Show HN: Let's all work together and get better wellness as we age - <AUTHOR> http://ec2-18-191-45-49.us-east-2.compute.amazonaws.com <comment><USER2> I would be more compelled to try it out if it didn't require me to sign up. It is better to provide, or clearly show the value, before asking something from users

<comment><AUTHOR> Thank you for your feedback. Say there is no signup, would you be interested in being part of this community to share your micro goals with others and see what people are trying to achieve?</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Is there an HN type site focused on medical news? - <AUTHOR> <comment><USER2> I've been looking for this, too. We have reddit.com/r/healthtech which I moderate but it's not that active right now. Trying to make it more active. :)

Also reddit.com/r/medicine but that is kind of more clinicians and less health tech. There's also reddit.com/r/telemedicine.

Personally I wish there was a way to sort HN via topic, so you could get all the medical news easily separated.

(am a telemedicine nurse at a health tech startup)

There's also RockHealth which you can follow on facebook but they kind of feel scammy imo and generally seem to only promote their own companies. Also you can sort by healthtech on techcrunch: [http://techcrunch.com/tag/healthtech/](http://techcrunch.com/tag/healthtech/)

</comment><comment><USER3> HIStalk has Healthcare IT News and Gossip [http://histalk2.com/](http://histalk2.com/)

But it's not forum style like HN.

</comment><comment><USER4> You can always create one yourself - check out HelloBox - [http://hellobox.co](http://hellobox.co)

</comment><comment><USER5> Over the years many people have tried building sites like this. None of them have ever worked out.

</comment><comment><USER6> No, you should build one.</comment>


Medical imaging radiation overdoses caused by UX defect - <AUTHOR> http://modcult.org/read/2010/8/1/paging-donald-norman-dr-donald-norman?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+modcult+%28Modcult%29 <comment><USER2> Discussion of the original NYT article, posted on YC just a few hours ago: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1566369></comment>


Tesla is now worth more than Ford and GM combined - <AUTHOR> https://www.recode.net/2017/8/2/16085822/tesla-ford-gm-worth-car-manufacturer-elon-musk-earnings <comment><USER2> Yeah, Tesla is probably somewhat overvalued right now, but what were you thinking of doing? Investing in BMW or Ford instead for their breathtaking and innovative self-driving electric cars?

Please, give me a break. Those companies are stagnant and dying regardless of what their profit margins may be.

<comment><AUTHOR> Both Ford and BMW have really been ramping up these past few years actually. Ford is supposed to be releasing their mass produced self driving car in 2020 and BMW already has the i3/i8 out with a supposedly Model 3 equivalent expected to be released in 2018/2019.

I applaud your confidence in Tesla, somewhat arrogant in tone though it may be, but you clearly have a narrowed view on the industry as a whole. Aside from entrenched automotive companies, have you given thought at all to the massive amounts of nation state funded companies coming out of Asia? Tesla is facing some major competition, and it very much is not as clear cut as you make it out to be. And I say this as someone who has invested and continued to invest in Tesla all the way back to when its stock was less than $30.

In my opinion though, and for the consumer in general, more competition is very much a good thing. Don't get caught up too much in any one company or business. It's about sustainable energy production as a whole, shifting away from fossil fuels as an obsolete source for humanity and the world overall.</comment></comment>


COWL – Confinement with Origin Web Labels - <AUTHOR> http://w3c.github.io/webappsec-cowl/ <comment><USER2> Probably the best intro to COWL is the video of Deian Stefan's OSDI presentation here: [https://www.usenix.org/conference/osdi14/technical- sessions/...](https://www.usenix.org/conference/osdi14/technical- sessions/presentation/stefan) Nice to see this work moving forward.</comment>


Critical Vulnerability in Docker versions - mike-cardwell http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2014/11/24/5

<comment><AUTHOR> The Docker engine, up to and including version 1.3.1, was vulnerable to extracting files to arbitrary paths on the host during 'docker pull' and 'docker load' operations. This was caused by symlink and hardlink traversals present in Docker's image extraction. This vulnerability could be leveraged to perform remote code execution and privilege escalation.

Docker 1.3.2 remedies this vulnerability. Additional checks have been added to pkg/archive and image extraction is now performed in a chroot. No remediation is available for older versions of Docker and users are advised to upgrade.

Related vulnerabilities discovered by Florian Weimer of Red Hat Product Security and independent researcher, Tõnis Tiigi.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Docker versions 1.3.0 through 1.3.1 allowed security options to be applied to images, allowing images to modify the default run profile of containers executing these images. This vulnerability could allow a malicious image creator to loosen the restrictions applied to a container's processes, potentially facilitating a break-out.

Docker 1.3.2 remedies this vulnerability. Security options applied to images are no longer consumed by the Docker engine and will be ignored. Users are advised to upgrade.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Besides the above CVEs, the 1.3.2 release allows administrators to pass a CIDR-formatted range of addresses for '—insecure-registry'. In addition, allowing a cleartext registry to exist on localhost is now default behavior. This change was made due to user feedback following the changes made in 1.3.1 to resolve CVE-2014-5277.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> I love that in [https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=CVE-2014-6408](https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=CVE-2014-6408) Trevor Jay says, "Red Hat does not support or recommend running untrusted images".</comment>


Anyone use bountysource? Crypto startup acquired it - <AUTHOR> https://blog.canya.com.au/2017/12/20/canya-acquires-majority-stake-in-bountysource-adds-over-46000-users/?context=243 <comment><USER2> Bountysource introduced bitcoin payments years ago and the community embraced it. seems like it could go the same

<comment><AUTHOR> Yeah i posted because I use bountysource</comment></comment>


India Loses Contact with Probe Just as It Prepares to Land on Moon - <AUTHOR> https://www.wsj.com/articles/india-loses-contact-with-probe-just-as-it-prepares-to-land-on-moon-11567805330?mod=rsswn <comment><USER2> All: please don't take this thread, or any other HN thread, into nationalistic flamewar. It breaks the site guidelines and is off topic here.

If your comment might contain flamebait, please edit it until it clearly doesn't.

</comment><comment><USER3> Here's [1] a data graph of the Doppler curve from Dwingeloo Radio Telescope (based in Netherlands) showing the exact moment the probe crashed into the surface of the moon.

[https://twitter.com/cgbassa/status/1170072672266592256](https://twitter.com/cgbassa/status/1170072672266592256)

<comment><USER4> I am confused, the contact with ISRO was lost at 2.1 km height (as per ISRO's last night statement). So, not at 0 km height (crash) ?

Edit: I meant contact with ISRO..

<comment><USER5> This isn't contact per-say, the telescope wasn't in communication with the probe, it was just watching it r.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Latest update.. DSN did a carrier lock on lander

[https://twitter.com/dsn_status/status/1170391223040954368](https://twitter.com/dsn_status/status/1170391223040954368)

DSS 54 carrier lock on Chandrayaan-2 Lander Frequency: 2.2846GHz Signal strength: -143dBm IDLE OFF 1 TURBO

<comment><USER7> Can you explain in layman's terms what this might mean?

<comment><USER8> It means they are _trying to contact it_ using the most powerful antennas available. It hasn't phoned home yet.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Space is hard. I wish India all success in their next try.

</comment><comment><USER10> It seems it was supposed to be a polar landing, which should be harder (I think) than landing from an equatorial arrival

Nonetheless, this is rocket science and failures are very common and not unexpected. Too bad, but it happens.

<comment><USER11> Why would landing from a polar orbit be harder?

<comment><USER12> I'm no expert but doing polar landing would involve a plane change maneuver after you arrive in moon orbit (or some clever orbital mechanics to minimize delta-v losses and somehow do it in a single burn (both capture and plane change).

Apart from that, I'd presume theres also complexity of the landing site not being directly visible from earth, necessitating re-transmissions from the orbiter.

Not something that hasn't been done before by any chance, but still harder than say USSR's lunokhod missions.

Though this is mostly coming from my Kerbal Space Program experience.

<comment><USER13> In terms of orbital mechanics the polar orbit around the moon isn't significantly more complicated than an equatorial one. A small midcourse correction after entering a flight path towards the moon is all that's needed to ensure capture into orbit around the poles (and a capture burn), without the need for a plane change (note that this is also based on experience from KSP).

<comment><USER10> I see what you mean, though I'm not sure of all the details, you might want to get into an equatorial orbit (there is an orbiter, though I'm not sure about its orbit) just because the error margin is smaller (?) or for some other reason.

(But then of course the moon is neither too far nor too big so I might just be barking at the wrong tree here)

<comment><USER13> As far as I can tell, the lunar orbiter itself is in a polar orbit, so it would make sense that it entered orbit as such. In terms of complexity the main part of the journey to the moon is the midcourse correction and ensuring that the engines fire at the correct time, in the correct direction, and for a certain duration. Depending on the engines used - ie. engines that can be used mutliple times - more than one midcourse adjustement may have been possible. It seems that all of these things worked out fine, since the Chandrayaan-2 orbiter has been there in a polar orbit since 20th of August [0]. The lander seperated since then, and the loss of contact a few seconds before the expected landing time implies that the lander reached the surface with a velocity higher than expected.

[0][https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/mangaluru/ISRO- chie...](https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/mangaluru/ISRO-chief- signals-Indias-readiness-for-Chandrayaan-II-mission/articleshow/51178528.cms)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment> happy-go-lucky Latest update... looks like they've found the location of the lander on the lunar surface, the orbiter has clicked a thermal image of the lander, and they're trying to establish a contact with it.

Don't know how reliable this source is:

[https://twitter.com/ANI/status/1170610654232731648](https://twitter.com/ANI/status/1170610654232731648)

<comment><USER14> Edit: This is a fake account. My apologies.

From the ISRO Chief himself: [https://twitter.com/KailasavadivooS/status/11706129755828879...](https://twitter.com/KailasavadivooS/status/1170612975582887937)

<comment> happy-go-lucky > > [https://twitter.com/KailasavadivooS/status/11706129755828879...](https://twitter.com/KailasavadivooS/status/1170612975582887937)

It's a fake account :)

<comment><USER14> Thanks for pointing it out!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> What do we think went wrong? I expect maths to be right but there was a comment somewhere about the regolith with fine particles whose specific composition could have caused unexpected dust clouds as the lander sped to the ground ... how was this tech different from the other 3 successes?

<comment><USER8> Those dust clouds, depending on particle size/composition, could start reflecting radar. Lander then gets confused about its altitude and crashes. This sort of thing makes some areas, the dusty flat ones, potentially more dangerous than others. But they are also flatter and so you don't worry about landing on a rock and tipping over. It's a judgement call.

<comment><USER15> That would always be a problem though, right? So for unmanned moon landings, do we instead need those inflated bouncy balls? Or did the previous successes just got it right?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> This is a great thing for the people of India - I mean, hopefully.

The science we expel is a reflection of the cultures that created it. In space, everyone has had failures. And I hope this failure offers reflection and improvement and that they can grow from it.

But even still, this is otherwise part of a narrative change for the people of india, and something "so simple" can have a huge impact on future generations and what people tell themselves on an individual level.

</comment><comment><USER17> This is a boring comment section. Only the top 40 comments are actually about the space mission. 130 comments respond to the same parent about a world government and the rest of the comments are flagged...

I personally am sad that this mission has failed. Exploring the permanently shadowed craters of the moon is necessary to find whatever sliver of ice remains on it. The satellite industry is growing but there is still no economic case for going to the moon and this mission could have changed that.

</comment><comment><USER18> Unexpected condition.

</comment><comment><USER19> It's a good effort by ISRO and it's scientist. Just can't understand why so many countries reinventing the wheels. Space missions should be multi-country efforts continuously as it belongs to all. We should not extend our tribal nationalistic thinking to space.

Best scientist can be in any nation and more diverse the group and experience the better chances of success.

I know I am just dreaming, but hopefully we can come to consensus and try challenges of space as a new frontier as a single human race, originating from Africa.

<comment><USER20> No. We're different groups of people with different interests, different values, different ideas principles cultures histories views of the world. It's good for us to be competing to explore space (and in trying to develop technological advantages in general). For countries like India it's critical to develop their own technologies on this front. Otherwise they'll remain eternally dependent on America, etc., for access to space.

A "single human race" would be a deeply dysfunctional, unworkable mega- society. Our societies are already too big to be governable. (Ever notice how in Star Trek, aside from token, curated, differences, trillions of people are somehow almost completely culturally homogenous? That's what makes the federation governable. But it would never work that way in real life. There would be intense conflict. The idea of a society that big being governable is part of the science fiction.)

<comment><USER21> Well let's revisit this statement in 500 years. Every decade has brought the world closer. Even the recent developments (brexit, trump) are reactions to increased pace of integration. You can find kfc, coca cola in socities as diverse as Mongolia and Madagascar. It will be extremely difficult to turn the clock back on this and this will only keep on intensifying in my opinion.

<comment><USER22> > _Every decade has brought the world closer._

Well,

(1) there are more sovereign nations now than ever,

(2) all the big empires (from Babylonian, to Alexander's, to Roman, to Byzantium, to Persian, to Incas, all the way to the Ottoman, Austro-Hungarian, British and French colonial empires, USSR, and more) -aside from the Chinese and Indian who are more homogenous racially/culturally - have collapsed

(3) there is way more infighting that on any time in the previous 40 years

(4) nations that were held together for half a century as a single country have nonetheless split at the first chance, often under fierce wars (e.g. Yugoslavia), and even centuries old countries like Canada, Belgium, UK, Spain, etc, still have infighting, and even votes to break up...

(5) a worsening of climate change and economy will more than likely see every- nation-for-itself than some unity, even if there's a coordinated effort to reduce emissions and so on, there will also be huge pressure to ascertain certain resources, safety, etc at a country by country level (sharing is only good for those that need it. For those that have the power to avoid it, or even grab from others, it just gives you moral points)

> _You can find kfc, coca cola in societies as diverse as Mongolia and > Madagascar._

Yeah, that's a huge cultural (and dietary) destruction...

<comment><USER23> > _aside from the Chinese and India_

Do you know how many different empires, rulers, internal wars and government systems China and India have gone through in 2000 years, and how many "races" and "cultures" they have?

<comment><USER22> > _Do you know how many different empires, rulers, internal wars and > government systems China and India have gone through in 2000 years, and how > many "races" and "cultures" they have?_

Yes. Still more homogeneous and stable than most other empires...

<comment><USER24> Oh you mean like that time when the Mongol conquered and ruled china for like, 100+ years, ushering in the largest case of minority rule the world had ever seen to that point.

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

<comment><USER22> I mean like that time when this was just an episode in millennia of history...

I also mean like that time when the eventual demise of most empires and huge nations was my point, which China and India managed to avoid, and not China and India themselves (which are totally orthogonal to the point I was making, and in fact an exception to the rule I posited)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> Kudos to India for even trying. While they are trying to put a probe on the moon, we have a President going through dementia arguing about a 2 week old weather forecast.

<comment><USER26> What value do you think your comment added to the discussion?

<comment><USER27> Perspectives on evolution vs. devolution? But agreed, we are digressing.

<comment><USER28> It's a bit of a false dichotomy, really. It isn't as if the US is behind on accessing the moon or space in general.

Nothing more than distracting partisan virtue signaling.

<comment><USER27> I was commenting in the context of the original remark. fwiw, personally I'd say the emperors are wearing no clothes on either side of the US polarized partisan divide, but then again I don't think the rest of the world is far behind and catching up fast in the race to the 'post truth' society.

<comment><USER28> And I'm commenting in response to your remark on "devolution." There is none, insofar as I can see. It's a pointless partisan jab not rooted in reality.

<comment><USER27> Well, we are talking forging weather maps with a sharpie, but I'll leave everyone to draw their own conclusions (pun intended).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> I have spent many years in India, and I know that the poorest of its people do not support these kinds of financial adventures (or in this case disasters)

<comment><USER30> Do all homeless people in developed countries support their respective nation's space program?

<comment><USER31> Homeless people in developed countries, are in almost every case (perhaps with the exception of the USA, I'm not sure) homeless due to mental issues and because they don't want to go into community housing. They aren't homeless due to a general lack of resources.

<comment><USER32> It's not always a lack of resources but access to resources. They need an address, along with a long waiting list the accommodation they have access to is shared, often with other homeless with said mental health issues. That itself is a scary and a dangerous place to be, they are also targeted by drug dealers that prey on any addictions, trying to get them addicted.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


ADHD Medication Calculator/Converter - <AUTHOR> http://adhdmedcalc.com/

<comment><AUTHOR> The ADHD Medication Calculator/Converter is an innovative website designed to help simplify the conversion of medications for ADD/ADHD</comment>


The week that Big Software shattered - <AUTHOR> http://www.roughtype.com/archives/2007/09/the_week_that_b.php

<comment><USER2> The bigger question is, "Whose customers will still be in business 10 years from now?"

The dinosaurs that don't survive won't lose to other big boys or foreign competition; they'll have their lunch eaten out from under by up and coming smaller more nimble competitors. And what software will those competitors use to grow? SAP? Oracle? I don't think so.

The future for Software as a Service is bright indeed. Hostage Taking will be replaced with Quality.</comment>


We're Going to Need More Lithium - <AUTHOR> https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2017-lithium-battery-future/ <comment><USER2> This seems like a simple case of "demand increases, price increases in the short term, production increases, things balance out" \-- a textbook example of how a market is supposed to work. Did I miss something?

<comment><USER3> Yes. You missed that it's an ad disguised as an article. Maybe someone need people to invest in lithium, or to make lithium based companies look good, or to divert attention to lithium from other things...

All in all, someone from an entity with a lot of money involved sent a PR guy with a story to tell to journalists. And the journalists were happy to write it down because it's interesting enough, serious enough, and doesn't require too much work.

<comment><USER4> It clearly worked as there are several questions here about where to invest, we are easily manipulated aren't we.

<comment><USER5> I invested a year ago and it is a interesting resource. As all car companies need Lithium.

Renewable energy is also in the same ballpark

<comment><USER3> Well made ads are actually selling to people that would want to buy, not just any target that could buy, so it makes sense.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> > The next dozen years will drain less than 1 percent of the reserves in the > ground

That's actually an extremely large portion for such a short length of time (this is the entire planet we are talking about). That projection doesn't paint a very sustainable future compared to oil (yes I hate oil), I hope it's efficiently recycled or replaced with better tech.

<comment><USER7> 1 percent for a dozen years, that's 120 years left. That's more than double of oil: [https://www.seeker.com/how-much-oil-is-left-on- earth-1792718...](https://www.seeker.com/how-much-oil-is-left-on- earth-1792718444.html)

<comment><USER6> Do you really think the consumption rate is linear?

...I didn't realise we were already at full EV adoption.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> How sure are we that some new tech won't replace lithium ion batteries? I'd want to know that if I was investing in a mine.

<comment><USER9> The reason lithium is used for batteries is that it is an excellent anode the lightest metal. Lithium will always be used for batteries that need to be light.

<comment><USER10> Relevant article from 11 days ago on sodium battery development: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15938642](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15938642)

<comment><USER11> Sodium is not fundamentally better material than lithium, though. It's just a bit more abundant (but lithium is very abundant and can be extracted from actual ocean water, though because of lithium's abundance, that will never be the cheapest way to get lithium).

Lithium is the third lightest element and the lightest (regular) metal. Sodium is much heavier.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> A novel idea for lithium is that much of our lithium recycling is done in other countries. If the government were to classify lithium as strategic security material, it would severely limit its exportation. Ergo retaining more of it domestically and encouraging domestic recycling. Lithium may arrive but it can never leave, so to speak.

<comment><USER13> An idea that the EU, China or any of your other large trading partners would never allow to fly for more than a split second without introducing reciprocal measures.

<comment><USER14> We live in reciprocal space now

</comment></comment></comment><comment> castle-bravo Can anyone comment on the feasibility/state of the art for extracting lithium from seawater?

I've found an article [0] which describes a specially made membrane which allows lithium ions to pass, but nothing larger. If it's really possible to scale this up cheaply, the supply of lithium will be constrained by the supply of power, not scarce mineral deposits.

[0] [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0011916414...](http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0011916414006560)

</comment><comment><USER15> This may be a silly question, but can't the lithium be recharged and reused? Or it's discarded and useless after a battery is tossed? Why mine more?

<comment><USER16> Typically when a lithium-ion battery is recycled some metal parts are extracted (the battery contains metal plates which are relatively easily separated), but the lithium usually is not as it's a lot more complicated to extract. Economically it is a lot cheaper just to mine new lithium, so proper recycling facilities don't often exist.

In the U.K. lithium-ion batteries are usually discarded in a landfill, and often treated as hazardous waste:

[https://app.croneri.co.uk/feature-articles/dealing-waste- lit...](https://app.croneri.co.uk/feature-articles/dealing-waste-lithium- batteries-0)

<comment><USER17> feels like such a waste.. would it be possible to design lithium-ion batteries in a way that's easier/cheaper to recycle?

<comment><USER11> Yes. Tesla's standardization on one or two cell types allows them to build specialized machines that can efficiently and quickly disassemble and recycle the components of the cell. (EDIT: That's the idea Musk presented, at least. I do know Tesla has done some battery recycling, but I don't know if they've implemented this method at scale, yet.)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> "People used to think gold was worth fightin' over, and that shit gets made by every supernova, which means pretty much every planet around a G2 star will have some. Stars burn through lithium as fast as they make it. All the available ore got made at the big bang, and we're not doin' another one of those. Now that's scarcity, friend." ― James S.A. Corey, Cibola Burn

</comment><comment><USER19> If I wanted to invest in lithium, what companies or ETFs should I look at?

<comment><USER20> Global X Lithium ETF (NYSE:LIT)

[https://www.globalxfunds.com/funds/lit/](https://www.globalxfunds.com/funds/lit/)

<comment><USER21> At 0.76% management fee and an average return over 5 years of 8.09%, you're better off just investing in an index ETF.

Their own comparison shows the index matching or beating the Lithium ETF in every metric.

* LIT since inception: 38.48%

* Index over same period: 45.82%

You also have zero diversification with a resource ETF. If you really want to buy into only Lithium then I won't try to talk you out of it.

But maybe consider Vanguard Growth ETF (VUG), the average return over 5 years is 14.4%, or nearly double that of LIT. [1]

[1] [https://institutional.vanguard.com/iippdf/pdfs/FS967R.pdf](https://institutional.vanguard.com/iippdf/pdfs/FS967R.pdf)

<comment><USER22> You're assuming OP wants to invest all of his money in Lithuum. And that past performance remains the same

<comment><USER23> He's also assuming that ETF is going to perform the same way in the future, when the whole point of TFA is that lithium demand is about to surge.

<comment><USER21> There was another quote in TFA about the potential to over build mining capacity and flood the market.

But sure, buy this and hope it "surges" more than the general market. Given that billions of devices already have lithium cells in them and the historical performance of the Lithium ETF is still quite disappointing compared to the broader market, I wouldn't hold my breath that this time is any different.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> Pneumatic cars.

</comment><comment><USER25> Sounds like these companies are good investment opportunities? No?

<comment><USER26> Doesn't the efficient market theory ensure that any outsized future returns are already reflected in the price?

<comment><USER27> an efficient market is a model that assumes the same information is available for all players, so don't put too much weight on it. it's an approximation that's sometimes useful.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> It might cost more, but it's certainly abundant; we're not going to run out of it. No I would even go so far as to say that a rise in the price of terrestrial lithium would be a good thing. In the short term it will hurt, but there's a lot of runway in that graph before we hit serious scarcity. As the price rises I could honestly see someone like Elon Musk or Jeff Bezos finally astroid money off the ground. I don't have much hope for Mars in our lives, but asteroid mining absolutely could happen.

This could be a safe source of pressure, partly political if people realize it will be easier to move in space than Afghanistan, to make that happen. For those of us you dreaming of a future for the species beyond Earth, I think this might be the realistic start.

<comment><USER29> mining asteroids in our lifetimes would primarily be useful for harvesting raw materials for constructing things in space, not sending the materials back down to earth.

<comment><USER30> It may be useful for _some_ raw materials - for example, osmium ($13,000/kg), rhenium ($2,750/kg), and iridium ($30,000/kg). All three of those are elements that are probably common in the Earth's mantle, but nowhere near the surface, and are mostly found in meteorites; all of them are used in high-performance alloys (high-temperature, corrosion-resistant, etc.)

Doubling the world production of any of these would greatly reduce the prices of aerospace engines and electronics (iridium is used for crucibles growing high-quality semiconductor crystals). And that's easy, because the quantities involved are so low - under 1 ton of osmium per year, 10 tons of iridium, and 40 tons of rhenium.

There are other materials like that. It's all about searching for the competitive advantage, the materials that _can 't_ be found on Earth in reasonable quantities. All the nickel and iron and titanium will indeed probably stay up for in-space use.

<comment><USER31> > It may be useful for some raw materials - for example, osmium ($13,000/kg), > rhenium ($2,750/kg), and iridium ($30,000/kg).

Or tungsten, in the form of cylinders 6m long and 30cm in radius, transported gravitationally to their place of use.

<comment><USER32> Rods from God?

<comment><USER33> Yep.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinetic_bombardment#Project_Th...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinetic_bombardment#Project_Thor)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> This is why the imperialists countries like USA, Britain, France etc are going to foment war in countries like Congo where people live like animals and work for peanuts to dig out cobalt:

[http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4764208/Child- miners...](http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4764208/Child-miners-aged- four-living-hell-Earth.html)

Let's make a million dollars no matter who dies. It aggravates me that I don't see any comments here relating to what is happening in Congo and all the multinationals supported by the all good US/Britain/France etc. Why do you think the arena of war is being shifted to Africa? Are you ready to wake up? Or do you care about what is happening as long as you have a new toy/mobile to play?

<comment><USER35> Do you have a more... reputable source than the daily mail?

<comment><USER36> _THE COBALT PIPELINE: Tracing the path from deadly hand-dug mines in Congo to consumers' phones and laptops._

[https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/business/batteries/c...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/business/batteries/congo- cobalt-mining-for-lithium-ion-battery/)</comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: I was director of development and I left the company.What is next step? - <AUTHOR> 11 years ago, I started working as Jr. Web Developer in a startup. Founders were close to my family and they gave me chance to work there. I can say that we started company together because when I got hired the company was 1 year old and there were only founders, no one else.
Two months ago I've left the company(There were some specific reasons for that). I was the director of development for 2 years and I've been always close to the management.  After I left, now I understood that that company became my identity because for 11 years I slept and woke up with that company. I sacrificed my nights and weekends for it. Now I am stuck, not sure what's the next? Actually I am close to one path but I am looking for advice.
I've been always interested in startups. I began my tech career in a startup and I know what exactly a startup is. I read articles, books and watch videos, movies related to startup. I've always wanted to start my own company one day. Besides that, I am a full stack developer and I can build a product from idea to product.
Options for me:
1. I can apply to a software company and I can get hired with a good salary. In my free time, I can start building a side project. When I reach the ramen profit, I can quit my full-time job and focus on my project full time.
2. I have my savings. With minimum expenses, I can live with these savings for two years. So I can now start building a project and I bootstrap it with my savings. If I fail, I can apply for a full-time job.
I want to go with this second option but I have a problem. I have many ideas but I have an analysis/paralysis problem. I am not sure what to build. I am not a big risk taker and I don't have a business partner. So I want one man bootstrapped business. All the ideas I have are already existed in the market (as expected). I can choose a specific niche and build a product for that market but I am stuck at choosing the niche too. Please give me some advice. <comment><USER2> 3\. Enjoy yourself for the next few months. Catch up with family, go travelling, take up a new hobby, whatever... If you have the luxury to forget about income, do something to develop yourself, clear your head. Work will always be there.</comment>


Redeye VC: Welcome FundersClub - <AUTHOR> http://redeye.firstround.com/2012/08/welcome-fundersclub.html

<comment><USER2> So the fact that they spammed my Facebook wall after joining is unacceptable. You want people to trust you to write multi-thousand dollar checks and then make random Facebook posts on their behalf without disclosing it to them.

This seems like the absolute worst way to build a brand around something that requires SUBSTANTIAL trust.

<comment><USER3> Exactly why I denied posting permission when signing up.

I was worried they'd do that.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Will investors be able to meet the startup founders at all? Or is this kind of like blind investing where you just look published stats and such?

<comment><USER5> Unlikely that you'll meet the founders - It's not worth it for a founder to meet someone for a $1k investment (the minimum allowed).

Seems more like an easy way for you to spread your risk over several start-ups with smaller investments in each, as opposed to putting a larger sum + time and effort in a single company.

<comment><USER4> It would be great if startup founders offered potential FoundersFund investors the opportunity to Skype with them. Or to save time for founders, they could offer a Google hangout at a specific time for potential investors to drop by and ask some questions. Kind of like an office hours for potential investors.

Some 2.5k investors might up their investment to 5k, and some 10k investors might up their investment to 25k. I think that would be worth the time.

<comment><USER6> I actually offered to do exactly this (I'm a Sponsorfied founder), and suggested doing it much like YC office hours (small 10 - 15 minute slots) but via Skype or Google Hangouts. Throughout the day I could easily do a few of these, and I'm always interested in new feedback and practice pitching.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Is this the new era for start-ups with investments becoming a real commodity? Interesting times indeed.

</comment><comment><USER8> Removing accredation requirements via a holding company - after a decade of bar talk in the valley, glad to see someone finally acted on this one.

<comment><USER4> Actually I believe you still need to be an accredited investor to participate.

It seems like the benefit is 1) you can easily invest smaller amounts than typically required of seed investments, 2) you save time by choosing from the companies FundersClub curates, and maybe 3) they handle paperwork(?).

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> Ill just have to work my way to $200k minimum salary necessary to be able to invest :)

<comment><USER8> You actually don't. One huge aspect of this is that they remove that requirement via proxying.

<comment><USER10> FTA: (You still need to be an accredited investor, though).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Great post Josh. Keep killing it Alex, Boris and FundersClub team :)</comment>


Stingrays and Dirtboxes: how cops can secretly track your phone - <AUTHOR> https://theintercept.com/2020/07/31/protests-surveillance-stingrays-dirtboxes-phone-tracking/ <comment><USER2> Hey. Someone who briefly worked on the Stingray team here.

I left the company that develops the stingray (who's name is mentioned in the article but I shall not say it) because I didn't feel comfortable with the ethics of how it could potentially be easily abused without legal permission and/or repercussion. I fear these technologies will become more commonly used against Americans by low level law enforcement without good reason and without responsible usage.

<comment><USER3> Used to work for makers of the dirtbox. I would hope anyone curious about this issue also spends a lot of time digging into those devices as well.

<comment><USER4> The majority of us are well aware how these devices create a MITM attack against your phone, but is there anything you found particularly interesting or egregious that we should know about? Especially how LE are using them to abuse every group who desperately needs protection from these devices.

<comment><USER5> Can it change what I read?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Pro-tip: If you want fairly good OPSEC when going to a protest, get a burner Android phone, put it on airplane mode with WIFI only. Then purchase a couple of Comcast / Xfiniti logins off the web, and use those to connect to "xfiniti- wifi" hotspots. Most cities have them, the speeds are fairly decent too.

We're truly living in the panopticon

<comment><USER7> Maybe I'm being overly paranoid, but if you're arrested, what's stopping the cops from matching the phones MAC to public wifi connections?

<comment><USER8> Since Android 9 there is an option to use randomized MACs for the actual connection (not just probing).

<comment><USER9> Most folks won't be aware of an option unless it is default.

<comment><USER10> On my Samsung Galaxy S10e (Android 10) it is the default

<comment><USER8> That's for probing only, randomization on connection is accessible via developer options only.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I remember this being described in Bruce Schneier's book. When I first read it, I was terrified. Now, seeing them in action, I'm closer to dejected. Most methods of avoiding them aren't easy or practical enough to be used by the layman, hell, most laymen don't even know what stingrays are. These are incredibly tough to protect against on a mass scale.

<comment><USER12> What happens when they are used in countries with fewer protections to individuals than the US?

<comment><USER13> The bar is already pretty low in the US. The FBI has trained cops to hide the use of stingrays from judges, so who really knows how many times these were illegally used to incriminate someone while telling judges they got anonymous tips or whatever.

<comment><USER14> So is it possible to set up spying on stingrays, then get them brought up on perjury charges when they say it's from anonymous tips?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> It's even possible for phones to be tracked while turned off:

[http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/nsa- gr...](http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/nsa-growth- fueled-by-need-to-target- terrorists/2013/07/21/24c93cf4-f0b1-11e2-bed3-b9b6fe264871_story.html)

[https://slate.com/technology/2013/07/nsa-can-reportedly- trac...](https://slate.com/technology/2013/07/nsa-can-reportedly-track- cellphones-even-when-they-re-turned-off.html)

<comment><USER16> How is this possible?

<comment><USER17> Unless you can physically disconnect the battery, your phone may not actually be fully off.

For example, on my Android phone should I drain the battery into oblivion ( let the phone die ) and let it sit for about a week in that state, takes about 90 seconds to become fully functional to the lock screen from the moment it is plugged into a charger.

On the other hand if I do hard power off of a phone followed by powering it on, it takes ~35-40 seconds for a phone to get to the lock screen. Out of curiosity I tested several more handsets with similar results. I can only explain that difference by phone not being completely powered off when the battery is inserted unless it does not have any juice at all.

<comment><USER9> I had assumed phone hardware generally won't power on until the battery has charged to 5% or so, ostensibly to prevent power drops. Not sure which idea is more accurate without a mobile electronics engineer chiming in.

<comment><USER18> That is correct. The phone waits until it has enough power to ensure it won't die during startup because a lot of modern phones (and ultralight laptops) require tapping into battery reserves because the direct pathway from the wall wart to the device was not designed to provide sufficient power to operate at full speed/capacity for more than a brief turbo boost and startup requires more than that.

<comment><USER17> Battery charges "enough" to that point in less than a minute? I find it hard to believe. 4-5 minutes? Absolutely. 50 seconds?

<comment><USER9> I suppose the timing depends on if you have one of the anemic iphone ones or a full 2.4+ amp USB charger. Given that charging status is unreliable at low charges and charge tends to "come back" a bit when not actively drawn.

My current phone has an old battery and can go directly from 40% to 70% charge in one refresh cycle (10-30 secs?) after plugging in to my ikea charger.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> I used to work for DRT, they make the "dirtbox" mentioned in the article. I would really encourage journalists to dig more into this company and their products.

<comment><USER5> Can these do MITM attacks that inject content into what you are reading?

<comment><USER18> Not when accessing https resources but the safe answer is yes otherwise. Unless your phone is infected, of course. Baseband isn't as confined as you think.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Reports of stingray flight patterns go back to at least 2015:

[https://komonews.com/archive/fbi-behind-mysterious-spy- aircr...](https://komonews.com/archive/fbi-behind-mysterious-spy-aircraft- over-seattle-other-us-cities)

[https://bgr.com/2015/06/03/fbi-dirtbox-stingray-spy-plane- pr...](https://bgr.com/2015/06/03/fbi-dirtbox-stingray-spy-plane-program/)

</comment><comment><USER20> > stingrays can force phones to downgrade to 2G, a less secure protocol, and > tell the phone to use either no encryption or use a weak encryption that can > be cracked.

Can android, iOS, or an open phone os prevent 2g communication?

<comment><USER21> It happens within the OS for the baseband processor, not within the OS of the actual phone. Unsurprisingly, the details of how the baseband processor work are a highly guarded secret, and trying to reverse engineer anything around it will end up with a heft lawsuit thrown at you.

<comment><USER22> > trying to reverse engineer anything around it will end up with a heft > lawsuit thrown at you.

Is there an example of that? I can't imagine how reverse engineering anything would get a hefty lawsuit thrown at you. Maybe if you were to publish the results with your name under it, but just the act of reverse engineering?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> Do they even need to bother with a Stingray, can't they basically just pull up whatever provider's law enforcement portal and click a few buttons?

<comment> xkcd-sucks Anecdotally from listening to police scanners, whenever there's an areawide BOLO notice or anything exciting involving a known party, they always say where the last "cellphone ping" was. E.g. "Look out for a Black male driving a white Nissan, last cell ping was on the north side of Lowell 15 minutes ago." Not sure if a warrant is required, but it happens pretty quickly

<comment><USER24> That data is typically from the cell phone network provider themselves, not stingray and dirtboxes. It's part of the Enhanced 911 system in the United States.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> Random story: I once saw an one of the vans for the local ISP driving around wtih a box labeled "Stingray" and got all excited.

Picture here: [https://imgur.com/a/P1nPSD2](https://imgur.com/a/P1nPSD2)

Turns out that "Stingray" is also the name of a system for air-blown optic fiber installation.

Personally I would have avoided the reuse of that particular name for anything in telecommunications because it has somewhat dark connotations already!

</comment><comment><USER26> Wi-Fi Calling while in Airplane mode would not be subject to Stingray interception, and would protect IMEI data from airborne bulk capture.

Authorities can still set up open SSIDs to capture limited information about phones, but the "fly an airplane over" capture model doesn't work well with Wi-Fi.

<comment><USER27> You may be underestimating people's lack of care about what open access point people connect to. The traffic itself may be encrypted, but DNS queries, phone hardware addresses, and background traffic might not be.

<comment><USER26> I'm not trying to offer a comprehensive solution for avoiding government monitoring. I'm just offering a solution for avoiding cellular Stingrays while retaining cellular service.

For a more comprehensive solution, you would need to _at minimum_ not carry any electronic devices (signal detection), wear a mask and IR-blocking glasses (face detection), and wear shoe inserts (gait detection) — and even then, they can still seize you and overcome those obstacles at will.

<comment><USER27> The context of this article is "Cops tracking your phone", of which the parent comment _does not prevent_ in any meaningful fashion. The rest of the remedies presented here are also mostly unrelated to phone tracking.

<comment><USER26> Your summary of the context is broader than that of the article. The context of the article is "cops interacting with your cellular radio" in order to capture IMSIs and perform other interactions, using Stingrays and Dirtboxes.

Not carrying devices with radios is sufficient to prevent you from being tracked by them. I concede that if you carry a radio-less device and hardwire it to a network, then as in Battlestar Galactica, you have now removed some of the safety that the absence of a radio provided.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> Anyone who cared (for either personal or professional reasons) has been leaving their phone at home for probably close to a decade now.

<comment><USER29> Absence of normal phone activity which correlates with prohibited activities can also arouse suspicion. If I wanted to prevent the spooks from thinking I was away from my phone, I'd probably use some sort of robot to move the phone around and randomly unlock it using a fake fingerprint. If you do that, your phone actually turns into an alibi, placing you somewhere other than where you actually are.

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> Title is "How Cops Can Secretly Track Your Phone" on my end. Assuming that was the original one, some comments here seem to suggest they only read the custom title without checking out the actual article.

</comment><comment><USER31> FWIW you can do much the same thing with your own SDR setup. One of the more surprising things for me was that the feature that a phone work "internationally" means that a nominally "4G" phones will still answer a GSM tower (talking on a GSM frequency) when the tower says hello. Some phones will let you turn that off.

But that said, most smartphones will tell you their WiFi MAC address if you tell them you are an access point. It is more difficult to track a MAC address back to its owner, but it is easy to see if it shows up again near you. My Cisco access point did a variant on this when MAC address filtering was on, it would send you reports of "unknown" MAC addresses which you could log and then later associate with people visiting the office.

Bottom line though seems to be to treat protests like DefCon events if you don't want to leak PII. Get a burner phone for such trips.

</comment><comment><USER32> Almost no agencies upgraded to 4G, way too expensive, about $500k. If on android you can enter a code on device to force ONLY 4G to be used by the device.

</comment><comment><USER33> Anyone know of any progress in 6G, that would improve privacy in this area? For example randomized (or truly encrypted) IMEI numbers?

Also, I found this SIM card which seems to be doing IMEI randomization:

[https://omertadigital.com/blogs/news/encrypted-sim-cards- wha...](https://omertadigital.com/blogs/news/encrypted-sim-cards-what-are- they-what-do-they-do)

<comment><USER34> There are no incentives to improve end user privacy with those who specify telco standards.

</comment></comment><comment><USER35> TL;DR it's a radio in your pocket that constantly announces its identity. I'm quite interested in the fact that people don't realize this. Is it a generational split between people who can remember when we did not all have radios in our pockets and those who can't, or ??? The fact that an always-on radio you carry everywhere can be used to track you seems like the #1 most obvious thing about the technology.

<comment><USER36> You can't expect end users with little-to-no technical know-how to have the same common knowledge that you do.

<comment><USER35> Well, why not? How can we improve general technological literacy? I don't want people to memorize the protocols, but I do want them to have the foundation of knowledge that would allow them to conclude that if the phone company can connect calls to your mobile handset, then they can also figure out roughly where it is. I'd also like for people to have the basic knowledge required to understand that GPS does not track you. It's the other way around. I'd like everyone to understand that mass and energy are conserved, the Earth orbits the Sun, etc.

<comment><USER37> Every professional, expert, specialist, or technician feels this way about the stuff they know. "Why don't people know [basic thing about their work]? What a bunch of uneducated morons." The answer is because if they knew all the basic stuff about all those fields to be what those experts judge to be informed consumers, and took the time to apply that knowledge, they wouldn't have any time left to 1) actually buy products and services, or 2) learn what they need to know about their own field. Also because being an uninformed consumer works out more-or-less OK much of the time, largely because regulation prevents the worst sorts of abuses.

In the specific case of tracking/spying I'd imagine lots of people (not most, but many) _have_ considered the possibility, then dismissed it without looking into it any further because it seems like something that would _obviously already be illegal_ , and assuming things that seem like they ought to already be illegal _are_ already illegal often gets one to the correct conclusion—just not this time. Those sorts probably assume that if a law enforcement agency gets a warrant or something _then_ they might start tracking locations using cell phones, but not that _the cell phone company is already doing that 100% of the time to everyone_ , since, again, it _really_ seems like something that'd be illegal. I think a lot of the "information economy" falls in this blind spot—that credit card companies would be selling your purchase history or google/your-ISP would be recording every single website you visit _also_ seem, intuitively, like things that'd be very illegal, for example.

<comment><USER35> I guess we will disagree on what is or should be obviously illegal. What your phone does is the functional equivalent of you walking down the street shouting your phone number. It does not strike me as obviously wrong for people to hear it.

<comment><USER37> I just mean that it's the kind of thing many people who have some concept of how cell phones work _might assume_ is illegal because tracking a bunch of people and storing all that info, or broad, non-tightly-targeted-and-regulated use of things like stingrays, and the various other things service providers and law enforcement do to spy on people really do seem pretty similar to stalking and warrantless search and various other activities that are illegal (so, obviously that would be too, how could it not be, one might reason), and so they might be surprised that a capability they know or suspect exists _in the technology_ is used the way it is and to the extent that it is by both private parties and law enforcement. Their not thinking about their cell phone as a device that spies on them or is otherwise very untrustworthy might not be because they don't know what the tech _might do_ but because they've assumed exercising those capabilities would be illegal.

I suppose similar reasoning is how we arrive at our judgements on _most_ questions of legality, personally, when deciding how to behave and what to worry about others doing day-to-day. Like, I definitely can't show you the statute that says driving the wrong way on the highway is illegal, rather than just a very bad idea, and I'm not sure I've even ever been told _specifically_ that that is illegal let alone done the research to makes sure it's illegal—but nonetheless, I'm pretty sure it is. So, I would guess some people surprised that their cell phones spy on them in certain ways are more surprised that they _are_ being used that way and not that they _could_ be used that way.

[EDIT] to stretch the analogy further, if I were surprised to learn that some delivery company had found a way to reduce delivery times by driving the wrong way on the highway, the fact that vehicles _are technically capable of_ driving the wrong way on the highway wouldn't be the part that I found surprising.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment> xkcd-sucks Slightly off topic: Why don't cell networks get shut down more often during large protests etc.?

It seems that police use cell phones for internal communications pretty extensively -- Even when there are encrypted radio systems or channels.

My guess is that UX of encrypted radio is generally terrible, and that it's a nightmare to distribute keys to all multiple agencies that might be operating in an area. So departments configure encrypted radio for internal use, but when there's large scale activity they need to fall back to cellphones for guaranteed un-eavesdroppable comms

<comment><USER38> > Why don't cell networks get shut down more often during large protests etc.?

What problem are you trying to solve, exactly?

<comment><USER14> The problem that people are allowed to disrupt society?

Not everyone values free speech and rights to association

<comment><USER38> Protests are supposed to be disruptive. That's literally the point of them. They're trying to bring about a change in the status quo.

If you're American, I wonder what your thoughts are about the Boston Tea Party.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER39> So - what countermeasures do people recommend?

Is there anything one can carry around that acts like "phone" but is somehow less trackable?

<comment><USER40> you could try to prevent the phone from attaching to the fake cell tower, and only attach to a whitelisted cell tower... that method isnt that easy to do with most phones

<comment><USER39> Are there any phones that support tower whitelisting (or blacklisting)?

And if so, where would one get such lists?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER41> Is there a way to go back and check you phone and see any evidence that it had connected to a stingray or dirtbox? Or is it really untraceable from the user end??

</comment><comment><USER42> I've heard faraday cages can prevent transmission and reception of electromagnetic waves.

</comment><comment><USER43> Can a Stingray be used to eavesdrop on someone using an app like Signal for a voice call or message?

<comment><USER14> If you're running e2e encryption, it won't be able to.

I imagine that's why the various governments want to bad Huawei -- with Huawei in the base infrastructure, more communications will use E2E encryption and the government mitm attacks will stop working

</comment></comment><comment><USER44> Protests should shift to "choose-your-own-adventure" style where a blockchain decides which branch to take. Just have a small selection of, say, 4 styles to choose from, where the most extreme includes potential branches with Ghandi- level long-term economic disruption.

That way the stingray offers no advantage over the protesters; law enforcement and protesters get the next chapter at exactly the same time, and no single protestor or group of protestors may be targeted to disrupt the decision- making process.

That pushes law enforcement either back to pre-protest prevention measures (which won't work for a spontaneous protest like BLM), or to disrupt internet connectivity altogether (which, for the Ghandi-level protest has its own economic implications).</comment>


The Voynich Manuscript Decoded? - <AUTHOR> http://www.edithsherwood.com/voynich_decoded/index.php

<comment><USER2> Italian dictionary... $20.

Magnifying glass... $15.

Internet connection... $40.

Using the Internet Anagram Server to help decode an ancient esoteric manuscript?

Priceless.</comment>


Iconogen | Favicon And Apple Touch Icon Generator - <AUTHOR> http://iconogen.com

<comment><USER2> Could be handy. A must-have option is to keep image ratio or not (as of now if you upload something rectangular you end up with an ugly distorted stuff)

<comment><AUTHOR> Cheers ozh, I think that's definitely a phase 2 addition along with multiple uploads!</comment></comment>


Bill Gates says he was 'disappointed' by reports he backs FBI in Apple fight - <AUTHOR> http://www.theverge.com/2016/2/23/11098592/bill-gates-fbi-apple-comments <comment><USER2> > But he doesn't fully support Apple, either

Oh.</comment>


Chris Poole - <AUTHOR> http://avc.com/2015/09/chris-poole <comment><USER2> Huge respect for Chris, and I'm very happy he's feeling that sense of relief.

I took a shot at moderating a few smaller subreddits, and managed to find myself hating every moment spent doing it. It sure makes the majority of internet look like selfish ingrates, even though it's usually just a vocal minority.

I just stay away from Reddit now for the most part; primarily due to seeing the kind of place you get when the barrier for entry is non existent.

<comment><USER3> >primarily due to seeing the kind of place you get when the barrier for entry is non existent.

you think reddit's bad, try 4chan!

I was 4chan "janitor" (lesser-mod) for 18 months or so and I agree, these sorts of positions really twist your perception of the community you're moderating. When you're buried in reports -- and these are 4chan reports, which means not just spam, but gore, cp, raids, etc. -- it becomes all too easy to dole out harsh penalties to people who may have just made an honest mistake. I essentially stopped browsing 4chan for fun; I saw it only through the lens of the janitor interface.

Chris, to his credit, frequently expressed his gratitude to the volunteer staff for doing what he knew was a thankless, soul-crushing job. He wondered aloud why we didn't go volunteer our time at a puppy shelter or something instead. I'm sure he asked himself that question too.

I'm no longer in that position; I outed myself as a janitor and was immediately terminated. I've come to the conclusion that I'm not really suited for these sorts of roles. Having access to privileged information and special powers makes me uncomfortable. The good news is that I've recently returned to 4chan as a regular, anonymous user, and I'm really enjoying it. I hope Chris experiences something similar. He deserves it.

<comment><USER4> "not just spam, but gore, cp, raids, etc." (I'm assuming cp means children)

"The good news is that I've recently returned to 4chan as a regular, anonymous user, and I'm really enjoying it."

I've never visited the site, and really don't want to. So maybe I'm missing something, but why would you want to associate yourself with a place like that? It seems like even spending time there as an anonymous user would change your perception of the world for the worse. I see people post screenshots on Reddit sometimes and it seems pretty deviant.

<comment><USER3> Unlike reddit, 4chan is not a popularity contest. There are no likes or upvotes that dictate what you see; everyone in a thread sees the same content. Furthermore, there are no persistent identities, so you have no way of gauging the value of someone's post other than by examining its content. I think this dynamic is what made 4chan such a creative force: the only way for a post to "live" longer than one thread was to make it memetic, remixable, broadly applicable.

What I really like about 4chan nowadays is the pace. When a new episode of my favorite show is out, or when the Super Bowl is on, or when a presidential candidate says something stupid, I know there will be a thread about it. At times, it's almost like we're all in the same room together. Having browsed for 7 years now, it really does feel like home to me.

<comment><USER5> I don't think the lack of upvotes means there isn't still a popularity contest going on. There is still a lot of posting done just to try to get as big of a reaction as possible out of people. Some people even talk about their activity on 4chan through other side-channels, like IRC or even in-person. People brag about their exploits to other people. It may not have a number attached to it, but it's really nothing _but_ a popularity contest.

<comment><USER6> I have one word for you.

Unidan.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I think it's pretty safe to say that no one's _really_ been through an experience remotely similar to Chris's. There's no community like 4chan, with respect to both its scale and its pervasiveness in both internet and real-life culture. Being at the heart of such a community through its high and low moments is an enormous load to bear, and Chris shouldered that responsibility for 12 years without buckling.

Huge congrats to him and I wish him the best.

<comment><USER8> This is a perceptive point. Chris' achievement is deeply impressive in far from obvious ways. The more one learns about it, the more impressive it gets. It's pleasing to see a post honoring him do so well here. Good luck, Chris!

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> I don't blame Chris for selling in the slightest and I'm happy that he's been able to let go, but I kind of wish he had found somebody a little more likeminded to take over the place. Chris has always been an excellent citizen of his own community, and always seemed to really "get" what made a lot of the community work. Other than one incident at the end of his tenure, "m00t" was always very well-loved (for somebody on a site that hates everything), and understood how to shape vibrant communities with a fairly light hand. Hiroyuki Nishimura's past doesn't really suggest the same sort of community-mindedness. Maybe with 4chan's current size that sort of involvement is irrelevant, but I hope it won't negatively affect the site.

<comment><USER10> >Hiroyuki Nishimura's past doesn't really suggest the same sort of community- mindedness.

That's putting it lightly.

[http://www.anonymous-japan.org/fake2ch/](http://www.anonymous- japan.org/fake2ch/)

Japanese netizens absolutely loathe him on a level that makes westerners' mixed feelings toward moot seem glowing in comparison.

[https://imgur.com/a/o8ruh](https://imgur.com/a/o8ruh)

Here's what the current lead developer of 2ch (@CodeMonkeyZ) thinks Hiroyuki's plans for 4chan are:

[http://pastebin.com/8bfsk6jP](http://pastebin.com/8bfsk6jP)

<comment><USER11> To be fair, most of the major internet companies intend to monetize your data. This doesn't sound much worse, even _if_ these allegations are true.

<comment><USER12> running a deep state culture-sculpting psyop in addition to monetizing user info is a little bit more than generic ad profiling

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I've often linked Chris Poole's approach to this with Matt Haughey at Metafilter. I can remember being amazed at how well mathowie moderated metafilter with a remarkably light touch and yet still set the tne of the site. Moot was less keeping the users in line than keeping the rest of the world out but their ability to _not_ interfere at times when I think most of us would want to say or do something is an incredible skill.

</comment><comment><USER11> >And he's come out the other side with his soul and his spirit intact.

I have trouble believing this one. Poole has stated that the controversies 4chan was involved in in September had a big negative personal impact, principally dealing with legal threats from celebrities who had their photos leaked on the site. Two other events, which he conspicuously hasn't commented on would have unquestionably left scars on his ego and soul: the 8chan exoduses and 'cuckgate'. I would speculate that these had a far greater negative personal impact on the poor guy than any of the others.

Some of the best original content creators and experienced posters migrated to 8ch, taking the mantle from 4chan as the authentic core of internet culture. It's evident that at least a couple of years ago, moot took some pride in 4chan's leading place in contemporary culture, so to lose the one single point of pride associated with the site must have been a big blow. In his farewell livestream, he responded to repeated questions about 8chan by talking about just about every other 'chan'-style site on the internet, making the omission very obvious, and indicating it was something he took personally.

Second is the situation with one of his friends with whom he was very clearly in unrequited love being revealed and mocked by his own board, giving rise to the current ubiquity of the 'cuck' meme across the internet (and even spreading into mainstream American politics). I know if I had been in his place, this second event would have been quite devastating not only for destroying my hopes and illusions of love and connection with this girl (she even joined in the mockery in a way), but also for having it be that basis of my ignominious fall from beloved benevolent dictator to a hated object of mockery and derision across the entire internet.

When you take these last two events into consideration, I don't think anyone could blame him for his decision to quit. Hope he has a much better time in his future endeavors.

<comment><USER14> I think you give way too much credit to the severity of the 8ch migration. It was not felt at all on many boards that I frequent.

As another poster mentioned in the comments, it seems more as a small very vocal group that moved, and the traffic stats seem to agree. The comparison was given that one hour on /vg/ was more than the traffic on the whole of 8ch.

<comment><USER10> Oops, I forgot that c i r c l e j y r k trips an HN filter.

I only post on throwaways these days because these moderation practices remind me a little too much of 4chan.

No, seriously, you are more likely to be banned from 4chan these days than from HN. Let that sink in.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> I have a lot of respect for Chris for all his dedication. I remember being a bit gobsmacked when I sent in a few bug reports for DrawQuest when it was launched, and in the middle of the night I got an email back from Chris thanking me for the bug reports.

I continued to send in bugs, and he continued to reply to my emails – pretty amazing dedication. When I initially emailed in, I didn't even realize DrawQuest was one of his creations.

</comment><comment><USER16> When I read the title I thought it was about moot joining USV as an EIR or partner.

<comment><USER17> I had the same thought. I'm a little disappointed this isn't the case, actually.

<comment><USER18> Ugh. The last thing a smart, creative young person with a soul needs is to be sucked into the VC empty-air universe.

<comment><USER19> I'm not criticizing Chris Poole at all, but _if_ your value metric is doing "good in this world," I'm pretty sure Union Square Ventures has brought about more good in this world than 4chan has.

<comment><USER17> Something tells me parent has a skewed understanding of what (good) VCs do.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Not surprising. Community creators end up hating their communities. This is one of the reasons I did not put comments in Delicious.

<comment><USER21> I think "real" communities work, were people have common interests, self- organizations, transparency etc. A lot of communities don't work because there nothing at stake. I think you could randomly ban 25% of HN and it would, excluding any eventual outrage, be largely the same.

<comment><USER20> I mean online communities?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> I'm really glad Chris has found a way out of 4Chan, so he can pursue other awesome things. I've only hung out with him a handful of times, but always found him to be a pretty inspiring and funny. On to new things!

</comment><comment><USER23> to me it is as if the internet as an invention culminated with 4chan. it is indeed a big moment to see the most humble genius - and probably the one big who never made big money out of his visions - of this internet bubble handover to someone much more like what we could expect of an owner of a crazy board. 4chan is for me a fantastic website, laboratory and show on what mankind can bring to us. It led me to be depressive far too many times, led me to mistrusts humans and sometimes try to trust again, led me to think that any other media was boring, any other activity was second to it.

I don't buy the stuff people adoring steve jobs or mark zuckerberg buy. those tech marketers who selling themselves as icons, stars and some idealistic values of what america is. Rather than that I buy an idea of the internet that is encompassed in the character of Chris Poole, an humble guy who created something far much bigger than him and got shit happening to him as his baby demon was out of control. This guy is like the inventor of tetris. a forgotten genius that will never earn anything out of his invention but will still make more smiles on faces than any google or facebook.

</comment><comment><USER24> > There aren't many who understand the Internet like Chris.

> (...) I am talking about the social architecture of

> the Internet.

I think i'm not the only one interested in how Chris understands the internet. Maybe he should write a book.

<comment><USER25> It would probably be the only book in existence to correctly explain what 'Anonymous' is. I'd read it.

<comment><USER26> Are there other books out now? Why do they fail at explaining it? I doubt that Poole is the only one in the world that really understands what 'Anonymous' is.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> I don't disagree with any of the assertions in the... article(?).

But whats the point of this and why does it need attention?

Communities feel ownership. Owners have conflicting responsibilities. The bigger the community the bigger Points 1 & 2 are. All true, but relevance to anything of anything?

Very strange posting.

<comment><USER28> my blog is my public diary. i write it for myself for the most part. if people choose to read it, that's their choice.

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> Agreed, huge respect for Chris.

Having been at the helm of a (nowhere near as big) social->turned anti social network I can relate to elements of the complexity around running 4Chan.

Excited to see what's next.

</comment><comment><USER30> Chris did a great job.

Unrelated though, it will be interesting to see how the new owner handles 4chan. 2ch is almost entire run but pron ads and ads for very scammy looking companies.

<comment><USER31> Especially for people with 4chan pass, hope what happened to 2ch users won't happen to them - [http://www.japancrush.com/2013/stories/huge-leak-of-2ch- user...](http://www.japancrush.com/2013/stories/huge-leak-of-2ch-users- personal-information-shocks-netizens.html)

<comment><USER32> Right now the pass payments are processed by Stripe so I doubt the same could happen.

</comment></comment></comment><comment> ryan-allen I absolutely adored the Canvas app that he made. I don't know why it went under, but I found it much more approachable than Reddit, as you could modify people's creations along with making your own.

I had to block it for myself at work because I couldn't stop using it.

Ah, the stickers! I miss it!

</comment><comment><USER33> Can someone explain the comments on the linked page? Is that a new sort of robots posting nonsense and replying to one another? OR is it an 4chan elaborate joke? That's the first time I see that.

</comment><comment><USER34> Ya, but it's all moot.

</comment><comment><USER35> A lovely article from an unexpected source.

This is another nice one about Poole:

[http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/features/4chans- overlord...](http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/features/4chans-overlord- christopher-poole-reveals-why-he-walked-away-20150313?page=2)

</comment><comment><USER36> I guess the ride ends after-all.

Goodbye m<3<3t.

</comment><comment><USER37> Thank you Moot.

</comment><comment><USER38> Space cowboy

</comment><comment><USER39> Well that isn't a very useful title.

</comment><comment><USER40> F

</comment><comment><USER41> mirror?

<comment><USER42> The site's not down it's just slow.

<comment><USER43> It's throwing an immediate db connection error currently.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER44> Good points, but a minor pet peeve:

It's moot, not Chris. Maybe Chris Poole, but again, probably moot. Has been moot. Always will be moot.

Are you friends with him? Do you have lunch with him? Do you work with him? In all odds, no.

It's really quite annoying seeing people refer to people by the first names like they actually are familiar with them. Were you a fan of Steve? Ever go on walks with Zuck?

Seriously, it's so fucking phony--especially when the person in question already has a name they're well-known by in their community.

<comment><USER45> I bet that's something nobody on 4chan ever wasted a single thought on.

<comment><USER32> Actually someone did

>>Do you prefer Chris, Christopher, moot, mootykins, or some other nickname. (In public obviously).

>Chris IRL, moot online.

[https://archive.moe/q/thread/176519/#177568](https://archive.moe/q/thread/176519/#177568) (Warning, may be very heavy to load.)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER46> I'm always expecting articles about multimedia or video compression from that domain, and I'm always let down.

</comment><comment><USER47> Is this article just saying "running an internet community is hard?" Pat on the back to someone who created the one of the most actively harassing communities online? TL;DR I knew moot?

<comment><USER31> Eh not saying 4chan is the perfect community, but many online communities are just as, if not more, "actively harassing". There are other sections outside of /b/</comment></comment>


Lenny Baum as trader (1982) [pdf] - <AUTHOR> https://klendathucap.files.wordpress.com/2017/08/baum-as-a-trader.pdf <comment><USER2> A couple of things I found interesting in this document, speaking as someone working in quantitative trading over 35 years later -

1\. Baum and Simons started by using a momentum strategy to trade currencies, years before this was commonly done (it had been used to trade commodities for decades, but was only later applied to financial assets)

2\. As well as momentum, they used a rudimentary value strategy ("a variety of line trading in which you sell or buy a currency according to whether it is to far above or below its line" and "I try to buy cheap and sell expensive")

3\. At least according to this document, they don't seem to have engaged in carry trading (taking advantage of interest differentials in different currencies)

4\. They at least considered the impact of macroeconomic variables, albeit in a somewhat ad-hoc and non-systematic way.

Despite starting out with a momentum strategy, Baum didn't seem to subscribe to the most common paraphrase of momentum trading, which is to "cut your losses short and let your winners run on", as evidenced by his statements that "I will hold positions both losing and winning for a very long time" and "I hate to sell in a falling market" and "I am courageous in losing positions holding on and sometimes enlarging them". I would characterize him as more of a value trader than a momentum trader.

It was only realized decades later (in the 1990s and early 2000s) that value and momentum strategies were particularly powerful in combination, and this only became part of the academic record in 2013 or so.

<comment><USER3> > Baum didn't seem to subscribe to the most common paraphrase of momentum > trading, which is to "cut your losses short and let your winners run on"

I don't have a source for it that I can find at the moment, but I recently read a paper showing that this advice is actually quite bad and traders perform better when they do the opposite. (They sell losers too early (when they would have recovered) and they sell winners too late (after they've declined)) Of course, prospectively knowing you're selling losers to early or winners to late is hard to do.

<comment><AUTHOR> Such a study is practically inevitable. Studies generally need central tendency to be statistically significant. Long trends are kind of by necessity outliers.

Both are valid and depend on your modeling and time horizon. But if you can find a simple statistical alpha which has more examples, you're probably better off doing that. Which is why HFT was so profitable.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> If this floats your boat you should also check out a BBC documentary from just about that time

Billion Dollar Day - a 1986 documentary about currency (forex) speculative trading

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

Two interesting things. Almost everyone retires from dealing by age 30. And its amazing, given our current age of anonymity in markets and robo trading, just how personal FX markets used to be. Almost akin to a sitting around a poker table. With your counterparts halfway around the globe, setting bull traps ;)

Regarding the role of luck. Given current global macroeconomic policy seems to be determined on the merest whims of authoritarian regimes. There is an interesting strategy that comes with fading spikes in EM FX volatility. Very illiquid. It's pretty much casino gaming. But with monthly swings in 25%+ range!

</comment><comment><USER5> Well page 6 is missing, but this is a very interesting historical document nevertheless.

<comment><USER6> Gave it a stab, anything with ? were (for me) illegible characters:

      I was aided in this action by (1) my personal estimates for
      very weak economic statistics for January to be reported in
      February which others had to varying degrees of certainty,
      (2) careful attention to what Volcker said (3) my ?????? aris-
      ing from careful reading of various components of the money
      supply statistics that there was a largely technical explana-
      tion for the rapid M1 growth - the other checkable deposits
      component was growing disproportionately (4) my carry tenta-
      tive observation that the treasury one way or the other was
      collecting more money than expected which was later confirmed
      by the treasury reducing the supply of treasury bills offered.

      Two years ago, I would not have been able to do some of these
      things at all and some not as well since I did not have the
      relevant knowledge. I now have a large amount of financial
      knowledge and monitor many financial and economic releases
      and cost sheets. However, since everyone has the same figures
      available to him and some people actually read them, one wonders
      how you can make money in this way.

      In previous years, I made money in financial futures in a non
      ??????lly way once as described to you in a previous ?ess ?
      talk by observing that the winter weather was good and selling
      bonds and bills short under the hypothesis that the economy
      would not slow up as many economists expected at the time so
      long as the weather was good.  On another occasion I bought
      treasury bills because of a misallocation of supplies of
      gasoline causing lines to form at stations under the hypothesis
      that if Americans could not conveniently use their cars then
      the economy would slow down. Of course everyone else knows
      about the weather and gasoline lines.

      Here is a list of some of my trading characteristics:
          1. I don't take actions except for specific reasons -
      a news item, a prediction I have of forthcoming data etc.
      Usually I will have several reasons 2 - 15 say for assuming
      a new position.

_edit: some words_

<comment><USER5> Wow, thanks! This is really helpful, thanks for taking the time to decipher this.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Anybody know the year?

<comment><USER8> Guessing from context in the document, I'd say circa 1982.

> _" Some five years ago, Jim Simons ... persuaded me to come down and consult > for a day in March 1977."_

Also, the latest figures for reported returns in the document are dated April 1981–March 1982, so that's consistent.</comment></comment>


Leverage the Wisdom of the Crowds With Wisia - <AUTHOR> http://todaysbesttools.com/leverage-crowd-wisdom/72/

<comment><USER2> "vote for the answers that they like best"

oops... they missed the point :)</comment>


Costs associated with Tail Call Optimization - <AUTHOR> http://tratt.net/laurie/tech_articles/articles/tail_call_optimization <comment><USER2> It's worth noting that even functional programmers will admit that stack traces are sometimes useful. People have even done research into capturing useful stack traces stack traces in the presence of tail recursion:

[http://libra.msra.cn/Publication/13279173/finding-the- needle...](http://libra.msra.cn/Publication/13279173/finding-the-needle-stack- traces-for-ghc)</comment>