If you act on those beliefs and kill people, then you'll be tried and convicted of murder.

Beliefs, no matter how stupid and shitty, are not a crime.

<comment><USER8> This is what I agree with. And thought crime is exactly what the article is insinuating.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> > There are these tiny microaggressions that happen when people know you're a > person of colour, they wanna know your origin, [...]

I ask white males such questions, and have been asked such questions as a white male. In environments where a significant fraction of the people do not come from there, asking where you come from is a normal ice breaker and opening to get to know someone.

If I avoid such questions when someone happens to not be white, will I be accused of racism? Someone could interpret that as me not wanting to get to know non-white people.

<comment><USER11> The answer is to avoid such questions with everyone :)

This is a barrier I also had to cross as someone who is involved in a lot of interviewing (software engineers). I used to always break the ice with things like "Where ya from?" or "How long have you lived NYC?". To me it was natural to ask that when first meeting someone.

But over time I realized it makes some people uncomfortable. For example, someone with a thick accent (English is their second language) might take "Where ya from" to mean, "I noticed your accent, where is it from?".

As innocent as my intentions may be, I now believe it's not appropriate to ask questions like that during an interview process or at any time in the work place. Talk about movies, the weather, programming languages. If someone volunteers that type of information by all means engage with them.

And as an interview icebreaker just say, "It's so nice to meet you, we're glad to have you here. Should we get started?". Another one I now use is, "So what do you think of our office? Did you see all the snacks?".

<comment><USER12> Just wait a bit, and with the way things are going, "Did you see all the snacks?" will be declared the thought crime against fat people.

I prefer using the same language in interviews as we do in office. If the candidate gets offended, chances are, he would be offended on the first day on the job; better weed those out early.

<comment><USER13> Good ol' slippery slope.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> There's an accompanying article[1]. It's all incredibly moving. Erica Baker said one of my favorite quotes from the video, "Everybody talks about diversity and getting people in the door. We measure those numbers. We don't really talk much about the inclusion part. What are you doing to make sure that everybody is included and feels safe and supported and valued in your organization?"

[1]: [https://www.wired.com/2017/06/women-engineers-rampant- sexism...](https://www.wired.com/2017/06/women-engineers-rampant-sexism- silicon-valley/)

<comment><USER8> I hear a lot of talks about people just being hired for diversity, that's not helping. (the talk and the action)</comment></comment>


IOS 'in-app purchase' hack extended to include Mac App Store apps - <AUTHOR> http://www.forbes.com/sites/adriankingsleyhughes/2012/07/21/ios-in-app-purchase-hack-extended-to-include-mac-app-store-apps/

<comment><USER2> Apple says you should validate your purchases with your own server, which should communicate directly with Apple's.

Seems to me like that's still secure.

<comment><USER3> This whole thing is overblown. For instance, another common technique with in- app purchases is to store a "item-y-has-been-purchased" key in either the NSUserDefaults or the keychain. Both of these are editable on jailbroken phones.

In app purchase is inherently insecure, but who the hell cares? If you are willing to go this far to get around paying, you're probably not going to pay. It's called software piracy, and it's going to happen, no matter what you do.

<comment><USER2> One thing you can do, which may or may not help, is use the Keychain Services API.

[http://developer.apple.com/library/ios/#DOCUMENTATION/Securi...](http://developer.apple.com/library/ios/#DOCUMENTATION/Security/Reference/keychainservices/Reference/reference.html)

It's more commonly used to store credentials, but it'll store whatever you give it.

It's important to note, when using this API, that the data is NOT erased when you erase the application. In other words, whatever way you save and restore you data, you want it to be future-proof[1]. Because you can't tell the user to delete the app, reinstall, and restore their purchases if something went wrong.

[1] I personally stash a protocol buffer message inside an NSData for that purpose.

But anyway, you're right.. whatever you do, pirating will happen.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Here is a much better version of this article (might be the original):

[http://www.zdnet.com/apple-mac-in-app-purchases-hacked- every...](http://www.zdnet.com/apple-mac-in-app-purchases-hacked-everything- free-like-on-ios-7000001323/)

</comment><comment><USER5> Let the idiots compromise their certs to get cheap apps for free. It'll cost them in the long run when their details get stolen.</comment>


60,000 jobs VS a killing machine.  - <AUTHOR> http://fa-18.com/

<comment><USER2> That headline seems misleading.

Perhaps the OP should find an article more in line with that editorial view and post it?

</comment><comment><USER3> It's plain lobbying. Legal in US but not in UK and most other countries.

<comment><USER4> Still happens in the UK behind the scenes. A lot of the political elite have links with the businesses.

<comment><USER5> Such as ex-PM Tony Blair and the BAE Systems deal with the Saudis.

<comment><USER4> That's the most obvious one - yep :)</comment></comment></comment></comment>


OneTravel creates fake booking urgency via random numbers in JavaScript - <AUTHOR> https://twitter.com/OphirHarpaz/status/1184486445039411201 <comment><USER2> ABET requires that ethics be taught as part of an ABET-accredited engineering degree.

To include "4\. an ability to recognize ethical and professional responsibilities in engineering situations and make informed judgments, which must consider the impact of engineering solutions in global, economic, environmental, and societal contexts"

Every single time a "wHaT eVeRy DeVeLoPeR mUsT kNoW" link is posted on HN I ctrl-f it for "ethic" and every single time: "Phrase not found".

As far as I can tell, unless there is either professionalization or legislation (or both) in the software development world organizations will never, ever, stop trying to screw their users.

Neither professionalization nor legislation will "solve" the rampant abuse of the public by software developers in the form of unethical PII harvesting and sharing, outright lying like in the case of nearly every single travel site, or the complete and utter disregard for security that many organizations exhibit, but it's a start.

<comment><USER3> "ABET requires that ethics be taught as part of an ABET-accredited engineering degree."

Ok, but presumably you state that to imply those degree holders are more ethical _and_ that leads to more ethical outcomes in the organizations that employ them. What kind of support do you think there is for that?

And you're implying software developers don't take any ethics class(es) in college, which is false.</comment></comment>


ReactJS v0.11.2 is out - <AUTHOR> http://facebook.github.io/react/blog/2014/09/16/react-v0.11.2.html

<comment><USER2> Anyone have more info on Flow?</comment>


New Sublime Text 3 New Beta - <AUTHOR> http://www.sublimetext.com/3

<comment><USER2> Could people stop spamming Sublime Text beta releases every few hours? Previous submissions:

\- 3 hours ago: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8241434](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8241434)

\- 2 days ago: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8227111](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8227111)

\- 3 days ago: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8226102](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8226102)

\- 3 days ago: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8226133](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8226133)

<comment><USER3> Think that's bad, you should see when a new Apple thing comes out.

<comment><USER4> Some thing that gets the whole industry excited and usually sells in the tens of millions of units?

Yeah, we should stop discussing those...

<comment><USER5> ... of course we shouldn't discuss such things here. Here's the quote about Off-topic submissions from HN guidelines:

> If they'd cover it on TV news, it's probably off-topic.

<comment> k-mcgrady The submission guidelines also state:

"Anything that good hackers would find interesting. That includes more than hacking and startups."

In other words, if it gets up-voted here hackers probably find it interesting and it's a useful post. Considering the discussion generated when Apple releases a new product and it's relevance to hackers (e.g. a new version of iOS means a new SDK + many new API's for hackers) those posts seem relevant.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> It took about eight months to get those bugs fixed. That's not the best thing. Other than that, I am still using it as main editor.

<comment><USER7> Yeah, I am hoping that an alternative will take ST crown. It really does not have the level of support it deserves. Lime looks like a good contender [http://limetext.org/](http://limetext.org/)

<comment><USER8> If we're going to have to play musical editors every year or so, it sure would be nice if they supported a common internal API or something. I'm sure I'm asking more than I'll get, here.

I haven't wanted to use an IDE since the 1990s but I really like the thicket of customized tools I end up with, from combining editor plugins with build scripts. It SUCKS to lose that integration by switching editors.

<comment><USER9> Well, _some_ editors are happily chugging along since the 80s and are still actively worked on.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Is anyone else seeing a strange issue on Linux where the sidebar doesn't toggle open/close folders correctly?

The folder icon toggles between open and closed, however the files inside are not displayed. I can still open files via the command palatte, but I'd like to be able to browse via the sidebar too...

Update: My desktop environment is xubuntu 14.04.

<comment><USER11> > Is anyone else seeing a strange issue on Linux where the sidebar doesn't > toggle open/close folders correctly?

Linux doesn't have sidebars, desktop environments do. Which desktop environment are you describing?

<comment> vertex-four > Linux doesn't have sidebars, desktop environments do.

No, either the GUI toolkit that ST3 uses, or ST3 itself, renders the sidebar. What desktop environment you're using has nothing to do with it - you can run Qt apps on GNOME without them somehow magically turning into GTK apps.

<comment><USER11> >> Linux doesn't have sidebars, desktop environments do.

> No, either the GUI toolkit that ST3 uses, or ST3 itself, renders the > sidebar.

Translation: yes.

> What desktop toolkit you're using ...

Please locate where I said "desktop toolkit".

<comment><USER12> Translation: you didn't understand what he said, but still couldn't refrain from a snarky reply.

Sublime renders the sidebar itself, and doesn't rely on whatever UI toolkit the user has installed

<comment><USER11> > Translation: you didn't understand what he said ...

I understood him perfectly. He said, "Is anyone else seeing a strange issue on Linux where the sidebar doesn't toggle open/close folders correctly?" That's not Linux, and because there's more than one desktop environment in common use, the OP needed to identify what he was referring to. He speaks as though everyone who runs Linux uses the same desktop environment.

> and doesn't rely on whatever UI toolkit the user has installed

Locate my use of the word "toolkit". I said "desktop environment". Linux is not a desktop environment -- that's something that, among other properties, has sidebars.

<comment><USER4> > _I understood him perfectly. He said, "Is anyone else seeing a strange issue > on Linux where the sidebar doesn't toggle open/close folders correctly?" > That's not Linux._

1) Nope. That's Linux (in that he refers to the Linux version of ST3, running on Linux).

> _and because there 's more than one desktop environment in common use, the > OP needed to identify what he was referring to._

2) Nope again. The desktop environment doesn't have anything to do with ST's sidebars.

It's all about the GUI toolkit ST uses, and the bug would be there whether the user used Gnome, GTK, fwvm, Englightnment, or whatever.

So, even if ST used, say, GTK for it's graphics, your answer would be wrong, because the toolkit a program uses has nothing to do with the user's "desktop environment". A user can run Gimp under KDE for example.

But you're doubly wrong, because ST doesn't even use a toolkit associated with a desktop environment in the first place, but instead uses it's own GUI code: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2822114](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2822114)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Somewhat unrelated: My least favorite part of Sublime is the logo, so I made a new version: [https://www.dropbox.com/s/7zys0368ddwui8c/st_logo_redesign.p...](https://www.dropbox.com/s/7zys0368ddwui8c/st_logo_redesign.png?dl=0)

</comment><comment> dj-wonk Maybe I just dislike change, but the new icons in the sidebar are wasted space in my opinion.

</comment><comment><USER14> How do I stop this with the new version: [http://screencast.com/t/OeMISqW05aYj](http://screencast.com/t/OeMISqW05aYj) I was hoping there was a setting. I'm using phoenix theme.

</comment><comment><USER15> Atom

<comment><USER4> So a slower non-native editor with even less features and adoption, that is also Mac only?

Sure, sounds like a good deal compared to ST.

<comment><USER16> Not disagreeing with your other points, but these days there is a Windows binary ([https://atom.io/faq](https://atom.io/faq)), too. On Linux you can build from source.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> wow, that's something new</comment>


Try typing charleswhitmore.com into your url bar - <AUTHOR>

<comment><USER2> It's just most likely a javascript call of window.close, it's not that cool.

<comment><AUTHOR> Its that or its going back in time to before you opened the tab

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> wrote a small ruby script and got the following as the content of the page (simple javascript to close the window):

<script language=JavaScript>

window.open('','_self'); window.close(); </script>

<comment><USER4> or fastest way: curl charleswhitmore.com</comment></comment>


The Ethics of Random Clinical Trials   - <AUTHOR> http://www.marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2010/12/the-ethics-of-random-clinical-trials.html

<comment><USER2> For what it's worth, as a general rule any research done on human subjects - this would count - must not cause (much) harm to any group of subjects.

So, for example, if it became clear during the study that either group of subjects in the study were doing materially worse than the other, there would have to be a review to determine whether the study should be stopped. That would be normal practice in any sort of medical study.

I do not know if NYC's Homeless Services department operates under similar rules or not. It says CUNY is participating and almost certainly CUNY does have an IRB that has signed off on this, with whatever conditions it thought appropriate.</comment>


Rainbow Mac v 2.4: Drag anything and Drop everywhere - <AUTHOR> https://itunes.apple.com/gr/app/rainbow/id649602428?mt=12 <comment><AUTHOR> Version 2.4 has the following features:

\- Share local files \- Drag & Drop files / folders from Finder to any folder in any cloud account \- Drag & Drop files / folders from any cloud account to any folder in any cloud account \- Show progress bar while a file is being transferred \- Fix the problem with the Onedrive account that did not allow the creation of a folder in the root folder \- Add multi accounts is now free (our sincere gratitude to our users who have purchased it)</comment>


The code for HealthCare.gov is actually Open Source on GitHub - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/CMSgov/healthcare.gov

<comment><USER2> On [https://www.healthcare.gov/developers/](https://www.healthcare.gov/developers/) they show an image that indicates all sorts of GitHub activity: [http://imgur.com/Cx93Y2U](http://imgur.com/Cx93Y2U)

Isn't that the default image? Their real graphs show only 1 contributor and 1 commit.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Background:

[http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/06/health...](http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/06/healthcaregov- code-developed-by-the-people-and-for-the-people-released-back-to-the- people/277295/)

</comment><comment><USER3> ruby fan boys couldn't be happy that their programming language is at the core of a huge scalability nightmare that is happening before our eyes.

</comment><comment><USER4> I submitted a pull request when it first opened:

[https://github.com/CMSgov/healthcare.gov/pulls](https://github.com/CMSgov/healthcare.gov/pulls)

Doesn't look like they're doing much updating, though. I don't know if that's standard operating procedure on gov't websites (which, let's face it, have lots of clunky requirements that other websites won't have) or if this repo is just for public show.

It's at least educational...for anyone who doesn't know how flexible Jekyll can be, this is a full fledged installation. You can create and deploy your own flat-file health care site in minutes. That's a very cool concept, actually, and probably never been done before with a government website.</comment>


Show HN: BlockBlockAdBlock - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/Mechazawa/BlockBlockAdBlock <comment><USER2> Awesome. Fans of this project should also check out [https://github.com/reek/anti-adblock-killer](https://github.com/reek/anti- adblock-killer)</comment>


Angry Birds Maker Sued for Patent Violation - <AUTHOR> http://mashable.com/2011/07/25/angry-birds-lawsuit/?WT.mc_id=obinsite <comment><USER2> I'll be completely honest. Prior to this I disliked patent trolls in a sort of abstract way, but now, I have a visceral feeling of disgust just thinking about patent trolls.

Lodsys in particular seems to have no shame.

I wonder if a few more of these higher profile lawsuits might pull the general public's attention from whatever the latest reality TV show is. Maybe then the political system could do something useful to stop the patent lawsuit insanity.

<comment><USER3> Considering that one of the biggest names in computing in the eyes of the public (IBM) in extremely pro-software patents, that's not likely to happen. IBM says:

       Given the reality that software source code is human
       readable, and object code can be reverse engineered,
       it is difficult for software developers to resort to
       secrecy. Thus, without patent protection, the incentives
       to innovate in the field of software are significantly
       reduced. Patent protection has promoted the free sharing
       of source code on a patentee's terms—which has fueled the
       explosive growth of open source software development.

That's from their brief to the Supreme Court for the Bilski case.

<comment><USER4> Patent protection has fueled the growth of open source? That's the funniest thing I've read all year.

<comment><USER3> Then you should get a copy of the full brief and read it, as you'll probably get a good laugh from more of it, like where they say software patents encourage the adoption of standards on the web and net.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Hopefully Rovio is big and well-connected enought to fight back, and maybe make a legal dent in this problem.

This weekend's This American Life was an hour long feature on the software patent mess. It's a good intro to the situation, especially to the non-tech public. Share with your friends (and send donations as a thank-you!).

[http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio- archives/episode/441/w...](http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio- archives/episode/441/when-patents-attack)

<comment><USER6> Mine patents. Build grunts. Give all grunts the same unoccupied office suite in Texas. Sell patent to grunts with revenue sharing clause. Select a grunt, scroll to target, right-click.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Before anyone makes a comment here I implore you to listen to this past weekend's This American Life. Here's a handy link: [http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio- archives/episode/441/w...](http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio- archives/episode/441/when-patents-attack)

More on-topic: they finish off the show by pointing out that Lodsys's registered address (104 E Houston St. #190) is the same as Oasis Research, a front company for Intellectual Ventures: the ultimate patent troll and the focus of the entire show.

</comment><comment><USER8> I realized one point regarding patents that I haven't thought of before. Patents shouldn't be transferable or saleable.

A patent should be nominated to its inventor personally and for a company to profit from it they would have to connect with that person. They could employ him or otherwise compensate him for being able to do things that were patented.

This would diminish possibilities for all kinds of trickery and return the power back to the actual inventor. A company who wishes to invest in patents would have to compensate these inventors more than fairly to reach an agreement where the inventor only licenses the patent to that company. Futile, bogus, or useless patents wouldn't be paid for so nobody wouldn't bother to file them. Inventors would have a big financial incentive to invent things that are truly good enough to be worth somebody paying for them.

<comment><USER9> I'm not sure how taking away an inventor's current right to sell his patent counts as "return[ing] the power back to the actual inventor."

Also, under current law, an exclusive licensee can be granted the right to sue on a patent. So you'd have to change that part of the law as well, for your scheme to actually change anything.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> The real problem is that you should only be able to patent a solution to a difficult problem, while these "broad" patents often look more like you are patenting the problem itself, so that any solution is covered. This is totally against the original idea of patents (either software or hardware).

<comment><USER11> > The real problem is that you should only be able to patent a solution

Not just any solution, a non-obvious solution. If presented with a new problem, as tech often is, you can think up a solution in a day, it shouldn't' be patent-able because others are going to come up with that same solution. The one click check out is an example of this.

<comment><USER12> I've heard it argued that simply thinking of a new problem should be sufficient for patent protection, though I strongly disagree with that position. Put differently, identifying the problem can be significantly more difficult than creating the solution, but I still think patents should cover non-obvious solutions to any problem, rather than any solution to non-obvious problems.

<comment><USER10> Absolutely, only a non-obvious solution to a problem should be patentable.

But if they at least only granted patents to _specific_ almost-obvious solutions, and not just to any solution (which is the same as patenting the problem), it would be a little better: You could at least try to find a different solution...

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Rovio is in a unique position to effect change here. They should yank Angry Birds from US app stores and say "sorry America, you can't play because your patent system sucks". That would create the kind of mass upset that might actually get something done about this problem.

Giving in to Lodsys might make fiscal sense in the short term, but they would be painting a target on themselves for the snowballing patent troll industry. All genuine technology companies, but especially those at the formative stages like Rovio, need to think about the future health of their industry. Don't negotiate with terrorists.

</comment><comment><USER14> US Courts need a script: _if(plaintiff == Lodsys){ dismiss; }_

Lodsys cases are the most BS cases I've ever seen. Unlike large _evil corporations_ who are at least contributing some sort of innovation, all Lodsys manages to do is stifle innovation, and screw over the entire public.

Too bad we can't file a class-action suit against Lodsys for emotional damages.

<comment><USER15> What's interesting to note is that, as revealed on an episode of NPR's This American Life [1], Lodsys has the same exact address (down to the room number!) of Oasis Research, which is known to have a "back-end arrangement" with Intellectual Ventures.

So Lodsys is pretty much a front for Myhrvold and his despicable company.

[1] [http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2011/07/25/138576167/when- pat...](http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2011/07/25/138576167/when-patents- attack) (this is pretty much a full transcript of the show)

<comment><USER16> Is it a physical address or one of those "2000 companies registered at the same address for tax reasons" deals?

<comment><USER15> It's a physical address [1] and in the radio show they actually visit it. They describe the location as being a little eerie:

 _The office was in a corridor where all the other doors looked exactly the same —locked, nameplates over the door, no light coming out. It was a corridor of silent, empty offices with names like "Software Rights Archive," and "Bulletproof Technology of Texas."_

[1] 104 E. Houston street, suite 190, Marshall, Texas

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> The problem is with the US patent system, not with the patent trolls.

The benefit to society of granting a patent is that it gives companies an incentive to do R&D. The cost to society of granting a patent is that other companies have to pay money to use the same idea. In a healthy patent system, the average benefit of a patent is equal to the average cost of a patent.

If the average benefit is higher than the average cost, the Patent Office should be more lenient in granting patents, or should lengthen the term of the patent. The former solution would increase the number of patents, but the new ones would have lower average benefit. The latter solution would reduce the average cost of a patent. Likewise, if the average benefit is lower than the average cost, the Patent Office should be stricter in granting patents or should shorten the term of the patent.

The average benefit from a software patent is quite low; most software patents are for an obvious solution to an uncommon problem, not for a clever solution to a common problem. The average cost for a software patent is (currently) pretty low too, because patent holders usually don't assert their rights; but if patent holders asserted their rights whenever they could, the average cost would be very high. The solution is for the US Patent Office to be much stricter about assigning software patents.

In a healthy patent system, patent trolls aren't a bad thing. Patent trolls raise the price of patents by buying and using them; that increases the incentives to do R&D. Since in a healthy patent system, the cost to society of the patent troll asserting its patent rights is equal to the benefits from the R&D that gets done, that isn't a problem.

<comment><USER12> _The problem is with the US patent system, not with the patent trolls._

Without addressing any of the other interesting points you raised, I have to rebut this one. I'll start by rewording the sentence to be more accurate by my judgment:

 _The problem is with the US patent system,_ and _with the patent trolls._

I base my argument on the notion that ethics and morality exist independent of any legal system. Whether what the trolls are doing is legal is irrelevant; they are acting against the interests of society at large and small inventors in particular, under the guise of helping small inventors. Thus, what they are doing is unethical, and they are therefore part of the problem.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> I've been hoping for a patent frenzy for some time, where all the major holders sue all the major violators. Maybe freedom and innovation will rise out of the ashes.

<comment><USER19> In an ideal world commonsense would prevail and there would be no such thing as software patents, but in the real world perhaps a software patent meltdown of the kind you describe would focus minds.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> The next Rovio game I'd like to see: "Angry Nerds", where you hurl enraged developers at patent trolls and the structures under which they take cover (causing very satisfying damage, of course).

<comment><USER21> <http://www.atlassian.com/en/angrynerds>

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> Does anyone know how the patents were violated?

As in, what is actually being done that was "invented" by Lodsys so that other developers can either avoid it altogether, or know if they need to license something.

<comment><USER23> As practical matter, many of these patents are so incredibly broad that you can't actually create a modern piece of software without winding up in the grey area of possibly infringing on one patent or another.

As a legal matter, if you have a policy/history of proactively searching for patents, when (almost inevitably) someone alleges infringement, they can assert that because of your policy you must have seen their patent and thus infringed willfully, opening yourself up to treble damages and putting you in the position of having to prove a negative. Any IP lawyer will advise that inventors should never look.

<comment><USER22> But what did they do that infringed?

Everybody always replies the same way, "it's broad", "there's prior art", etc, but does anybody ACTUALLY know how a game like Angry Birds specifically infringed on these patents in such a way that they will have to pay royalties?

<comment><USER24> TFA doesn't give the patent number, if you want to know you'll have to dig up whatever they've filed with the courts. I'd start looking in EDT; I'm just guessing, but it's where all the trolls file for quick, predictable payouts.

All the article says is that the patent allegedly covers buying new levels from within the game. So the patent is probably some generic nonsense about a method of having an ordinary computer do ordinary things. But nobody prior to them patented or mentioned doing _those particular_ ordinary things on a computer, so it's not considered legally obvious, no matter how much it makes us want to bang our heads on a wall.

EDIT: I should mention that we won't know if they infringed at all (or whether Lodsys has a valid patent) unless it goes all the way through the system. Depending on what's being demanded, they may find it cheaper to settle, even if the patent is garbage and they may do so as a pure business decision.

<comment><USER25> Where is EDT? That means "Eastern Daylight Time" to me.

<comment><USER26> I believe that it refers to the Eastern District of Texas, where many patent cases are filed:

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_District_Court_fo...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_District_Court_for_the_Eastern_District_of_Texas#Patent_litigation)

<comment><USER24> You are correct, that's the district I was referring to.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> I don't tend to agree with groups like Lulzec and Anonymous, but please think about Lodsys as a target.

<comment><USER28> That's a merry proposal, but!

The real problem is that one can't actually _steal_ a patent (or copyright). It's virtual property. And there is no closely guarded secret, either; quite the opposite: a patent is published openly as part of patent process. Downloading any documents from Lodsys and disseminating them on the 'net won't hurt them in any way.

Also, I doubt there are any interesting technical documents on this invention (or any other invention for that matter) on Lodsys' computers ;-)

<comment><USER29> A few internal emails detailing possible corruption would be a start.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> I thought this was going to be about a method for destroying pigs in structures by accelerating birds through the use of an elastic or spring- loaded device.

</comment><comment><USER31> This patent crap is getting ridiculous. We should create a script to auto- generate Patent Violation Notices in masse to be sent to patent trolls. Business should be about creating value, not leeching and hurting others to steal their value and make it your own.

<comment><USER32> Well, here's the problem with that: patent trolls aren't actually operating any systems. Thus they are not violating patents - it's an asymmetric game that the troll can't lose. That's why it's so pernicious.

</comment></comment><comment><USER33> Are there any representatives or senators working on fixing this yet? Is there a petition that we can sign? Some kind of site to raise awareness?

<comment><USER18> You can write your members, and maybe the members on the two Commerce Committees, but I don't think Congress ever met a monied patent holder they didn't like.

My impression in the last five to ten years is that the sleeping bag is looking like stuffed sausage with all the members and IP interests squirming around in there.

</comment></comment><comment><USER34> It is obvious that the overwhelming majority of HN dislikes software patents. Hence, links like these are simply religious arguments.

If Angry Birds wins this case, people will complain that given enough money companies can ignore laws. If Angry Birds loses, people keep complaining about patent trolls.

<comment><USER35> I guess there are a few kinds of arguments about the right approach. Legal, economic and religious.

At lest the religious argument are the one I value most. One concept is that ideas should be free. Another is that ideas are property which should be respected.

The legal argument is that it is difficult to create independently many kinds of software without infringing some patent. This implies that patents are being granted on things that are obvious to those skilled in the art. I.e. most patents are probably not valid. An alternatively the legal argument is that software is mathematics and mathematics is not legally patentable.

And the economic argument is that these monopolies are used by established players to stifle innovation, for example the history of flight in Europe and the US, where the Wright brothers patents killed innovation.

I think it is a really hard issue, because I don't think it can be determined well with any system of governance that we have. The voters are not well informed so democracy won't work. Lobbyist and experts represent established monopolies which are not innovative, so other systems won't either.

</comment></comment><comment><USER36> By Lodsys, of course.

</comment><comment><USER37> A day after the big news in tech was about patents, the TAL episode and Intellectual Ventures and they pull another crazy patent lawsuit, just to drive the point home.

They are making themselves a big target. Those that didn't really follow patent news previously likely all know now who Lodsys/IV etc. are and what they are up to.

I hope these cases lead to reform of the entire system.

</comment><comment><USER38> This is going to be the case that breaks the USPTO system to bits. Either that, or no new companies are going to release in the US, and instead create shells in other countries, which will only hurt our economy more.

<comment><USER39> By selling inside of the United States that makes them subject to US patent laws. That is why Rovio is subject to this lawsuit despite being a Finnish company.

<comment><USER40> But if they are Finnish, how is someone going to their (Finnish) website and buying something different from someone physically traveling to Finland and buying it? They don't have a 'physical presence' in the US, so by the same rationale that US companies don't have to charge sales tax in other states it seems they should also not be bound by this.

If I make a website containing content illegal in <some country>, am I committing a crime in <some country> if someone from there looks at my page?

<comment><USER21> Yes you are. A court in Italy found several Google executives, that had never stepped foot in the country, personally criminally liable for a Google Video video that violated Italian law. Those execs wouldn't want to travel to Italy while that ruling stood, if it doesn't still. [http://www.thedomains.com/2010/02/24/italy-finds-3-google- ex...](http://www.thedomains.com/2010/02/24/italy-finds-3-google-execs-guilty- criminally-for-online-video-posted-on-google-video/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER41> The greed machine is at it again. This is exactly why I hate patents. Innovate or take a seat and be entertained. Do not leech or you'll bring the whole system down.

</comment><comment><USER42> Bottom-eating scum...

</comment><comment><USER43> I'm sorry, but how did Lodsys lose out here?

</comment><comment><USER44> Remember folks.. MS has been using scare tactics for 20 years to keep firms form choosing Linux..with those efforts being dismal failures and at times including patent trolling..this is the new MS Patent trolling chapter of Linux..

<comment><USER16> Huh? iOS runs on Linux?

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> 1\. Post on HN about evil software patents.

2\. Receive karma.

<comment><USER9> 1\. Point this fact out.

2\. Lose karma.

<comment><USER45> I'd like to know the final karma balance between the grandparent and the parent comments.

One more reason I wish hn still displayed points.

<comment><USER9> It's not pretty, I'll tell you that. HN doesn't tell me how low my first comment went (it just appears to be pegged at -4), and my second one is at -2.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


'No to China extradition' – Hong Kong protest against controversial new law - <AUTHOR> https://www.hongkongfp.com/2019/06/09/just-no-china-extradition-tens-thousands-hong-kong-protest-controversial-new-law/ <comment><USER2> This is huge for Hong Kong.

It's not just a standard extradition agreement like existing ones made with other countries.

With Hong Kong under China's foot, there is a grave risk that any -unverifiable- trumped up charge made in the Mainland against dissidents and those voicing discontent against the Chinese government would result in potential extradition to China, a country that has no rule of law and where torture is routine (China is 82/126 in the latest Rule of Law Index[1]. HK is 16/126).

The HK government tried to assuage the critics by including some safeguards that would require the crime to be serious enough to require at least 7 years of imprisonment for the extradition to be processed, but voicing criticism of the Chinese government is considered a crime against national security in China...

There is little doubt that at some point these types of requests will be made and this new rule is opening Pandora's box wide.

Hong Kong is a great place, with great people who basically have little to hope for as the little freedom they had is getting eroded day by day.

China advises against the western views on separation of powers. This alone should ring alarms bells.

Loud ones.

[1]: [http://data.worldjusticeproject.org/](http://data.worldjusticeproject.org/)

<comment><USER3> Is there a point to this? Isn't Hong Kong already a part of sovereign China? Doesn't China already freely "extradite" anyone they want from Hong Kong?

<comment><USER4> Not legally. No. There is currently no extradition of any kind between China, Hong Kong, and Macau.

<comment><USER3> See [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causeway_Bay_Books_disappearan...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causeway_Bay_Books_disappearances)

I mean, the reality is Hong Kong's "autonomy" only exists because Beijing allows it. I guess it means something that so many people still show up despite the "futility" of it.

<comment><USER5> A sovereign nation stays sovereign not because it can defend itself, or because of the treaties it has in place, but rather because of the way the people there delineate the mental boundary between "us" and "them." The government of a country can sign away every _legal_ element of there being an independent country, and yet still not destroy the sovereignty of the nation of people that exists there. Before and after legal annexation, it's still just as hard to absorb that "country" into your own, because the legality of doing so was never the blocker.

Empires want _productive_ colonies. They don't go around conquering land just to kick everyone who lives there off and move their own citizens there. They want to capture the GDP of the existing nation-of-people, and have that GDP become part of _their_ aggregate GDP, advancing their ends. So empires are unwilling to do anything to conquer a nation-of-people that destroys their GDP in the process. They don't want to start with a first-world neighbour and end up with a third-world satellite.

And nations-of-people, who actively resist thinking of themselves as part of a given empire, when the order comes down to work toward that empire's ends—they'll just _not work_. They know they might be sent to "labor camps" in said empire, to get a _little_ productivity out of them—but they also know that this is still a destruction of economic value from the empire's perspective, since they were doing labor before which had far more economic value than the labor the empire can coerce out of them in a labor camp. So they know that, by and large, the empire won't bother to do this. They might try doing it a few times, as a terrorist tactic to scare the nation-of-people into compliance... but they don't want to _actually_ do enough damage to the GDP of the annexed state to matter.

Or, to put that another way: a nation-of-people under annexation is like a city _made of glass_ , under siege (where "made of glass" refers here to both the city _and its people_.) Sure, anyone could just go in and break all the glass, if they wanted the city wiped off the map. But—at least in the modern geopolitical landscape—there's no reason to want to. Everyone wants to _capture_ the city. And that's basically impossible by military means, because the military tools empires have available to them are designed to shatter glass. They'll end up with a big heap of nothing, rather than a city. The only way to make the city _yours_ is to just _convince_ its citizens that they _want_ to work for you.

And, if an empire is in a negotiation at that level, they're essentially back to negotiating with a peer sovereign nation. They can't truly dictate law or custom, because the citizens (as-yet unintegrated, still thinking of the empire as "them" rather than "us") won't work under those conditions, and there's no way to force them to do so without killing the golden goose.

——

China is in a holding pattern with Hong Kong. They think they can, through secular drift, get future generations to think of themselves as just "Chinese"—to think of the Chinese empire as "us" rather than "them." At that point, the game is won, and China can enforce whatever laws and customs they like on Hong Kong.

But _until_ that point—and, perhaps, that point may never come, if the citizens of Hong Kong continue to raise their children to see themselves as "citizens of Hong Kong" first-and-foremost—China can only put in place such laws and practices as the citizens of Hong Kong will tolerate.

<comment><USER6> Great point regarding GDP. Vox did a piece[1] that pointed out that with the recent rise of highly economically productive cities in the mainland like Shenzhen, the mainland is getting more emboldened in projecting its control over HK.

[1]: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MQyxG4vTyZ8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MQyxG4vTyZ8)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I'm at the event right now, was waiting for 4 hours in Victoria park before finally started moving. People are very peaceful and non aggressive, and I'm not sure this strategy will work.

Extradition to China is basically extradition to North Korea, a lawless country with no police, no courts and no justice.

Eventually this will extend to crimes like using a VPN and operating a group chat, not to mention the threat to businesses, journalists and lawyers.

I imagine if my startup refuses to provide data to mainland China, I could be held without court at an undisclosed location for as long as needed.

<comment><USER8> To be exact, China has police (serving Communist Party), has court (highly bias toward plaintiffs who have power), and has justice (the Communist version of justice).

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> Inside the protest.

I think that is really a new break as anyone can be pull back to china. Including any foreigner. China has no rule of law. No human rights or at lest right in court.

Back to the protest.

<comment><USER10> Can't believe this makes it to HN, although I feel politics is off topic I can't help but to feed to this because it means so much to me.

Over a million people, or 1 out of 5-7 people walked out against this tighten grip. The whole Hong Kong island is dead lock now. China has been subtly (or so much with this attempt) trying to erode our freedom, rule of law and culture.

Shamefully I'm not physically in Hong Kong. Thank you for your effort, that's the least I could do.

<comment><USER11> Not sure that turnout is over a million. Even HKFP are being cautious and only switched from "tens" to "hundreds" of thousands about an hour ago. I do hope that you are right though! And even 1 in 10 or 15 would be remarkable.

Edit: the SCMP has some turnout figures. As usual they vary wildly.¹

1\. [https://www.scmp.com/news/hong- kong/politics/article/3013725...](https://www.scmp.com/news/hong- kong/politics/article/3013725/hong-kong-edge-crowds-gather-ultimate-showdown- against)

<comment><USER10> I just gathered it from live video, local forum posts, news and my intuition of the size of Hong Kong island (it's all full with people still being stuck in the train system from Kowloon side). From images, it's also visually much bigger than the previous ~500K turnout protest.

But yeah it's intuition after all so I could be wrong. Still, numbers in the 60K range is just impossible.

Edit: By gather and intuition, I mean I'm getting quite a volume of confirmation bias from forum post, video comments and the hosts of the protest.

<comment><USER11> One of the pan-dems doubts it's more than the aftermath of 6/4 which was ~a million, but the opening of all the roads etc. suggests more than the art. 23 protests, yes.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Hong kong is the least independent in a group of regions like mongolia or taiwan that China all lays claim to. It's an interesting lithmus test for their future behaviour in those regions. [https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c0/ROC_Admi...](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c0/ROC_Administrative_and_Claims.svg)

<comment><USER13> That's a map of ROC (Taiwan) claims, not China.

<comment><USER14> Yep:

      - ROC: Republic Of China (Taïwan)
      - PRC: People's Republic of China (China)</comment></comment></comment>


MPAA joins the W3C - <AUTHOR> https://twitter.com/w3c/status/420548145102061568

<comment><USER2> The web is circling the drain. Get off while you can. On the other hand, no one really listened to the W3C, as evidenced by the misspellings of "color" on most web pages.

/sarcasm

</comment><comment><USER3> "Oh sh*t, there goes the planet."</comment>


Back End for AngularJS App – Firebase, MongoDB, PGsql? Etc Etc. - <AUTHOR>

Was thinking for an app that works on both mobile and web, Firebase is ideal for its REST Api and real time sync. Also Angularfire makes it easy to hook all of the components up. However, I have also seen a couple of apps using MEAN stack with MongoDB. Whats the main differences that one should know between these 2 stacks?
What I understand is Firebase has less control but needs less codes and has less quirky errors. But that also means the data is not query-able or not as easily manipulated and search engines are not optimised to track Firebase stuff.
Would like to hear your experiences on the various backend solutions used (not exhaustive). Feel free to talk about the requirements from your project that needs various stacks.
Some other considerations I have: - scalability - costs (user number/ usage level vs. costs)- both are free until usage hits a certain level - code maintainability
- code portability - device compatibility <comment><USER2> The cool thing about MEAN is as a front-end developer you have the ability to trace all the way down the stack without having to learn another programming language (JavaScript) but it works primarily with MongoDB. Similar to Firebase is Backand.com which also provides you a REST API but to any database, which means you can work with your own MySQL or Postgres database. Unlike Firebase, Backand gives you a bunch of AngularJS UI directives to begin with so that it makes getting started very simple. Another technology is PhoneGap which can make your Angular web app into mobile apps using standardized web APIs.

</comment><comment><USER3> o</comment>


Godaddy caves to UK Porn hysteria - <AUTHOR> http://domainincite.com/14058-the-uk-is-going-nuts-about-porn-and-go-daddy-and-nominet-are-helping

<comment><USER2> My rant about the topic of UK Porn is that it is entirely analogous to what is happening in Russia with the anti-Gay legislation.

Two forms of sexual expression, both states using the same logic in terms of reasons for legislating against them, namely "Protect the children". Both with social stigma and negative attitudes from the most ardent conservatives of the population.

Though in Russia the bigotry extends a little deeper in terms of social acceptance (or lack thereof), i.e. violence against porn watchers is pretty much non-existent in the UK. But in terms of the law, what is to be codified into law is very similar.

/endrant

Feel free to debate and correct my naive interpretation if you disagree.

<comment><USER3> Maybe my analogy would also by naive, but I consider the effects of porn to be similar to effects of consuming alcohol - some enjoy it, some became addicted to it, and some people's lives will get literally destroyed by it. Therefore, alcohol is "opt-in" \- you have to reach certain age, and you also need to buy it, there are not bottles of alcohol available anywhere for anybody to consume.

Similar with porn, it should be opt-in, you should read certain age to be able to access it, and then do some kind of opting for it.

<comment><USER4> Going to a web site is already opt-in. Plus google has default safe search. The only other path I can think of offhand is advertisements on torrent sites. If you want to make those opt-in I won't complain.

<comment><USER5> And as surely as you could "accidentally" visit a porn website (does this _really_ happen to anybody? I am convinced that this is a myth created by the go-to excuse of every teenager and husband with a controlling spouse...), you could accidentally visit a restaurant that serves alcohol.

If such an incident disturbs you to the core, then turn around and find the door.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> > As a related part of this move, the government has already arranged with the > six largest Wi-Fi hot-spot operators in the country to have porn filters > turned on by default.

> I haven't personally tested these networks, but they're apparently using the > kind of lazy keyword filters that are already blocking access to newspaper > reports about Cameron's speech.

That's a good thing, it'll demonstrate just how lousy the idea is.

> Censorship, in the name of "protecting the children" is already happening > here in the UK.

Is it really censorship if it doesn't stop anything from being published or read? At the moment it's an optional filter.

We already have stricter controls over what children can see in the form of film ratings. Except even then parents can rent / buy films and allow their children to watch them.

I don't want to say "It's not censorship unless you're being beaten up by police" (see, eg, Egypt ([http://www.freedomhouse.org/report/freedom- net/2012/egypt)](http://www.freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-net/2012/egypt\))) but, well, I'm not bothered by poor quality filters that I can turn off being put on my Internet. There's plenty of stupid things that ISPs do already that are more annoying.

<comment><USER7> On technical counts, I agree. The scenario of a poorly implemented filter reminds me of "porn before the Internet": young people learning the basic tricks to gain access to forbidden material and then spreading them within their groups. Even with physical pornography, doing this was neither complex nor particularly time-consuming.

However, I maintain that there's reason for concern when a government elects to make sexuality a matter of policy. Steering public opinion in a certain direction (making the filter opt-out sounds more like a "you shouldn't be doing it, perv" rather than a "it's entirely up to you, my well-adjusted friend!") and exerting control over exposure at the infrastructure level might not be censorship proper, but I wouldn't consider it harmless from a cultural perspective. Generally, I'm indeed bothered when my government wields morality to crusade against something of dubious consequence.

Granted, this comes from someone who considers the most common stances on pornography and sexual education largely detrimental.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> This whole story would be hilarious if it wasn't so sad. I can just imagine a whole generation of young brits teaching each other how to avoid this idiotic pornography filter. Just like every other ineffective pornography filter has been worked around by every other group of adolescents in internet history.

The people who think it works get placated, the kids work around it, and it has absolutely no effect on violence, rape or abuse whatsoever. Efficaciously a win win.

<comment><USER9> The adolescents teaching each other how to get around filters - that is exactly what ends up happening. A few years back, Turkey had a pretty long ban on Youtube. Countless sites for tweaking browser settings specifically geared for Turkish Youtubers emerged. There was even a cartoon by a prominent artist that depicted the PM declaring his agenda: "We won't lift the ban until we have 70 million DNS experts."

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Stay classy, Godaddy - you are the poster child for corporate sleaze and amorality.

</comment><comment><USER11> I work at GoDaddy, though not in the domains group. I heard this story from a co-worker that does work directly on domains and was involved in the the deployment.

Within the last week, a UK news agency published a report that it was was possible to buy the domain name 'rapeher.co.uk'. I don't know the exact article but I believe it was this one [1]

The rumor is that someone from the Prime Minister's office called the GoDaddy CEO to express the PM's displeasure with the idea that you could buy that domain name.

An emergency deployment was made to blacklist that one domain name. No additional filtering was added. As GoDaddy states in the article, "We are withdrawing the name while we carry out a review. We have not done this before."

The discussion with my co-worker was clear that it would be impossible to add in a word filter without having a large number of false positives given that domains don't have spaces and it would be hard to know if a blocked term was a word or part of another word.

So, yes, GoDaddy did block a domain, but it's not as nefarious as some people are making it out to be.

(Ironically, that article about getting rid of porn has a full column of ads on the right side filled with half-naked women)

[1] [http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2384629/Britain- home...](http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2384629/Britain-home-half- million-porn-websites-UK-hosts-biggest-volume-adult-content.html)

<comment><USER12> > (Ironically, that article about getting rid of porn has a full column of ads > on the right side filled with half-naked women)

That's the Daily Mail for you. Ironic.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> I have not used GoDaddy in years, and will never do so again. However, in a world where the governments seem to be in a war against their electronic citizens rights and privacy, then there is no better countermeasure than to train an entire generation to circumvent security from the age of 13.

</comment><comment><USER3> I might be a minority here, but I honestly think that making internet porn opt-in is a good idea, I am not from UK, but I support it.

As a reader of /r/nofap subreddit, I have learned that porn have had a very negative impact on a lot of people, and it is certainly not healthy for very young people (or even kids) to have easy access to it (as the situation is now).

I am just not sure if I would support other categories to block (like "esoteric material"), but regarding porn - good idea. You can opt-in if you want, can't you? The only problem is that if there are more adults in a household, and only some of them wants to opt-in.

<comment><USER14> Why does government or industry have to intervene in your personal life? If you don't want to view pornographic material, don't search for it. Stay away from sites where you might see something like it. If you're a parent, educate your kid.

This is a waste of time and money. Plain and simple.

<comment><USER3> If you are a parent yourself, you will know that suggesting education is not enough. By your logic, why is there an age limit to alcohol consumption? Your whole reasoning could be used for that as well - and enforcing alcohol age limit also costs time and money...

<comment><USER15> The comparison to alcohol is actually very useful: in the US where the drinking age is high (and fairly strictly enforced), binge drinking and alcohol abuse is extremely common in the teenaged population.

Compare with other countries where alcohol usage is not taboo, where the drinking age is low (and/or unenforced), where teen alcohol abuse is a far, far lesser problem.

It turns out that making something taboo and setting up some rudimentary roadblocks to its acquisition does not have the effect on consumption that you think it does...

Speaking anecdotally, growing up in Canada there was _no one_ under the drinking age who couldn't get alcohol if they wanted it. Hell, half of us didn't even _like_ drinking, and we did it for the taboo-ness of it all.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Instead of having ISPs and governments with databases detailing which one of us wants to enjoy online porn, there should be a standard on how to provide adult material on the internet. If this was to be implemented it'd be easy to create simple technologies that users could use for filtering out this kind of material themselves. The use case that most people would find this good is blocking porn in kids' phones and computer accounts. The easiest solution being having a .xxx domain.

<comment><USER17> So, in your scheme, existing websites are deprived of their domains if someone in government decides they belong in .xxx? And new sites are forced to the likely-to-be-blocked tld if someone deems them pornographic? What definition do you propose should be used? Can you imagine any conflicts over definitions of "adult material"? How would you imagine them being resolved? Would you have have site owners forced to self-apply labels they disagree with? What about foreign sites not subject to the law?

Try reading up on the many criticisms made of the .xxx concept when it was proposed.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> Porn is a escape from people's sexual frustration. UK is just going to increase the number of rapes by banning porn.</comment>