Pythonic syntax to declutter Javascript - <AUTHOR> http://www.azarask.in/blog/post/making-javascript-syntax-not-suck/

<comment><USER2> Javascript example in the article:

      function triangle(a,b){
        if(a > 0 && b > 0 ){
          function sqroot(x){
            if( x > 0 ){
              return Math.pow(x,.5);
            }
            else {
              return 0;
            }
          }
          return sqroot( a*a + b*b );
        }
        else {
          return 0;
        }
      }

Can be made much cleaner:

      function triangle(a,b){
        if (a <= 0 || b <= 0 ) return 0

        function sqroot(x){ return ( x > 0 ? Math.pow(x,.5) : 0 ) }

        return sqroot( a*a + b*b )
      }

I don't know about a whitespace-sensitive language in the browser. Much JS is written by non-coders, later quickly edited on live servers (yeah, I know. But that's reality) etc.. It all comes down to taste, of course, but personally I find Ruby at least as readable as Python, so I'm not sure whitespaces are where the elegance is found.

<comment><USER3> With JavaScript 1.8.1:

        function triangle(a,b)
            a <= 0 || b <= 0 ? 0 : (a = a*a + b*b) > 0 ? Math.pow(a,.5) : 0;

<comment><USER4> Is ?: really not right-associative in JavaScript? I thought PHP was the only language that messed that one up...

<comment><USER3> I wrapped it with parentheses out of habit. _updated_

<comment><USER4> That's a relief :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Nothing against python, but pyscript is terrible idea to go in the browser? Why? Because you can't remove the spaces, you can't compress your source code so that it uses less bandwidth.

Also really, honestly, I hate to post python script somewhere in forum, and because of the identation someone else cannot test it.

Hey there is email@example.com - right - you type something in google.wav - send it to the address above, and the clojure appspot program gives you back the result - nice REPL :)

Now how would that work with python, or this pyscript? Just thing about it?

<comment><USER6> I would imagine you pre-process the pyscript before sending it to the browser as part of your deploy step. So you don't have the compression issues.

<comment><USER7> Actually, it looks like a separate script translates all script blocks with type="text/pyscript"

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> This is reminiscent of those occasional attempts to "fix" Lisp's parentheses. In practise, I've never found JavaScript's braces and semicolons distracting. I just don't notice them that much.

<comment><USER8> JavaScript has been fixed, and its new name is jQuery.

<comment><USER9> jQuery only attempts to deal with the DOM. Confusing a browser API and a programming language is a mistake to be avoided.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Awesome, thanks. Going to see if I can use this for my crypto class (the project is to build an encryption system on top of Twitter, using GreaseMonkey).

Also - reminds me of CoffeeScript (which has similarly clean (if less Pythonic) syntax, but has to be compiled to Javascript, I believe). <http://jashkenas.github.com/coffee-script/#overview>

</comment><comment><USER11> _The stark modern minimalism of the language causes the meaning of code to float on the syntax like a feather on water._

I think Python is dandy. I will be starting a new project on it, actually. But "stark" and "modern" are relative. While there's a lot of very pretty Python that reads like pseudocode, there's also a bit of Python that goes down the same sinful path as C header files or Perl in the use of arcane symbols. There's no reason why things like meta-programming have to look like anything different from plain old programming.

That said, I think Python hits a very attractive middle ground. There is _just enough_ syntax to fit the most basic cultural expectations of technical people as well as a large number of programmers. That, if you think about it, is a stunning achievement in human-interface design. (Read that straight-up!)

(And to be fair: Smalltalk - even more minimal, but ignores lots of important cultural expectations. Lisp - even more minimal and just about everything, no matter how meta, looks like normal Lisp. But on the downside, everything looks like normal Lisp.)

</comment><comment><USER12> Whatever anyone can say about Python you can't deny how nice it looks on the page.

</comment><comment><USER13> Very alpha (the lack of anonymous functions is a killer even for experimental use), but it is clean-looking. A project to watch or jump into.

</comment><comment><USER14> Yuck. I appreciate Python as much as the next guy, but explicit curlies give you _way_ more flexibility in the appearance of your code. Yes, that can be good or bad but so is anything that gives you more power.

Not to mention that in his samples half the curlies were unnecessary.

</comment><comment><USER15> Seems like you might be better off using the python->JS converted in pyjamas and writing things in straight python:

<http://pyjs.org/>

<comment><USER16> I wrote a browser one too <http://skulpt.org/>

I'm not sure if it's better to write in real Python or just know that you're using JS with different syntax ala pyscript. Emulating all the bizarre Python attribute access behaviour in JS (e.g. __get__) is quite complex.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> It can be educating to look at the history of Reia (Python/Ruby-like language for Erlang VM). At first its author tried to hard to make Reia indentation sensitive (like Python). Finally he reconsidered after discovering several limitiations: [http://www.unlimitednovelty.com/2009/03/indentation- sensitiv...](http://www.unlimitednovelty.com/2009/03/indentation-sensitivity- post-mortem.html)

</comment><comment><USER18> Hmm, a language interpreted by a parser implemented in a scripting language. Won't that be rather slow? I'd be more comfortable with using it as a compiler that outputs js I can then include, rather than letting clients' browsers interpret it on the fly.

<comment><USER4> _A parser implemented in a scripting language_

What's a "scripting language"?

 _Won't that be rather slow?_

Firefox is implemented in JavaScript. It's pretty fast, and a little more complicated than a parser.

<comment><USER19> _Firefox is implemented in JavaScript_

i'm pretty sure that much of the performance-critical core is in C++; javascript is th UI/extensions layer, to the best of my knowledge

<comment><USER20> They've been talking for years about written more and lower layers with Javascript. I'm not sure how far along they've got, it would be interesting to know.

Obviously parts are C++ but isn't interfacing with such code one of the defining characteristics of a "scripting language" and javascript in particular?</comment></comment></comment></comment>


More from the Sony Pictures hack - <AUTHOR> http://fusion.net/story/30850/

<comment><USER2> This article isn't great. The data is from Sony. I guess if fusion is a news site they need to 'confirm'. But it's impossible for the data to be anything else. I've never seen one faked spread sheet, let alone millions.

The leaked data so far is in a 35 gig multipart rar. The list of files only(No directories or metadata) is 400meg -> 1 gig uncompressed. Both are on PB.

The NK angle seems to be there was Korean comments in the malware. But there's also a theory it was insiders angry about the restructure.

The hackers were using the Sony PlayStation network to seed these latest torrents. IE they still had some control days later.

This sort of thing is pretty hard to stop. Security kills productivity, you won't be rewarded for lowing output with no proof you didn't anything useful, that's the nature of the issue.

Limits on stolen data in the old days was more about getting it out, not security. With the huge pipes in and out these days this will become more common. The only thing stopping people doing this everywhere currently is they can't be bothered.

[edit] This is also a good lesson on why you should never put anything in writing you don't want everyone to know.

<comment><USER3> > This article isn't great.

Could have stopped there. This is just a list of a couple of key points in the data with pretty banal reactions. And if it's the most interesting parts of the data then it's not all that exciting.

Just feels like someone wanted to strike while the iron was hot.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> China, Russia, Iran--now _North Korea_ is the "cyber boogeyman"? Attribution is an incredibly difficult problem. Color me skeptical. Does anyone know where the rumors of North Korean direction started?

Any explanation below seems more likely to me than it really was a North Korean operation (yes, pure rank speculation):

1) it was made up by Sony to make them look somehow less incompetent†,

2) it was made up by some media organization to drive clicks, or

3) the initial investigation revealed suspicious activity from IPs in/linked to North Korea--which could, among other explanations, just mean the attacker owned their boxes and launched attacks from there

† ...And boy does their image need improvement! The attackers were supposedly able to exfiltrate a rumored 100TB of extremely-sensitive corporate data before anyone noticed?! After the rootkit fiasco, the epic SOE break-in, and now this--I can't imagine anyone wants their data anywhere _near_ Sony's networks (nor, perhaps, Sony's software anywhere near _their_ networks).

<comment><USER5> So, I'm totally with you on all these foreign-boogeyman stories but this one is a bit different:

[http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-30283573](http://www.bbc.com/news/world- asia-30283573)

 _> >"When asked if it was involved in the attack a spokesman for the North Korean government replied: "Wait and see."_

EDIT: To be clear, I am aware NK likes to look tough and can totally be taking credit for something they did not do. It's just that ominous replies like this spokesman gave makes it appear slightly less boogeyman'ish as compared to how the media loves implicating China & Russia in every cyber-attack story without bothering inform the general public about stuff like proxies.

<comment><USER6> Consider the amount of time, money, and effort North Korea has invested in presenting the image of a rabid dog to foreign policymakers, in hopes of improving that nation's ability to maintain its sovereignty against the threats it perceives from all sides, and particularly from the United States. Given that, what else would you expect? Honesty?

<comment><USER7> Yeah, think about it. Who benefits from the idea that North Korea is behind this? _Literally everyone_.

Hell, they could even have contributed by donating VPN capacity to leave the tell-tale footprint or whatever without providing any of the actual talent to pull off this operation.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> After what Sony did to Geohot, I must say that I have zero sympathy for them (as an organization) here. Obviously, the leak of personal data (SSNs, etc.) is a different story.

<comment><USER9> See also their rootkited CDs [0]. They lost my respect a long time ago.

[0] [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_BMG_copy_protection_rootki...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_BMG_copy_protection_rootkit_scandal)

<comment><USER10> I'm right behind you in boycotting anything Sony.

It raises the question though, what would it take for a company with a reputation as tarnished as Sony's to earn back your respect and patronage?

For me, the answer to that is not only maintaining a history of not attacking your customers (rootkit in CDs), but would also require an established track record of going above and beyond what other companies do to respect customer privacy.

Purely as a thought experiment, what would it take for you to reevaluate your stance on Sony?

<comment><USER9> I kind of see two separate questions here, so I'll answer both.

> [The breach] raises the question though, what would it take for a company > with a reputation as tarnished as Sony's to earn back your respect and > patronage?

Certainly it's a hard problem for companies to assure users that their privacy is being respected, their data is safe, and their products are wholesome. The common response involving phrases like "we are working closely with law enforcement"[0] might assuage most laypeople, but this canned answer is not satisfying for the technical crowd who understand how challenging infosec is.

Unfortunately, operational security is a critical aspect of respecting customer privacy, and the bar is not very high at many companies where the standard response is anything less than rebuilding from the ground up. Obviously, most companies do not do that, even after a severe intrusion. That is not practical unless your infrastructure allows (cold backups, all workstations are thin clients or easily flashed, etc.), so there's really no way to go "above and beyond" other companies in that aspect.

So really, what we are left with is: since we can't trust any given company to have complete omnipotence and control over its network, especially where many networks may be covertly compromised[1], what is a company to do from a PR perspective in order to assure users that doing business with them is no more harmful than doing business with another company?

If I were faced with this question in a vacuum, I would have to concede that I couldn't fault Sony for having been hacked - it could happen to any company, respectable or not. But we're not in a vacuum.

> [Sony's past behavior] raises the question though, what would it take for a > company with a reputation as tarnished as Sony's to earn back your respect > and patronage?

Sony is actively hostile to the consumer[2][3] and operationally negligent[4]. Full stop. Quite frankly, these behaviors are inexcusable and it would take a massive organizational change for me to even consider patronizing Sony[5]. Their attitude towards their customers is completely orthogonal to how a company should behave - at this point, it's not constructive for me to rant, so I will spare the rest of my opinion. But when a company is inevitably compromised and realizes it needs to regain the trust of its customers and partners, its past will precede it, and in this case Sony's past precludes forgiveness.

[0] [http://www.businessinsider.com/sony-execs-hack-response- empl...](http://www.businessinsider.com/sony-execs-hack-response-employee- memo-2014-12)

[1] [http://arstechnica.com/security/2014/12/critical-networks- in...](http://arstechnica.com/security/2014/12/critical-networks-in- us-15-nations-completely-owned-by-iran-backed-hackers/)

[2] [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OtherOS](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OtherOS)

[3] [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Computer_Entertainment_Ame...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Computer_Entertainment_America_v._George_Hotz)

[4] [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation_Network_outage#Unen...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation_Network_outage#Unencrypted_personal_details)

[5] I feel that your question may be hitting on "what exactly would that organizational change have to be?" \- if this is the case, I couldn't tell you. I have no idea who calls the shots at Sony, but a good first start would be to replace them. I'd also like to see more companies active in areas where they contribute to open-source ecosystems, have bug bounties, encourage tinkerers to hack on their hardware and developers to modulate their software, the list goes on. Really, the answer could be the same as the answer to "What makes Mozilla different from Sony?", but my answer is starting to read more like a stream-of-conciousness than a coherent response, so I'll stop here.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Weak article. I'd like to see a link to a _thorough_ analysis of the leaked data.

<comment><USER12> According to the top comment on this post at the moment, a file that is nothing more than _a list of all the files in this dump_ is about one gig, uncompressed.

I think a thorough analysis of this is going to take a while.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> I couldn't tell from the OP and the previous story it linked to: is the spreadsheet of salaries and personal data straight from Sony's servers? Or is it a cracked database file that the hackers took time to convert to XLS for easier dissemination? I'm guessing the former, since the screenshots show the kind of spreadsheets that are lovingly hand-formatted and curated by the people tasked to maintain them.

It's kind of a fascinating look at how data is clumsily handled within corporations. I mean, how do they keep everything synced between the sheets that contain salaries/benefits, severance actions, etc.? ( _shudder_ )

<comment><USER14> > It's kind of a fascinating look at how data is clumsily handled within > corporations. I mean, how do they keep everything synced between the sheets > that contain salaries/benefits, severance actions, etc.? (shudder)

Email, of course!

<comment><USER15> Companies love to use sharepoint for this. There's decent integration with MS Office, but it's still huge pain to use. Usually it involves multiple full time sharepoint "developers" to make it do what you want.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> I wish the private keys used by the ps4 are part of the leak. Would seem only right after Sony's behavior when it came to Geohot.

</comment><comment><USER17> I'm surprised that Sony didn't increase their defenses when North Korea first warned them months ago as they were promoting the new movie "The Interview". Given that North Korea can be a credible threat, it would have made a lot of sense to beef up security or at minimum increase monitoring.

</comment><comment><USER18> out of sheer curiosity, does anyone have the pastebin link for this? I know it was taken down, but I'm hoping the Barbara Streisand Effect has taken place.

<comment><USER19> Here's the link (down) [http://pastebin.com/jncFTMJZ](http://pastebin.com/jncFTMJZ)

Here's an archive of it [https://archive.today/wqbRP](https://archive.today/wqbRP)

</comment></comment><comment> mark-r So the _average_ salary was $119K? I'd love to know what the median is, the average is probably highly skewed by a few big numbers at the top.

<comment><USER20> Yeah, and I'd like to see what the average salary for VFX artists are.</comment></comment>


Safari Accidentally Treating ';' as an Assignment Operator - <AUTHOR> https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=176114 <comment><USER2> _LiteralParser is used for JSON and for JSONP.

To do JSONP quickly we have magic logic to handle

(a(.b)_=json | a(.b) _\\(json\\))+

which we parse and call directly to avoid jumping through the interpreter. We need this because people still insist on sending megs of data as executable script. because reasons._

This is hilarious.

 _> This code looks suspicious inside the lex() function:

             if (*m_ptr == ';') {
                 token.type = TokSemi;
                 token.end = ++m_ptr;
                 return TokAssign;
             }

that does indeed seem questionable. I'm so sad I wrote it :(_

Know that feeling.

<comment><USER3> Part of the patch does

      -    return TokAssign;
      +    return TokSemi;

but that commits the same original sin. The better fix is

      +    return token.type;

OTOH, if _all_ the other code were using the same poor pattern I could understand not wanting to fix it properly, at least in an initial patch.

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Relevant [https://twitter.com/RReverser/status/902504540393660416](https://twitter.com/RReverser/status/902504540393660416)</comment>


The American Middle Class - <AUTHOR> http://reason.tv/video/show/61.html

<comment><USER2> This ties in a lot with what PG says about creating wealth (<http://paulgraham.com/wealth.html>). It's not about how much money you make, it's about how much "stuff" you can get with it. It's about what your efforts (work) will gain you.

</comment><comment><USER3> The logical fallacies in that video are breathtaking. This must be how conservative-voting people view the world, and for that at least it is informative.</comment>


Ask HN: When is a new business not a startup? - <AUTHOR>

If the definition of a startup is the search for a business model, then does this mean that any new business that starts which has a working business model is NOT a startup? <comment><USER2> Being newly founded does not in itself make a company a startup. A startup is a company designed to grow fast. Check out Paul Graham's essay "Startup = Growth" for a great answer to your question: [http://www.paulgraham.com/growth.html](http://www.paulgraham.com/growth.html)

<comment><AUTHOR> hmmm, I guess this boild down to how a startup is defined, good point!

<comment><AUTHOR> Then since Apple is designed to grow fast does that make it a startup, since 2000?</comment></comment></comment>


Show HN: Multiplayer Set (nodeJS card game) - <AUTHOR> http://multiplayerset.com/

<comment><USER2> Interesting, but ran into an issue. Made a private game, saw a set immediately (all single, all stripe, different shapes, different colors). That one wouldn't take though. Mashing hint three times though highlighted three cards that weren't a set (single/single/triple,blue/blue/red).

Using IE8 but I don't think it would make a difference.

 _edit_ My friends and I are Set nuts though, so I'm kinda stoked about this for us.

<comment><AUTHOR> It MIGHT be a browser issue. Did you reload/switch browsers?

<comment><USER2> Switched to Firefox, and still not showing a valid set. (quantity different, color different, fill and shape similar).

cody dot maggard at gmail for the game URI if you want to check it out.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> Oh man- this could be bad for my productivity... Does this have the blessing of the creators/copyright owners of Set?

<comment><USER4> blessing or not, this game is going to be a problem for my productivity.</comment></comment>


A Tiny Speaker Printed on a Single Sheet of Paper - <AUTHOR> http://www.wired.com/design/2013/12/a-tiny-speaker-made-out-of-paper/

<comment><USER2> I guess I'm just feeling weary of grad-school tropes, but think about this statement with me:

"I hope that we will find an effective way of solving the problem of electronic waste, which is growing quickly."

If the "designer" really feels this way, then why did they do this project???

Speakers actually recycle very well. They're steel, paper, glue and copper.

This project doesn't take steps toward the problem of electronic waste. It doesn't matter that the speaker was made on their own workbench instead of in a factory. (except that "factories are bad.")

AND it appears to recklessly waste a slab of (toxic, difficult-to-recycle) acrylic for NO REASON. Wood would have been fine there.

I'll identify what is really going on here: Grad schools are filllled with people alienated from the products they consume. That's a serious phenomenon that we can do something about. This project is an attempt to understand the electromagnetic phenomenon and thereby reduce alienation.

But _please_, don't construe this as anything environmental, or a statement on the future. It's a personal project the designer needed to do to understand a natural phenomenon, not anything that's going to help the rest of us.

If you want to be taken seriously, practice what you preach. Don't mumble platitudes about toxic waste while parading your own contributions to it.

I'll only mention the fact that paper-processing is one of the more well-known toxic activities (although some steps have been to reduce it) out there... contrasted with organic stains and varnishes used in the wood of "bad" speaker design.

Plus, by building inferior versions of mass-produced items, you're sending the message that "homemade stuff is shitty." I mean, listen to that speaker! Is that really something you want playing at your house?

How are we supposed to take seriously someone's ideas about the future when their perception is so clearly compromised they somehow feel that this an acceptable substitute for anything I would actually use to listen to music in my home?

Or are you going to tell me that this is just a hint, a suggestion, of how things _could_ be? If that's the case, then you haven't done anything, and you're trying to trick me into imagining how it could be better. If the designer has any idea how to make a GOOD speaker that's environmentally friendly, then stop being a jerk and keeping it a secret. Fucking demo it, not some weak-sauce illustration of the principles of electromagnetism.

DIY doesn't have to mean shitty quality and we shouldn't let anyone control the future who tells us we have to accept shitty quality and toxic materials where they're not needed.

(yes, I am _this_ mad.)

<comment> grey-area I voted for this story as it's such a lovely idea - this is a prototype, an educational hack, and not a consumer product. It is clearly not expected to be compared to mass-produced products or to somehow solve the world's recycling issues. Printed, lightweight electronics may well help address recycling in the future, and that was one off-hand comment at the end of the article.

I was really sad to see this nasty, entirely negative and mostly irrelevant comment at the top in response. From the article pic captions:

 _The goal is to demystify the gadgets people use every day._

I'd say it succeeds admirably, particularly the annotated circuit diagram with the actual components spread out within it. What a wonderful idea for an educational tool that could be used in schools for example to demonstrate simple electronic circuits.

Clearly it's not some high end speaker replacement, a solution for recycling issues, world hunger, your demand for quality music in your home (!), or intended to trick you into thinking anything. It's a little demo, a hack, and I think it's a good one.

<comment><USER2> > that was one off-hand comment at the end of the article.

Kennedy's assassination was one bad action at the end of an otherwise lovely day, yet we still have to take it as part of the whole. So, when the designer says, "I want less electronic waste" and then makes electronic waste, I am calling them out on it.

I'm blaming the writer for a bad article, too and if you think this is somehow news, you should have linked to a better source of this info.

For example, here are two other articles on the same design from over a week ago _without the fake environmental rhetoric_ :

[http://www.designboom.com/technology/conductive- electronic-p...](http://www.designboom.com/technology/conductive-electronic- paper-speakers-by-coralie-gourguechon-) 12-12-2013/

[http://gizmodo.com/the-worlds-simplest-speaker-is- silkscreen...](http://gizmodo.com/the-worlds-simplest-speaker-is-silkscreened- on-a-piece-1481884888)

Here's the same article again, from last month, _also without any fake environmental rhetoric_ : [http://www.creativeapplications.net/sound/paper- electronics-...](http://www.creativeapplications.net/sound/paper-electronics- by-coralie-gourguechon/)

:)

Now, since you are so excited about home-made speakers, I'm sure you'll lead us in another round of healthy enthusiasm for another home-made speaker from 5 years ago by a _2nd_grader_?

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2CxMm0ksJ8Y](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2CxMm0ksJ8Y)

And now another home-made speaker from 5 years ago from household materials by two high schoolers?

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=995yt8Eb5FU](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=995yt8Eb5FU)

Here's another such home-made speaker from five years ago:

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i90jJ9bKmRg](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i90jJ9bKmRg)

Oh yeah, here's another home-made speaker and audio circuit like OP's with half a million views that was two years ago. I used to be friends with this girl and her husband, I should look them up:

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y1F5Gg4bG3o](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y1F5Gg4bG3o)

And if you are not completely exhausted and can't understand why I think presenting this as news is silly, here's a 4-part video series on how to make a decent, 20 watt speaker and that teaches you how to calculate and measure basic electrical terms like impedance:

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X6rwZvM1Tx4](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X6rwZvM1Tx4)

I would greatly admire that one for its demystification and educational qualities as opposed to the tinny, hissing thing in OP.

Here's another nice, minimal home-made speaker re-using a wire spool, from a year ago:

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IYywo- UUkJA](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IYywo-UUkJA)

Here's the design and construction of an entire subwoofer!

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u4IeUElN8oQ](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u4IeUElN8oQ)

Here's ANOTHER little school kid who made something sounding about as good as OPs article last week. Why isn't this "news"??? It only has 3 views so far. Go post him a nice comment, too:

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CHX10ouc- lw](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CHX10ouc-lw)

The practice of making and teaching how to make speakers from every day objects and from scratch is and has been an ongoing practice for decades and decades. So why is this article suddenly considered news? I'm sorry if you're really sad, but I disagree with this newsworthiness of this article.

Also, there's been an instructable on how to do make speakers from scratch, how can OP be news?

[http://www.instructables.com/id/How-to-Make-Paper- Speakers-F...](http://www.instructables.com/id/How-to-Make-Paper-Speakers- From-Scratch/)

And a "maker" project on using a paper plate to make a home-made speaker:

[http://makezine.com/projects/styrofoam-plate- speaker/](http://makezine.com/projects/styrofoam-plate-speaker/)

Even ehow has a crappy article ( With no pictures?! Is it really so easy to do that we don't even have to see it to know? possibly.) on the topic:

[http://www.ehow.com/how_4895246_make-speaker-out-paper- plate...](http://www.ehow.com/how_4895246_make-speaker-out-paper-plate.html)

Ehow can also do it with a paper plate (and no pictures):

[http://www.ehow.com/how_6630889_make-homemade-speakers- plast...](http://www.ehow.com/how_6630889_make-homemade-speakers-plastic- cup.html)

Here's one using Legos from 2007:

[http://www.ehow.com/how_6630889_make-homemade-speakers- plast...](http://www.ehow.com/how_6630889_make-homemade-speakers-plastic- cup.html)

Here's another one with really great pictures:

[http://science.wonderhowto.com/how-to/make-paper-plate- speak...](http://science.wonderhowto.com/how-to/make-paper-plate-speaker- actually-works-for-under-1-0141522/)

When you look around, you'll see people have been making educational paper speakers with and without soldering for years and years. And none of them are waving the "less electronic waste" flag. Article is a hack, but not news.

<comment><USER3> > > that was one off-hand comment at the end of the article.

> Kennedy's assassination was one bad action at the end of an otherwise lovely > day, yet we still have to take it as part of the whole

Good lord, way to equate things.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> The one question I would like to know is: where can I get my hands on this kind of ink and what kind of printer does it require? Unfortunately, journalists don't think to delve into this kind of information.

<comment><USER5> Try the Mitsubishi NBSIJ–MU01 conductive ink for inkjet printers. Available here: [http://www.k-mpm.com/agnano/agnano_ink.html](http://www.k-mpm.com/agnano/agnano_ink.html)

MSR published a paper where they tried using this ink and wrote about their results: [http://research.microsoft.com/pubs/201273/ubi1415-instant%20...](http://research.microsoft.com/pubs/201273/ubi1415-instant%20inkjet.pdf)

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> As an aside, this isn't as 'hi-tech' but with a paper plate, styrofoam bowl, sheet of paper and a magnet you can make a speaker, too.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Awef78YtWmc#t=8s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Awef78YtWmc#t=8s)

It's just a neat thing to do during a break, or if you need a science project.

</comment><comment><USER7> A different take on the printed speaker, this was news a couple days ago: [http://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/2013/12/fully- functional...](http://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/2013/12/fully-functional- loudspeaker-3-d-printed)

</comment><comment><USER8> I up voted it because it promises to greatly simplify hobby circuit interconnections. Design, print, glue components, use.

The aforementioned green piety at the end I'd overlooked - and appreciate the screed regarding it.</comment>


Functional Pearls - <AUTHOR> http://www.cs.ox.ac.uk/people/jeremy.gibbons/pearls/ <comment><USER2> Amazing is the sudoku solver in the second half of the linked talk at [http://icfp06.cs.uchicago.edu/bird- talk.pdf](http://icfp06.cs.uchicago.edu/bird-talk.pdf).</comment>


Ask HN: Is social media a user acquisition strategy?  - <AUTHOR>

I was having an argument with another founder about listing social media as a user acquisition strategy in a pitch deck. I think social channels might be a way of getting users, but to me it doesn't seem like a reliable way to do so unless your target user is best reached through social media.<p>Or am I just over-thinking what user acquisition strategy means? <comment><USER2> I think people misconstrue the value proposition of social media. By definition, social media channels are where people congregate... so therefore wouldn't it benefit EVERY company and product to understand how social media best applies to them?

The targeting options in Facebook, Twitter, and LinkedIn (not just paid via ads, but also via strategic searches and groups) are vast. If you know how to find the right users, and build trust with them, then that is a high- converting way to start the acquisition funnel via Awareness (McClure's AARRR metrics).

I should also note that for various clients and companies, I've seen at LEAST 20% conversion rates, through the actual homepage registration (legitimately acquired into the SQL database, not just email list).

</comment><comment><USER3> It depends on your company. Are you geared toward creating shareable content that appeals to your target market? Then social medias is definitely a viable user acquisition strategy. Just look at Upworthy (although lately they've been dinged by Facebook, apparently).

But if your social media strategy is to just create a Twitter/Facebook account and put out a few random blog posts, then don't expect that channel to bring in a consistently large amount of users.

</comment><comment><USER4> Just adding my 2 cents here.

I would say that if you are consumer-facing and your product has a broad appeal, then perhaps user-acquisition could work on social media.

The trick is to not focus on user-acquisition and to build user-relations. Perhaps your first followers may not need your app, but maybe their followers and followers-followers might find it useful.

</comment><comment><USER5> Buffer is one of those companies that uses social media to acquire users. But I know they've invested significantly in writing their blog posts. It really depends on your product.

</comment><comment><USER6> as social media is pretty much anywhere people chat or gather on the internet wouldnt this site be part of a social media strategy? in some cases posting to hacker news just hoping on a wish and a prayer it gets picked up is some startups strategys. so in short. yes its a very valid strategy.</comment>


The Bugs In Ubuntu 10.04 - <AUTHOR> http://lcorg.blogspot.com/2010/04/bugs-in-ubuntu-1004.html <comment><USER2> I just did a fresh install of Ubuntu on my netbook, and I'm impressed. Things that didn't work before in previous releases (like the camera which I used to have to configure, or skype sound which I had to go through several opaque sounding options before I guessed the right one) JUST WORKED.

Yes, there are a few green technologies, as the author points out, but I'm very happy to see this level of innovation, especially in the "social from the start" space. They're not just innovating, they're leading the pack.

Very positive experience so far.

</comment><comment><USER3> I've done both a fresh install and an upgrade to 10.04 and both worked without a hitch. I'm impressed.

Ubuntu is a massive piece of software components that have to work properly on all kinds of random hardware. The release schedule that they've committed to (one major every six months) is really hard and I'm also impressed that they're sticking to it. Every release seems to replace large components with newer versions or even new codebases. The GUI changes with almost every release, but not so much that it's unrecognizable from the last release.

Of course there are bugs. There are always bugs. But you know what they say about software - you can have it secure, on time or of good quality, just pick two. They seem to have found a decent balance and keep pushing to deliver a modern OS. Kudos.

</comment><comment><USER4> I keep seeing this idea that Linux upgrades shouldn't break old functionality, particularly in Long Term Support releases. That's two separate fallacies interacting.

1\. A Linux upgrade is not like someone redecorating a few rooms, or adding a new wing to your house. It's more like that extreme makeover show where they bulldoze the entire house and rebuild it from scratch. In exchange for fixing your foundations, replacing lead pipes, and fitting a high efficiency heating system you have to put up with the fact that hat rack no longer accommodates your ten gallon hat and that handy light-switch in the bathroom has been moved outside because it is no longer up to code.

If you don't want to take this tradeoff then you have the option to not upgrade, certainly not on the day of release.

2\. A Long Term Support release of Ubuntu is supported for 3 years on the desktop (5 on server). This means it needs to balance stability with the fact that it's not going to be changed for several years. This means doing things like putting a newer version of Firefox as going with the 2.0 line would have been soon out of date.

Combining these and expecting a LTS to be more likely to support old hardware flawlessly is the wrong conclusion. People seem to understand that the introduction of Vista or Mac OS X Snow Leopard will obsolete certain lines of older hardware. Don't hold Linux to a higher standard because they actually make a effort to support old hardware with the new code.

</comment><comment><USER5> I _wish_ I had those bugs. The install disc for Ubuntu 10.04 doesn't even work on my MacBook Pro 7,1 - it hangs at a BusyBox/initramfs prompt.

<http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1458341>

</comment><comment><USER6> I updated my VMware install of Ubuntu to 10.04 and now no keyboard input is recognized. I looked around and there are fixes, but this sort of thing ruins the whole experience from the start. I know that VMware probably doesn't officially support 10.04 yet, but 10.04 is supposed to be a stable release of a major distro. I want to love Linux but it never seems to get to the "it just works" level.

<comment><USER7> I was bitten by this (or a similar bug), too. Unfortunately it's a VMware bug and not an Ubuntu bug.

[https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/xorg- server/+bug/5...](https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/xorg- server/+bug/548891)

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> The bugs in 10.04 are annoying, but it's a beta. It's driving me up the wall though, I wish I had not upgraded but I'm just on the edge about whether I reinstall or no.

</comment><comment><USER9> Where's Linux Hater (linuxhaters.blogspot.com) when you need him?</comment>


Calca – The text editor that loves math - <AUTHOR> http://calca.io/ <comment><AUTHOR> I don't have anything to do with this project, I just stumbled across it and thought it was interesting.</comment>


Google Wallet is here and it looks awesome | Front Side Bus - <AUTHOR> http://www.frontsidebus.net/2011/09/19/google-wallet-is-here-and-it-looks-awesome/ <comment><USER2> Its a great step for NFC adoption in the US but permit me to brag a little by showing you the NFC-payment system in Hong Kong (Octopus Card) which you can use in:

\- all public transport (subway, bus, tram, ferry, etc)

\- shops (7-11, drugstore etc)

\- as access card to buildings, offices, residence

... and on a run-down boat which charges you HK$1.80 per ride (US$0.23). This is the ultimate Mom and Pop shop.

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5_EtTiLP_EE>

</comment><comment><USER3> Well according to this:

<http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-09-chance-credit-card.html>

Credit card technology in the US has been stagnant for a while. It looks like Google is trying to solve a worthwhile problem. But I imagine that many users might feel hesitancy, and early adopters will find a lot of places where there Google wallet just doesn't work.

Digital wallets will be a nice change of pace from having to carry different physical cards with information on them that can be easily stolen.

</comment><comment><USER4> Do anyone* think that the required NFC-enabled credit card terminals will be sold cheaply enough for all the small Mom and Pop businesses in the US to adopt this over the more familiar technology, non-NFC-enabled credit card terminals?

I imagine that this will go the way of Google Health eventually.

*Outside of Google

<comment><USER5> Mom-and-pop, maybe not, but there are already a ton of NFC-enabled machines out there. Around here (Florida) I can even use the chip in my AmEx to buy a soda.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> I basically treat my phone the way I would a windows machine. I download lots of apps without too much concern for their integrity, because I really have no way to track what's going on on it (is there tripwire for android?.) No way am I going to put financial information on it.

<comment><USER7> And that's why I'm going to use the prepaid Google card option and keep only <$10 or $20 in it at all times. I doubt I would use this for huge transactions, but the main thing: I see lots of stores that have the NFC/Paypass machines, but rarely do they have them on/functional. I received my Visa Paypass card more than a year ago and have yet to use the Paypass functionality.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> If they can ultimately bypass the credit card services/fees then I can see the significance of this, otherwise isn't it just adding another step to the credit card purchasing process?

What am I missing?

<comment><USER9> You're not missing anything.

While services like ours (FaceCash, <https://www.facecash.com>) bypass the credit card interchange and lower fees as a result, Google is just emulating what everyone already has and adding extra cost to the equation for merchants.

<comment><USER10> I'm sorry because this is unrelated, but speaking as an interested and even encouraging consumer, FaceCash has some of the most horrendous branding I have ever seen.

The logo looks childish at best, nightmarish at worst, and the motto is vaguely threatening. Didn't the Joker make someone sign with his face in The Dark Knight? As I recall, it was fatal. The narrator of the videos needs a drink of water - the smacking sounds are incredibly distracting - and the reason the name sounds so terrible is because it's a near-homophone for "Face Gash."

I really want to love this. I do. It sounds really useful. But I can't even look at it without flinching.

But, as my English teacher was fond of saying during critiques, feel free to tell me to go to hell. Perhaps I am not in your target market.

<comment><USER9> You can't please everyone. A lot of people like the logo. The narrator has also received a lot of compliments.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Why do I still want to have POS systems and have to have a "credit card". So instead of the piece of plastic, I have to carry my phone and a piece of plastic?

I'd much prefer to see a comprehensive shift away from the credit card companies and PoS systems entirely.

<comment><USER9> I agree!</comment></comment>


An Experiment in BlackBerry Development: Lessons Learned Writing PodTrapper - <AUTHOR> http://www.versatilemonkey.com/story.html <comment><USER2> Brilliantly written, very thorough. It's interesting that the 'little guys' have that "I love my users, and I really just want to help them" mentality so at odds with the big players (I'm trying to take the same approach with Twitterscribe too). I wonder at what size it flips around and users become the enemy, or at least, an annoyance to be ignored.

<comment><USER3> I would guess it's about the time that you start to interact with your users less frequently than you interact with some other category of people - investors, managers, co-workers, QA staff, subcontractors, whatever. The human brain pays vastly more attention to the people around you than the people who support you, and if the two sets are sufficiently distinct, very strange and unhelpful attitudes arise.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> oh, man. to all the people who say "why would you put up with apple's draconian app store policies?" this article is the answer.</comment>


Chrome's ad blocker will expand to video on August 5 - <AUTHOR> https://venturebeat.com/2020/02/05/chromes-ad-blocker-will-expand-to-video-on-august-5/ <comment><AUTHOR> The fact that Chrome has an ad blocker at all is hugely anticompetitive, even if it can be disabled. (TFA doesn't say)</comment>


Traction Trumps Everything - <AUTHOR> http://www.gabrielweinberg.com/blog/2010/07/traction-trumps-everything.html

<comment><USER2> Traction is absolutely the most powerful asset for raising money.

You will find once you've closed that your investors keep pushing for traction at the cost of everything else including revenue and burn rate.

This is because, from their perspective, they want you to create a market for your stock. Which is now also their stock. They want you to do this the same way you created a market when they wanted to buy. With traction.

There are several target markets for your stock. Future angel and VC investors. The public markets through an IPO. An acquisition. Traction is good at creating interest in all of these [less so for an IPO].

You can be a very effective CEO from your investors perspective if you spend your career in your startup doing the things that are best at creating a market for your stock. This approach has the highest likelihood of creating a successful outcome in the shortest time for your investors.

However, you can not use this approach to build a lasting business or a great business. When your target market becomes investors and your product becomes your stock, you are not only neglecting the fundamentals of building a lasting business - you are working against them.

But the reality of the world we live in is that you occasionally need to raise money. So you need to somehow resolve this conflict which I leave as an exercise for the reader.

Recommended reading: Jim Collins - Good to Great.

Recommended viewing: Boiler Room

<comment><USER3> I up voted your reply, not only for your magnificent input, but because of your recommendations. Absolutely spot on.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> _I should also point out that once you have traction, you may not need investors at all._ \- Sums it up perfectly.

Now that I actually have some traction, and I can roughly calculate how long it will be before I am ramen profitable, investors just completely fade from the picture.

</comment><comment><USER5> My takeaway: it's easier to get money than to get traction. A powerful and sobering thought. I've never been present at the attainment of traction. I've either worked for big companies who already established traction long ago, or startups that could never find it. In my projects, no traction. It's starting to feel like the Moby Dick to my Ahab. TRACTION WHERE ARE YOU?

</comment><comment><USER6> _I should also point out that once you have traction, you may not need investors at all._

Oh how true.

I was recently pitching an angel who was telling me that he didn't see a market for my app when my cell phone vibrated. I checked voice mail after the meeting. It was the president of one of my customers, asking if the angel "got it". If not, no problem, just get back there because he had a bunch of new requirements and some more referrals. He never understood why I was pursuing funding when there was already so much demand for what I was building.

That's one time I wish I had been rude enough to take the call during the meeting, and handed off the phone saying, "Don't ask me. Ask him."

<comment><USER7> ... and gotten the investment? That you didn't need?

Or you just would have liked to score off the angel.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Gabriel, I think this would be even more useful if you talked about how that graph happened. Why was there a dip? How did you overcome it? Where did you get your traction? Etc.

<comment><USER9> Also I think it's relevant to show how much was spent on advertising. If all of that traffic came from paying $$$ to Reddit, then that needs to be taken into account, but if the majority of traffic is from real traction then very cool indeed.

<comment><USER10> Hey guys, I didn't mean to relate this post to DDG at all. I was just trying to find a good image, and I figured why not use the DDG compete one, though I purposefully left out the title and the y-axis.

That said, I'm happy to answer your questions. Andrew, I didn't see a dip on my end. That's something weird with compete, which is known to have various biases (and is only US). Axod, not much advertising $$$. From 1/1/10-6/1/10, ~$500 in online advertising, ~$250 on reddit. Most of DDG traffic is actually direct.

<comment><USER9> Good to hear :) I imagined reddit advertising would cost much more than that.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> If this is true, it says a lot about the chances Diaspora has. I think there is more traction there already, even before launch, than many failed social networks ever had.

<comment><USER12> Traction != Hype

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> Truer words have never been spoken :)

</comment><comment><USER14> Traction, social proof, key customers for b2b, these are a few of my favorite things.

..........|

........./

.___/

This chart is pretty much playing on repeat in my head:

</comment><comment><USER15> sorry Michael, this is ridiculous, i like Gabriel but please don't upvote this absolute CRAP here.

<comment><USER10> Sorry, why is this crap? People ask me all the time what it takes to attract angel investors, and this is my most succinct answer.

<comment><USER16> It sucks to be told as someone who hasn't had an exit yet that you have to not only build something but also get real users before angel investors will help you. But it's a message that needs to be beaten into entrepreneurs looking for external funding. (I know I could have used it first time around.)

<comment><USER10> You can still get angel investors to help you without traction, including myself. Anyone looking for advice can feel free to email email@example.com, and we'll try our best to help.

<comment><USER17> Why do you guys help random people? Out of pure curiosity - is it for profit or just as a contribution back to society?

<comment><USER18> In part, they gain headlights into deal flow at an extremely early stage.

I can vouch for the Hacker Angels' willingness to help just for the sake of it, though. I pinged them when their announcement first hit HN, and while I am sure they were deluged, and my business is "pre-traction", they still took the time to respond in detail to my questions. This type of advice is difficult to get, especially from angels themselves. It's a great service to the community, and personally I don't mind them extracting a little value of out it!</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: Interested in a weekly space startup and science news newsletter? - <AUTHOR> Hey HN friends! I'm planning to start a short weekly email newsletter with a selection of space science updates, aerospace startup news, DIY space stuff (ground stations, cubesats, simulation software, etc.), and other geeky space content that I found interesting during the week.
Would this interest you? If so, what specific topics would you most like to hear about?
I'm planning to send out a trial first edition next week. If you're interested, here's a signup form: https://goo.gl/forms/uGi2AL7ELpJK86bx2 <comment><AUTHOR> Clickable link: [https://goo.gl/forms/uGi2AL7ELpJK86bx2](https://goo.gl/forms/uGi2AL7ELpJK86bx2)</comment>


Ask HN: Any Tips for Applying to Berkeley or Stanford? - <AUTHOR> This morning I woke up and checked the temperature. It is currently -18 degrees. This is much too cold for me, and I am seriously considering crossing off Michigan and anything in New England for grad school. As a result, I am now thinking about some schools on the west coast. Does anyone have any tips for applying to Berkeley or Stanford's mathematics program? Were you already published? Besides good grades and GRE scores, did you feel you needed something more to get into either of these schools? <comment><USER2> The most important thing is your recommendations. If you have three professors who went to a top-tier school, and who will give you a good recommendation, then you should get in.

So, how to get a good recommendation. Just ask your professors, would you give me a recommendation, and would you expect me to get in. If they are actually going to give you a good recommendation, they will tell you that they definitely expect you to get in. If they are sort of noncommittal, you are probably going to get a mediocre recommendation. Ask them what you would need to do to be a great candidate. Then do that.

Publication helps of course, especially in convincing your professors to give you a good rec. If you don't have any publications or ideas on how to get some, you might try a REU.

</comment><comment><USER3> _Does anyone have any tips for applying to Berkeley or Stanford's mathematics program?_

Win the Putnam. :-)

<comment><USER4> Any other tips?

<comment><USER3> In most cases it makes sense to pick the supervisor and then go wherever he is, rather than picking the university. I've heard people say that the relationship a student has with his supervisor is the second most important one in his life, after the relationship he has with his spouse; I've also heard people dispute this and argue that the supervisor is more important.

Of course, in order to be in a position to pick a good supervisor, you need to make yourself attractive. Do research; publish papers; go to conferences and present your work there; talk to other people in your field. Faculty are always looking for more good graduate students, and meeting them at conferences will give you a chance to figure out if you get on well with them at a personal level.

That said, I did almost none of the above -- but I was a special case, in that I didn't particularly need any supervision (I'm pretty certain that I literally _saw_ my supervisor less than two dozen times while I was a graduate student, and interacted far fewer times than that).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Recommendations and research experience (published if possible) is absolutely the dealbreaker</comment>


Living on the Plateau - <AUTHOR> http://blog.cleancoder.com/uncle-bob/2017/11/18/OnThePlateau.html <comment><USER2> > The C++ era was short lived because Java/C# came along in the latter half of > the decade. By this time machines had gotten so vastly powerful that it was > possible to implement whole systemes in virtual machines. Just ten years > before: that would have been unthinkable.

Maybe I've got this wrong, but in the back of my head there's something rattling around about virtual machines being one of the strategies employed for portability in the pre-Cambrian PC explosion, before the IBM PC became overwhelmingly dominant. The first one that comes to mind would be the Infocom Z-Machine; the original source code was compiled down into virtual byte code, and could run on any platform that had implemented a z-machine interpreter.</comment>


Why human children take so long to reach maturity - <AUTHOR> http://www.americanscientist.org/template/BookReviewTypeDetail/assetid/57123;jsessionid=baag3bXuJ30X8O <comment><USER2> The simplest answer may also be the best: there's a lot to learn. And it seems that as society becomes more complicated, there's more you must learn to survive.

There is a strong evolutionary advantage to taking care of our sick and elderly -- experts are very hard to train. As medical care improves we can afford to invest more time (childhood) and energy into training increasingly specialized experts.

</comment><comment><USER3> It seems like a positive feedback loop. Improved brains require slow development and allow for greater social complexity, which requires bigger brains and even slower development.

To summarize, this article adds that perhaps slow development contributes to the loop, rather than detracts from it.</comment>


No, Professors Aren't Discriminating Against Conservative Students - <AUTHOR> https://psmag.com/ideas/no-professors-arent-discriminating-against-conservative-students <comment><USER2> Study results demonstrated that the grades after 4 years for conservative students were not lower than for liberal students. There is a material difference between proving the former and proving that conservative students aren't discriminated against for espousing conservative ideas.

Their data did not capture whether these conservative students kept their ideas to themselves and adopted the socially acceptable positions and beliefs they would assume their professors were seeking in order to get the grades. Why rock the boat when a college degree is an economic instrument and not some kind of political debate?

"Over the phone, Woessner stresses that, in the end, he and his co-authors had 'to engage in speculation, trying to map our possible explanation ranging from discrimination to skills to interests. [Conservative students] may be not as engaged' when it comes to the humanities, whereas 'liberal students are much less happy with their math classes.'"

Nonetheless interesting study, but headline writers once again drawing conclusions beyond the scope of a study. Yay social science journalism. We'll all continue on agreeing with headlines that conform to our echo chambers and dismissing out of hand those that do not, regardless of what the actual study truly demonstrated. Let's just infer explanations that makes sense to us and interpret our findings the way that suits our agenda.

</comment><comment><USER3> I'm prepared to believe that unconscious bias or systemic discrimination is preferentially benefiting liberal students. What alarms me about this idea, and the related one of group privilege, is not that they are necessarily wrong (they quite possibly aren't), but that once you've convinced somebody that they are subject to being unfair in a way that is invisible to them, it's not hard to pull them around by the nose in whatever direction you like.

For that reason, if there's some activity or structure that discriminates against someone who is acting in good faith, it should be addressed specifically. In other words, it should be possible to clearly explain what a problem is and how it functions, rather than tossing around vague accusations of unfairness. By doing so, everybody benefits, and everybody has a fair chance to be heard.

</comment><comment><USER4> Pacific Standard's headline is flat wrong: "when controlling for SAT scores and demographics, differences between liberal and conservative students are modest. For example, holding all else constant, the most liberal student would enjoy a 0.16 point advantage over the most conservative student on a 7 point scale. Given our large sample size, this difference is statistically significant." (page 11 of the actual paper)

Modest. And statistically significant.

</comment><comment><USER5> I'm actually not terribly surprised to hear this. Bret Weinstein may have been (and continue to be) a lifelong liberal, but from what I know about him, I wouldn't expect him or professors like him to discriminate against conservative students. Nor would I expect Nicolas Christakis to discriminate against conservatives, I don't know him other than by what I've seen and heard on the media, but this would seem very out of character. Yes, professors lean left, but these are still, by and large, people who devoted their lives to scholarly pursuits, and often show a very deep and principled adherence to the pursuit of truth, where data and analysis takes you. Professors have long been further to the left of mainstream society and their students, but until very recently, conservatives and republicans, in polls, have viewed universities as having a very positive effect on society. The collapse and political divide is recent. It is driven, to an extent, by a effort to associate liberal professors with the very worst attributes of "cancel" culture. Unfortunately, while I continue to feel positively about universities, I can no longer agree that this narrative is entirely fabricated, either.

My understanding is that college administrators tend to run more left wing than college professors, and they may contribute more to the campus climate than professors do - their ranks have swelled considerably in recent years. I also suspect that professors self-censor, and that students do this as well - not just conservatives, but moderates and liberals. I brought up Bret Weinstein for a reason - liberal professors giving conservative students bad grades simply to punish politics they don't like would be reprehensible, but I don't think this is the elephant in the room.

<comment><USER6> > My understanding is that college administrators tend to run more left wing > than college professors, and they may contribute more to the campus climate > than professors do...

We have 15% women in STEM, and we're told that it's because of residues of the oppressive patriarchy. Well, we have less than 15% conservatives among the faculty of social science departments, and that's because... ?

<comment><USER7> Well, since female is something you _are_ , while conservative is something you _think_ , I imagine the reason for the latter discrepancy is probably quite different from the reason for the former.

Is that what you were going to say? It looks like you forgot to conclude your point.

<comment><USER6> So you think it's wrong to not hire someone because they're female, but it's fine to not hire them because they're conservative? That's where you draw your lines? And if so, what is your justification for drawing them there?

<comment><USER7> > So you think it's wrong to not hire someone because they're female, but it's > fine to not hire them because they're conservative?

If you can show me where I said that or admit that you're putting words in my mouth, I'd be more than happy to continue this conversation. Otherwise, (I'm sorry but) I have a policy not to invest real effort in discussions with people who are either incapable of or not interested in reading what I've actually written, or are simply not arguing in good faith.

I'll say this much: I do think it's wrong to not hire somebody because they're female, and I don't think it's _necessarily_ wrong to not hire somebody because they express some arbitrary opinion that I think is bad. For instance, if somebody told me in an interview that "women should be legally considered property, without any rights of their own," I would not hire that person.

Is that a real conservative opinion held by a substantial number of people? In some parts of the world, to a first approximation, I think the answer is yes! "Conservative" and "liberal" are quite overloaded these days, wouldn't you agree?

Anyway, just food for thought. Refer back to the first paragraph of this comment if you want to continue this.

<comment><USER6> I thought the conclusion to my first post (which you complained was missing) was quite obvious - that if we conclude, in the case of male/female imbalance, that it's because of residual sexism (prejudice/discrimination), then in the second case (liberal/conservative), it would be reasonable to conclude the same. And (tying it back to geebee's comment that I was replying to), it's probably discrimination on the part of college administrators, who lean even more liberal.

I thought that inference was pretty obvious - so obvious that I assumed you understood it when you made your comment, and that you therefore just didn't want to admit the point. The alternatives were to assume the worst of your honesty (the course I took), to assume the worst of your understanding, or to assume the worst of the clarity of my post. In charity, I should have chosen the last, but... I didn't.

At any rate, you said:

> Well, since female is something you are, while conservative is something you > think, I imagine the reason for the latter discrepancy is probably quite > different from the reason for the former.

The "discrepancy" we were talking about is differences in the rate of hiring. My comment was (trying to say) that, if we suspect discrimination for the male/female imbalance, shouldn't we suspect it for the liberal/conservative imbalance? Suspecting bad faith on the part of your comment, then, you certainly seemed to be saying that it was OK to not hire conservatives, but not OK to not hire women.

But, presuming good faith on your part, then what _were_ you trying to say?

> Well, since female is something you are, while conservative is something you > think, I imagine the reason for the latter discrepancy is probably quite > different from the reason for the former.

So what _do_ you think the reasons are? How does what you are vs what you think affect the situation? You complain that I didn't conclude my point, but you left a lot to the imagination also.

> I'll say this much: I do think it's wrong to not hire somebody because > they're female, and I don't think it's necessarily wrong to not hire > somebody because they express some arbitrary opinion that I think is bad. > For instance, if somebody told me in an interview that "women should be > legally considered property, without any rights of their own," I would not > hire that person.

I would hope you would not hire that person! But do you think that the liberal/conservative imbalance in social science departments are because almost all the conservative applicants are deplorable?

<comment><USER7> > But, presuming good faith on your part, then what were you trying to say?

Nothing more or less than that the trait of being female is fundamentally different from the trait of being conservative, so we shouldn't _necessarily_ expect the relative absences of these groups in certain positions (in the general sense) to have similar root causes.

Frankly I think your conclusion is _too_ obvious to you, to the extent that you aren't considering other (fairly obvious) possible mechanisms, like the one another commenter mentioned ([https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20578689](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20578689)). I think he or she did a good job of articulating a similar point in a different way.

Would you accept as a possibility that _neither_ of these imbalances is due primarily to "hiring" bias? Or do you have some generally applicable evidence of the "hiring" bias you're talking about in either case, i.e. identity, physical or otherwise, being used to deny applicants access to a position? I'm just saying the question is more complicated than you're making it out to be; I don't claim to have the answer. It seems that you _are_ claiming that, and IMO you're reading between a lot of lines to cast other commenters' words in the form you're looking for.

("hiring" in quotes above because I think a lot of young women are put off STEM while they're still in school, despite the fact that they would not have had any trouble getting into the program(s))

<comment><USER6> Well, no, I wasn't trying to claim that the STEM imbalance is because of discrimination. (Or, as you mentioned, because of issues in school, which is not the fault of hiring managers.) I was trying to poke at people who claim discrimination for the STEM situation, but see no problem with the social subjects being very one-sided on the liberal/conservative axis. I was suggesting that, if they are so sure that it's discrimination in the gender case, they should consider the same explanation in the conservative case. (deogeo correctly stated my point.)

Do I think that the gender gap in STEM is because of discrimination? My guess is no, or at least largely no, but I'm not sure I know enough to be dogmatic on that subject.

Do I think that the gap in the social sciences is because of discrimination (or at least bias)? Given the liberal/conservative gap in school administrators, it seems to me that it would be almost a miracle if that wasn't at least part of the reason... but I have no concrete information.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Maybe not grades. However, I've seen and heard from others of their professors routinely berating conservatives of their beliefs in front of the class.</comment>


AppThwack expands automated app testing service to iOS on real devices - <AUTHOR> http://blog.appthwack.com/android-ios-and-web-app-testing-in-the-clou/

<comment><USER2> Your product is pretty cool and useful, although I haven't had much of a use case for it yet, since I mainly deal with debugging AOSP builds.</comment>


Open source web app for watching YouTube - <AUTHOR> http://inbox.video/ <comment><USER2> Looks simple, nice expoloration.</comment>


Finally switched from apache 2 to nginx 1.0.5 - <AUTHOR>

Making the decision to switch from apache to nginx was never for me a question about which web server is faster or better, but getting to know a new web server which has gained a good reputation in the last years.  I already knew that both web servers are pretty good in what they are made for. There has been a lot of talk about nginx, lately. So I got interested in this web server solution because it has also build up valuable reputation just like apache, and competition is always beneficial for the customers. Installing nginx was as easy as installing apache.
Nginx is running on my life site (http://www.joelle.de) since about 2 weeks without any complications, yet. My site is about 20% faster than before, but this is a pretty vague measurement.
So it would be nice to evaluate nginx's power if more traffic would hit my site. <comment><USER2> I've suggest you to take a look at this post

<http://blog.cppcms.com/post/99></comment>


The toxic side of free. Or: how I lost the love for my side project - <AUTHOR> https://remysharp.com/2015/09/14/jsbin-toxic-part-1 <comment><USER2> Excellent series of posts. I think his description of the paralyzing uncertainty of how to monetize his work is something many of us who've created open-source products can relate to.</comment>


In a Car-Culture Clash, It's the Los Angeles Police vs. Pedestrians - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/26/us/in-a-car-culture-clash-its-los-angeles-police-vs-pedestrians.html?hp&_r=0&pagewanted=all <comment><USER3> Apologies for looking at everything through startup-colored glasses, but my first thought on reading this was that LA is going to have a hard time becoming a startup hub with attitudes like this. The hackers and designers that startups want to hire seem to be disproportionately likely to want to travel on foot or by bike. So they like to live in cities where you can do that, and dislike car-centric cities.

There is a bigger trend here though. As several recent studies have shown, people in their 20s are turning against cars. So a city that favors cars at the expense of pedestrians and bicycles is also one that favors the old at the expense of the young.

<comment><USER4> > The hackers and designers that startups want to hire seem to be > disproportionately likely to want to travel on foot or by bike

Startups clustered first in the aggressively car-centric suburbs of Silicon Valley and in large part remain there. Even the YC offices are a long slog from Caltrain, on foot through big streets clogged with cars and parking lots. If Mountain View can attract startups why can't LA? I don't even agree with these jaywalking fines but there seem to be at least as many car lovers among my startup friends as my writer pals. (More, actually, when you factor in all the friends who live in NY.)

<comment><USER3> Actually Palo Alto is an exceptionally bike-friendly place. I wouldn't live in a town that wasn't. I've never seen a town in the US where a higher percentage of students bicycled to school, or serious cycling was a hobby of more adults. (Bicycling has for years been the cool sport among VCs, for example.)

And as for YC, it's less than a mile from the Caltrain, in weather that is almost always dry and warm, mostly along roads that are pretty empty of cars. A lot of the founders we fund never get cars during the 3 month cycle, because they can get everywhere by bike and Caltrain.

<comment><USER5> Palo Also is comparatively good for its area, but bicycling's modal share among commute options even there is quite low, hovering around 10%. Partly that's because many people who live in Palo Alto work elsewhere, and vice versa. In other cities on the peninsula it doesn't even crack 5%; nearly everyone who lives or works in Santa Clara or Sunnyvale drives, for example (biking's modal share is <2%). Mountain View is somewhere in between, at ~6%.

Those numbers aren't inconsistent with it being _possible_ to bike in those cities, but they suggest that people in practice don't. Here's a map: [http://www.flickr.com/photos/bike/8007583135/](http://www.flickr.com/photos/bike/8007583135/)

Infrastructurally, it's quite noticeable as well. The Valley doesn't _feel_ like a bike- or pedstrian-friendly place, but like a place criss-crossed by huge roads, giant parking lots, and not only interstates and state freeways, but _county_ expressways, something I've rarely seen elsewhere (apparently the Peninsula opted out of BART and took the money that would've been spent there, to build abominations like the San Tomas and Lawrence expressways, instead). I remember walking from Mountain View Caltrain to the Microsoft campus on La Avenida once for a SuperHappyDevHouse, and it clearly did not seem like a route anyone ever expected a pedestrian to walk on.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> It's remarkable how different cities have such radically different approaches and attitudes toward pedestrians. More so how drivers - on the whole - <USER2> this almost ESP-like ability to share a common like or dislike.

One of the most (pleasantly) jarring things I noticed about my move from NYC to SF is how totally dominant pedestrians are in SF, how totally deferential drivers are to pedestrians, and frankly how polite drivers are to each other. SF is filled with 4-way stop signs, and there's a very efficient (unspoken) system of coordinating who goes when (based on arrival time at the stop sign). If you dare break the system, you get yelled (honked) at mercilessly.

As a pedestrian in SF, I sometimes have to insist that cars go ahead (I'm rarely in a rush when I'm walking, and I know how frustrating it can be as a driver to wait for a slow person to meander across the street). You need to do nothing more than approach a crosswalk and every car in every direction will stop and wait for you to cross -- people even insist that you cross and will stop their cars while in mid-turn. I find that sometimes ill have to actually walk away from the curb if I'm waiting for someone or not actually crossing yet, otherwise _I_ impede traffic. It's pretty cool.

I spent a weekend in New Orleans recently, and one of the first things I noticed was the complete lack of that pedestrian deference. Step in the street at a crosswalk and cars will rush to get through before you start crossing.

I guess that's what they mean when they say "Live in Northern California, but leave before you get soft" ;)

<comment><USER7> The way they deal with 4-way stop signs isn't "unspoken," it's the frigging law [1]. That law is _exactly the same_ as every other state. This stuff is covered day one of driver's ed. If you "break the system," you're breaking the law and deserve a ticket, not just honking.

Moreover, the same deference can also be seen in Boston, which is a very walkable city. Although jaywalking is very common in Boston. New Orleans is a completely different city--only a small section of it has significant pedestrian traffic, and that section is often closed off to cars, anyway.

[1] [http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi- bin/displaycode?section=veh&gr...](http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi- bin/displaycode?section=veh&group=21001-22000&file=21800-21809)

<comment><USER8> In Ohio, the law at a four-way stop is: one car, rotating clockwise around the intersection. NOT whoever got there first.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> In some of the most popular squares / blocks there shouldn't even be car traffic during popular hours. It makes no sense to reserve 80% of the commons 60% of the time for hugely inefficient users of the space.

Take Times Square, why should thousands of pedestrians have to wait extra time to cross, or even just have less breathing room to stand around, so that cars with one to four people in them can have a more direct route to wherever they are going? Let them go around.

<comment><USER10> This is the case in some parts of Hong Kong, and it works beautifully — it's actually part of an active campaign on the part of the HK government to increase HK's pedestrian accessibility[1]. Interestingly, even here in one of the most densely-packed cities on earth where 95% of the population uses public transportation on a daily basis, pedestrians are only now being thought of as more than second-class citizens.

1\. [http://www.td.gov.hk/en/transport_in_hong_kong/pedestrianisa...](http://www.td.gov.hk/en/transport_in_hong_kong/pedestrianisation/pedestrianisation/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> Not sure if this really paints the most accurate picture. For one, LA has plenty of unmarked crosswalks that are completely legal to cross. When I worked in Downtown LA I never had a problem with this.

Secondly the LAPD regularly does the reverse of this crackdown and has plain cloths officers cross said crosswalks in order to catch motorists who aren't paying attention/don't care.

I live in Hollywood and every few months I see a jay walking/unmarked crosswalk related accident. When you have distracted motorists in a busy area it's going to happen. When it gets really busy the LAPD cracks down on both sides and erects barriers to keep people on the sidewalk. Seems to work well here but probably is too manpower intensive for downtown.

</comment><comment><USER12> We need to desperately change perceptions for traffic. Cars are the recurring factor in all crashes, and they can't be even near pedestrians. If that means they can't clog up the city center, then thats what we have to do.

Just look at this statistic from NY for 2012: [http://www.streetsblog.org/wp- content/uploads/2013/12/dmv1.j...](http://www.streetsblog.org/wp- content/uploads/2013/12/dmv1.jpg)

135 pedestrians killed. These are not people that suddenly collapsed and died, they died from intersections in the space-time continuum with cars. And nobody is being charged for these crashes, if you are not drunk or flee the scene, you can kill people with impunity (jumping the curb included).

I highly recommend reading through [http://www.streetsblog.org](http://www.streetsblog.org) for a few pages. Or try this article, it's a good summary of all that is wrong:

[http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/01/nyregion/traffic-agent- fat...](http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/01/nyregion/traffic-agent-fatally- struck-in-manhattan.html)

</comment><comment><USER13> Would love to see the NYPD do this. People make absolutely bone-headed decisions as to when and where to cross the street and get killed every year.

My favorite is when people block traffic to cross one way, then the light changes, and they do the same thing to cross the other way. If they had just crossed the two streets in the opposite order, they would have done both crossings with the right of way. Stupid, stupid idiots.

I also enjoy it when people jump out from between parked cars right into the bike lane. It must be nice to have a destination that would be out of the way if you went to the fucking corner to cross the street.

<comment><USER13> I should also point out that I'd like to see this, _after_ we increase car ticketing a thousandfold. Every day, I see cars running red lights, people driving 50 in a 20 zone, cars illegally triple-parked, completely blocking ambulances, and so on. The reason so many people die in traffic in New York is because the NYPD does not enforce any traffic laws, and the laws have no bite anyway.

Did you know that if you don't have a driver's license and you kill a little kid on the way to school, the maximum penalty is a $500 fine and 30 days in jail [1]? If you ever want to murder anyone, the message is clear: do it in New York, with your car.

[1] [http://www.streetsblog.org/2013/12/20/unlicensed-truck- drive...](http://www.streetsblog.org/2013/12/20/unlicensed-truck-driver-kills- noshat-nahian-8-in-northern-blvd-crosswalk/)

<comment><USER14> I would love to see traffic enforcement increase - as Lon as it is fairly and evenly distributed and not tied to illegal substance possession enforcement.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> NWA said it best: "Fuck the police."

But look at the date... End-of-the-month quota-filling dragnet likely.

<comment><USER16> No, it's worse than that, far worse. In hard times a city with a failing budget does many things to generate revenue. One of the easiest sources of revenue for a city is a series of laws that imply fines on people for actions that at the time is considered normal behavior. Often the reason given is for "public safety" or for "public goodwill" or other similar notions.

New taxes is popular too, but if you live in a city that has legal issues with creating new taxes they suddenly institute new "fees".

As more cities drown in their budgets you can expect more of this behavior from some cities. Not all of them will go down this road, but many will.

You can expect, and we've already seen much of this, new ideas of generating revenue such as fines, fees, and/or taxes. All at the expense of the people that these revenues are supposed to somehow help.

<comment><USER17> This the problem when you let local government have to many powers and set their own laws.

<comment><USER16> Not just local, but all governments. All governments over time build themselves up to a point that it can no longer be supported by society, nor itself, so that it eventually collapses. Then the people pick up the pieces, vow to never let that happen again for the sake of future generations, and then they go about doing it all over again.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> I think the framing of this is a little off—from what I understand from friends living in LA, ridiculous ticketing is endemic, for minor traffic infractions to jaywalking. Their perception is that large swaths of the police force are basically being repurposed as tax collectors.

It makes sense, it generates a ton of revenue and isn't subject to many of the traditional political procedures. I'd be curious if any LA locals agree or disagree with that assessment?

<comment><USER19> No, this is not at all my experience in Los Angeles, and certainly not with LAPD.

I've gotten tickets here, but one was on the freeway from CHP, and the other was in Burbank (which is a different city and police department). In Burbank the officer was explicitly waiting for someone to do what I did, which kind of annoyed me.

But in Los Angeles itself, LAPD has left me completely alone. I joke that unless you're actively stabbing someone in front of them, they have better things to do.

Parking is another matter. There's a parking enforcement department, and they are quite aggressive, 24 hours a day.

<comment><USER20> For those of us not prone to drug sales, extortion, murder, etc... traffic and parking are our only interaction with local PD. So in most cases it sounds like you are actually in agreement despite the comment above.

Most of us have very little interaction with LAPD, since they maintain low numbers of officers for a city its size. But when it comes from extracting $$$ from citizens they are a well-oiled machine. You can expect a parking ticket within 15 minutes anywhere in the city. Santa Monica (a different city) is even more aggressive.

<comment><USER19> I'm saying I've never gotten a traffic ticket from LAPD. In my experience traffic enforcement is pretty lax in Los Angeles.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> Reminds me of the elderly UK historian who managed to get himself locked up for jaywalking in Atlanta.

 _" First, I learnt that the Atlanta police are barbaric, brutal, and out of control. The violence I experienced was the worst of my sheltered life. Muggers who attacked me once near my home in Oxford were considerably more gentle with me than the Atlanta cops."_

[http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/commentators/felipe- fern...](http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/commentators/felipe- fernandezarmesto-the-accidental-criminal-431881.html)

</comment><comment><USER22> As a Brit living in London the whole idea of 'jaywalking' is hilarious. It's totally ridiculous to force pedestrians to always use lights & pelican crossings. Assuming everyone has a bit of common sense (don't walk in front of a moving car) I can think of absolutely no reason why these ridiculous laws even exist. A huge number of hours are saved in London every day by everyone not having to wait for a green man.

And a $197 fine?! WTF? Glad I'm not living in LA, I could rack up thousands of dollars in a few hours if walking as one does in London.

<comment><USER23> > Assuming everyone has a bit of common sense (don't walk in front of a moving > car)

And therein lies the problem. There is a subset of American pedestrians who, because the law says they have the right of way, believe that the laws of physics also do not apply to them either. I have personally witnessed, too many times to count, a pedestrian approaching a crosswalk across a busy, four lane road, who continues, fast paced, without slowing the slightest, towards, into, and across, the crosswalk, without so much as even a glance left or right to check where the oncoming traffic happens to be. I.e., they just step out in front of cars (4 lanes worth) moving 35MPH, with no regard for how much distance there is between a cars hood and their spot in the crosswalk.

The only thing that saves them from getting killed is the random positioning of cars such that they don't actually step in front of a car with only 20 feet left before impact, and the fact that the drivers with 100 feet of space left nearly skid to a stop because of the fool that forget what his/her mother taught them: "Always look both ways before crossing the street".

Sadly, this total lack of common sense seems to infest about 20% of the pedestrian population, and is a major factor contributing to the accident rate. Because quite simply, if you are not in front of a moving car, you can't possibly be hit.

<comment><USER22> This is very rare in the UK, everyone's pretty good at looking left & right (although many will run/jog rather than wait). I guess this is more an education problem. To be frank if you're stupid enough not to look then you deserve to be hit (of course that attitude won't work in reality as often the driver/car will be at fault by default - certainly in the UK).

Perhaps the best approach would be to not punish 'safe' jaywalking but to give out harsh tickets for those that cause cars to slam the brakes/similar.

<comment><USER23> > Perhaps the best approach would be to not punish 'safe' jaywalking but to > give out harsh tickets for those that cause cars to slam the brakes/similar.

Yes, this would be best, but sadly like so many root causes of problems, it will likely not get addressed.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> [http://paleofuture.gizmodo.com/the-invention-of- jaywalking-w...](http://paleofuture.gizmodo.com/the-invention-of-jaywalking- was-a-massive-shaming-campa-858926923)

</comment><comment><USER25> Some of the details are a bit sketchy, buy $197 for jaywalking really caught my eye. Got a parking ticket a couple if months back... $128. Seems like these more than doubled in last few years. Inflation anyone?

<comment><USER26> He crossed a red light, that seems fair to me( Europe has similar "prices" ). A car doing that would get at least 2x times that plus points depending on the country.

<comment><USER27> No, he was crossing with the _green_ light, but started after the pedestrian signal started flashing red. Provided he still got through on the green, I don't think this should even be illegal!

The fine for a car going through a _red_ light is only ~$500 in California.

<comment><USER26> Flashing don't walk is there to signal new pedestrians to not start walking and let the existing ones to finish the crossing.

[http://www.walkinginfo.org/faqs/answer.cfm?id=16](http://www.walkinginfo.org/faqs/answer.cfm?id=16)

<comment><USER28> I was recently in downtown LA for a convention and there was at least one pedestrian signal that had a white walk signal that showed for 1-2 seconds. If you had your head turned to the side while waiting for the walk signal, you would likely miss it before getting the red flashing "don't walk." LA is the least friendly walking city I've ever seen.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment> jack-r-abbit "People upset that previously unenforced rules find renewed enforcement... news at 11"

I get that a fine of $200 for starting to cross on a flashing "Don't Walk" is a bit excessive. But people should not be surprised by a ticket for jaywalking. They are only surprised because it turns out that "everyone does it" isn't really a good defense. I do it. By myself and with groups also doing it. Never got a ticket. But if I did get a ticket, it would totally be justified.

</comment><comment><USER29> This screams of quota fulfillment.

</comment><comment><USER30> I'm a card-carrying member of the National Motorists Association so I totally get the idea of maintaining a free-flowing thoroughfare but this seems ridiculous. The law should be amended thusly:

      - if (person.isCrossingWithoutSignal) officer.cite(person, fine=$197.00);
      + if (person.isCrossingWithoutSignal && nearbyTraffic.isImpededBy(person)) officer.cite(person, fine=$30.00);

</comment><comment><USER31> I'm not even sure this is news. In 1990, on my first business trip to LA from NYC, my contact there - a transplanted New Yorker, warned me that jay walking wasn't tolerated in LA.

</comment><comment><USER32> I live in Atlanta and people jay walk, aggressivily every day. I have never seen either anyone get arrested or an accident result from jay walking.

I hope the LAPD move onto something more reasonable.

<comment> w0rd-driven I live in the suburbs of Atlanta and it's pretty much all over here. I have a problem with noticing it primarily because I don't bother doing it, I can wait those few extra seconds or minutes to be safe. I think the main reason it's annoying is people often do it knowing cars are coming at full speed, with no real regard for their safety or the safety of others. Jaywalking to me is a privilege when used correctly and I'm all for not fining the hell out of people. It's when they become a douchebag, seemingly trying to win some sort of lawsuit lottery with their arrogance that really rubs me the wrong way. You more often die from an automobile striking you than them slowing down just enough for it to be a "love tap" you can take to the bank anyway.

</comment></comment><comment><USER33> When I lived in philly, I jay-walked all the time. Now I live in LA, the streets are usually wider and the cars tend to drive faster so I very rarely jay-walk.

</comment><comment><USER34> Revenue generation masquerading as public safety.</comment>


British Opposition Leader: 'Nobody's Interested in English, Maths and Science' - <AUTHOR> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4827676/Jeremy-Corbyn-claims-no-one-interested-core-subjects.html <comment><USER2> The article later puts back the critical word(s) left out of the headline:

        Don't believe in Michael Gove Victorian
        theory of education that only English,
        Maths and Science matter.  Nobody here
        is only interested in those three subjects,
        so why should our children be?

See the difference? See the word _" only"_ ??

Changes the meaning completely ...

The Daily Fail strikes again.</comment>


Why Nobbas Is a Revolutionary Real Estate Search Platform for Buyers and Renters - <AUTHOR> https://startupradius.com/nobbas-real-estate-search-platform-for-buyers-renters/ <comment><USER2> I used Nobbas a little bit but unfortunately, not so many listings in the Boston area right now.

Great job on the interview. I enjoyed your UI much better than Zillow or Trulia. Collab took a few minutes to get used to it (I suggest you add a joy ride for first time users).

Good luck!

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks aakashm!

We are already working on a joyride and it should be released in the next 7-10 days. We appreciate your feedback!</comment></comment>