The Sanskrit verse for the value of pi - <AUTHOR> http://hindufocus.wordpress.com/2009/07/16/the-sanskrit-verse-for-the-value-of-pi/ <comment><USER2> This is going to test HN's tolerance for myths and pseudo-science, but then it's a Sunday. "It has a self-contained master-key for extending the evaluation to any number of decimal places." is not going to convince many people here.

There are many alternate views on the origin of this verse itself. The one I find most believable, is that this is a fairly recent fabrication [1]. There is nothing to suggest that we had this level of accuracy that far back. For instance, how was this arrived at? Methods? None. But much later, _in the 5th century AD_, Aryabatta used a simpler expansion for which we actually have some evidence.

Just like most other religious texts, the Vedas don't stand up to modern science and rigor. You'll see plenty of revivalist material on the web; many here in India hold it in high regard. In my view, its lasting significance has been the role in dividing India into castes. From the priests to the serfs, a system that continues to hurt even today.

[1]: [http://vedicmathmyth.quora.com/The-misconceptions-of-the- poe...](http://vedicmathmyth.quora.com/The-misconceptions-of-the-poem-gopi- bhagya-madhuvrata)

<comment><USER3> /Just like most other religious texts, the Vedas don't stand up to modern science and rigor/ \-- There is no such thing as modern science. Its the same universe that existed billions of years ago and with our "thought process" we are able to understand it better (compared to what was written in the past) and are calling it modern now. Go forward 100 years and look back at current science. What is it called as now ?

/dividing india into castes by religion/ \-- This is completely humans fault. What Bhagavadgita explained were the variety of things people do to get tired/frustrated in this place and get enlightened. Look at the meaning of division without the caste mirror. You see the same set of things happening everywhere in the world. a) People who are good at protecting others b) People who are good at taking care of the mess created by others c) people who are good at providing things to others c) People who are good at understanding things and sharing the knowledge with society. At some point, this whole thing got misunderstood, misinterpreted and exploited for ones selfishness. We are paying the price now. But, the same things explained still holds true everywhere in the world.

<comment><USER4> > There is no such thing as modern science.

The way we approach and do science has evolved drastically ( [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_scientific_method](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_scientific_method) ). For example empirical falsifiability which is one of the primary tenant of modern science is less than 100 years old, but forms an essential part on how we do science now a days.

Parent comment's point being; while we may be trying to understand the same principle/phenomena, not only the data available to thinkers that time was very sparse compared to the present; but also the level of rigour applied was of significantly lower standards. While there might be scattered scientific truth in the vedas ( or any other religious document) ; it is insolent to believe that it is good reference manual for scientific knowledge.

<comment><USER3> As i see, the current science is more rigorous because people are producing lot of crap. So, we made it to be like "if it can't be verified/repeatable its not science". But do we really know for sure ? How many discoveries are being overridden by new discoveries coming from future ?

The amount of data accessible to the people in the past is a lot more when compared to current. Thats why there able to explain things that can't be experienced by our senses. To share such things in the current time, the "can be verified by our senses by a independent vendor ?" rule rejects. So, very few people experience them and bring it down to such a level that every human gets benefited from it.

The division between religion/science is very small, when both are approached using similar thought-process. Its just that some rules reject others. As human we need to approach and find truth for oneself without being biased.

<comment><USER4> > As i see, the current science is more rigorous because people are producing > lot of crap

Good, grief. No!!! It is a way of managing uncertainty and saying something with a precision that is available at a given point of time.

> How many discoveries are being overridden by new discoveries coming from > future ?

This is beauty/and USP of science. Every scientific proof is always open for scrutiny and revision in light of new data or discovery ( tenants of falsifiability kick in here). That is, it tries hard NOT to be dogmatic by being provisional. For example, science says that we are confident Higgs Boson exists "accounting for one-in-a-million chance on the contrary" ( 5-sigma).

Let me flip your argument on the converse; success rate at which we could make ground breaking theories [ like evolution, theory of relativity , uncertainty principle ] ( which is standing the test of time for extended period of time) using the scientific method is sheer staggering and amazing. The methodology has accelerated our progress and understanding by leaps and bounds which no alternate system has managed to do so, so far!

> The amount of data accessible to the people in the past is a lot more when > compared to current.

I lost you completely here. Can you please elaborate and the rest of the paragraph. ( My belief: If you take 20 random guesses; one of them turned out to be true; it is more likely to be a coincidence than a mystical insight. If on the contrary, the Monte Carlo filter I routinely simulate might just be the most insightfully entity I have encountered ).

> The division between religion/science is very small

Epistemologically they are apples and oranges! Falsifiability is not applicable to religion nor is it is provisional and routinely advocates absolute (and imho dogmatic) reasoning!

<comment><USER3> > science says that we are confident Higgs Boson exists ( 5-sigma).

Agreed, Science comes from our experience/understanding of things around us by our senses. Try to explain the above Higgs Boson to a blind person who has never seen anything in their life. As long as science explains stuff that can be experienced by the senses, everybody else with similar senses get them.

> Epistemologically they are apples and oranges!

Its all in our thought process. Everything came from our thinking/undertsanding of things around us. It just happened to be that we are closer to prove somethings easily vs others.

> ... using the scientific method is sheer staggering and amazing > The amount > of data accessible to the people in the past is a lot more when compared to > current.

Appreciated the hardwork done by all these determined people. How did _only few_ people have access to such knowledge ? In order to find the truth we should not be biased. The reason why people in the older generations might not have shared such knowledge is to prevent mis-use of it, for better of mankind. While we take pride in such innovations.

<comment><USER5> It vastly depends on the actual science which standard of proof is accepted.

For maths, with a 5-sigma result you can maybe get a mention in the "curiosa" section if it's weird enough. It is certainly not considered a valid mathematical result.

For biology, a 1 sigma result is considered pretty good. And due to experimental restrictions, this is actually more strict than medicine requires.

Many science disciplines work with known-wrong theories. Civil engineering for example, works with pre-Newtonian mechanics (not even "turtle mechanics" : in the best simulations a building stands on ground, which stands on a plate which is magically suspended in a "downward" gravity field, not on a planet).

The idea of "this is the standard of proof for 'science'" is a nice one, but it doesn't exist in any reasonable sense. Only the utilitarian definition sticks : we have 100 standards of proof, and if the theory works (or gets enough money if your cynical) we'll find the standard of proof that allows us to call it science.

Furthermore, there are several inconsistencies in the science underpinning, for example, the Higgs boson discovery. We do not actually have rigorous proofs for constructing even natural numbers by the standards of first-order logic. And second order logic has paradoxes that stand unresolved (there is a lot of research to find something "more flexible" than first-order logic, but stricter than second-order that works, but this research has been going on for more than a century and there are no really good candidates, only really bad ones like the famous failure of the Choice axiom)

The standard model doesn't even contain gravity, so if you're being pedantic you could drop a pen from your desk and claim, correctly, that you've just falsified the entire standard model, or at least proven it's incompleteness.

Less pedantically in the physics itself there is the massive open question. The Higgs field only causes inertia, not gravity. Yet the measure of interaction with the Higgs field of any object we've ever measured matches exactly the value we've got for that same object's gravitic interactions. Does anyone believe this to be a coincidence ? Major open hole there.

<comment><USER4> Falsification and Incompleteness are two different things. Since we reason about physicals system using the language of mathematics/logic; it has be based on certain axiom which cannot be proved or disproved ( Godel's incompleteness theorem ). Though this renders certain statements inside physical theorem non-provable ; it certainly does translate to every claim made by a proposed theory. Further many aspects of physicals systems can be disproven experimentally. ( It is still in active debate if Mathematics should treated as science per se : [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematics#Mathematics_as_scie...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematics#Mathematics_as_science) )

While the pen falling from a desk do point out to the incompleteness ( non- Godel sense) of the standard model, which is widely accepted ( [http://home.web.cern.ch/about/physics/standard- model](http://home.web.cern.ch/about/physics/standard-model) : last paragraph ), it does not falsify it. Science is full of open holes, and no one knows ( my bet is against) that it will be completely patched up; but it is the best form of reasoning we have in understanding things, and its ongoing goal is to seek explanations that with the least amount of uncertainty possible.

<comment><USER5> I think we're largely making the same point : that science is largely based on a utilitarian definition of truth. A somewhat more direct way to state that is that scientific truth is simply

"What works for me"

And nothing more.

I do disagree on one point though. The standard model doesn't just "lack" gravity. It describes a world without gravity. Therefore that gravity exists must mean that the standard model is wrong. It describes a universe that is most certainly not the one we live in. I therefore find it hard to describe that theory as true. It is more akin to "currently the best-known least-wrong theory". Even best-known has to be in there since, for example, relativity theory was known long before Einstein got his ball rolling, and Newton's equation was known before the apple fell. So we do likely know about better theories than the standard model, we just currently have no way to distinguish them from either the standard model, or (more likely) the better theories are just failing to get enough attention from well-publicized physicists. Of course, when you don't know exactly which theories are in fact better, their existence doesn't matter.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Wikipedia is not infallible but it says Sanskrit sources had one or two digits of pi: "In India around 600 BC, the Shulba Sutras (Sanskrit texts that are rich in mathematical contents) treat π as (9785/5568)2 ≈ 3.088. In 150 BC, or perhaps earlier, Indian sources treat π as sqrt(10) ≈ 3.1622."

Anyway, the source the linked article cites is

[http://www.vedicsciences.net/articles/vedic- mathematics.html](http://www.vedicsciences.net/articles/vedic- mathematics.html)

which notes

        It must be pointed out that these sutras given by Tirtha Maharaja are created by the author himself, as stated in the introduction to his book, "Vedic Mathematics" (published posthumously) and are therefore not actually Vedic.
        These mathematical sutras are Vedic only in the sense that they are inspired by the Vedas in the mind of one dedicated to the Vedas. Thus the title "Vedic Mathematics" is not correct.

</comment><comment><USER7> I'm in a random mood, so here are random pi facts:

Inscribe a circle within a square. Choose random points within the square. As the number of points approaches infinity, the number of points that fall within the circle divided by the total number of points, times four, is pi. [http://mathfaculty.fullerton.edu/mathews//n2003/montecarlopi...](http://mathfaculty.fullerton.edu/mathews//n2003/montecarlopimod.html)

Memorizing something like the first 8 digits of pi is enough to calculate the circumference of the Earth to within a few inches, iirc. (My memory is bad, so it's probably 8 +/\- 2 digits.)

The quadrillionth bit of pi is zero. [http://www.daemonology.net/papers/](http://www.daemonology.net/papers/)

And keeping in spirit with the post, here's a pi chant: [http://pi.ytmnd.com/](http://pi.ytmnd.com/)

<comment><USER8> I don't think you can calculate the circumference of the Earth to within a few inches that easily because earth's topology isn't perfectly smooth. It has ups and downs all over.

<comment><USER9> And is significantly bulgy around the equator due to rotation. Calling BS.

<comment><USER10> Not BS, take the equator as the circumference and a weighted average between sea level and the highest point on that line for the constant circular path and you'll have a measurement relative to pi.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Noped out of that. Considering the recent string of these Nationalist, feel Good posts, it's about time they're autobanned.

I'm Indian myself and I've done quite a bit of study on this topic.Vedic mathematics is rooted in ignorance and a disregard for proofs. It's pretty much a way for nationalists (which intensified after the british conquest) to appease and make a billion people feel good about their history. In short, it's pretty much bullshit. What Ramanujan did was math, not this hindutva propaganda crap. Next thing you know, you'll start hearing about astrology and how it's a Vedic science.

<comment><USER12> I would like to know what you think about [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Srinivasa_Ramanujan](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Srinivasa_Ramanujan)

Nearly all of his findings were without proof, so what are you trying to imply here?

And about astrology, they did know about the Arundhati twin star system, so they did know something. While you are at it, blow your minds and lookup the fact that they gave a measurement of speed of light in Mahabharata.

It's not about nationalism. No offense, I don't know you but you kind of sound like all those Indians who just have to look down on everything Indian.

<comment><USER11> I think we both understand where I was coming from with the Ramanujan thing. Regarding the Mahabharata, same story. how did they find it out? Why wasn't the methodology given with proof? Why didn't they put more effort into understanding it's properties? Do you have a source to the exact line in the early scripture? Otherwise, it just sounds like something that was slipped in during the translation process.

None taken. Personally, I believe that if you're vehemently "proud" of your country and heritage, you havent accomplished much else in life thus far. I don't look down upon Indians, only worried that pseudoscience like this is a dent to credibility and only belittles and overshawdows the great work that's being done today/will be done in the future

<comment><USER12> I think you do not understand why I mentioned Ramanujan. He said in his own words that mathematical facts just came to him while dreaming from a god. Since there is no methodology given for his findings he is a crook, right?

As for early scriptures, suppose after 5000 years if the current civilization is no more and the future generations get hold of a book with no mathematical proofs but astounding facts which clearly state the technological advancements of our time, they should just call it "pseudoscience". Yeah, right.

Personally I believe that if somehow you are proud of only the things YOU have done, you have got way too many problems of your own to take care of.

The fact that you couldn't google a simple fact says a lot about your "achievements/accomplishments" too. Here you go [http://alishekh.blogspot.in/2009/05/speed-of-light-in-rig- ve...](http://alishekh.blogspot.in/2009/05/speed-of-light-in-rig-veda.html)

It's pretty simple Sanskrit, it's not even riddled, it's plain Sanskrit. If you understand even a little Sanskrit (I do) the translation will make sense. Of course you could trust the author of the article too for having done a good job in translating and explaining. And just so you know that guy who has written this seems to be a Muslim, so zero benefit in advancing the said "propaganda".

<comment><USER13> Wow your link looks extremely scientific and rigorously researched.

Just one of its more obvious gems:

2000 Dhanus = 1 Gavyúti (distance to which a cow's call or lowing can be heard) = 12000 feet

<comment><USER12> <scrcasm>

2000 Dhanus = 1 Gavyuti hmmm, they must have first calculated a Gavyuti and then just randomly equated it to 2000 dhanus. The fact that they named it after a cow's call (range approximately 12000 feet) is the proof. People named unit erlang after erlang, so <insert a bullshit correlation here>

</sarcasm>

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> As an Indian. I would request fellow Indians (who else is upvoting this?) to not encourage such posts. There's enough superstition already in the country. Let's not encourage it. Let people join and learn modern mathematics and sciences and make them study ancient texts as leisure but let's not shout there are hidden codes and blah in them.

</comment><comment><USER15> How can ka mean 1 or 0, ta mean 1 or 6, da mean 3 or 8, etc ?? Some sounds have multiple numbers associated with it!

<comment><USER16> I presume it's a tonal language (like, say, Chinese), where words have different meanings depending on the gone that they are said in.

<comment><USER17> No, it's just that there are different sounds that transcribe to the same letter in English. (aspirated th versus th (th in thirst)).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Doesn't this give the value of pi if you don't put the decimal point before the first number? I mean you could say it represents pi*10^32, right?

Incidentally, I used the same technique to memorize some (fewer) digits pi in English. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mnemonic_major_system](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mnemonic_major_system)

<comment><USER5> This looks like a hoax. If you look at the decoding ring, it's more complex than the message is in the first place. There are even duplicates in their decoder ring. Sa means 4 different numbers, and 7 duplicates in their decoder ring. Using their decoder ring (using the first "meaning" of any number, I get (text, value according to their decoding, value from pi approximation) :

        [('go', 3, 3),
        ('pi', 1, 1),
        ('bha', 4, 4),
        ('gya', 'UNKNOWN', 1),
        ('ma', 5, 5),
        ('dhu', 4, 9),
        ('vra', 'UNKNOWN', 2),
        ('ta', 1, 6),
        ('srngi', 'UNKNOWN', 5),
        ('so', 5, 3),
        ('da', 3, 5),
        ('dhi', 4, 9)]

It's close, sure. But not better than other random stuff.

In "lorem ipsum" text, translating a->1, b->2,... you find 3141(391491322514) at position 170 onwards. And the collected works of william shakespeare (as downloaded at [http://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/100/pg100.txt](http://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/100/pg100.txt)) contain the following "PI approximations" (encoded as above):

3 => 290159 occurences 31 => 116402 occurences 314 => 7913 occurences 3141 => 3970 occurences 31415 => 1650 occurences 314159 => 39 occurences 3141592 => 8 occurences 31415926 => 0 occurences

Shakespeare must have been a closet mathematical genius ! (Hmmm, I guess he lived after the discovery of Pi, ... oh well, still makes the point I guess)

Even the bible contains actual approximations to pi (for example the surprisingly accurate 22/7). It even makes sense that it does. For a lot of history the bible was effectively the only book available for a large percentage of the population (and even then, often not directly). It seems the authors knew that and included tons of relevant stuff. It contains descriptions of how "large" buildings can be built (large by medieval standards, of course). Including textual descriptions of plans for things like churches. It contains details of how to make agriculture work, when to sow, when to harvest, when to switch between grain and animals, when to ... to make land productive. We still use the 7-year land rotation rule on today's farms.

Given that the bible clearly was meant to be a sort of "civilization in a single (if massive) book", it makes sense that intuitive descriptions for pi would be one of the things found in there. Perhaps the same is true for the vedas ?

Maybe I'm putting the horse before the cart here. The situation could be reversed as well. Assuming a religion gets of the ground at all, it's survival depends on how well it's subjects do. So it's only natural that the religions that grow huge in some way things like the (approximate) value of Pi, and stuff like making agriculture work. And like in the real world you have different flavors of survival. Building, breeding, growing and defense clearly weighed heavily on the bible, vedas and buddhist texts (all of those books, for example, heavily favor not counterattacking an enemy that comes and fights for plunder, merely to let plunder run out and let the attacker starve), whereas conquest, plundering and looting predominate, for example, the quran or the original mongol religion (those religions focus on things like plunder, remaining mobile (e.g. absurd punishments for doing things to horses), and very strict rules about not directly attacking other religions (only their power on the ground). They all have rules about recruiting new cannon fodder (ie. promises of plunder for anyone who joins the religion, making it everyone's duty to recruit new members, ...). Islam actually contains rules that bear a resemblance to a multilevel marketing scheme. If you bring new members, you get a share of their loot for a while). "Growing" religions are vulnerable when they reach a large size, because at some point the borders can't expand while the population keeps growing. "Attacking" religions have the same problem any predator population does : they can only grow by destroying other populations, never by themselves. They survive as tiny inactive pockets, every now and then blowing up exponentially only to die off just as fast soon after, leaving enormous devastation (to read about this in nature, read about the history of wildlife management, or about what happened in Australia, or for a less extreme example American national parks).

Maybe we should just look at religions as just another form of life. Not "really" alive, but certainly making a huge difference in the world. (Yes, I've read Jared Diamond's books).

If a religion did not imitate a real-world survival technique it simply wouldn't survive. So there probably have been a lot of alternate versions, just almost no surviving ones.

<comment><USER19> Huh?! The "duplicates" in decoder ring you mentioned, are actually different letters that differ in their sound. I commented about it elsewhere in this page.

<comment><USER5> Then please fix the transliteration and the ring. Isn't the whole point of transliteration is that you can "accurately" reproduce the sound ?

"Sa" means 4 different numbers in order to make it work. That's not reasonable.

Even if it does fit, it's still a hoax. Look how far shakespeare got. Do you believe that he intentionally put 8 references to 7 digit approximations in his texts ?

Without (at least) the inverse tangent expansion of pi, this number could not have been constructed. Furthermore, if it came from divine inspiration, there's a glaring omission : why doesn't it mention the irrational nature of Pi ? Otherwise even a 100 digit approximation would lead any reasonable reader to a wrong conclusion. In this case to nothing better than an Indian version of this : [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indiana_Pi_Bill](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indiana_Pi_Bill).

Every "real" mathematical book on Pi contains three proofs. First that it is irrational (that you can only approximate Pi, it doesn't have any finite representation), that some method of series expansion approximates Pi, and that said series converges. Without these 3 bits of data you don't know what Pi is. The actual value of Pi is almost inconsequential, and can be trivially measured using a rope and a measuring stick by a first grader to an accuracy of at least 10 digits. Alternatively you could calculate without an explicit value, like the ancient Greeks did.

Furthermore there's nothing special about this. When it comes to written references to the value of Pi, there are documents going back ~4000 years (E.g. the Rhynd papyrus). If you accept buildings that could not have been constructed without an approximation of Pi's value, then we can go back 6000 years before we really get into trouble. If you accept the reasoning that pyramids which are the "internal" pyramid of a ball shape could not have been a coincidence, knowledge of pi (which is necessary to construct such a shape) goes back nearly 10000 years.

<comment><USER19> I'm not the author of that blog, so can't fix it :) Here's the link that talks about consonants: [http://www.languagereef.com/consonanttable.php?lang=SANSKRIT](http://www.languagereef.com/consonanttable.php?lang=SANSKRIT)

Also, I don't have any comments about that Pi verse itself. From what I gather, it's first occurrence was in a book from 1965. So, may be it's a retro-logic based on Katapayadi system ([http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katapayadi_system](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katapayadi_system)).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> A bit of background on the verse: [http://vedicmathmyth.quora.com/The- misconceptions-of-the-poe...](http://vedicmathmyth.quora.com/The- misconceptions-of-the-poem-gopi-bhagya-madhuvrata)

</comment><comment><USER21> I find the "real" pi poems more interesting, e.g.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piphilology#German](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piphilology#German)

</comment><comment><USER22> so learn sanskrit first, learn their numeral equivalence, then you can learn pi!

In all seriousness, I've always wondered how I could learn Pi. I've seen people assimilating a word to each double digits. Then make a story out of those words.

But first you'd have to learn exactly 100 associations.

Anyone knows of another technique ?</comment>


World Economy Shudders as Coronavirus Threatens Global Supply Chains - <AUTHOR> https://www.wsj.com/articles/world-economy-shudders-as-coronavirus-threatens-global-supply-chains-11582474608 <comment><USER2> I have a lot of very smart, research-inclined friends and it's been interesting to watch their reactions as this potential pandemic develops. About half are taking it extremely seriously (prepping and encouraging others to do the same) and have been since China declared a quarantine of Hubei. The other half are completely brushing it off with statements like "the flu kills [x] people every year anyway". It's one extreme or the other; almost nobody I talk with, who is following the storyline, has a moderate perspective.

<comment><USER3> The latter extreme ("Flu / falling off ladders is worse!") is a dangerously misguided line of thinking. Inconvenience is always better than dead, and lest anyone think "dead" is an abstract/unlikely outcome, collapse of supply chains (medical or otherwise), overloaded health systems, lack of hospital/ICU beds, etc can all contribute to death-rates-in-a-pandemic, even if those folks never got infected in the first place.

So the smart money is to be cautiously prepared -- have 1-2 weeks of "stay-at- home" supplies, that is food, water, and self-medicating items. You do not want to dependent on being out and about if this gets worse. Best case, you can have a canned food party once this clears.

<comment><USER4> 1-2 weeks? That seems dangerously optimistic to me.

<comment><USER5> Yes. But more than that and you run into space issues. FWIW, Mormons are experts at having enough for a full year for a family that might be 12 members, but they have special things they get like gallon sized cans of unground wheatberries, for making flour by grinding it.

US Government is currently recommending citizens have enough food and water for 2 weeks for every member: [https://www.ready.gov/pandemic](https://www.ready.gov/pandemic)

This isn't a new page it's their advice for being prepared in general for a pandemic.

Here's a similar page put together by the CDC: [https://cchealth.org/pandemic- flu/pdf/individuals_and_famili...](https://cchealth.org/pandemic- flu/pdf/individuals_and_families_checklist.pdf)

<comment><USER6> > FWIW, Mormons are experts at having enough for a full year for a family that > might be 12 members, but they have special things they get like gallon sized > cans of unground wheatberries, for making flour by grinding it.

Latter-day Saint here. This indeed was a teaching of the Church for quite some time, not so much anymore as it has shifted to general emergency preparedness [1][2][3][etc]. Some indeed still keep decent food stores though, we can order cases of #10 cans for varying things from the Church online [4] (the general public can too).

Some people keep a lot of freeze dried stuff, some can their excess that they grow, others just keep a lot of staples on hand that they rotate through. Personally I can feed myself for a few months on freeze dried stuff and 10-30 year canned staples then another 1-2 months on stuff I rotate through and eat daily (beans, oats).

[1] - [https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/gospel- topi...](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/gospel- topics/emergency-preparedness?lang=eng)

[2] - [https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/preparednes...](https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/preparedness)

[3] - [https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/church/news/church- annou...](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/church/news/church-announces- updates-to-food-storage-emergency-preparedness?lang=eng)

[4] - [https://store.churchofjesuschrist.org/](https://store.churchofjesuschrist.org/) click all categories, food storage (direct linking to the page will often generate errors)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> The daily updates in r/supplychain are a good overview of what's going on.

[https://www.reddit.com/r/supplychain/comments/f87aec/covid19...](https://www.reddit.com/r/supplychain/comments/f87aec/covid19_update_sun_23rd_february/)

<comment><USER8> What a neat little subreddit.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> Every country needs to take a hard look at the supply chain of critical goods such as medical supplies or chemicals and figure out how to reshore these factories. Even if the Chinese migrant workers comes back to the factory (estimated only around 20-30% did), most of the small businesses might be gone by then.

[https://asia.nikkei.com/Business/Industry-in-focus/Virus- hit...](https://asia.nikkei.com/Business/Industry-in-focus/Virus-hits-China-s- economic-heart-its-small-businesses) 35% of 1,506 Chinese SMEs surveyed in early February expect to run out of cash within 1 month, 85% within 3 months. Chinese small business which account for 99.8% of registered companies in China and employ 79.4% of workers, according to the latest official statistics. They contribute more than 60% of gross domestic product and, for the government, more than 50% of tax revenue.

[https://www.zerohedge.com/economics/chinese-workers- refuse-g...](https://www.zerohedge.com/economics/chinese-workers-refuse-go- back-work-despite-beijings-demands) Chinese workers refuse to go back to work

[https://www.zerohedge.com/economics/jpmorgan-now-expects- chi...](https://www.zerohedge.com/economics/jpmorgan-now-expects-china-q1-gdp- drop-1-crash-4-if-coronavirus-not-contained) JPMorgan Now Expects China Q1 GDP To Drop To 1%, Crash To -4% If Coronavirus Is Not Contained

<comment><USER10> And imagine what would happen if an incident like this hits TSMC, the world definitely needs some reconsideration on where we manufacture things.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> We shouldn't forget that the novelty of this disease, and the unknowns surrounding it, are causing the (probably necessary) extreme reactions like those we're seeing now.

In the longer run, after the patterns are better understood and treatment protocols are in place, we will probably normalize to whatever the non-zero steady state infection and fatality rates that results, much as we do with diseases like influenza, malaria, etc.

As that happens, the reactionary controls that are in place today will gradually lessen and we'll be back to a business as usual.

Of course, the short term shock of this might send a fragile world economy off the rails, but pretty much any globally correlated emergency incident would have done that.

</comment><comment><USER12> This is the exact equivalent of distributed service going down or suffering latency issues and affecting critical downstream services. There are supply chains set up but no real thoughts or solutions when catastrophic problems occur, like if China suffers a pandemic crisis for example.

I wonder if those things will be in consideration going forward or if we will keep making the same mistakes over and over again.

<comment><USER13> I mean, it's literally a coordination problem. Redundancy and resiliency rarely decrease costs in normal operation. If you're operating in a vertical, and all your competitors are operating diverse/redundant supply lines, you are at a tremendous advantage to defect and slim down. It's only when disruptions become frequent enough to model in a straight forward way (and also frequent enough to loom in people's memories) that we can expect a pure market solution.

The same way tech companies rarely actually go for multi-cloud setups.

Our primary system of incentives are not setup to consistently deliver black swan redundancy.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> I understand that the impact of COVID-19 plays an important role. Shouldn't we be pointing out on other systemic issues that impact the global economic system? Is it as robust as it could get?

</comment><comment><USER15> It might trigger the bigger move to automation and robotization of the scale manufacturing and services. On the other hand, more people will be left without the job.

<comment><USER16> It's hard to tell the scale of it, especially as an outsider but I've read a couple of articles like this one: [https://www.techinasia.com/chinas- ecommerce-robots-delivery](https://www.techinasia.com/chinas-ecommerce-robots- delivery) . Once the dust has settled many might not have jobs to go back to and in turn this probably makes it harder to quarantine people, would you take a "holiday" if there was a good chance you'd be replaced by a robot before you returned?

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> America's response has been somewhat alarming. In 2018, the Trump admin cut funding to a lot of health programs to deal with pandemic responses at the CDC, HHS, etc: [https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/01/31/coronavirus-china- trump...](https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/01/31/coronavirus-china-trump-united- states-public-health-emergency-response/)

Recent proposals are asking for more cuts: [https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/02/10/trump-world-health- orga...](https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/02/10/trump-world-health-organization- funding-coronavirus-state-department-usaid-budget-cuts/)

Recently, the CDC has botched test kit rollouts, preventing widespread testing: [https://www.politico.com/news/2020/02/20/cdc- coronavirus-116...](https://www.politico.com/news/2020/02/20/cdc- coronavirus-116529)

Without getting too political, I don't have any confidence that America's response will get it done.

<comment><USER18> Yeah the messed up testing is very concerning. The US has done 500 or so tests in total. SK is ramping to 10,000 per day. I don't think it's clear when the US would be in a position to mount a similar response if needed.</comment></comment>


Woman starts satchel company, scales to 900/day in 4 years.  - <AUTHOR> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2245651/Cambridge-Satchel-Company-mum-afford-daughters-school-fees-makes-12m-year.html

<comment><AUTHOR> So what interests me in this story is that she had a need for money, and saw entrepreneurship as a way to deal with this.

She didn't set out to solve anyones problem, she just made something she thought was an excellent product.

I have a feeling these stories pop up more often lately, people starting small single-product companies that focus on quality, like they guy that makes the perfect sweatshirt, or the guy that makes the perfect jeans, and the company that makes the perfect undergarments.

Also they have in common that they try to do all production in their own countries.

Is this a counter movement to the chinese goods consumerism and low quality products? Do these companies just work because they are lucky, and do dozen others just fail? Is it a good idea to challenge an established product that has fallen prey to cheap chinese production?

Also, is craftsmanship something that is coming back to the western world? Will sites like Etsy or Amazon play a role in reintroducing craftsmanship into our daily products?</comment>


If Google's Management Doesn't Use Google+, Then Why Should You? - <AUTHOR> http://mashable.com/2011/10/04/google-needs-to-use-google-plus/ <comment><USER2> _First, these senior Googlers could be posting a ton privately and we simply don't know it. But it's more likely that their lack of public engagement is indicative of their lack of engagement overall._

Almost all of my G+ posts are private. I guess I don't use the service either.

</comment><comment><USER3> "Eating your own dogfood" is nice and all, but why do we expect the top executives of a massive organization to actively participate and dictate every aspect of every facet of the company? That's the point of delegation; Google+'s lead developer _does_ use Google+, and that's what's most important.

Is anyone else baffled as to why people seem to care about this? For a parallel, what's Bill Gates' gamerscore? Does he even have an Xbox Live account? (If he does, please mention it.) For that matter, how often does the CEO of Johnson & Johnson douche himself? These are, apparently, the facts that matter.

Mandatory disclaimer: I have a Google+ account, but I've never once posted anything (I just wanted my name to appear in the header bar on my Google pages (yes, I'm vain)).</comment>


Monitor Docker Containers with Prometheus - <AUTHOR> http://5pi.de/2015/01/26/monitor-docker-containers-with-prometheus/

<comment><USER2> See also SoundCloud's post about releasing Prometheus today: [https://developers.soundcloud.com/blog/prometheus- monitoring...](https://developers.soundcloud.com/blog/prometheus-monitoring- at-soundcloud)

</comment><comment><USER3> similar stuff - [https://github.com/mustafaakin/docker-resource- reporter](https://github.com/mustafaakin/docker-resource-reporter)

</comment><comment><USER4> also [https://github.com/google/cadvisor](https://github.com/google/cadvisor)

which now supports native export to influxdb

<comment><AUTHOR> Apparently influxdb would take 11x the storage of prometheus's approach: [http://prometheus.github.io/docs/introduction/comparison/#pr...](http://prometheus.github.io/docs/introduction/comparison/#prometheus- vs.-influxdb)

<comment><USER2> (Prometheus author here)

Yeah, InfluxDB is great, but suits slightly different use cases than Prometheus. That is, monitoring numeric time series vs. event logging, basically. Still, I could well imagine running both in a single organization for these different needs.</comment></comment></comment>


Epic Animation Created Entirely in Google Docs - <AUTHOR> http://malbonnington.com/best-thing-u-will-see-today-created-entirely <comment><USER2> If you don't get it (took me a while), look at the slide counter ticking away in the bottom-left corner from around the 40 second mark...

</comment><comment><USER3> Stop calling it powerpoint!

</comment><comment><USER4> I am asking to learn. The www.demoslam.com is very nice. Would anyone please tell me what the front end / User interface was developed in? Thanks.

</comment><comment><USER5> Google Docs couldn't have hoped for better publicity.

</comment><comment><USER6> Sounds like three people have way too much time on their hands. That, or they are fascinated with the rich set of corroborative tools, (as rudimentary they may be4 for animation) in Google Docs.

<comment><USER7> > people have way too much time on their hands

I love those kinds of people. Like this guy: <http://www.tomscott.com/>

<comment><USER8> <http://www.tomscott.com/cliff/>

_THAT_ is epic. Wow.

<comment><USER9> Or "Technical Difficulties"

<http://www.techdif.co.uk/one/street-view-race/>

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Brute-force powerpoint animation. Nice.

</comment><comment><USER10> was the music part of the powerpoint?

</comment><comment><USER11> When I download the slide, it's 413 slides, not 450.

</comment><comment><USER12> 404

</comment><comment><USER13> s/Epic/Okay</comment>


Feds crack Medicare gene test fraud that peddled cheek swabs - <AUTHOR> https://apnews.com/de789d3d5f204adb8f05b852e6de50f6 <comment><AUTHOR> Please consider this news in relation to this post yesterday: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21086866](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21086866) . What's to stop people from dumpster-diving to gather both personally- identifiable information and DNA to build out an unofficial, off-the-books DNA database?</comment>


Kids Can't Use Computers... And This Is Why It Should Worry You - <AUTHOR> http://www.coding2learn.org/blog/2013/07/29/kids-cant-use-computers/

<comment><USER2> There was a massive discussion when this was submitted a year ago[0]. Discussion there is closed, of course, but if you value what the HN community thinks, you might like to read that before commenting here.

[0] [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6186730](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6186730)

</comment><comment><USER3> This is a dupe of [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6186730](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6186730) which has been posted 3 times today. I wonder why?

<comment><USER4> It was on /r/programming for some strange reason, and was therefore shoved over here.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Using computers and maintaining computers are different things.

I can drive a car. I can refuel it or add oil. I can, if I have the tools and a service manual, do simple maintenance tasks like changing spark plugs or the oil. Anything beyond that generally requires tools and skills I don't have, so I take it to a mechanic. I could get the tools and skills to do more complex tasks, but the only thing I want from my car is to get from point A to point B. Working on my car is work, it's not fun, and it's something I therefore avoid or pay others to do.

Computers are much like cars. People know enough to accomplish basic tasks, and anything more is worthless to them. Things like knowing that proxy settings even exist are beyond most people, and that's perfectly fine. Computers are tools, they exist to do a job, and when they fail to do their jobs you take them to a technician. Just like you take a car to a mechanic.

<comment><USER6> I would say that more basic things like setting up proxy settings would be more like the spark plug replacement or oil change that you mention. Things that you don't need to know, but that you probably shouldn't be paying a professional for either. Just like with a car, if you don't learn a few things, expect to spend more time and money than you need on getting the little things fixed.</comment></comment>


James Gosling (Java Creator) quits Oracle - <AUTHOR> http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE63B4HV20100412

<comment><USER2> "As to why I left, it's difficult to answer: Just about anything I could say that would be accurate and honest would do more harm than good," he said.

That is one of the best ways I have ever seen someone say volumes by saying so little. Masterful!

</comment><comment><USER3> Interesting discussion here: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1254839>

This was posted few days ago for anyone who missed it.

</comment><comment><USER4> I'm sure he's welcome to Google!

</comment><comment><USER5> Nothing really new here since the last article about Gosling leaving Oracle: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1254839></comment>


Ask HN: Best server down notifier? - <AUTHOR>

Hi all,
I'm looking for a very simple SMS/email notification service to let me know if/when the server has gone down.
Context: this weekend we ran out of space, which knocked our server over. We pull in 130 store feeds + product images, hence the overload.
Any suggestions much appreciated! <comment><USER2> Nagios - www.nagios.org. Has email notifications, and you can setup SMS too by using a third party SMS service.

</comment><comment><USER3> www.uptimerobot.com sends emails, SMS, and/or follow the robot on Twitter (just tweets related to your account).</comment>


DigitalOcean have increased referral commission payments from $10 to $25 - <AUTHOR> https://www.digitalocean.com/?refcode=9178b6b0b2d4 We have increased our referral commission payments from $10 to $25!
This update will affect all new referrals, and you can find out more at https://cloud.digitalocean.com/user_referrals.
Happy Coding, DigitalOcean <comment><USER2> You remembered to include your referral code, but forgot to link to a page that substantiates your claim.</comment>


3D model of a person coughing in an indoor environment – Aalto Uni - <AUTHOR> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WZSKoNGTR6Q <comment><AUTHOR> Press release here: [https://www.aalto.fi/en/news/researchers-modelling-the- sprea...](https://www.aalto.fi/en/news/researchers-modelling-the-spread-of- the-coronavirus-emphasise-the-importance-of-avoiding-busy)

 _The researchers modelled a scenario where a person coughs in an aisle between shelves, like those found in grocery stores; and taking into consideration the ventilation._

 _Preliminary results indicate that aerosol particles carrying the virus can remain in the air longer than was originally thought, so it is important to avoid busy public indoor spaces._</comment>


Reengineering the Way Engineers are Educated - <AUTHOR> http://www.inc.com/articles/201104/olin-school-of-engineering-richard-miller-interview.html

<comment><USER2> This makes a lot of sense and echoes my experience. I'm lucky enough to study Engineering at one of the (if not the) top universities for Engineering in the UK. It also has a reputation for being one of the most theoretical in the country.

Right from day one, we have design orientated tasks, whether or not it's a structural design project linking in with our structures course, or designing an automated robot in a team from scratch (combining the mechanical, software and electrical courses). I think they've realised that people become Engineers because they want to see the fruits of their labour physically and not just in a purely mathematical sense.

I know without these design projects and frequent lectures from leaders in industry I would quickly lose sight of what I'm actually doing and would almost certainly have transferred course.</comment>


Show HN: Google Music autoplaylists (iTunes "smart playlists") - <AUTHOR> https://autoplaylists.simon.codes/ <comment><USER2> This made me realize how much I miss the Zune devices "Smart DJ".</comment>


Don't use backbone.js... yet - <AUTHOR> http://skyhighcode.blogspot.com/2012/06/dont-use-backbonejs-yet.html

<comment><USER2> I don't always write trivial frameworks, but when I do I have a conference about it. Blows my mind, enterprisejs ftw

</comment><comment><USER3> This doesn't look like a whole lotta free. This is also not achieving all that Backbone gives you. Interesting slides though, can't wait to see the talk video.

</comment><comment> sam-mueller I agree with the premise of learning the fundamentals. However, the fact that jQuery has "free" support for features like data binding is not enough justification to forgoe using a framework like backbonejs or emberjs. What about routing? In a large client-centric app, I'd argue that routing is as important as data binding.

There's no question that understanding the mechanics behind these frameworks will yield much better apps, even if you skip out and go barebones jQuery. But there's always going to be a tradeoff between writing all the boilerplate and structure yourself, rather than relying on a framework to lessen the burden. With emberjs, you get immensely reduced boilerplate and some pretty sound opinions on structure. If you want to exchange writing more code for less of an opinion and more flexibility, then go with backbonejs.

Each of these frameworks bring key strengths to the table, having been written by amazing devs (like Yehuda Katz) with the additional benefit of "community consensus" to boost their usefulness. The article makes valid points, but keep in mind there's definitely more to this story.

</comment><comment><USER4> The slides are interesting, I definitely learned some things. The only item I wasn't clear on is how $.Callbacks fits in.

But these techniques are hardly as clean or powerful as Backbone or Angular. In fact, rather than using vanilla jQuery, he seems to be rolling his own minimal data-binding library. (I'm tempted to package up his code into a jQuery plugin.)

Looking forward to seeing the actual talk.

<comment><USER5> Please do. This looks pretty nice for a simple data bind scenario.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> This isn't "yet" as much as "at all". They're all tools, use the best one(s) for the job.</comment>


Steven DenBeste, writer of USS Clueless, has died - <AUTHOR> http://brickmuppet.mee.nu/steven_denbeste_1952-2016 <comment><USER2> Back when Steven first stopped writing _USS Clueless,_ I was concerned that the content would go away. He sent me, at my request, an archive of the site, which I hosted at Electric Minds for a time. That archive is now available on my site [0].

He was a great influence on everyone who read him, including me. He will be sorely missed.

[0] [https://erbosoft.com/ussclueless/](https://erbosoft.com/ussclueless/)

</comment><comment><USER3> I remember SDB from the old days. He was smart and passionate and a good writer. Many of his posts provided good starting points for many of my own - usually in vociferous and even caustic disagreement, but even an enemy can be missed. If there is an afterlife, I hope he has found happiness there.

</comment><comment><USER4> That's a shame. I remember I started reading USS Clueless around the time of the second Iraq invasion. He's probably too "neocon" for current tastes, but a great writer with an interesting take on current events.

</comment><comment><USER5> Would be nice if the title would suggest what he did. He was an important blogger in the early days? What did he write about?

<comment><USER6> Very prominent and _hugely_ prolific blogger, back in the Cambrian explosion of 2000-2001. If you wanted to read several thousand word blog posts on why it was right - no, _a moral obligation_ \- for the US to go to war with Iraq, several times a day, he was one of the people to follow in your RSS reader. He also posted on pop-sci and engineering topics. Eventually he wearied of the controversy of war and retreated to blogging about anime.

Actually, the blog hosting this obituary is quite similar to and probably inspired by DenBeste.

<comment><USER7> It _was_ our _moral_ obligation to go to war with Saddam, ask for an outline of details as I and as I recall Steve saw them if you want, but the moral case starts with "you broke it, you fix it" ... and come to think of it we followed the same pattern with Vietnam, except for our unprovoked breaking of that country vs. our responding to Saddam's invasion of Kuwait. And that war was very successful and improved things in general, if for no other reasons than removing Saddam from power and blowing open the Khan nuclear production network (for which we rewarded Qaddafi with death...).

It was also our moral obligation to properly handle the aftermath, after we'd finished completely breaking the country, and _that 's_ where the horrible failures started, with e.g. the appointment of the clueless proconsul Paul Bremer (although killing zillions of jihadists on ground of our choosing was one good result).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> What happened to him exactly?

<comment><USER9> Second sentence in the post:

 _" I did not inquire as to specifics, but Steven had been in very poor health of late, having had a stroke just under four years ago."_

Not sure we really need specifics.

<comment><USER8> I somehow missed that line, thanks!</comment></comment></comment>


Porn-o-nomics: Who is watching you watch porn? - <AUTHOR> http://www.cbc.ca/radio/day6/episode-325-trump-vs-spies-being-bowie-porn-o-nomics-hollywood-s-black-list-planet-earth-2-and-more-1.3983955/porn-o-nomics-who-is-watching-you-watch-porn-1.3983963 <comment><USER2> I simply have no idea how you would find out the pervasiveness of the technique, but i remember learning how to acquire an amazing amount of detail about a user who visits your site. Version of client, resolution of screen, plugins, configuration settings, input methods, and last but not least, IP, etc etc. When you realise how many things there are, and how many different variations there are, you can pretty effectively verify a user is a particular identity, even if you don't know their name.

It's not even that hard to record it. Analyzing the data is not really that complex a problem either.</comment>


Ask HN: Looking for Feedback on Replacing Your DVD Library Online - <AUTHOR> We have been looking into a new concept to replace your DVD Collection. We think it is crazy that in this day and age if you want to watch a DVD you have to dig out that disc, hope its not scratched and set up the DVD player. Our concept is that you would scan your DVD's barcodes and then send the discs to us. We add a digital copy to your library on the site and then sell the dvd's and send you a cheque.
We are in the early prototype stages and looking for feedback on the concept and what people think maybe missing.
The link is http://www.streamlyapp.com
Any Feedback greatly appreciated. <comment><USER2> Would be great, except I doubt it could be done legally. Afaik, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act bans me from even copying a DVD I own to my own hard disk...

Are the prices given on your website one-off, or per period of time?

Also, the link in your post is not clickable.

</comment><comment><USER3> If you sell the DVD what rights do I have to watch something that is no longer mine?

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for the comments. We are still looking into the legal ramifications in different countries and territories as they vary quite widely.

The selling of the DVD's and then offering access to the movie is based on the concept of movie rental. We would own a rental copy of the movies which you would have access to under the monthly payments.

This would however mean gaining deals with the major studios and so it may return back to the initial concept which means that it is more like iTunes match for movies.

The Prices are per month.

Thanks for the heads up about the Kickstarter project. Looks interesting.

</comment><comment><USER4> I don't have much to offer in the way of opinion, but a similar concept popped up on Kickstarter during the week, though more tailored to movie swapping:

[https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1151191861/movieswap- jo...](https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1151191861/movieswap-join-us-to- freethemovies)

<comment><AUTHOR> Looks interesting.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> I have not owned a DVD player for 5 years. Even my parents have converted to streaming services and iTunes for purchases.

</comment><comment><USER6> 1\. This might make a good "Show HN" because it is for getting feedback on things the submitter has created.

Guidelines: [https://news.ycombinator.com/showhn.html](https://news.ycombinator.com/showhn.html)

2\. How does Streamly deal with the legal ramifications of buying the DVD's and still providing access to the content to the previous owner?

<comment><USER7> From the guidelines you linked: _If your work isn 't ready for people to try out yet, please don't do a Show HN. Once it's ready, come back and do it then.

Blog posts, sign-up pages, and fundraisers can't be tried out, so they can't be Show HNs._

Their page has nothing to try yet, only a signup for a beta "soon".

I second the question in 2: I can't think of a way that can be legal. Google Music etc match your offline music collection, but you "have to" keep the originals.</comment></comment>


Self-Folding Origami Robot Goes From Flat to Walking in Four Minutes - <AUTHOR> http://spectrum.ieee.org/automaton/robotics/robotics-hardware/self-folding-printable-origami-robot#.U-O-mTGDLG4.hackernews <comment><USER2> Has anyone ever made or seen a robot that's the size/shape of a pencil that has inner motors and can propel itself by rolling? That would be useful if you put a small camera in it (it would have to be stopped of course to record or take a picture).

The only reason I mentioned that was because I could see the originally linked to robot being useful if it could also return to it's flat position on it's own and slide under doors (would need thin batteries and motors but that's doable). But then the pencil shaped robot seems more practical for that purpose and would be fairly stealthy.

I tried looking it up but all I found was this crazy looking thing: [http://archive.wired.com/design/2014/02/nasas-super-ball- bot...](http://archive.wired.com/design/2014/02/nasas-super-ball-bot- revolutionize-robotics/)

</comment><comment><USER3> Considering how much work is involved, the "walking" that robot does is a bit underwhelming. It looks more like flailing that conveniently propels it forward.</comment>


Lead: America's Real Criminal Element (2013) - <AUTHOR> https://www.motherjones.com/environment/2016/02/lead-exposure-gasoline-crime-increase-children-health/ <comment><USER3> The author of this piece just recently published an update, also in Mother Jones:

"An Updated Lead-Crime Roundup for 2018", Kevin Drum, Mother Jones, 1 Feb 2018.

[https://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2018/02/an-updated- le...](https://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2018/02/an-updated-lead-crime- roundup-for-2018/)

<comment><USER4> From that article: "Unfortunately, the number of murders is relatively small compared to the universe of violent crime, which makes it statistically challenging to analyze."

I don't find that especially unfortunate.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Blaming lead for the increase in crime certainly has an appeal. Any claim like that is going to be controversial - pinning causes and effect this closely is a bit like large-scale anecdotal evidence - you're never going to repeat the multitude of causes and effects to went into the twenty years from 1980 to 2000.

A different approach I find compelling involves those who look at different time scales. Especially, violent crime has been declining since colonial times in the US and around the globe - with specific exceptions. While the overall downward trend needs explanation, any moment where crime is declining is normal and the moments of upturn seem to be what needs explanation. And the explanation here is often the aftermath of war, soldiers who've learned to kill coming home.

Of course this isn't to claim lead pollution is in any way acceptable but whether it lead to violent crime is a fuzzy question.

[http://blogs.berkeley.edu/2010/06/16/a-crime-puzzle- violent-...](http://blogs.berkeley.edu/2010/06/16/a-crime-puzzle-violent- crime-declines-in-america/)

<comment><USER6> >And the explanation here is often the aftermath of war, soldiers who've learned to kill coming home.

I don't think the stats bear that out. Veterans may suffer PTSD and other ailments, but I don't think they contribute disproportionally to US crime statistics.

Brazil hasn't been at war recently, but they have high crime rate.

<comment><USER7> > Brazil hasn't been at war recently

I wonder if drug trafficking and the global drug war counts? I mean it's in some ways even more violent, but I guess then I'm mixing up cause and effect... interesting to think about.

<comment><USER8> Violence begets violence?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> For all of those who are so amazed at the current state of technology in the world, it's articles like these that help bring us back to Earth.

It was less than 100 years ago that we thought it was a good idea to (1) put lead in paint, (2) put asbestos in building materials, (3) put x-ray machines in shoe stores so people could casually look at their feet (learned this from a relative).

We are only a few generations away from some literal dark age shit.

<comment><USER10> Well, the fun thing is to look at what we do know and wonder what horrible stuff people will see that should have been more obvious to us in the present day.

<comment><USER11> I think coal burning power plants are the next big one. There's been some studies that have come out lately which link coal plants to tons of modern ailments.

<comment><USER12> Diesel engines also. Black carbon smoke in all its forms is toxic to life, in general.

<comment><USER13> Modern Diesel engines don't smoke. And black Diesel is mostly just muck and not pollution in the way you think it is, clear diesel exhaust has the NOX in it.

Sorry, but it seems you don't actually know anything about diesels.

<comment><USER14> If we have data, let's go with the data. If all we have is opinions, let's go with mine.

 _Diesel exhaust is a Group 1 carcinogen, which causes lung cancer and has a positive association with bladder cancer.[2][3][4][5][6] It contains several substances that are also listed individually as human carcinogens by the IARC._

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

<comment><USER13> That's great! Except that your post was about black smoke which is just unburnt fuel, the actual diesel exhaust is invisible.

<comment><USER14> I'm going to disagree here, the black smoke that comes out of diesel engines isn't _just unburnt diesel_.

And if it comes out of the exhaust ports on a dieeel engine is _actual diesel exhaust_.

All that aside, airosoled diesel still wouldn't be something you'd want to inhale much of.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Another source of lead pollution that I wasn't aware about until buying a house on former orchard land is that lead arsenate was used as an insecticide against the coddling moth for several decades. It is a large issue in Eastern Washington State where a lot of former orchard land has become schools, housing and parks.

<comment><USER16> I've been trying tonfigure our if fruit and vegetables grown in lead polluted soil pick up lead or not. I haven't been able to track down a good answer

<comment><USER15> From the research I've done it seems that most plants pick up very little. In fact it's almost a problem because you can't "leach" it out through planting. On the other hand, fruits and such aren't affected. The problem is that it's in the soil, so you have to be really careful about washing produce if it's dusty. I would be very hesitant to eat any beets, carrots, potatoes, etc... unless the soil had been amended. That usually means several feet get manually removed and dumped somewhere else and you bring in fresh topsoil. This is what WA state has had to do with a lot of the parks and public schools where they've tested and found high Pb levels.

<comment><USER17> That's removal and replacement.

Amendment is adding something to improve the soil. Manure or peat or whatever.

<comment><USER15> Thanks, you are correct

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> This is a really ancedotal story with sample size N=1 so YMMV. I lived in a poorly maintained building constructed in the 1920s. I'm sure there was old lead paint that was just painted over. Also a couple of times per month the pipes would spew out brown water. During that time I was dealing with a lot of anger outbursts and anxiety attacks. Since I've moved (same city, same job, slightly higher rent), these things really haven't been a problem. Again it's hard to know what the exact reason is, but I do wonder if I was experiencing some version of heavy metal poisoning.

<comment><USER19> I don't think heavy metal poisoning goes away with a simple change of environment.

You were probably just pissed off that you lived in a shitty apartment building.

<comment><USER20> As far as I know it slowly goes down so the story may make sense.

<comment><USER21> >"The most recent evidence from epidemiological and toxicological studies suggests that low levels of exposure can, over time, damage the heart, kidneys, and brain."

[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1797860/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1797860/)

<comment><USER20> The question is what happens when the exposure stops. Do things get better?

<comment><USER22> From what I've seen and heard the answer with lead is an unequivocal no - <USER2> lead exposure has occurred, the damage is done. It's compounding and irreversible.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> Discussed at the time: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5006368](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5006368).

</comment><comment><USER24> Similar sort of idea wrt "A sound mind in a sound body" being the best antidote to crime:

 _Vitamins for convicts could save taxpayers ' money_

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16140867](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16140867)

</comment><comment><USER20> It's really hard to understand that the country is not setting up a nationwide program to get rid of lead paint and fixing the water supply. The payoff would be enormous.

<comment><USER25> Enormous, but diffuse. Governments, and especially democracies, and _especially_ especially the United States have consistently failed miserably at tackling problems with diffuse benefits bit highly visible costs, even when the costs are much lower.

<comment><USER26> The theory is too narrow here -- not only does this apply to governments, it applies to businesses. Or technical debt and sufficiently large software projects. Or individuals and lifestyle choices.

Our reward structures aren't always lined up with optimal responses to current conditions.

<comment><USER27> Good point. And people with similar mindsets/POVs tend to be at the top of such large organizations. I think there's just a certain way of being in the world that makes some people inclined to a) want to be in charge, and b) downplay these kinds of diffuse, semi-intangibly-expensive problems. We need better ways of explaining problems to them.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> Related article from a few years back that I've found myself referencing in many discussions since:

[https://www.damninteresting.com/the-ethyl-poisoned- earth/](https://www.damninteresting.com/the-ethyl-poisoned-earth/)

</comment><comment><USER29> Does anyone know any good studies looking at this in different countries?

For example, lots of communist countries had ridiculous levels of lead pollution. Does this show up in their crime & IQ stats, as articles like this suggest it should? They also (sometimes) took great effort to mix up the population, putting all social classes in the same building... which would help avoid one complaint here, that obviously people who could afford to do so chose not to live in the most polluted bits of American cities.

<comment><USER30> I think this would be a good variable to analyze. A lot of third-world countries didn't have a large automobile infrastructure, and so they had lower lead levels, leading to smarter people with less crime.

This could be the source of "smart Asian" stereotype.

But, I don't know if atmospheric lead pollution is uniform globally or localized.

<comment><USER31> It is very localized - areas by old highways have issues with higher lead concentration in soil. Which seems intuitive but CFCs are heavier than air yet can still wind up high enough to cause ozone layer issues via air currents

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> Thought this was an interesting theory when initially proposed. How has it held up since then?

<comment><USER33> An interesting question; here is one negative datum: [https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2018/06/no...](https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2018/06/no- lead-homicide-connection-eastern-europe.html)

I find it interesting that lead use also seems to follow the trajectory of drug usage / permissiveness in the '70s: [https://jakeseliger.com/2018/06/15/grass-roots-the-rise- and-...](https://jakeseliger.com/2018/06/15/grass-roots-the-rise-and-fall-and- rise-of-marijuana-in-america-emily-dufton)

</comment></comment><comment><USER34> The aqueducts feeding water to Ancient Rome were lined with lead, which apparently had a poisoning effect. Was the famous Roman Mob affected by this same thing?

<comment><USER35> The water was pretty hard (lots of dissolved minerals) and it formed a protective non reactive layer over the lead.

The same thing happened in Flynt, but the city cheaped out on the pH control chemicals, the protective layer was dissolved, and eventually the pipes with lead in them started leaching.

<comment><USER36> Three things I've read. Romans complained in writings about the use of lead acetate in wine.

They also used lead cook pots to reduce grape juice to Defrutum.

And the Romans used to smelt lead in Italy and banned the practice eventually. I've never seen a description of a Roman lead smelting operation but I can imagine.

On the other hand I haven't seen anyone trying look for lead poisoning in Roman era bones. Just looked found this.

[http://www.poweredbyosteons.org/2012/01/lead-poisoning-in- ro...](http://www.poweredbyosteons.org/2012/01/lead-poisoning-in-rome- skeletal.html)

<comment><USER34> Great link (I resubmitted just now for wider audience).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> Was lead used in other countries around the world? Did they see a similar drop in crime when it was banned?

<comment><USER38> Iraq stopped using leaded petrol in 2011. The lead/crime hypothesis postulates a 22 year time-lag. So if Iraq becomes a lot more peaceful in 2033 you'll know what's up.

Incidentally, the list of countries where leaded petrol is still used, or was banned most recently, is basically a list of countries where bad things happen: "Algeria, Iraq, Yemen, Myanmar, North Korea, and Afghanistan". But the causality probably goes the other way; leaded petrol is cheaper.

</comment></comment><comment><USER39> (2016)

<comment><USER23> The article is from 2013: [https://web.archive.org/web/20130112132922/http://www.mother...](https://web.archive.org/web/20130112132922/http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2013/01/lead- crime-link-gasoline). Not sure why they're playing games with its date like that.

</comment></comment><comment><USER40> Well, seems lead in drinking water goes hand and hand with empires falling.

<comment><USER41> Since evidence of lead water piping goes back at least to 200BCE, it looks more like lead water goes hand and hand with empires growing.

[http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-4843640/Roman...](http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-4843640/Romans- using-poisonous-lead-pipes-200-years-earlier.html)

<comment><USER42> It's pretty nuts some of the toxic chemicals the Romans used. I seem to recall arsenic as a major component of beauty products, and lead compounds as artificial sweeteners.

<comment><USER36> They used to use arsenic in wallpaper. If it got damp enough some types of mold would convert inorganic arsenic into volatile organic arsenic compounds and poison people.

Just remembered an ex gf worked in a museum. She said they used to dust taxidermist specimens with arsenic powder to prevent pests and decay. So a lot of display items are problematic. Toxic, irreplaceable, and you can't just throw them out either.

<comment><USER43> There's a 19th century book of poisonous wallpapers. Not many copies exist and they have to be stored carefully.

<comment><USER36> I saw a picture of some old Victorian era wallpaper. All the colors had completely faded except the black ink and the rich purple arsenic pigmented flowers.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER44> I feel this is just a case of correlation != causation. I remember once someone, perhaps here, posted something that would randomly link things together based on loose trends, oftentime to ridiculous results. There are a -lot- of societal changes in those years. If lead were the sole culprit, crime would have dropped off a cliff.

<comment><USER45> Agreed. Not sure why this is the favorite pet theory on HN. It's interesting, but very little data to actually support the connection.

<comment><USER46> It's popular largely because of the convincing data. Read the article, or any of the many other articles by Kevin Drum on the subject.

<comment><USER45> It's largely popular because because people gravitate towards simply explanations. It makes them feel good.

Is there directional data to suggest a connection? Sure. But there have been plenty of theories like this that have turned out to be complete bunk.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


PaintCode 2 - <AUTHOR> http://www.paintcodeapp.com/intro <comment><USER2> I am feeling increasingly frustrated by product websites that assume I already know what their product is. This seems to be especially prevalent on sites of tools meant for developers.

Please, don't make me have to guess by reading your tooltips, feature blurbs, and customer quotes like they are puzzle pieces to the question of "what the hell is this thing!"

At least PaintCode is kind enough to give an overview in their documentation.

<comment><USER3> This is becoming an increasingly common and frustrating thing for products posted here to HN.

How did this product even get to the front page when it's almost impossible to actually tell what it is or the problems it solves?

I scrolled down past the screenshot expecting to read an introduction about it and now we're suddenly talking about StyleKits??? Huh?

E: Quite ironic that the URI path is /intro and the main header "Introducing PaintCode 2", when the page does everything except introduce the product.

<comment><USER4> >How did this product even get to the front page when it's almost impossible to actually tell what it is or the problems it solves

Just read the first couple lines on the screenshot. It's the first thing you read when you visit the page:

 _" Use built-in vector drawing tools to design controls"_ and _" PaintCode instantly generates Objective-C or C# code from your drawings"_

That's explanation enough for me, didn't you see that?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Looks pretty nifty, but I wish it would mention what it runs on (it looks like OS X only, but would it kill them to just say that?)

<comment><USER6> No it definitely also runs on iOS, and, interestingly, Xamarin: [http://docs.xamarin.com/samples/PaintCode/](http://docs.xamarin.com/samples/PaintCode/)

I met the authors in person > 1 year ago, when they were thinking about whether Java (Android) code generation would make sense. Would love to learn that they made it happen too.

<comment><USER7> I think they are referring to what platform the actual app runs on, not the code it generates, which appears to be OS X only.

<comment><USER5> Right, it generates Objective-C and C# which can presumably be used anywhere those can run, but the tool itself runs somewhere.

<comment><USER8> Tool runs on OSX only.

I guess they (I would, too) assumed it was pretty obvious, but it is clearly not. (I don't mean this in a derogatory or a mean way). Just interesting. Related to the top comment here about not assuming that the visitors know what the app is about.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Nice, Apple itself is a customer. That's a big thumbs up.

In general, do you have to contact companies and ask them permission before you put them on the customer list?

<comment><USER10> You generally ask the company for permission, and they generally say yes because it's free marketing for them.

<comment><USER11> I bet Apple didn't give them permission, they never want their logo to be used for marketing purposes for any reason. There are no takeaway Apple-branded gadgets for instance (while I have tons of tshirt/pens/gadgets with logos/products of any technological company in existence), and many shopping malls in which Apple has a store can't show an Apple logo on the big ads panels outside.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Wow, if you bought version 1 they have no upgrade price :(

<comment><USER7> That's the trend lately. App store doesn't support that sort of pricing model.

<comment><USER12> That's pretty bad way to alienate your loyal customers. They can still have users email them and issue download codes after paying through their website.

<comment><USER13> No they can't. The App Store very deliberately prevents that (because that would let you use the App Store for all its benefits, while completely bypassing the 30% cut). The only codes you get are a limited number of promotional codes. Sure, if you have 5 customers, you could give them codes, but if you have 500 you can't.

<comment><USER14> They can.

[MAS = Mac App Store, nMAS = non-Mac App Store]

The only (okay two) way that is impossible to do is: MAS ➜ MAS (and nMAS ➜ MAS)

but:

non-MAS ➜ non-MAS: via serial in the store MAS ➜ non-MAS: Receipt Validation ([https://developer.apple.com/library/mac/releasenotes/General...](https://developer.apple.com/library/mac/releasenotes/General/ValidateAppStoreReceipt/Introduction.html))

the last one is rarely used by Developers… 1Password is one, that allows you to buy it in the MAS, and use at least their Beta-Builds.

That many developers use the MAS as an excuse, for not providing any upgrade paths at all… is a very silly solution to a problem that many Developers/Companys face (to make permanent profit) at the cost of customer satisfaction.

<comment><USER15> A _paid_ upgrade for store MAS ➜ non-MAS is forbidden by Apple. Omni already tried that [1].

[1] [https://www.omnigroup.com/blog/omnikeymaster-upgrade- pricing...](https://www.omnigroup.com/blog/omnikeymaster-upgrade-pricing-for- mac-app-store-customers)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> I would KILL for something like this on Android. I know on Android it's not standard to layout UI in code but even just a better Android WYSIWYG layout xml designer would be wonderful. People have proven that it's possible to create gorgeous custom Android apps but it's definitely easier on iOS.

<comment><USER17> I don't think it is what you think it is. It is not a UI layout design tool. It's a tool to build vector-based control icons and graphic.

<comment><USER16> It looks like you can create vector-based custom controls and export them as Obj-C code. Custom controls are a real pain to layout on Android, so this would be great.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Fantastic progress on a great app!

Seems like a candidate for an Apple acquisition and then integration in Xcode 6. A bit of a stretch, but such a move would align with the trend of baking interface builder, particle effect editors, etc. right into the IDE. (Designer <\--> developer workflow considerations aside...)

</comment><comment><USER19> Lighten up people. I understand the frustration, but OP is not ALL of those posts you're referring to. He's one guy that posted a link looking for feedback.

OP: I like this and think it has a nice, fresh look to it. Look forward to playing around with it. Thanks.

</comment><comment><USER20> Wow, tough crowd! I'd be curious to see what some of the commenters have shipped...

One question for the PaintCode team if they read this: is it possible to have dynamic star shapes? i.e I set it grows with the frame

This update looks awesome, can't wait to use it

</comment><comment><USER21> As someone who has fairly limited exposure to mobile application development I have to ask a basic question, what are the use cases for this tool?

I can tell that it turns vector into code, but why not just include the vector in the app?

<comment><USER22> From what I understand, there's a performance gain from doing the drawing directly.

<comment><USER23> Actually, there's a performance hit when drawing directly (via [UIView drawRect:])

The point of PaintCode is to allow dynamic manipulation of an image. If you don't need a dynamic image, the best option is a .png; second option is drawing once to a UIImage.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> I _just_ bought PaintCode 1, about a week ago. Sad^h^h^h Happy - free upgrade woo!

<comment><USER25> If you bought it after April 1, the upgrade is free. Email support for info (as seen in the blog post here: [http://www.paintcodeapp.com/news/introducing- paintcode-2](http://www.paintcodeapp.com/news/introducing-paintcode-2))

<comment><USER24> Outstanding. Cheers VeryVito.

<comment><USER26> Not very outstanding at all. I bought it last year and have used it a total of zero times (whose fault is that, mine, correct, but still, it stings that they have a shitty upgrade policy).

<comment><USER24> Well $99 for a developer tool is quite some impulse purchase. Can I gently suggest that your upset might be more a case of buyer's remorse than dissatisfaction with their upgrade policy?

If it helps, it does come up on things like MacHeist occasionally, and they have sales once in a while (there's one now, at $79.99, but I've seen it as low as $50).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> The animated bubbles make it very hard to read the text they connect to. Very distracting. But otherwise, the look of the site is absolutely gorgeous, and I'm really curious to see all the improvements.

</comment><comment><USER28> This seems like a cool way to learn Objective-C and iOS development.

Can I make an entire working app using this, or is it only meant for prototyping/mock-ups?

<comment><USER29> PaintCode is meant to replace the need for images by giving you the equivalent code for basic images. Their initial claim to fame with version 1 was being "Retina ready," since the images are drawn in code instead of PNGs. It is a very good way to learn Quartz and CoreGraphics, but not necessarily the best way to learn ObjC.

I used PaintCode in a project I worked once, and it was a lot more work than I wanted for just asking my designer to give me an @2x image. If you work with designers who do vector art already, you're not going to gain much. The StyleKit class is slick, though, so I may revisit this once again.

<comment><USER30> I am wondering if PaintCode would allow my designer to draw up a complete UI - e.g. all screens so I could just use that.

What I do now is I get the designs in some sort of intermediary format, e.g. InVision or whatever, then I have to go and measure everything and all the pixel distances, then re-create it in Interface Builder. It's retarded.

<comment><USER4> Couldn't you just use Interface Builder to begin with? You can e-mail or put into git .xib files right?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> It really annoys me that the website doesn't even say what the product is / who it is intended for.

</comment><comment><USER32> What's the difference between this and something like Interface Builder?

<comment><USER33> Interface builder is pretty limited for customizing design elements.</comment></comment>


Modern life 'turning people off sex' - <AUTHOR> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-25094142

<comment><USER2> And people were worried about overpopulation.</comment>


Yet Another Sign Up (Why Isn't Open ID More Popular By Now?) - <AUTHOR> http://blog.amir.rachum.com/post/25950218796/yet-another-sign-up <comment><USER2> It's common knowledge now that OpenID has severe usability problems. As much as I wanted it to work, none of my apps' visitors (hell, back in 2006) could understand what it was or how to use it.

BrowserID, however, has now fixed most of these issues, and it's _very_ straightforward to use. To try it out, you can have a look at <http://www.yourpane.com/>

<comment><USER3> "To log in, just enter your email address below and click the link that we send you. To log in again, you can save the link and use it directly (you don't have to request a new one)."

In what world is that more usable than "Click here to login with Google / Yahoo"?

<comment><USER4> StavrosK has a hybrid auth system -- that's not a part of Persona (née BrowserID). Which is actually kind of cool -- because we use email addresses as identifiers, it's really easy to add Persona support alongside traditional auth mechanisms, and without giving up ownership of your users.

If you want to see a more "pure" Persona implementation, our standard example site is at <http://123done.org/> (and you can preview the "Persona" redesign at <http://dev.123done.org/>).

As for as being as easy for first-time users as "Click here to log in with Google / Yahoo," well, we've got some tricks up our sleeves. Look for a blog post next month at <http://identity.mozilla.com/> :)

<comment><USER2> When are you guys going to add browser support already?!

Also, I love how I can integrate Persona with Django in (quite literally) three minutes, with _zero_ changes to any existing auth mechanism.

<comment><USER4> Native browser support is slated for Firefox 17, though it'll be disabled by default for a while, much like with our SPDY support. Of course, native support in Gecko is a hard requirement for our Boot2Gecko phones, and the first big code freeze for that is rapidly approaching (mid-August, IIRC?), so it's absolutely on its way!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> And why _wouldn't_ I prefer to have a set of fully independent, unlinked accounts at different sites?

If I understand correctly, using OpenID means that Site A can confirm that User X is the same as User X on Site B, using OpenID?

I can see where that's a win for sites A & B. I can also see many instances where that is _not_ a win for me.

<comment><USER6> If you use the same e-mail address to sign up for both sites, they can already determine this. The only way to get the anonymity you want is to create new throwaway accounts for each service. (I realize GMail lets you do things like + aliases, but these should be stripped when trying to match up users across databases.)

<comment><USER7> Or run your own mailserver and hand out email addresses like servicename @ [yourmailserver].com

Everything gets forwarded to the same inbox.

tuffmail.com is awesome and cheap; I'm a happy subscriber.

<comment><USER2> I like 33mail.com.

<comment><USER8> or 33m.co for those quick to type throwaways.

<comment><USER2> That works? That's awesome, thanks!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Take this as a few bitter words from an "grumpy OpenID early adopter":

* because the user experience really requires you to have the "nascar effect" of several well-known icons. OpenID could scale horizontally technically but in fact it doesn't work that way. Except for a few providers (like Google) it is not "peer to peer" (many to many) but more like "business to customers" (one to many) relation

* because the "like"-generation beloved blue button talks something else (and is "way more important" than some technical nice thing)

* because it requires putting too many eggs in one basket (one ID to rule them all. And even "the few big ones" are these days hacked without problems)

* because your database of users is your asset (at least in the US). In EU it is more often a liability. * As this is an asset, nobody wants to _pay_ anything for a secure identity as a TTP service.

* because it forbids "sensible" use on mobile devices (I have a phone and a PC, I would like to link my phone(s) to my services through numbers rather than on-phone cumbersome username or openid hack)

* pairing with a QR code works well for me. It even allows to establish a more meaningful key for further communication (I check the "green bar" of the browser than the underlying, semi-anonymous, DNS-depending OpenID)

* because OpenID does not really work for anything than medium-security _identification_ transport. I hope my bank will never use an OpenID to authenticate anything.

* just try a new service with a throwaway account. or a throwaway password. Maybe one day people build services, which do _not_ require pairing to "something" at all. Or Just use "click-the-link-in-e-mail-or-copy-token" approach.

<comment><USER10> > _because the user experience really requires you to have the "nascar > effect"_

Seriously. I love SO, but this is one of the scariest log in pages I've ever seen: [https://img.skitch.com/20120627-d49s8rqaeu5p5d3dkmn2p26tim.p...](https://img.skitch.com/20120627-d49s8rqaeu5p5d3dkmn2p26tim.png)

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> At OpenRent [1], we use the google identity toolkit [2] and whilst it has a few quirks and bugs, it's been received fairly well by even our non-tech crowd. It uses email providers as identity providers - and is only as intrusive as inputting your email into a traditional log in box, just with much less friction, and without the requirement to remember another password!

I'm surprised it's not seen bigger adoption in the start-up crowd, but I guess it was slightly more work and isn't quite in-line with the MVP culture.

It also places a reliance on a third party - but in this case I expect good reliability from Google, and have a fallback option in place (both for availability, and to support older browsers).

[1] - <http://www.openrent.co.uk>

[2] - <https://developers.google.com/identity-toolkit/>

</comment><comment><USER12> "It boggles my mind that this is apparently a big question for techies and, to me, is a perfect example of the Silicon Valley mindset that doesn't understand how to build products that real people want to use.

"The short answer is that OpenID is the worst possible 'solution' I have ever seen in my entire life to a problem that most people don't really have. That's what's 'wrong' with it."

[http://www.quora.com/OpenID/What-s-wrong-with- OpenID/answer/...](http://www.quora.com/OpenID/What-s-wrong-with- OpenID/answer/Yishan-Wong)

The real question is why these guys didn't let you signup with Facebook.

</comment><comment><USER13> The reason you dont see it mainstream is because for someone like my mom its too difficult to understand. She does however understand "Login with Facebook/Google/Twitter" because it is simple, one click, approve permissions and done. Anything more is just a hassle for them to remember and they will fallback to email/password instead.

<comment><USER14> And when you have more than one option, your users will start to make more than one account for your site.

<comment><USER13> Nothing is stopping them from doing that with Username/Password or OpenID. In fact I would argue that it probably happens more with the username method because users forget they have an account. With Google/Facebook/Twitter signin they click and that service remembers everything for them and sends it to the app for authentication.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> There's no way to make everyone happy, but pretty much all the options suck. Setting up yet another account sucks. OpenID sucks because nobody intuitively understands it. My login is a URL?? WTF? Facebook/Google/whatever login sucks because some people don't have it and some people who have it don't trust it.

I don't have any answers.

</comment><comment><USER16> BrowserId is another option that I'm rather fond of.</comment>


Over Half of Americans Support FBI Over Apple in Encryption Fight (Survey, 2016) - <AUTHOR> http://www.newsweek.com/over-half-americans-support-fbi-over-apple-encryption-fight-study-429241 <comment><USER2> Can you correct that title to read:

In 2015 Over Half of the 1,002 Americans surveyed by PewResearch support the FBI...

The way its written is misleading.

<comment><AUTHOR> Fair criticism, clumsy post on my part</comment></comment>


Ask HN: What to Pursue? - <AUTHOR> I'm tired of making stuff (software) that has no impact on anyone's lives. Ultimately I'd like to pursue AI research and/or to build the future of humanity in some manner, but meanwhile I also need some money to live.
I've been bouncing off various ideas, but either I'm prematurely killing them, or they haven't had any (apparently) feasible target markets:
- a service to save 2-factor authentication backup codes with client-side encryption - I couldn't convince myself finishing this was worth the effort
- a personal analytics service, taking in "the kitchen sink" from health devices and other data sources, drawing up correlations, etc. -- it didn't seem like anyone would pay for this
- a service to lend expertise on demand inside software engineering teams, like a 'virtual engineer' inside a client team (I figured there are loads of inefficiencies in software development) -- I couldn't find a way to even start this. I think the 'silos' separating companies from the outside are probably considered a feature so there's no chance even for this
- an index of all geospatial open(/closed) datasets -- I made some preliminary work here but ultimately I fail to see who would possibly pay for this in some way
- tools for geospatial processing -- GDAL/OSGeo/QGIS/rasterio came short so I made some of my own for joining datasets and such -- also doesn't seem monetizable easily?
- reproducible datasets and computation -- this also didn't seem worth the effort
Am I just prematurely killing off all my ideas without finding a single customer?
Is there some productive way to refine ideas and find better ones?
Should I find a different viewpoint to this entirely? <comment><USER2> If you want to create something of high quality you should pursue something that you are passionate about or already have a lot of knowledge of.

For example, I like table tennis a lot, if I could work a few years on whatever I want, I would create some tool to improve the ways you can train in table tennis, for example create some TT robot that you can play against, or some AI to watch you play and show what you are doing wrong or how much spin/speed was on the ball.

If you want to make something that's useful, don't make what everyone else is making or, if you do, make it A LOT better.

<comment><USER2> The main idea is that it's very unlikely to make something that will benefit every human on the earth. Choose a specific niche/category you are interested in and improve it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Hey, I can really understand your problem,even i am going through similar situation.</comment>