Show HN: An improved version of HyperLogLog - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/axiomhq/hyperloglog.git <comment><USER2> Somewhat similar to Redis implementation in many ways: Redis also uses loglog- beta, sparse representations, and dense representations in packed format without wasting 1 byte. However Redis representation uses 6 bits registers.

<comment><AUTHOR> Its heavily inspired by the rowdies implementation, fact is I looked back then how you did loglog-beta in redis and did a repo for it. Now I just added TailCut to it. Do you mind if I do a PR for redis?

<comment><USER2> Cool! Please drop me an email if possible, I would like to explore how the reduced bits in the registers affects Redis ability to estimate very very high cardinalities: imagine millions of events / second running for years. The problem with improving the current Redis implementation is backward compatibility. I made the error of representing the HyperLogLog in Redis as a string instead of using an opaque data type, so it is not possible to do conversion-on-load of old data, but there is to convert at the first access.

<comment><AUTHOR> If there is a version annotation it is very easy to convert the old HyperLogLog to a 4 bit register representation. I will send you an email ASAP.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Author here, the main 3 things that make this stand out is: 1) 4-bit register instead of 5 (HLL) and 6 (HLL++), but most implementations use 1 byte registers out of convenience 2) Sparse representation for lower cadinalities (like HyperLogLog++) 3) loglog-beta for dynamic bias correction medium and high cardinalities.

</comment><comment><USER3> This is absolutely amazing. Seems like a great tradeoff of having smaller space usage and better accurancy on average at the same time. It is also worth to read the related white paper: [http://cse.seu.edu.cn/PersonalPage/csqjxiao/csqjxiao_files/p...](http://cse.seu.edu.cn/PersonalPage/csqjxiao/csqjxiao_files/papers/INFOCOM17.pdf)

</comment><comment><USER4> This is awesome! We make heavy use of HyperLogLogs in our monitoring systems[0], which are also written in Go and currently use Clark Duvall's library, which this library is based on.

I'm excited to try this out on our systems and see what results we get.

[0] [https://github.com/stripe/veneur](https://github.com/stripe/veneur)

<comment><AUTHOR> I am happy to help if needed :D

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> How does the Xiao et al. paper (which introduces TailCut, "Better with Fewer Bits: Improving the Performance of Cardinality Estimation of Large Data Streams", <[http://cse.seu.edu.cn/PersonalPage/csqjxiao/csqjxiao_files/p...](http://cse.seu.edu.cn/PersonalPage/csqjxiao/csqjxiao_files/papers/INFOCOM17.pdf>)) compare with Ertl's "New cardinality estimation algorithms for HyperLogLog sketches", <[https://arxiv.org/abs/1702.01284>](https://arxiv.org/abs/1702.01284>)?

<comment><USER6> The tailcut approach breaks one important property of cardinality estimation algorithms: Adding the same value multiple times should change the state of the sketch only once when adding it for the first time.

However, due to the chance of overflows the same value can lead to multiple changes when using the tailcut approach. The introduced error depends on the order and also on the frequency distribution of inserted elements. It would be interesting to know which assumptions on the input data were made for the promised accuracy. In their paper I could not find any hint how the input data looked like in their experiments. It is fairly easy to obtain good results for the trivial case where all input values are distinct.

The tailcut approach reminds me of the HyperBitBit algorithm which also drops the property described above and promises a better storage factor (less error with same amount of memory).

It is true that the traditional 5-bit or 6-bit representations of Hyperloglog registers are suboptimal. Even with lossless compression (see [https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/6558/d618556f812328f969b60b...](https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/6558/d618556f812328f969b60b5f97dae6f940c8.pdf)) a significant amount of memory can be saved.

It is interesting that the standard error is reduced from 1.04/sqrt(m) down to 1.0/sqrt(m) despite the loss of information after the tailcut. Therefore, I conclude that it must be the estimation method itself which is superior to existing methods. I will need to check.

<comment><AUTHOR> Hey oertl, big fan of your paper [https://arxiv.org/pdf/1706.07290.pdf](https://arxiv.org/pdf/1706.07290.pdf) :D I going to start working on "intersections" and some improvements of the large scale cardinalities based on your research. Can I hit you up an email with some of my questions (concerning the intersection work? how does it compare to [https://arxiv.org/pdf/1704.03911.pdf](https://arxiv.org/pdf/1704.03911.pdf))

<comment><USER6> Sure, send me an email.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I was interested in using HLL for a project where I had ~20 million objects and each had a "status" with about 6 possibilities. I wanted to get fast counts of how many objects were in each status. But their status can change over time, so I needed a way to also _remove_ items from the count. HLL doesn't support this. Does anyone know of an algorithm that does? (Keeping a separate HLL for "removed" doesn't help because objects can revisit the same status they had before.)

<comment><USER8> I'm sure you thought of this, but what are the drawbacks to simply INCR/DECR some counters when an object changes state?

<comment><USER7> Indeed after ruling out HLL I decided that was the way to go. :-) I guess an HLL is more appropriate when you can't so easily keep track of which items have already been added to each set. For example if you were counting unique visitors per day, you would have a lot of sets (one per day), so you wouldn't want to store n visitor IDs for every day. But when an item can only be in one set at a time (and the sets are finite) incr/decr is possible so you might as well go with it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I don't understand what the result table measures. What are the numbers and what is the " _Exact_ " column?

<comment><USER3> Exact is the actual cardinality. How many distinct elements are in the set. HLL can estimate the cardinality by using fraction of the space that would require the store the unique elements instead.

<comment><USER9> Then wouldn't it be useful to add two columns for space used?

<comment><AUTHOR> Its always going to be half. The thing is the space is allocated upon creation of the data structure and does not increase afterwards

<comment><USER9> That doesn't match up with the tagline " _An improved version of HyperLogLog for the count-distinct problem, approximating the number of distinct elements in a multiset using 20-50% less space than other usual HyperLogLog implementations._ "

<comment><AUTHOR> I am comparing the implementations from influx and axiom

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I'm looking for implementations of this in other languages. Specifically in Python or Java. Please hook me up if you know of any such implementation.

</comment><comment><USER11> Do you guys know any way to calculate the intersection of two HLL instances? The algorithm allows merging two sets but it's not that easy to take the intersection of them. A + B - (A U B) is not the optimal way so I would love to hear your suggestions.

<comment><AUTHOR> I have a way will post it soon

<comment><USER11> Would love to hear about the solution, are you going to implement it or publish an article?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> There really are a lot of hyperloglog implementations in go.

I'd be interested in seeing a comprehensive comparison between implementations for speed, accuracy and space efficiency.

<comment><AUTHOR> I'll take care ofd this over the weekend :D

<comment><USER10> Any progress?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> why use metro hash instead of xxhash ?

<comment><AUTHOR> In my test metro hash gave me higher throughput, must be something with the xxhash implementation in Go

<comment><USER14> I tested both 64 bit variants a while ago and there was no throughput difference worth mentioning with the C++ and C implementations, respectively. (I settled on xxHash since it's around for longer and the code is portable, also I didn't need to do a C++->C translation).

If there is a large difference, perhaps one of the implementations is vectorized or botched.</comment></comment></comment>


Low batteries on your Tesla? Swap 'em out - <AUTHOR> http://blog.sfgate.com/energy/2013/06/18/low-batteries-on-your-tesla-swap-em-out/

<comment><USER2> I wonder if this is motivated by ZEV credits; I think rapid refill zero emission vehicles qualify for a lot more credits--possibly even if no owners take advantage of the feature. So just having a few rapid recharge stations that nobody uses could be a huge financial windfall for Tesla, allowing them more profit on each car sold--again, even if owners never once swap a battery.

<comment><USER3> Source? My search was fruitless.

<comment><USER2> www.greencarcongress.com/2013/05/zev-20130502.html

Looks liken California is thinking of closing this loophole; nothing a little lobbying can't fix.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> If we're going to be swapping things at charging stations, why not use a technology like this:

[http://www.phinergy.com/](http://www.phinergy.com/)

Takes a refill of plain water every ~200 miles and a swapping of aluminum at larger intervals. Aluminum is common as is the recycling of it. It's also a lot easier to handle than battery packs I would imagine -- lighter, safer, etc.

Not sure about the range but early press suggests it to be at least 1k miles between changes. I put around 4k miles on my car a year (much lower than average, I know). I take my car in at least twice a year for service so it would get half of them "for free".

Even at 12k miles per year that's only once a month. If it could be done in 15 minutes (a number I just made up) that's not much of a PITA.

I wonder what the cost would be vs gasoline vs the cost of buying a car packed with LIBs.

<comment><USER5> > why not use a technology like this

Because it is highly inefficient, requires a large infrastructure, is susceptible to air pollution, and has low power density?

Versus battery electrics have infrastructure at every home, are upwards of 93% efficient, don't use air, and have plenty of power.

<comment><USER4> > and has low power density

Wikipedia:

"They have one of the highest energy densities of all batteries ... an electric vehicle with aluminium batteries has the potential for up to eight times the range of a lithium-ion battery with a significantly lower total weight."

> Because it is highly inefficient

I just read in the 20 - 30% range. One, that's a lot better than a gas burner. Two, your magical 93% doesn't account for the efficiency of the source of the electricity. Over 40% of the electricity produced in the US is from coal. The average efficiency of a coal plant is around 30%.

Coal plants are also the #1 source of greenhouse gasses in the US.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I don't think battery swapping is a great idea. The problem is that the battery is such a huge part of the car's cost. I can only guess, but I would estimate $15,000-20,000. Getting someone else's poorly treated battery could drastically effect the resale value of the car. The other company in the article tried to mitigate this problem by actually owning the batteries, but that isn't Tesla's model.

<comment><AUTHOR> If I understand the idea correctly, you'd be swapping out your (depleted from a road trip) battery for someone else's (or Tesla's, if they shifted to a model where they provide some of the batteries at the swap-out stations), and then next time you wanted to swap again, you'd get another one. Doesn't seem to me to be a factor for resale. Seems like they're pitching it instead as a way to increase the range of a car while on the road, though I'm willing to say I've misunderstood based on my (twice) read of the article.

If they are planning to release further detail Thursday, though, that'll presumably clarify.

<comment><USER7> If they take my (say) brand-new Southern California battery and replace it with someone's two-year-old Salt Belt battery, that's going to decrease the value of my car.

<comment><USER8> > _that 's going to decrease the value of my car._

Forgive my ignorance, but how? Cheap battery swapping would mean that all batteries are essentially fungible. What stops the new owner from just swapping batteries again? What stops _you?_

You're also forgetting that Tesla has a _very_ generous battery warranty. Unless you don't think they'll honor it. [http://money.cnn.com/2013/04/26/autos/tesla-service- gaurante...](http://money.cnn.com/2013/04/26/autos/tesla-service- gaurantee/index.html)

<comment><USER9> _Cheap battery swapping would mean that all batteries are essentially fungible_

Which will be interesting. I wonder if at that point the "tragedy of the commons" would start to set in. "Oh, it's ok if I run this battery totally flat all the time, it will shorten the battery's lifespan a lot, but I can just swap it for another!"

<comment><USER8> Why would you leave your car intentionally empty? Why inconvenience yourself like that?

There might be people who _can 't_ plug in, but that'll happen regardless of swapping. You might make the argument that swapping could convince more people in that situation to buy the car, but that's hardly a downside for Tesla Motors.

>it will shorten the battery's lifespan a lot

It doesn't do that if you set your depth-of-discharge correctly. Lithium cells are more sensitive to temperature than charge cycles anyway.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Though I'll believe it when I see it in (user) action, this would make a huge difference, IMHO, in the usability of the car. It would make it truly feasible to drive to Tahoe from the Bay Area, for example. _That 's_ something I'd pay for.

<comment><USER8> ::checks GMaps:: TIL a 4 hour 20 minute trip is unfeasible, but a 3 hour 50 minute one is fine. ;)

<comment><AUTHOR> Until you're traveling at freeway speeds, in cold weather.

[http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/10/automobiles/stalled-on- the...](http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/10/automobiles/stalled-on-the-ev- highway.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0)

So I'm not sure even 3 hr 50 m would do it?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> High overhead, but if it can be done quickly and for a not exorbitant price, probably a winning idea. I imagine they'd charge people a yearly service to be in such a program.

</comment><comment><USER11> wasn't this the premise of the Israeli startup, Better Place? which just went bankrupt?

<comment><USER12> The article talks about that.</comment></comment>


Jason Fried Rants about Modern Web Design - <AUTHOR> http://tech.co/jason-fried-design-2013-12 <comment><USER2> He is talking out of his rear-end.</comment>


Introducing Gmail Tap - <AUTHOR> http://gmailblog.blogspot.com/2012/03/introducing-gmail-tap.html

<comment><USER2> I put the app we used in the video up on Play Market: <http://goo.gl/IZN16>

It's a real Android input manager, you can use it (more or less) as a real keyboard :)

The code will be open-sourced here: <https://code.google.com/p/morse- keyboard/>

</comment><comment><USER3> Awesome. Morse code for your Android. Ship-to-shore coming soon! I think someone hit the publish button on the April Fools content early.

</comment><comment><USER4> April Fools. But oddly enough I like the idea - and its not ridiculous like yesteryears'. The technology sure exists.

</comment><comment><USER5> Haha hilarious. Loved the LL Cool J cameo!

<comment><USER6> Agreed, what a perfect April's joke prelude.

(unrelated, but still interesting: I guess the guy with the mustache looks kind of familiar, too...)

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> I'm surprised. I thought Apple would have been the first to bring something like this to mobile since they already have a similar concept for laptops.

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9BnLbv6QYcA>

</comment><comment><USER8> Why three buttons? Morse code only needs one (as is obvious from any telegraph key)—short press for dot, long press for dash, short pause for intercharacter gap, long pause for interword gap. Then you could type at least eight messages concurrently.

</comment><comment><USER9> Morse code? I think it's way easier to excuse yourself from the table tho.</comment>


LexisNexis Announces HPCC Systems, Open Source, ~4x Hadoop performance claimed - <AUTHOR> http://hpccsystems.com/about-us/press_center/lexisnexis-announces-hpcc-systems

<comment><AUTHOR> "Read how the HPCC Platform compares to Hadoop"

<http://hpccsystems.com/Why-HPCC/HPCC-vs-Hadoop>

"on the same hardware configuration showed that HPCC was 3.95 times faster than Hadoop for this benchmark."

Though I am cautious, these things always take time to hash out what's really what (especially when the competitor is the one running the benchmark).

</comment><comment><USER2> Interesting that they are choosing to release the community edition under the Affero GPL3. (They also mention a "contributory agreement" which probably means a copyright assignment.)

<https://hpccsystems.com/faq/licensing>

</comment><comment><USER3> Just had a quick look and it seems that to use HPCC you will have to learn some new syntax (not sure though). Hadoop is based on java and most developers know it well. This could be a problem with widespread adoption of HPCC.

Would like to know your view :)</comment>


What Comes After Antibiotics? Alternatives to Stop Superbugs (2013) - <AUTHOR> http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/health/breakthroughs/what-comes-after-antibiotic-5-alternatives-to-stop-superbugs <comment><USER2> The original url [1] pointed to this one, so we changed it.

Submitters: Please double-check the articles you post for links to more original sources. When one article is lifted from another, HN strongly prefers the original.

1\. [http://www.news.com.au/technology/science/science-has- found-...](http://www.news.com.au/technology/science/science-has-found-the- answer-to-what-happens-when-antibiotics-fail/story-fnjwl2dr-1226787418714)

</comment><comment><USER3> IBM are also doing some amazing work in this area with their ninja polymer nanotech - [http://www.research.ibm.com/articles/nanomedicine.shtml#fbid...](http://www.research.ibm.com/articles/nanomedicine.shtml#fbid=klilCTIj3Vr)

<comment><AUTHOR> Yeah, a real effort is being made to counter this problem. It's a good thing too, people don't really understand the real threat that antibiotic resistant bacteria will.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Phage Therapy. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phage_therapy](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phage_therapy)

</comment><comment><USER5> Someone just needs to find a way to turn the bitcoin mining problem into an antibiotic mining problem.

<comment><USER6> I've heard that once you make mining "useful" for something other than securing the block chain, some of the security guarantees break down.

<comment><USER5> I'm pretty sure kittens are somehow harmed in the process too

<comment><USER6> I'm not sure if you're making a point or goofing off.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> All solutions to the evolution of resistance are temporary.

<comment><USER8> Some are less temporary than others.

Bleach, for example. Autoclaves. Magma.

<comment><USER9> Well, we're talking about antibiotics so you want something that kills bacteria without killing the cells of the person in which the bacteria are.

If what you're looking for is harmless for human cells, it's just a matter of time until bacteria find a way to resist it.

<comment><USER6> Well, reducing introduction of microbes to the interiors of human beings reduces the need to deploy "antibiotics" in the sense of "sufficiently harmful for bacteria, sufficiently harmless for humans". Not a complete solution, but being better about reducing spread is probably a component - particularly in the surgery portion of all this.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


How to Scrape Websites in Ruby on Rails using scRUBYt - <AUTHOR> http://dmix.ca/2008/09/how-to-scrape-websites-in-ruby-on-rails-using-scrubyt/

<comment><USER2> When I did <http://zerodaydeals.com> (not mine anymore) the biggest pain was scraping all the sites, since there was 50+ sites... and people would constantly change layouts, breaking it.

I tried using plugins but ended up resorting to pile of regular expressions for each site. I wonder if this would be better as I don't think it was around at the time.

<comment><USER3> [ _shameless plug_ ] Our startup - Feedity - (<http://feedity.com>) provides custom RSS feeds for virtually any webpage, which helps many small-medium online services in data integration.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> So, when I was creating Adonomics I considered using scRUBYt for scraping Facebook. Here's why I didn't go with it:

1\. It was hard to get scRUBYt to learn the "correct" rules. It tends to be over-specific or over-broad.

2\. It was slow. Really slow. Using Ruby Mechanize was at least 2-3x faster, and even that was pretty slow.

3\. The learner doesn't like bad HTML, but as a practical matter you have to deal with poor markup all the time. scRUBYt makes it hard to get to the guts of the system.

YMMV.

<comment><USER5> I wrote a similar tutorial a while back using Python and BeautifulSoup ([http://lethain.com/entry/2008/aug/10/an-introduction-to- comp...](http://lethain.com/entry/2008/aug/10/an-introduction-to- compassionate-screenscraping/)). BeautifulSoup doesn't learn in any sense of the word, but it plays very nicely with malformed (even extraordinarily malformed) html, and you can usually do things in a way that is resistant to changes (a combination of tag and id|class is usually fairly resistant to non- drastic changes).

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> I took at look at scRUBYt, looked nice, but I ended up just using hpricot - fast, and pretty easy. I would just have one screen with the site with firebug open, and grab the xpath expressions from it, slap them in a ruby string and then put in place holders for the parameters.

Only minutes of work.

</comment><comment><USER7> Nice work, script is a lot simpler than i thought.</comment>


Driving on the Autobahn - <AUTHOR> https://www.german-way.com/travel-and-tourism/driving-in-europe/driving/autobahn/driving-on-the-autobahn/ <comment><USER2> The autobahn is a glorious thing. When I lived in Germany I bought a Honda Civic hatchback, 1.6L, 5 speed manual through AAFES car sales (cars sales to US military personnel in Europe). I drove that car all over Europe from where I lived near Frankfurt. I'd drive it on the autobahn regularly. That little car had 120 mph on the speedometer. I had to really push the accelerator into the carpet but it could do it, easily on a down slope a bit harder on a flat, not at all up hill. Invariably I'd be in the left lane building up speed to get around someone going 110 or so, only to have a big bmw or Mercedes to pull up behind me and flash their lights. Then I'd have slow down, move over, let them pass then try again. Note this was out in the countryside far from major cities.

People here are amazed when I tell that story, 120 in a Honda? Is that safe? All I know is it felt rock steady, and the autobahn was so smooth and sweeping it, was nothing to drive at those speeds.

I brought that car back to the states and drove it till 2010. A lady backed into it in a store parking lot. Dented the left rear quarter, totaled the car because it wasn't worth much at that time. Somewhere there's Honda with a German owners manual in the US.

Edit typo

<comment><USER3> > 120 in a Honda? Is that safe

The real problem would occur if you had to stop or slow down as quickly as a car that actually had real brakes, like say an AMG. But hey... it would be HUGELY hypocritical of me to say that you should Not have done that.

<comment><USER4> I never understood how 'good brakes' make a difference as every car has brakes powerful enough to lock the wheels. Why isn't it the ratio of the mass of the car to the size of the contact patch for the tires that is the overriding factor?

<comment><USER5> Anti lock braking and wheel surface contact will make big differences between cars in braking behavior. Those AMG not only have better brakes, with possibly better software controlling ABS, but also wider tires. With formulas [1]

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

<comment><USER6> Some also have active aerodynamic braking, sports tyres have softer compounds with more grip which results in better braking and usually larger engines also provide more engine breaking.

<comment><USER7> Engine braking is completely irrelevant on a RWD car during hard braking. The weight transfer means barely any braking is needed on the rear wheels, aside from a token amount to keep the car going straight.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> A few things the article might have added:

* When getting on the Autobahn, there will _always_ be a "Beschleunigungsstreifen" or acceleration lane. Use it to get to speed while watching the traffic on your left (while signalling, needless to say), then merge in.

* When getting off the Autobahn ("Ausfahrt", ha, always on the right (with < 5 exceptions)), there will be 3 beacons with 3, 2, 1 white stripes on a blue background indicating 300, 200, 100 metres to the beginning of the deceleration lane. Start signalling at the 300m sign, and do not slow down until you've changed onto the deceleration lane (as otherwise you'd force those behind you to slow down & reaccelerate).

* As mentioned, do not overtake on the right. However, if the highway splits (or at an exit), the broken white line dividing the lanes will change: wider and with shorter gaps. Here, one may overtake on the right.

<comment><USER9> > do not overtake on the right

how is it defined ? suppose someone is driving 100 km/h on the left lane while the right lane is free and you approach from behind doing 150- should you stay at the left and wait for slow car to move right ?

<comment><USER10> You flash your headlights at them. If they still don't move that's what your horn is for.

All joking aside though ... you don't pass on the right, so if they refuse to move you need to slow the heck down and follow.

<comment><USER11> Believe me, after a few seconds of waiting I always pass slowly on the right. It might not be legally perfect, but is the accepted way of handling drivers that are an obstacle on the left.

<comment><USER12> This is not at all "the accepted way" in Germany.

<comment><USER13> the people going 100kph in the left lane will protest, ofc. but they cannot stand in the way of progress and will be overtaken on the right lane ;-)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Ah the no speed limit sign!

I rented a 5-series and drove from Frankfurt to Schwangau via Munich last December. I've been driving in the US for 4 years now, and can tell that the Autobahn is only as stressful as you want it to be. There are multiple lanes, and if you're in the leftmost lane, you'll be tailgated by those with better cars even while doing 230 kmph. If you're not into that kind of stuff, just stay in one of the right lanes and enjoy the view (otherwise you better stay _extremely_ focused on the road!).

Driving on the Autobahn also made me realize that buying a car for its speed is extremely pointless in the Bay Area (or any place that imposes speed limits), because one would never be able to experience the thrill that comes out of pushing the gas pedal for 30 seconds straight.

<comment><USER15> I live in Germany and get to drive on the no-speed-limit Autobahn regularly. It's fun! But what many newcomers or tourists fail to understand is that you can't just go and drive 230 km/h just because there's no speed limit. Whether or not you can _safely_ drive 230 km/h hugely depends on circumstances, mainly on how dense the traffic is. If the left lane is almost permanently completely empty: go for it! If the left lane is regularly used for passing people in the middle lane, then driving 230 km/h makes you a dangerous amateur who's actively endangering other people's lives.

Unfortunately, people who've never driven the Autobahn before don't usually get this and some seem to get in a blind haze and just push push push until their car is at their speed limit. That can be so stupid and dangerous. Use your common sense, please.

<comment><USER16> Plenty of Germans who are neither tourists nor newcomers _also_ don't get this. But compared to Poland, Romania, Greece, Lithuania and Latvia driving in Germany is pretty safe.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Disclaimer: I am German.

I absolutely hate driving on the Autobahn in Germany. The pure stress and the amount of assholes you encounter is absolutely astonishing.

I have driven cars before in other countries, including the "chaotic" Italy and the US, and it was always a more pleasant experience.

<comment><USER18> Your post seems odd. The autobahn is generally regarded as some of the best highway experience there is when it comes to other road users.

As someone who spends too much time going slower than the rest of traffic in grossly overloaded light trucks I think I have some authority when I say that being a road obstruction to the point where people pull dick moves to pass you is a great way to turn everyone else into an asshole make driving stressful. As long as you're not trying to go a ton slower than everyone else in your lane (forcing them to rapidly merge left or slow down, wait for a gap and move left cutting someone off) driving in your lane shouldn't be too stressful.

<comment><USER19> > Your post seems odd. The autobahn is generally regarded as some of the best > highway experience there is when it comes to other road users

I drive Autobahn both in Germany and Netherlands and I can tell you that driving in Germany is a 100 times more stressfull compared to NL! As soon as you cross the border to Germany everyone channels their inner race car driver and it becomes stressful. Driving in NL is much more relaxed and laid back.

<comment><USER8> Well, driving in most countries but Germany is more relaxing because everyone goes at the same low speed.

You can have the same experience on a German Autobahn by staying in the right lane. You'll go at the same low speed as the trucks, nice and cozy, straight, without much worries or concentration needed.

Now, if you want to go faster, you do have the option (unlike in other countries), but then you'll have to be a bit more careful and dynamic, because it is quite possible that a car approaches you from behind faster than you approach a stationary target (if the car goes 250 km/h while you go 120 km/h, say). Of course that requires keeping an eye on not only the traffic in front, but also the traffic behind, and getting out of the way when required, so you have to change lanes quite frequently.

It is somewhat more stressful (if you choose to leave the slow lane), but that's the price you pay.

Furthermore, after a while, all this becomes second nature, and rather stress free, as long as everyone follows the rule. (What remains stressful are drivers not following the rules, eg not signalling before changing lanes, or changing into your lane when you're about to overtake them, etc.)

<comment><USER20> > Of course that requires keeping an eye on not only the traffic in front, but > also the traffic behind, and getting out of the way when required, so you > have to change lanes quite frequently.

This hits the nail on the head. I know people who complain intensely about Autobahn driving and when I ride with them all of them have very poor viewing technique ("Blicktechnik") and are the kind of driver that's rather oblivious to anything that happens on the road that isn't squarely in front of them. Of course, with these predispositions, just things like merging or changing lanes become stressful each time. You have to be able to do both on the Autobahn, so Autobahn = very stressful for them.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> My additional rules:

\- if I'm driving on the right lane and I'm approaching a car in front of me while some other car approaches me on the left lane to overtake me (or even if it's on the right lane but quickly approaching) then I usually slightly break even if I wouldn't need it. This way the car approaching from the back will see my break lights and will know that I don't intend to suddenly change to the left lane to overtake the car in front of me. This is nice for the other person and makes the traffic more fluid.

\- the faster I drive the more I have to force myself to look more in the distance to be prepared for anything unexpected (sudden traffic jam, animals, debris, etc...). Sounds obvious but in other countries I usually drive up to max 140 km/h but with 200km/h I need a lot more space to react.

\- I try to anticipate and modulate the speed more than in other countries. E.g. even if the pavement is dry where I am driving, if I see a dark cloud in the distance I usually start slowing down as it could be that a few km ahead even, if it's not raining, there might still be a lot of water if a heavy cloud just did a pass-by.

All in all I usually loved driving in Germany, with the exception of during the hours when people go or come back from work (can be quite hectic).

<comment><USER22> Two more things this made me remember, at least based on the _savoir vivre_ in Poland (not sure if that's part of the culture in Germany too):

\- It's considered very polite (kinda gentleman-grade polite) to change to the left (i.e. higher-speed) lane when you see a car building up speed to join the traffic from an acceleration lane (on the far right), to open a place in the traffic for them. That said, it's not "mandatory": you should only ever consider this as a lowest priority gesture, i.e. if noone's in sight getting ready to overcome you on the left. Conversely, if you're already driving fast on the acceleration lane and have trouble merging into the main traffic, and are already approaching the end of the acceleration lane, I've heard it recommended to stay on the subsequent "emergency lane" instead of e.g. reducing speed to a halt and trying to merge (or, obviously, forcing your way into some other car in the main lanes). It feels kinda risky, but the alternative of outright stopping, although it may feel tempting from basic instincts, is actually a huge immediate danger to you and everyone around.

\- If you notice an unexpected, sudden congestion ahead, it's also considered good manners to blink your emergency lights, to signal a danger to drivers behind you. That said, I personally find it a rather difficult feat, given that if the congestion is sudden and unexpected, by definition it means I'm surprised by the situation, and thus quite busy handling the car and the gear trying to decelerate quickly but safely, while looking in all the mirrors and ahead at once to actively monitor the situation around. Searching for the rarely-used emergency lights switch is a risky distraction.

<comment><USER23> Typically you'll see a "wave" of blinking emergency lights arriving well before the sudden congestion, you pass that on for those behind you, and prepare to slow down.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> > When driving in Germany, you need to drive like a German – at least like the > good German drivers.

Or you can get a Dutch car (with a yellow licence plate, compared to the German which is white) and German drives will immediately recognise you as a danger on the road and give 'friendly' reminders with blinking lights to stay on the right side of the autobahn. Disclaimer, I'm Dutch.

<comment><USER25> There is a joke in Germany about this:

Q: In the Netherlands, what happens to people who fail their driving test for the third time?

A: They get a yellow license plate.

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> I love the Autobahn, less so because of the driving experience and more so because it represents the Pinnacle of road engineering. Every inch of lane is striped properly, every sign is informative and bright, every Gore point is painted, every inch of road is paved with high quality materials, no potholes, all exit and entry ramps are separated and predictable, with long merges, highway facilities are in excellent condition. I don't know why we can't have these things in the US

<comment><USER27> The same reason our cars are shittier, and our water faucets don't make most excellent whooshing sounds: insufficient German engineers and craftsmanship.

American engineering is always over engineering, but lazy over engineering without any Teutonic perfectionism. Except maybe the various moon shots. Oh, wait.

<comment><USER28> Just don't bring up the Berlin Brandenburg Airport. Never, ever do this.

<comment><USER29> There are plenty of countries that would have opened BER in the state it was in 5 years ago, either sweeping problems under the rug or fixing them during operation. The airport is as much a testament to bad construction as it is to safety inspections and rules trumping economic interest.

<comment><USER28> When you kill 17 people and have to reconstruct multiple airport terminals due to fire ([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D%C3%BCsseldorf_Airport#D%C3%B...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D%C3%BCsseldorf_Airport#D%C3%BCsseldorf_Airport_fire)), you want to make certain you don't have a repeat.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> > GW Autobahn Rule 3: Slower traffic stays to the right! As in the US, > whenever possible, move into the right lane. Most German drivers are good > about this, but some non-German drivers are not.

Having driven both in Europe and the US, this is one of my pet peeves in the US. This causes so much unnecessary risk. I used to chalk this up to the super light driving test in the US (at least compared to Europe).

But recently I realized it's not just driver education: the road UX is different between Europe and the US on main highways. Here in the US, the right lane very often "disappears", i.e. becomes an "exit only" lane. The result is if you're going straight for a while, you find it easier to not stay on the right and then have to change lanes. In Europe, the road design tries to minimize the "vanishing right lane" syndrome: exits ramps are separated; and if need be, it's the left lane that goes.

<comment><USER31> _> Having driven both in Europe and the US, this is one of my pet peeves in the US._

Funny, one of my pet peeves since I moved to the US is the "keep right unless passing" or "left lane is for passing only" or any other variation of the same sermon. Sounds logical at first, but it's really bureocracy.

If the highway is congested, then the rule becomes meaningless. The traffic density is so high, that it's perfectly natural to use all of the available lanes.

If the highway is not congested, then the density is low enough that you should be able to change lanes as necessary, with minimal fuss. If that's the case, then the whole "keep to the right unless passing" is really just a crutch. In this situation, what we really want is something along the lines of "pay attention and don't make people pass you on the right", but that's not enforceable. So we come up with a rule like "keep to the right unless passing", because that can be enforced by cops.

<comment><USER32> In my experience it isn't really the people in the left lane that present the biggest problem, it's the cruisers in the middle lane (on a three lane highway). They effectively cap the speed of the highway because you have to match their speed and squeeze in (they rarely leave a legal amount of distance) just to get to the other side of the highway to go faster, or to the right to take an exit. I really do wish cops would do some enforcement of the keep-right rule so the highway would flow smoothly.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> It should be noted that not all Autobahns are equally well built and maintained. Even though they are called "Bundesautobahn" (federal highway), it's actually the states who are responsible for construction and maintenance. Some do a good job with that, others not so much.

For the best driving experience I'd recommend Bavaria. They have well maintained roads and less congestion, also only few speed limits. Avoid Baden- Württemberg and especially the Stuttgart area, unless you really like traffic jams.

Here's a map of Autobahn sections without speed limit: [http://autobahnspeedhunter.de/routes_de/](http://autobahnspeedhunter.de/routes_de/)

<comment><USER34> No, Bavaria is actually one of the worst. The best are by far in the east, Sachsen. When I have to go from Sachsen down to Bavaria all hell breaks loose. Crippled asphalt, broken concrete from the 30s, endless constructions, highway police enforcing 80km/h. It's the worst.

<comment><USER33> I drive A8 (Stuttgart - Munich) and A9 (Nuremberg - Munich) regularly and don't see much to complain about. Compare that to A5 here in southwest and you see what I mean...

Anyway, if Saxony really has better Autobahns than Bavaria, I need to go there soon ;) Any specific recommendations?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> I find driving on the Autobahn very stressful. The main problem is the width of the speed distribution. You have the trucks on the right lane, often struggling to even reach the required 60 km/h when going uphill, and you have people driving over 200 km/h on the left. When you're stuck behind a truck, you have to be very careful before switching lanes since you need time to accelerate. It's not easy to gauge the speed of an oncoming car in the rear mirror. Also, nobody wants to drive on the rightmost lane because you don't want to have a truck behind you when you suddenly encounter a traffic jam (especially when the end of it is behind a curve). So the left lane is usually pretty crowded, and often times the distance between cars is way too low for the speed that is driven there.

<comment><USER36> Have you considered just adopting a faster cruising speed? Would this not solve all your problems by giving more room for error should someone behind you have to hit the brakes if you misjudge? Almost all cars can comfortably run 170 kph and it sounds like it would make you a lot less stressed (arguably stress and nervousness are more dangerous than the speed differential itself; the speed differential can be anticipated by others, whereas nervous driving is inherently unpredictable for everyone involved.)

The not-wanting-a-truck-behind-you thing is new to me, didn't know that was a thing.

<comment><USER35> The autobahn is usually too crowded for driving such high speeds continuously. You constantly have to break for slower cars overtaking trucks or who are simply "idling" on the left lane because they don't want to drive between trucks. This just creates another kind of stress (and will also reduce your mileage considerably).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> >If you see a vehicle coming up from behind you at a higher rate of speed, signal and move over. Don't be surprised if they flash their high beams. It's common and only considered mildly rude. Just move over.

While this is somewhat common this is a clear violation of Traffic Law and actually also a violation of the German criminal code ("Nötigung"). It's definitely not "only mildly rude" and the types of people who flash their headlights aggressively (often accompanied by driving way to close to the car in front of them) are those we could really do without on the Autobahn.

<comment><USER38> I thought so as well, but articles I've found (eg [0]) seem to indicate Lichthupe can actually kinda be used when overtaking. But I doubt most people on the road use it this way. Flashing your lights till the lane is clear certainly isn't legal.

[0] [https://www.adac.de/der- adac/rechtsberatung/verkehrsvorschri...](https://www.adac.de/der- adac/rechtsberatung/verkehrsvorschriften/inland/lichthupe/)

<comment><USER37> Yes you are correct. You are allowed to use the Lichthupe (or the normal horn as well) _once_ when indicating that you are going to overtake. But that's only for situations on single lane roads where there is already enough space to overtake. You are not allowed to push other drivers around it is only for signalling that your overtaking maneuver is about to happen.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> I've driven in Germany many times and thought it was a lot less stressful than driving in the US. Autobahns are typically only 2 or 3 lanes per direction vs the 4 to 6 lane monstrosities that we get here. They are also very well marked, designed, and paved.

<comment><USER39> If you go over 3 lanes per direction you have absolutely failed at designing a road.

<comment><USER40> Or you have the traffic density required to move that many cars. The George Washington Bridge, which essentially carries all traffic that travels through New York City that isn't going to/from Manhattan and some parts of Long Island, carries 9 lanes in each direction on two levels, and absolutely needs that many lanes.

<comment><USER39> If you ever fill 3 lanes than you need to seriously invest in public transport. More than 3 lanes is never a sane idea. 9 lanes is an absolute atrocity.

<comment><USER41> _> If you ever fill 3 lanes than you need to seriously invest in public transport._

Um, you do realize that the George Washington Bridge is in New York City, one of the largest cities in the world, with an _extensive_ system of public transportation? The idea that if NYC would just invest in some public transport those 9 lanes would go down to 3 is laughable.

<comment><USER42> I somewhat agree with the parent poster. The city's design should not require 9 lanes. I didn't see 9 lanes roads in Tokyo and it's bigger than NYC.

<comment><USER41> _> I didn't see 9 lanes roads in Tokyo and it's bigger than NYC._

That's because Tokyo and NYC are different cities in different countries, populated by people with very different preferences.

My point was not that NYC's public transportation and highway systems are optimal by the criterion of "optimal" that the poster I responded to appears to be using. My point was that the fact that NYC doesn't look optimal to him is not that NYC has simply failed to consider public transportation as an alternative. It's that, as I said, NYC is populated by people with different preferences from his, and NYC's public transportation and highway systems reflect those preferences.

<comment><USER43> That's because NYC and most of America is dysfunctional to the point where people think that a 18 lane road is not just necessary but actually a good idea. Not a single place in the US has _good_ public transport. Maybe good to US standards but thats a low bar.

<comment><USER41> _> That's because NYC and most of America is dysfunctional_

Not to those of us who live in America. That's the nice thing about having different countries, and different states, cities, etc. within countries: it enables people with widely different definitions of "functional" to all find a place to live, instead of everybody having to conform to somebody's fixed idea of how people should live.

<comment><USER43> Well I guess if you enjoy spending hours stuck in traffic and having air that slowly kills you.

<comment><USER41> What makes you think "most of America" (or even most of NYC) experiences this?

<comment><USER42> The fact that there are nine lanes gives it away.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER44> While the rules of the Autobahn are not that different to U.S. freeway rules, the practice of them is very different (e.g. the use of blinkers). U.S. drivers could learn a lot from this.

<comment><USER45> Absolutely. Having driven in a bunch of EU countries and then driving in the US what struck me the most was not that Americans were "laid-back" as the article claims. At least in California highways following distances are very small and everyone seems to think it's natural to cut across into another lane with no safety margins at highway speeds. That combined with very poor lane discipline, with overtakes on the right and left, made me fell much less safe than in highways across the EU. As with anything you end up getting used to it but there's something to be said for simple rules well followed. These Autobahn rules are fairly normal practice across the EU. The Autobahn just makes obeying much more important as the speed differences are deadlier.

</comment></comment><comment><USER46> One of the signs is labeled incorrectly. The clear white circle with the four diagonal lines is actually kind of a combination of the other two white circle signs. It means end of any speed limits _and_ end of any passing restrictions.

There is no need for a "No speed limit" sign because this is the default.

</comment><comment><USER47> > "[...] Don't be surprised if they flash their high beams. It's common and > only considered mildly rude. Just move over."

According to the very angry and also very stereotypically German Police officer pulling over me and my friend back in 2017, flashing your lights is in-fact illegal. We were doing approximately 140km/h having just passed the police car in the left lane when someone pulled out ahead of us going much slower forcing us to slam the brakes to avoid hitting them. No blinkers were used on their part and we flashed our lights as we had seen and experienced countless times on our trip to let them know we were coming. We had driven all the way down from the top of Denmark, through Germany, France and Switzerland, down through parts of Italy and were then on the way back up through Germany when this happened so we had seen people flashing their high beams like that countless of times, and it seemed like a good practice if you were going much faster than the people ahead.

My friend was driving at the time and luckily got no ticket and kept his license after getting scolded by the police officer for a good 15 minutes.

No idea if it's actually illegal, but considering of angry the police officer was I'm assuming so. We were confused as to why they stopped us at first, and he kept yelling/asking "what is that? Why do you do that?"

Other then that my experiences driving on the Autobahn (and that whole stretch of road) have been pretty good! Very straight roads of decent quality where they seem to use concrete or something instead of asphalt like they do here in Norway. Someone else mentioned the speed limits kept going up and down over short distances, which I remember as well.

I think the most perplexing thing for us driving on the Autobahn is that you can purchase alcohol, even the stronger stuff, at the gas stations along the way, coming from having a strongly regulated alcohol monopoly system here in Norway where anything stronger than 4,7% alcohol is only available at Vinmonopolet, which is only open specific hours and dribks with a lower percentage are also only available in normal stores within certain hours.

This is turning out to be a much longer comment than I intended.

<comment><USER29> The police officer probably had a bad day.

Flashing the high beams or using your horn is allowed in two situations: to signal that you will overtake the car in front of you (or have the intention to do so) outside of a built-up area, or if you judge yourself or someone else to be in danger ($16 StVO).

There are some additional provisions about not blinding oncoming traffic, but that shouldn't be a concern on the autobahn. Signaling something that they are driving unsafe and put you in danger is justified by the law.

<comment><USER48> My experience with German road police it that they can be really obnoxious and rude. Me and a friend got stopped once in Germany, and we were picked out solely because of our Dutch license plate, nothing more. Guy demanded to search our car, demanded we open and empty all of our luggage. He was sure he'd find some marijuana since we're Dutch. Held us up for more than two hours, threatened to get a sniffing dog (which he hoped would make us give up what he suspected we had), and just being an enormous douche. He then just left us standing next to the highway on a very dangerous spot with all of our luggage a mess and on the street.

So yea, probably he just had a bad day. Or, he's one of the many many men that work for the German Police that are just enormous a-holes.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER49> > If you remain a typical, more laid-back American driver, you could have > problems. You also need to be alert and pay even more attention to the road > than required in the US.

I've driven around the US & Germany. There is no "typical" US driver. They vary based upon what kind of area in the US they live in, the time of day & the amount of traffic.

I do prefer the semi's & large trucks on the far right rule & the pass only on the left rule. This is sometimes applied around the US but plenty of cities have people passing in every lane which seems to slow down traffic overall.

<comment><USER50> _This_

Driving in the United States is very region dependent.

In cities it's everyone for themselves. Lots of speeding and general shenanigans. Especially Boston, Philly, NYC, Baltimore, SF, LA, DC, and Miami.

In the mid west drivers are generally more laid back and follow the speed limits more.

In rural parts of the Northeast like upstate NY and PA you'll find drivers a lot like Germans. Stay right, pass left.

PA turnpike has a speed limit of 70 but it's normal to see people doing 80-85 especially on I-80. But I-95 near Philly is even worse. Posted speed limit of 55. People doing 80 regularly in the left lane.

This is basically almost autobahn speeds.

For the non-mericans: 80 MPH ~= 128.748 KPH

American roads are all over the place as far as maintenance goes. The interstate road between NYC and Philadelphia is extremely high quality and you can easily hit 120 MPH (193.121 KPH).

</comment></comment><comment><USER51> Tangentially related, but for some reason many Americans that I've talked to here in the US (I'm originally from Europe, and have lived in Germany for several years) have a collective misconception that "The Autobahn" is a _particular_ designated, semi-mythical piece of highway somewhere in Germany that doesn't have speed limits. They don't understand that lack of speed limits is the default on any limited-access highway in the country (unless explicitly restricted).

</comment><comment><USER52> Many of these laws are also laws in the US, but not in all states. Passing on the right (undertaking) is illegal in many states. Hanging out in the left lane while not actively passing cars to the right is similarly illegal in most states.

In Germany, I noticed that they use camera enforcement for tailgating and undertaking - not just for speed. Since these activities seem much more dangerous than speeding, it seems strange that there is so little enforcement in the US.

</comment><comment><USER53> I rode a bicycle through a long stretch of German autobahn once. Took quite a while to reach a suitable exit. That was very late at night without much traffic though.

That was a Schengen thing. I'd crossed from Switzerland into Germany without any visible border and I didn't know that the blue/green road designation has exactly the opposite meaning in Germany than in Switzerland...

<comment><USER54> Similar thing happened to me in Italy. Wanted to ride from Perugia to Assisi, just following the signs and was suddenly on the ramp to the high way with cars and trucks behind me. Had to climb over the side rail to escape.

</comment></comment><comment><USER55> Re: the recommended limit of 130 km/h: Exceeding that soft limit does not put you at risk of a fine or a criminal penalty, but courts will increase your civil liability in case of an accident. Meaning that it gets more expensive.

</comment><comment><USER56> My one Autobahn experience was a blast. I drove from Frankfurt-am-Main into Switzerland in a rented Ford Focus wagon (5-speed diesel, thank you). There was a period of about an hour when I didn't go below 120mph, and there wasn't a single moment when I felt unsafe. Just stay to the right and keep it between the lines.

It's striking what a well-built road the Autobahn is. You could put a full martini glass on the dashboard, and even above 100mph you wouldn't see it spill. Back in my younger days I went similar speeds on American roads, and the construction quality just isn't the same.

<comment><USER32> To be fair, Germany is a tiny country and the autobahn spends a _lot_ of time under construction. It's dug much deeper than typical American highways. Nobody in the US wants to pay that much for road construction.

<comment><USER57> I had no idea how big Germany is, or how it compares to US states.

Germany is a bit bigger than New Mexico, but a bit smaller than Montana. If it was a US state it'd be 5th by size.

<comment><USER58> While Germany would be the 5th state by size, it is only 3.6% of the area of the United States.

(Those of us who grew up when there were two Germanies knew it as even smaller - only 2.5% of the US' area...)

I learned this when being berated by my German hosts about the fact that you could at that time mail a letter "anywhere in the country by 4pm" and have it delivered the very next day, as an example of how efficient the Deutsche Post was.

We'd usually make up by drinking some good Weizenbier, so it was all good.

<comment><USER59> Only 3.6% of area but 25% of population

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER60> > GW Autobahn Rule 2: Double check your side-view mirror before moving into > the left lane!

This was the biggest difference I noticed while driving on the Autobahn; driving in UK and doing 80-90mph, you get used to looking in the mirror and judging how much time you have to overtake, cars in the distance probably won't be doing much more than 20mph more than you.

On the Autobahn I found it much harder to judge how much time I had to overtake, as they could be doing 50+mph more than me, and they'd go from barely visible in the distance to very close much faster than expected.

<comment><USER61> In the UK everyone's on the right lane anyway, with the other lanes mostly empty.

<comment><USER60> Except on the M25!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER62> I think it was better if there was a general speed limit at around 120km/h. Driving in Switzerland or Austria is in general more relaxing and needs much less fuel. But I have to admit there are things I like about being able to drive 200+km/h. First is acceleration. Being able to put the foot down and just accelerate (even in the end it's just accelerating to ~120) feels great. The second factor ist actually driving 200-220km/h. It's not really fun but it is a strange feeling. A mixture of of tension and relaxation and hyperfocus. You have Focus on your driving because you know an error (it does not have to be your error) can kill you but on the other hand you fell calm and feel you have control and through your focus everything slows down. It calms me. I would describe it as almost meditation, having never meditated. I know thinking about it I should not do it, and I should not praise it and I probably should have used a throw away, but it has some appeal and even just writing about it triggers some of those feelings.

<comment><USER29> > Driving in Switzerland or Austria is in general more relaxing and needs much > less fuel

Nobody is forcing you to drive that fast ;)

<comment><USER62> It makes a difference when overtaking a truck for example. In Germany it's possible that the right lane flows with about 85km/h whereas the left lane is used by "overtakers" with about 180+km/h.

<comment><USER63> One of the reasons I like three lane Autobahnen. You have the left lane for the racers. You have the right lane for the trucks. And you have the middle lane to overtake trucks. It all works fine until some beep beep beep beep decides that staying in the middle lane all the time is better cause they cannot be bothered to switch lanes every few kilometers.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER64> But don't obey the speed limits too closely. My first few times on the Autobahn, I'd cruise along at a great speed, then slow down to a reasonable approximation of the speed limit, only to have the cars I had passed over the previous 10 minutes blow by me on the left... wash, rinse, repeat.

</comment><comment><USER65> Driving on the Autobahn is actually quite relaxing when you got three lanes.

On the right there are all the trucks, which aren't allowed more than 80km/h.

On the left all the speeders going as fast as they like.

In the middle you get along with 120-140km/h.

</comment><comment><USER66> Love the German autobahn. Did regular trips to Munich which was about 600km in like 3 to 4 hours. Just foot down and see the fuel gauge move, because if the car was flat out I burned almost 30l of fuel per 100km.

</comment><comment><USER67> I drive on average 25K miles (40K km) per year, mostly intercity and done so for the last 12 years, 10 of them in UK and the last two in the West of Germany.

I used to think autobahn and specifically the lack of speed limits was a great design and that British top speed of 70mph (110km/h) was somewhat dated. Now, having driven about 50K miles (80K km) in Germany, mostly on autobahns, I prefer the design of British motorways.

First the signage. On German autobahns it is extremely easy to miss a speed limit sign. The signs are the same size as regular "slow" road signs and often displayed only on the left side of the autobahn, they are very difficult to spot from afar, can be blocked from view by other vehicles and easy to miss when momentarily concentrating on the situation developing on the road. The speed signs are almost never repeated. On the contrary in UK the signage is done with much better understanding of how humans operate: motorway signs are bigger than their regular road counterparts, easy to spot from afar, installed in clear view on the both sides of the motorway, often repeated a few hundred meters later.

Then the speed limits themselves. They are far from thought through. For example a no speed limit stretch can suddenly, without any apparent reason, have a 80km/h (50mph) limit sign, then 300 or 400 meters later (quarter mile) another sign removing any speed limit. This leads to quite a lot of sudden breaking and many drivers ignore the limit slowing down only to 120km/h or so. Another example would be a "end of all limits" sign after a long 130km/h stretch in the beginning of an steep ascending stretch, followed with the 100km/h limit a mile or later on the top of the hill. Literally encouraging unaware drivers to pointlessly burn fuel accelerating up the hill.

The top speeds can rarely be attained in Germany unless at night. Traffic and roadworks leave a few short stretches where one can go faster than 130km/h. But this leads to constant acceleration and breaking and many many emergency breaking. Chain accidents are very common.

Cruise control is pointless due to constant speed adjustments. Adaptive cruise control doesn't work well either as it requires a certain distance to the car in front to operate safely, but overtaking from the right is very common and most German drivers hence leave a very short distance, essentially tailgating.

I find that the UK system, there traffic progresses steadily at a constant pace of around 70..80mph to be safer and less tiring.

German roadworks, including non-essential, are scheduled with little or no regard to the expected amount of traffic (e.g. public holidays, peak traffic hours etc). In UK system this type of planning gets a lot of consideration.

Diversions on Ferman autobahns are cryptic, signage is very scarce and they are practically impossible to follow without supplemental info (i.e. satnav). Diversions in UK are clearly marked and much easier to follow.

UK rest areas (services) are head and shoulders above their German counterparts and include free toilets.

All in all, I believe, German autobahn network is great, but UK motorway network had much more consideration for how humans work put into its design.

</comment><comment><USER68> "The Autobahn is great! There are no speed limits!"

The first speeding ticket I ever received was from doing 270km/h in my old 2003 Porsche Boxster S I had back in 2013. They took a photo of me, and said that I am "accused" of speeding, and would I very kindly like to send them my personal details to some office in North Germany.

I didn't bother, and they also didn't care to follow up.

<comment><USER29> There are speed limits on about half the autobahn, mostly for noise control, to improve traffic flow and around construction zones.

<comment><USER42> The figure is around 70% [1]

[1] [https://de.statista.com/infografik/16725/tempolimitregelunge...](https://de.statista.com/infografik/16725/tempolimitregelungen- auf-bundesautobahnen/)</comment></comment></comment>


Democracy Is Dying as Technocrats Watch - <AUTHOR> https://foreignpolicy.com/2016/12/23/democracy-is-dying-as-technocrats-watch/ <comment><USER2> So Hillary lost because she appealed to reason as Trump appealed to emotion? Nerds vs. jocks writ large?

        Her campaign website listed bullet-point plans to solve
        41 different measurable problems, each one containing
        multiple sub-plans to solve multiple sub-problems.

        There was even a plan to protect the interests of dogs,
        cats, and horses.

This is presented as a point of ridicule, but am I the only person in the country who sees this as a _good_ thing?

At the very least, I find having a plan more compelling than having vague rhetoric and bluster.

</comment><comment><USER3> What a load of garbage. The reason Trump and other politicians attack "technocrats" is that politically they are overwhelmingly unrepresentative of the population they're meant to serve. Combine that with little accountability and the ability for regulatory bodies can make new law on the fly, and you have a recipe for corruption, disconnect and resentment.

Case in point, Clinton got 91% of the vote in DC:

[http://www.nytimes.com/elections/results/district-of- columbi...](http://www.nytimes.com/elections/results/district-of-columbia- president-clinton-trump)

</comment><comment><USER4> Of course it's not essential to live in a democracy. Pretty much nobody in the world lives in a democracy. Most people live in either representative republics or monarchies.

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

There are very few countries that even tried a democracy - Switzerland is one of them, which is a hybrid between a republic and direct democracy.</comment>


Zoom takes down all access to web-based meetings - <AUTHOR> https://status.zoom.us/incidents/16ll08mmddk6 <comment><USER2> > Zoom will be placing the Web Client into maintenance mode and take this part > of the service offline.

Good. Take that web client offline until further notice, because there's no way I'm installing that ZoomInstaller.pkg malware on my Macbook since I can just use Jitsi Meet instead.

> We apologize for any inconvenience that this may cause.

No need to apologize here, I think they've done quite enough. A great reason to use Jitsi Meet.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> For some reason they've marked this as "resolved" but in fact the web client remains offline and they don't seem to have immediate plan to correct it.

<comment><USER3> Resolved, meaning permanently offline.</comment></comment>


DMCA goes after Twitch streamers' clips - <AUTHOR> https://twitter.com/twitchsupport/status/1269851779790929921 <comment><AUTHOR> I don't really understand why DMCA thinks this is necessary. Twitch streamers playing an artists' music while they stream can only help an artist in my mind.</comment>


2.5 GHz Rural Tribal Window: How to File – Federal Communications Commission - <AUTHOR> https://www.fcc.gov/25-ghz-rural-tribal-window-how-file <comment><AUTHOR> Figured I submit the link with the hopes someone on HN would know what equipment you end up buying to build it out once we claim the spectrum.</comment>


If Windows 8 Fails to Impress, Ballmer Could Be Out - <AUTHOR> http://news.softpedia.com/news/If-Windows-8-Fails-to-Impress-Ballmer-Could-Be-Out-315303.shtml

<comment><USER2> Wow, this claim is basically fabricated. The content of this article is sourced from an NYT post ([http://www.nypost.com/p/news/business/window_pain_for_ballme...](http://www.nypost.com/p/news/business/window_pain_for_ballmer_4hGeo5cjUHOi6WM0n3UuNJ)), where the claims that Balmer may be fired are being speculated by "Gartner analyst Carolina Milanesi", who says:

> _The success of Microsoft's mobile strategy doesn't hinge only on this > quarter's sales. But if the company can't boost results into next year, > Ballmer would become vulnerable, Milanesi said.

> "If Windows 8 were to fail, Ballmer would be questioned," she said._

So this isn't even a rumor, it's some analyst making speculations and then being rebranded as a rumor by a 2-bit news outlet.

<comment><USER3> A lot of people want Steve Balmer to leave, of those, a subset seem to think that Steve Balmer is _the reason_ that Microsoft isn't competitive with Apple or Google at the present time. A subset of those, have blogs and/or are reporters and they construct stories to support their belief structure.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Whether Windows 8 fails badly or mildly succeeds, I think Microsoft could benefit largely from a fresh perspective. They need someone who's thinking about the future, not someone who is trying to recreate the success from their past. They lost a few strategic battles, and the game has changed. Web is huge, open source systems are becoming more widely adopted, they don't own a monopoly any more.

In my opinion With windows 8 they saw a split in the market. Consumers are becoming mobile, and producers are migrating to laptops. Rather then creating 2 perfect operating systems for both they decided to create a zipper to merge them back together. It reeks of a regressive perspective.

Microsoft still employs an army of talented engineers, and they have a successful platform. I'm a .NET developer. I'm proud of working on Windows. But I can't see their future, and I suspect neither can they.

<comment><USER5> >Rather then creating 2 perfect operating systems for both they decided to create a zipper to merge them back together.

I think that's the right approach in general, though Windows 8 may not be the right implementation. The reality is that you can no longer neatly sub-divide market segments. We're exiting the era where we can point to a device and categorize them as a phone, tablet, laptop or desktop. There is overlap between the phone and tablet categories and even more overlap between the tablet and laptop categories - and things will get more and more confusing as manufacturers experiment with designs. The upcoming Surface Pro is a great example. Is it a laptop, or an iPad-like tablet? Well, it's neither and both.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> It's failed to impress -

The travesty that is Windows Server 2012 is /bad/ just really really bad. I like some things they did with it (No gui - admin by powershell? awesome!)

But Windows 8 as a desktop user experience and "Metro" or whatever they are calling it now is nearly unusable. There will always, always be people that embrace and enjoy new technology and new interfaces but they haven't broken the Skip one buy one philosophy yet.

</comment><comment><USER7> What Microsoft needs is a fallback option. Same issue as Ubuntu/Unity debacle.

Here is what Microsoft needs to do:

1) Bring back old start menu (as an option).

2) Go straight to desktop (as an option).

The problem is that users expect no learning curve.

<comment><USER8> Microsoft really needs to make a split between Business/Professional and Home.

The Home version with the touch _Metro_ -esque interface and social network integration makes a lot of sense.

This simultaneously seems completely inappropriate in a professional environment. It shouldn't even be a part of Professional, or if it is, then as an add-on after the fact.

Microsoft is famous for making one-size-fits-all solutions to problems that aren't so simple, and this is one of those cases.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> I'm not sure about that, but Ballmer should leave regardless. Microsoft did OK in the 2000s, but largely played catch-up to Apple and Google and now lags in categories it wants to lead. Some fresh leadership could do Microsoft a world of good.</comment>


What Does Modern Prejudice Look Like? - <AUTHOR> http://www.npr.org/blogs/codeswitch/2013/04/22/177455764/What-Does-Modern-Prejudice-Look-Like <comment><USER2> I don't typically approve of in-group preferential treatment as discussed in the article. I've come across it most in dealing with various minority/ethnic groups where it seems to be okay to admit to it. A colleague of mine who is Greek was once talking to me about various restaurants and shops he goes to because the owners are Greek and give him a discount. He saw nothing wrong with it. I've heard similar comments from other colleagues who were Indian, Jewish, etc.

I couldn't imagine going to a restaurant and getting a discount because the owner and I are both white. Even typing this out and thinking about someone telling me they would give me preferential treatment because I'm white makes me uncomfortable.

All that said, how is in-group preferential treatment any different than familial preferential treatment. The article mentioned giving away free tickets as an example. Is it wrong to give your brother some concert tickets you have because you should be equally inclined to give them to a perfect stranger? Okay, how about a third cousin whom you never but you know would like the tickets? Is giving that third cousin the tickets that much different than giving them to a neighbor?

<comment><USER3> > Even typing this out and thinking about someone telling me they would give > me preferential treatment because I'm white makes me uncomfortable.

You need to shake that PC bullshit off. There is nothing wrong with freedom of association, nor with feeling good about being "white". Neither of those things is discrimination (or evil).

Not only are you just 8% of the world's population (and on a decline), but you're also part of a race (if you accept white as meaning of somewhat Eastern European decent) that has built some of the most impressive civilizations, empires, and cultures on this planet,... filled libraries with countless works on all subjects and matters,... ended slavery (a long world-wide practice that was mosty done by non-whites; and still is),... built and financed just about every part and institution in America (USA was 90% white even up to 1960; now about 62-72%),... invented, refined, and progressed just about every modern technology and field,... actively discriminated against your own race to help & better minorities,... and did a countless other _exceptional_ things in abundance.

It's amazing how people will associate the bad things that some people did (the things that are all easy to do like kill and destroy - that all other races have done in abundance) to the white race, yet at the same time ignore all the positive things they did to advance the whole of humanity (things that are difficult to do - things that require quite a bit of work, self-sacrifice, intellect, and character/morality).

<comment><USER4> How about just feeling good for being a human? Tribalism is not a virtue.

<comment><USER3> Ideally? Sure, but...

The human condition is complicated, and the human brain is a pattern matching and association machine.

Humans have been identifying and separating themselves by color/race since the beginning of time, even before we could talk. It is the first category... before rich/poor, beautiful/ugly, young/old, etc. It's almost primial.

The context to what I wrote was in relation to the current "white privilege" PC bullshit that has been indoctrinated into our collective. Nothing more.

<comment><USER5> >Humans have been identifying and separating themselves by color/race since the beginning of time, even before we could talk. It is the first category... before rich/poor, beautiful/ugly, young/old, etc. It's almost primial.

How exactly does proving that something has always existed also show that it is right?

<comment><USER3> Does it really have to fit in the right/wrong classification?

Can't it just be an evolutionary survival mechanism?... One of the things that primarily is designed to help people come together and stay away from danger.

I'd imagine at the core of it there is a neural network (that you're born with) that categorizes things into - "like me" - "not like me".

In of itself, it's not something that's right/wrong in a moral sense, but how it's further _consciously_ used can be.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I have both good and negative feelings on the subject.

The good feelings, come from the fact that I believe that people for the most part should be free to help their peers as they want, it is part of nature to strengthen your group...

Yet, it leaves a bad taste in the mouth, when circles that are supposed to be fair, and claim to be fair, aren't. It is specially bad when we are outside those circles...

On my case there are two ones that are particularly striking: One, I am not related to the US startup scene at all, I did not went to Ivy League universities, or anything close, I don't know anyone at MIT, Stanford or have a friend in the whole city of San Francisco...

This mean that getting investment is not easy...

Some people might say: "Oh, but anyone can apply to Y Combinator or to a VC!" well, yes... You can apply, but if you read around, many times "social proof" is required, and what is social proof?

Or the other case, is since I make games, I might want to compete for a award, yet brazillians mostly gave up on IGF, because most of IGF winners (and judges, and organizers) are somehow related to CMP itself (the organizer company) or Tig Source (a blog and forum ran by Derek Yu, winner and judge).

But IGF one is not exactly new, every year people bash it because of that, and every year a flamewar ensues in several forums... And some ex-IGF judges and founders sent me e-mails claiming that this is the reason they are ex-IGF in first place.

<comment><USER7> >it is part of nature to strengthen your group...

If you find yourself appealing to nature, you're starting down a slippery slope.

<comment><USER8> Because nature is... not part of... nature? This makes no sense. If you find yourself discounting large swaths of reality, you are generalizing.

<comment><USER7> No, because everything is part of nature, including not being racist. When you start to draw a line through human behavior and label one expression of it natural and the other not, you're creating a norm rather than observing one.

In other words, in labeling some human behavior natural (for example heterosexuality), or unnatural (for example flying in a plane), you are immediately discounting large swaths of reality in favor of dressed up idiosyncratic personal prejudices.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I'm always reminded of this quote:

"We have never met before, but I instantly know him. One look, one phrase, and I know where he grew up, how he grew up, where he got his drive and his sense of humor. He is New York. He is Jewish. He looks like my uncle Louis, his voice is my uncle Sam. I feel we've been together at countless weddings, bar mitzvahs, and funerals. I know his genetic structure. I'm certain that within the last five hundred years—perhaps even more recently—we shared the same ancestor."

\--- Robert Reich, Clinton administration Secretary of Labor, on his first face-to-face meeting with Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan

That's what kinship _feels_ like. The same psychological effects described in the OP are every bit as real when it come to racial and ethnic identity. It's not "fair"—we don't choose our heritage—but then "fairness" in matters of interpersonal human affairs always was a chimera and a false god. Should people just not be allowed to meet each other face to face? It's silly.

<comment><USER10> > Should people just not be allowed to meet each other face to face?

In some cases, when making some kinds of selections, this is entirely reasonable. For example, in auditions for certain orchestras:

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audition#Instrumentalists_2>

> In many major orchestras, a cloth screen may be used at some stages of the > audition process, to protect the audition panel from allegations of > favouritism or sexism.

So they don't see the musician. They hear the music. Which is what the orchestra is about, right?

<comment><USER9> I suppose that is the crux of the issue. If the orchestra is just about the music, why not listen to a recording instead? The people performing the music are just as much a part of the performance as the music itself.

<comment><USER10> > If the orchestra is just about the music, why not listen to a recording > instead?

The social experience. The experience of going someplace special, outside the normal orbit of your life, and being That Person for a while. That Person being your mental image of the kind of person who goes to a concert played by a live orchestra in a concert hall. Maybe, on the other hand, it's a warm and homey return to a younger time, when your grandfather took you to that one performance of Mahler which you will never, ever forget.

Lots of reasons, really.

> The people performing the music are just as much a part of the performance > as the music itself.

But is it vital that they be white? Or Jewish? Or perceptibly taller than average even when sitting down?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I remember being a young man and searching for a word to generally describe this.

I settled on predilection.

Anecdotally, I'd say it's extremely common. I've confronted a few people about it and heard the same arguments in each case. It seems to boil down to a notion that anything which can be phrased in positive terms can't possibly be bad - quite a handy rationalization.

</comment><comment><USER12> I have a friend of Indian nationality who settled in the valley after finishing his education in India and has actually done pretty good for himself. I have heard him mention more than once how prejudice stemming from alma maters comes into picture at larger technology corporations based in the valley. From what I understand, for engineers with less than 10 years of experience and who do not have a degree from a preeminent american university -- it is definitely an uphill journey into junior or middle management.

</comment><comment><USER13> _I'm not saying, I'm just saying:_

Brown man reviews work of brown woman and white (Jewish?) man in favor of trying to help those outside your group-identity to foster openness and whatnot. Brown man proceeds to mention brown woman 27 times by name to her co- author's 6.

I'm not calling him a hypocrite - I don't think it was conscious either. If there is a point to be made here, though, perhaps that's it: the Morally Outraged About Extremely Subtle, Subconscious Effects of Involuntary Decisions have not fully investigated and do not fully comprehend the obligations they're laying at everyone's feet.

</comment><comment><USER14> Apologies for not having read the book, but is there evidence that unconscious favoritism is actually at the root of various economic and social disparities in the U.S.? How does it account for disparities amongst similarly "different" groups? Asian median income in the U.S. is higher than non-Hispanic-whites (god I hate these categories...), while Hispanic is lower.

It seems to me that the vast majority of the difference is rooted elsewhere, because you'd have to tell a pretty good "just so" story to suggest that "modern prejudice" simultaneously helped Asians and punished Hispanics.

<comment><USER15> If the theory is in-group favoritism, then the disparity is self-perpetuating: if one group has more income it presumably has more favor to give disproportionately within the group, and vice versa.

I'm guessing it's mostly a black-white thing though, for most other US minorities I would be surprised if the effects weren't dominated by the differences on quantity and wealth of immigrants.

<comment><USER14> I'm inclined to believe that culture matters. A lot. I bet it swamps any effects of in-group favoritism. Of course, "culture" is hard to define and even harder to design good controlled experiments to test. On the other hand, I'd be interested to see the results of something like the authors' IAT testing, but looking for "hidden" responses to cultural traits (value of work vs. leisure, family vs. friends) rather than racial images.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> >>* we strengthen existing patterns of advantage and disadvantage because our friends, neighbors and children's classmates are overwhelmingly likely to share our own racial, religious and socioeconomic backgrounds.*<<

It's interesting that the article (and presumably the researchers) presume this is a bad thing. This is, in essence, natural selection playing out. Adopting the behaviors of those closest to us is also how will advance (or retreat) as a species.

<comment><USER17> What you are talking about is social darwinism, not simply natural selection, and I think there has been enough said on why it is problematic that I don't need to reiterate it here.

<comment><USER18> It's kin selection, which is regular Darwinism.

"Natural" != "morally right"

<comment><USER17> Were this an article about how, for example, people's mothers /sisters/familiar relations favors them, that might be the case.

But it isn't.

And, in case this was a point of confusion, race != family.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> I'm surprised to see two such distinct incidents brought together under a common heading. The first one (interview granting) is about feeling more altruistic towards people that we share some experience with. Interesting phenomenon, but it has nothing in common with a doctor (who probably had no experience in common with his patient) deciding that the hospital's interests are best served by providing for a (potentially very influential) Yale professor extra super special forms of treatment.

</comment><comment><USER20> Another issue this creates is the "fight fire with fire" paradigm. Or, in this case, using favoritism to combat favoritism.

For example, I know I'm much more likely to get favoritism from people who share my ethnic background partly because there is the common belief within that group that nobody else is "looking out for us"-- so we have to "look out for each other."

</comment><comment><USER18> That's not "modern" prejudice. That's traditional kin selection / tribalism / in-group prejudice.</comment>


I never delete code - only comment them - <AUTHOR> http://visualstudiomagazine.com/blogs/tool-tracker/2011/04/wbtip_comment-keystrokes.aspx

<comment><USER2> This is f-ing terrible. Put your code into version control and stop having it be bad, for goodness sake.

</comment><comment><USER3> I've seen one reason to keep old code in: if the new implementation is complicated and the old one is short and simple, keep the old one as documentation for how the new one _essentially_ works.

<comment><USER4> This is exactly what I do when writing complex code, and is about the only reason that I can think of to comment out code like this. The other time that I might do it is when I'm trying a couple of implementations to see which one is better.

But leaving commented out code in there is just asking for trouble. What happens when someone comments it back in 6 months later?

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> There are times when this is required. For instance, where I find there is a line of code that shouldn't be called. Commenting it out and explaining that it breaks so and so is preferable to deleting it all together because there is a risk another developer will make the same error too.

</comment><comment><USER6> Sorry I don't agree with this. I delete code all the time. The difference is, when I write elegant code that I am proud of I save it. The majority of code I write is utility not elegant by comparison. This is like my art, or any art.</comment>


New Search Engine, KGB: Knowledge Generation Bureau - <AUTHOR> http://www.kgb.com/

<comment><USER2> I saw a few commercials for the site on tv this week but didn't check it out. After a few searches I'm underwhelmed. I searched for things I know fairly well and found their ordering to be surprising as some sites for small outlets ranked higher than bigger, more established sites.

I like the name, and am eager for Google to find real search competition again, but their design is also very awkward. Every link looks like a Google ad to me, the styling and small size of results.

Perhaps they'll pick up speed and take off but I won't be using them anytime soon.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Seems intriguing. Their web search is still in alpha though.

Here are their three youtube ads as well:

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BWXo3ctvGXI>

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G3taQ2Ym38E>

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PULV8EAgTNI>

Already better then cuil, imo, on the strength of their ads.

</comment><comment><USER3> Self-referential fail.

No results for: kgb search engine

Time will tell but how am I going to remember to take another look in six months time? :)

<comment><AUTHOR> I think that is actually accurate though. They are not relevant enough yet for their own search results.

...they are in alpha after all. I guess that does kind of seem like a pre- alpha step if you are a search engine.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> not bad... i don't like the page design though

</comment><comment><USER5> KBG sounds a whole lot better than "Cuil". If KGB one day eventually fails, at least their demise will bring back memories of a humorous name.

<comment><USER6> See, I think of something more historical with KGB that has nothing to do with the Internet. In the future, when someone mentions KGB, I'm still not going to think of this search engine.

<comment><USER7> Weatherunderground.com (wunderground.com) was successful. In the 70's, the name, for most people, was nothing to joke about. <http://www.google.com/search?q=weather+underground+nail+bomb> Today, it makes a good punny name for a weather-report site. Maybe, as time passes, people will also lighten-up about the KJB.</comment></comment></comment>


Straight Dope on the IPod's Birth - <AUTHOR> http://www.wired.com/gadgets/mac/commentary/cultofmac/2006/10/71956?currentPage=all

<comment><USER2> > _''Steve made some very interesting observations very early on about how > this was about navigating content, '' Ive told The New York Times. ''It was > about being very focused and not trying to do too much with the device -- > which would have been its complication and, therefore, its demise. The > enabling features aren't obvious and evident, because the key was getting > rid of stuff.''_

I remember back in 2002 or so I had bought an ARCHOS because it had a camera, video camera and played movies. I then saw non technical friends starting to talk about the iPod. I honestly felt it was like hearing non technical people discussing recursion. I knew the iPod must be different. Sure I had plenty of friends that new what MP3's were and downloaded them, but they were my technological friends. So to hear these non techies talk about the iPod, I was like "Whoa".

I took a step back to compare the ARCHOS that I bought with the iPod. And I realized wow Steve Job's is very smart [1] and at that moment I realized Apple is going to be bigger than Microsoft. As Jon Ive says in the quote above: "It was about being very focused and not trying to do too much with the device -- which would have been its complication and, therefore, its demise." I had already realized this works very well for In-N-Out Burger. So well that when Chipotle came out I knew it would be a success.

It has really surprised me how Steve Jobs laid out the winning model for making a product 9 years ago and few companies have followed. It is actually rather frustrating. Every time Apple comes out with a new product (for the most part), a few people are like "Yes, this is amazing" and everyone else complains "It doesn't have enough features. It sucks."

[1] The ARCHOS had a bunch of features such as a camera, camcorder and it could play videos. But I never used the thing. The interface sucked and the battery life sucked. When I bought an iPod I used it constantly. I still use it. It is much better to have a product that does one thing extremely well than a product that does a bunch of things mediocre or not well at all.

<comment><USER3> And now the iPod nano _has_ a video camera, can watch movies, play FM radio, etc.

Maybe it's more about the gradual introduction of all these things to the masses.

<comment><USER4> No, it's about delivering the essential things first. If they wasted effort doing all that other stuff first, all of those features would be badly integrated into the product. This means that they would be hard to learn about and use. And if they're jammed in before the technology is ready, they'll make the device ugly because they'll add so much bulk and heft that the _essential_ feature of the device is hampered or lost entirely.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> > _While describing the player, Jobs constantly referred to Apple's digital > hub strategy: The Mac is a hub, or central connection point, for a host of > gadgets._

I wonder if this will ultimately be downfall of the whole iPod/iPad/iPhone experience. Apple is still working around the idea of the computer as the central hub (requiring you to sync with iTunes before you can use an iPad, for example) rather than the hub now being entirely in the cloud.

So far, Apple has failed miserably at cloud computing experiences.

<comment><USER6> > So far, Apple has failed miserably at cloud computing experiences.

So far, Apple has barely showed any interest in it. How can they fail at something they never even tried?

<comment><USER7> What about MobileMe? I'd say they've tried, and they've been an also-ran since the beginning.

<comment><USER8> Maybe the purchase of LaLa will change that.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> >> _...Ive told the Times that the key to the iPod wasn't sudden flashes of genius, but the design process. His design group collaborated closely with manufacturers and engineers, constantly tweaking and refining the design. ''It's not serial,'' he told the Times. ''It's not one person passing something on to the next.''..._

Perhaps this and the rest of the article provides some insight into pg's question about Apple's culture: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1596767>

</comment><comment><USER10> I highly recommend Steven Levy's book, The Perfect Thing, for a more in-depth look at the iPod. Levy did a mini article-ized version of his book for Wired a few years ago:

<http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/14.11/ipod.html>

</comment><comment><USER11> Cross-reference with this classic story from Cabel Sasser of Panic

<http://www.panic.com/extras/audionstory/>

</comment><comment><USER12> No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame.

</comment><comment><USER8> The other kicker about the original use of firewire was that it could charge the iPod simultaneously while syncing. I don't recall usb 1.1 being able to charge a device.</comment>


Amazon Is Building Global Delivery Business to Take on Alibaba - <AUTHOR> http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-02-09/amazon-is-building-global-delivery-business-to-take-on-alibaba-ikfhpyes <comment><USER2> AWS equivalent for logistics.</comment>


Tracing the origins of modern Internet culture to the BBS world - <AUTHOR> http://www.niemanlab.org/2015/04/tracing-the-origins-of-modern-internet-culture-to-the-bbs-world/ <comment><USER2> Watch Jason Scott's BBS documentary to see the people who built many of the icons of the bbs world. It is 8 episodes long and is available on youtube right now. I have watched it multiple times and the depth it provides into what was going on is why I like it. I dialed into bbses for years to post messages, play games, and get patches. At the time I didn't fully grasp how wide spread the phenomenon was so when your favorite board went away it was brutal.

I see a lot of the bbs community feel in many online forums so I know it lives on.

</comment><comment><USER3> Many BBS systems provided Internet access to newsgroups and IRC chat. Many BBS systems had become ISPs in order to survive. In the early to mid 1990's many BBS operators had invested in an ISDN Internet modem and then SLIP/PPP access on their BBS to become ISPs via rows of MODEMS.

Once the telecommunication and cable companies got into Internet access providing they bought out the ISPs to get customers.

Once DSL and Cable Modems because less expensive and people left dial-up MODEMS these BBSes hard started to die.

There still exists a part of BBS culture here: [http://www.synchro.net/](http://www.synchro.net/)

An Internet based BBS system that uses Telenet.

</comment><comment><USER4> I kept my BBS up and running until about 1996. I really couldn't understand why people liked the "web" so much because my bbs had so many more features then any website at the time. Eventually getting down to about 1 call a day and BBS's dropping like flies (from 1200 in San Diego to just a handful) I had to move on from it.

</comment><comment><USER5> 1:2230/149 (I _think_ , anyways -- it's been a while!)</comment>