Undercover reporter reveals life in a Polish troll farm - <AUTHOR> https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/nov/01/undercover-reporter-reveals-life-in-a-polish-troll-farm <comment><USER2> What this article fails to mention: there was recently a case discovered where one of the clients of these troll farms was... Ministry of Justice. They used to slander judges who were not in the political line of thought of the previous / current leading party.

The knowledge of this was as high up as Jaroslaw Kaczynski, the man who appears to be driving the whole country from the back seat.

One of many, many articles available in Polish press: [https://www.rp.pl/Sedziowie-i-sady/309239933-Farma- trolli-w-...](https://www.rp.pl/Sedziowie-i-sady/309239933-Farma-trolli-w- Ministerstwie-Sprawiedliwosci-co-ustalil-UODO-ws-wycieku-danych-sedziow.html)

Edit: added "line of" in " They used to slander judges who were not in the political line of thought of the previous / current leading party."

<comment><USER3> I can't say it surprises me. But I think by now every government is using such farms. I find it difficult to believe otherwise based on recent FCC issues ( [https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/jsvine/net- neutrality-f...](https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/jsvine/net-neutrality- fcc-fake-comments-impersonation)).

Yes, sadly, I am invoking everyone is doin' it.

<comment><USER4> I don't think it's just government, but also likely industries as well. I've seen what could only be trolling for support of nuclear power and the medical industry.

<comment><USER5> What do nuclear power trolls look like? I support nuclear power (instead of fossil fuels and in addition to renewables) and, sadly, I haven't got a cent from the nuclear industry yet.

<comment><USER4> You will see "we need nuclear power because it's the greenest/most renewable/etc... energy" type posts dispersed all through social media almost anywhere there's a discussion about climate change, renewable energy, etc...

Even if the original topic was only tangentially related it will get changed. A post with puppy photos can turn into a climate change discussion because "nuclear power is so green".

It's so common now that it's uncanny.

<comment><USER6> Let's run with your idea and let's say that there are clandestine efforts to promote the idea of nuclear power generation in the public -- cui bono?

Who benefits? Are there any major initiatives in the nuclear industry? Are any new plants starting to be built?

All I've seen is a bunch of plants that have horrible cost overruns and no fixed time line for being finished.

That doesn't sound like something that you'd want to raise public awareness about if you were in the nuclear industry.

So who does this kind of campaign benefit if not the nuclear industry? It doesn't seem to benefit the oil and gas industry who are without a doubt the masters and originators of propaganda in this market. It doesn't benefit solar and wind generators -- so who?

<comment><USER4> I don't know, but maybe discussing it will bring some light to this subject? Maybe a system/method to determine who is a professional troll?

\-----

Pro-Troll Filter: (first draft)

1\. Is the commenter able to rationally discuss the downsides of their position?

NO? Possibly a pro-troll or an irrational comment.

2\. Is the commenter willing to admit past errors in implementing of their ideal solution, and also consider the same errors could occur again? (ie, no true Scotsman logical fallacy)

NO? Possibly a pro-troll or an irrational comment.

3\. Is the commenter willing to look at and/or discuss real data, even if it contradicts their position?

NO? Possibly a pro-troll or an irrational comment.

4\. Does the commenter devolve into ad hominem attacks?

YES? Possibly a pro-troll or an irrational comment.

\----

Irrationality note:

People have bad days and can act irrationally at any time. But I have found that when someone is unable/unwilling to admit error tries to support an idea based on limited information will devolve into irrational comments when challenged with counter arguments/questions. Not sure how this will help with pro-troll filtering, but it's more data to consider.

<comment><USER7> Your filter sucks. Pro trolls don't become irrational. They just defuse or disappear.

Only fanboys dig in and defend a subject with senseless arguments once they become emotional.

If you're trying to come up with a filter, decide: do you want to filter out trolls or just people that are fans of topics that hurt your feelings? Right now it just looks like a filter for any conversation with a human you disagree with.

<comment><USER8> To me it just reads as a filter for people who aren't worth arguing with on the internet.

<comment><USER4> Then it has multiple uses?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> This really is a critical juncture for the internet; the moment wherein the democratization of information has empowered those with the resources to overwhelm the signal with noise.

I wish I saw a way out.

<comment><USER10> Google has largely solved the spam problem for end users. What I can't figure out is why platforms like Facebook and Twitter couldn't mark these sort of posts as, essentially, spam, by the same sort of rules and heuristics as email spam. Why can't they look at the metadata of verified troll-farm-generated clickbait/junk/spam/fake news, and make their own filters, and demote that content?

Simple. Because they're making money on the garbage. It's a misalignment of incentives. Until that is fixed, through reorganization or regulation, the problem will persist. They will only do enough to fight this -- both in terms of technology and public image -- so that it doesn't impact their bottom line(s).

<comment><USER11> I think you're trivializing the difficulty in categorizing the low quality, and extremely brief, comments of social media.

Go look at a political subreddit, or some controversial tweet. There's little conversation or context. Most users could be bots.

Google often has the advantage of having hard (url) or soft (product/key word mention) links that point to something extremely rare and "unimportant". Everyone is bitching about politicians and policy in a way that's not far from a Markov chain.

<comment><USER12> Thee larger problem is factual accuracy. With all the propaganda going around, it is hard to find the truth. Any attempt to classify such opinions will inevitably further a propaganda.

As someone said, we live in strange timeline where comedians are more trustworthy than politicians.

<comment><USER13> FB does work with 3rd party fact checkers. We should be able to trust people from places like Reuters to remain fairly neutral.

<comment><USER14> 3rd party fact checkers themselves are highly biased. If you think reuters is neutral, then you really don't understand the "news" business. The "news" business isn't in the business of news. It's in the influence business. The founder of reuters started off peddling radical revolutionary propaganda.

Paul Julius Reuter worked at a book-publishing firm in Berlin and was involved in distributing radical pamphlets at the beginning of the Revolutions in 1848.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reuters#History](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reuters#History)

Besides, the problematic part with "news" involve "non-factual" news but rather political "news". Whether globalism is good or bad. What, if anything, to do about climate change. Nonsense like veganism, etc. There, by nature, can't be fact-checked because it is a value/contextual judgment rather than a factual one. Capitalism vs communism, nationalism vs globalism, immigration vs nativism, alt-right vs alt-left, traditional media vs social media, etc.

<comment><USER13> Reuters having started off spreading radical pamphlets is about as relevant as Hitler being involved in the development of Volkswagen.

Nobody in charge needs to (or even can) decide if something like globalism or communism is good or bad, just that no obvious lies are spread while discussing it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> > "For them it was just work and that's it."

Is it? If someone's job is spewing cleverly provocative, disruptive, toxic, and intentionally negative messages all day ... does that edgy skill and behaviour not leak into their home or personal life?

I understand, these workers need jobs and I'm sure some get quite proficient at trolling. But my gut says there will be personal side effects from reinforcing and working your brain and interactions like this all day. :-(

<comment><USER16> With the risk of pulling a Godwin, the "It's just a job, so any ethics, morals or generally doing the right thing don't apply" defense is getting kinda stale.

It's one step away from "I was just following orders"

<comment><USER17> It sounds more like it's akin to wage slavery rather than blindly following orders. Assuming there aren't other jobs for those workers then they most likely have to chose between that job and a meagre existence based on government subsidies and goodwill of others.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Reminds me 18th century Paris where professional applauders and influencers were paid to influence the crowd.

Or the retro seo trick where you ask a question on yahoo questions so you can answer it with another account to backlink "relevant" website.

Literally nothing new, internet has of course changed the scale and took away the monopoly from newspapers and tv.

<comment><USER19> Pre-YouTube, fashion companies would employ companies to identify the cool kids in a group and give them free stuff to wear, in order to promote the brand.

<comment><USER20> Is this not still a thing for Instagram "influencers"?

<comment><USER21> I guess nowadays you don't need companies to tell you who the cool kid is because you can just look at followers count.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> It is not just foreign governments using paid trolls. Apparently Hilary Clinton used paid trolls against Bernie Sanders in 2016.

[https://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-clinton-digital- troll...](https://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-clinton-digital- trolling-20160506-snap-htmlstory.html)

>Hillary Clinton's well-heeled backers have opened a new frontier in digital campaigning, one that seems to have been inspired by some of the Internet's worst instincts. Correct the Record, a super PAC coordinating with Clinton's campaign, is spending some $1 million to find and confront social media users who post unflattering messages about the Democratic front-runner.

> "It is meant to appear to be coming organically from people and their social > media networks in a groundswell of activism, when in fact it is highly paid > and highly tactical," said Brian Donahue, chief executive of the consulting > firm Craft Media/Digital.

<comment><USER23> US campaigns doing it is, while still bad, is vastly different. One is an issue of sleazy election campaigns. The other is a matter of foreign interference with a country's fundamental sovereignty.

<comment><USER24> Not sure I see the effective difference between bad faith domestic interference in democratic process and foreign interference in democratic process. Both have the same end result.

<comment><USER25> On the other hand, politicians have been trying to manipulate voters for centuries - it seems like a new danger that foreign governments are now trying to manipulate voters.

<comment><USER26> I would argue the foreign govt angle also is not new. The US at least has interfered with foreign elections before the internet era.

<comment><USER23> Sure but just because the US are hypocrites on the issue doesn't mean we should tolerate it.

<comment><USER26> I certainly am not arguing against that. My point was that it isn't new not that we should tolerate it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> The sentence 'There is no such thing as bad publicity' Talks exactly about cases like this.

The polish PR firm is about to get a wave of leads from this 'negative PR'

<comment><USER28> So? The only way things are going to change is by bringing it to light. What does it matter if in the short term the bad guys get some free press?

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> Most telling part of their statement is the defense that the company operates "like like any other agency of its kind"—as if that is a defense.

As disgusting as this is, there are so many layers to regulating, much of which stems from the nature of social media platforms vs. traditional media platforms. Are the platforms they're posting on subject to the same propaganda regulations as news outlets? Are they as individuals liable for the spread of misinformation, as a result?

</comment><comment><USER30> I highly recommend reading their statement, which is btw the only content on their site - [https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=pl&tl=en&u=http%3A...](https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=pl&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fcatatnet.pl%2Fo- nas%2F)

<comment><USER31> They object to being called a troll farm, but essentially admit to all the activities, including making fake accounts, that makes them a troll farm. Other than getting picky about terminology it appears to be an admission of guilt.

<comment><USER32> I once went to a meeting of an actual full-blown cult.

It was a very curious evening. The first thing they did was reassure everyone - slightly nervously - that they weren't a cult.

"You'll see us called a cult online, but we're not a cult. Ha ha. Definitely not a cult. Certainly not. Oh no."

This denial sounds rather similar.

<comment><USER33> Reminds me of when my friend took me to a MLM get together (aka Sales Pitch)

<comment><USER34> It's not a pyramid, it's an upward funnel!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> > A majority of Cat@Net's employees are understood to be disabled, allowing > the company to derive substantial public subsidies from Poland's National > Disabled Rehabilitation Fund. According to the Reporters Foundation, the > company has received about 1.5 million zloty (£300,000) from the fund since > November 2015.

I thought this was the worst part.

</comment><comment><USER36> The solution is not regulate it. The solution is to stop pretending like social media have anything to do with reality.

<comment><USER37> Try explaining this to the types of people who rely on heavily politicized news outlets for their news...in addition to Facebook. It seems you either have critical thinking skills or you don't. These types are addicted to becoming outraged whenever their pundit tells them to. Everything is taken at face value, as long as it's coming from their ascribed source of truth. This behavior carries over into their social media filter bubbles, rinse and repeat.

<comment><USER38> > It seems you either have critical thinking skills or you don't.

I strongly disagree. Substantial amounts of similar (if to a lesser degree) behavior can be observed in any identity-related thread on HN. We may be better than the average mouth breather, but we're far from immune from delusional beliefs.

I wonder, downvoter, why do you disagree? Surely you can acknowledge that technical folks on HN are capable of critical thinking....do you truly believe this ability extends to all other domains, completely free of error? Or, _might it be something else_? :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER39> I really don't like PR operations like this, but here's a thought experiment:

Presumably it's OK to voice one's opinions on social media, but:

1\. Is it acceptable for private interests to do the same?

2\. At what point does something turn from personal opinion to propaganda?

3\. Is it more problematic that a private entity (e.g. a PR firm) is _pretending_ to express an honest opinion? Would this be acceptable if this were a group of up-front political activists instead?

Personally, I'd draw the line at private interests trying to influence public opinion. Sadly, this is a process as old as the hills. Marketing and propaganda have existed for a long time, it just seems like it's become much harder to pin it for what it is in the era of social media.

<comment><USER40> Disclaimer: I'm not saying any of these except the first has happened

\- Tory Bruno (CEO of ULA) promoting ULA on reddit under his own name providing useful information: Definitely ok (thanks Tory! [https://old.reddit.com/user/torybruno](https://old.reddit.com/user/torybruno))

\- Tory Bruno promoting ULA on reddit under a pseudonym: Almost acceptable, not the best since he has money involved and isn't disclosing it, but he probably honestly thinks most of what he is saying.

\- A PR person hired to promote ULA promoting ULA on reddit under disclosing that they are a PR person: Mostly acceptable, not the best since they probably aren't at all genuine

\- A PR person hired to promote ULA promoting ULA on reddit under not disclosing that they are a PR person or associated with the company: Mostly unacceptable, this isn't personal opinion but paid propaganda, and it shouldn't masquerade as personal opinion.

\- A PR person hired to promote ULA promoting ULA on reddit under 10 different pseudonyms: Completely unacceptable, this should probably be made outright illegal. The only purpose of using pseudonyms like this is to trick people into thinking you have support that you do not.

The article is talking about the last case, shades of grey exist, but this one is known as pitch black.

<comment><USER41> I find it pretty interesting that this comment is on HN. A few years ago, I think it was pretty widely accepted in SV that the last method you mention was just part of the grind. Maybe not the most straight-shooting approach, but still accepted. We even had a title for it: growth hacking. People hired growth hackers! I'm going to refrain from asserting a value judgement; I just thought it was interesting

<comment><USER42> We ban accounts that do that. It has never been acceptable on HN, not since the beginning, and not by a long shot. People have wildly varying ideas about what is "widely accepted in SV", largely imaginary I think, but in any case not in the section of the Venn diagram that HN overlaps with. (Btw, only about 10% of HN's community is in SV.)

One case where we might not instantly ban someone is if they had a long history of using HN as intended. Then we might left them off with a strict warning not to do it again. But that's rare. Real community members tend not to do this kind of thing, and that makes it easier for the community to spot: since such comments are made by people without much experience here, they tend to stand out like a sore thumb—usually a bunch of green thumbs that turn red when whacked by a ban hammer.

Many has been the email thread in which a sheepish startup founder or manager wrote to apologize for what their "growth hacker" did and asking to be unbanned. We usually let them off if they promise not to do it again and to tell all their friends that what "growth hacking" got them on HN was a swift ban.

Another case where we incline to mercy is when the underlying article is good work and something the community would normally find interesting, and it's clear that the "growth hacking" was happening out of naivete. Usually this is because someone had the mistaken idea from afar that it was "widely accepted in SV" that this is how you do startups. Ironically they usually turn out to be classic technical types who are clumsy at marketing and influenced by the wrong kind of blogs. I say ironically because if they would just be themselves and present their work in a direct way, they'd more likely do well on HN. In this case the cure is to educate and hopefully make real community members out of them.

<comment><USER43> >We ban accounts that do that. It has never been acceptable on HN,

I think he meant that it was an acceptable methodology, not that the various platforms condoned it. I don't think any platform has ever condoned that sort of use, or at least none that I can recall.

<comment><USER42> That's a fair point, but I'd still like to get the word out that doing it on HN will get your accounts and sites banned.

A similar point here if anyone is curious: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21439027](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21439027)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER44> Making of "artificial opinions" is a big part of PR trade now, in use by commercial companies, NGOs, and politicians, of course. If it's paid with tax money that's a scandal, for sure. But otherwise think of any entity which wants (for whatever reason) to influence public opinion - you may be sure they do that sort of stuff with practically 100% certainty. Some prefer to use volunteers for this work, seeing it as a more ethical approach, but it still involves creation of orchestrated accounts, and posting in accordance with guides, and schedules. It's probably worth accepting that unknown voices on the net are unlikely to be trusted sources of information.

</comment><comment><USER45> In my opinion this is actual problem in Poland nowadays, however: a. This article was published by a newspaper which has proven track of publishing fake polarizing news, b. Unfortunately - the so called democratic oposition has also proven track of similar behavior. One may check #SilniRazem (together we are strong) which is kind of meme on Polish Twitter. 3\. It is likely that the intent of the original article was to polarize using one-sided reporting of the issue.

To sum up - yet another polarizing click-bait with aim is to cause outrage.

</comment><comment><USER46> So, can _this_ particular problem be solved if social media accounts had to be tied to a verifiable identity?

I don't think we should go that route - as just some non-celebrity figure I would much rather post psuedo-anonymously because the social costs of accidentally saying something "bad" on the internet is way too high. I'm just trying to figure out where the boundaries are.

</comment><comment><USER47> Facebook has said it disabled 2.2bn fake accounts in the first three months of 2019

Uh, no they didnt that is 90% of the network.

<comment><USER48> That would be so helpful if it were true.

</comment></comment><comment><USER49> I can't wait until we can just automate this garbage generation and put them out of business.

</comment><comment><USER50> Be warned of doing business in Poland. You might spends years in prison awaiting trial.

Google Mr. Osiecki's case, a founder of a public mutual fund, or a case of Mr. Kluska, a founder of Optimus.

</comment><comment><USER51> What makes this any different from any other social media PR firm?

</comment><comment><USER52> The existence of paid trolls and shills has been a known fact for many years on various imageboards and forums. It's become a bit of an inside joke. I even suspect that some memes have been generated by private institutions. For example, the 30 year old boomer and his association with Monster has been great advertising for Monster Energy ([https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/30-year- old-boomer](https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/30-year-old-boomer))

</comment><comment><USER53> So internet's got rid of nicknames and switched to real names to avoid anonymounity... yeah... right...

</comment><comment><USER54> > she was given access to the company's internal communications channels

Did she publicize logs from these channels?

</comment><comment><USER55> Isn't it nationalism raising?

</comment><comment><USER56> This is CRAZY.

How the fuck do you explain this level of trolling to your parents! That this is why they shouldn't repeat neo-Nazi Facebook garbage.

<comment><USER57> Walk them through the history of Propaganda.

</comment></comment><comment><USER58> Looks like the US is now trying to increase the division between East and West Europe, huh?

</comment><comment><USER59> How many troll farms exist in the USA? Perhaps they're simply an arm of PR and reputation management nowadays.

Anyway, further evidence that social media is bad for society.</comment>


My friends bet me I couldn't make cybersecurity sexy. Here it goes - <AUTHOR> https://hackernoon.com/my-friends-bet-me-i-couldnt-make-cybersecurity-sexy-here-goes-cyp3tfh <comment><USER2> Pay them.

That's pervy-uncle levels of cringe.</comment>


Lasers Made of 'Spacetime Wave Packets' Are Breaking the Normal Rules of Light - <AUTHOR> https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/4ay5w3/lasers-made-of-spacetime-wave-packets-are-breaking-the-normal-rules-of-light <comment><AUTHOR> This can only mean one thing: Sharks with Laser Beams on their heads.</comment>


Six Shades of Coupling - <AUTHOR> https://mrpicky.dev/six-shades-of-coupling/ <comment><USER2> Too loose of a coupling can cause the code to be not understandable either. Examples include use it general formats with adhoc protocols or schemas. Local data structures likewise create a fine mess that is still coupled to the definition of said structure.

Sometimes you should accept that parts are tightly coupled and not pass the buck.</comment>


Dextrose (jQuery game engine maker) acquired by Zynga - <AUTHOR> http://www.dextrose.com/

<comment><AUTHOR> Wow, a more polished demo: [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SmtQOB_KFzU&feature=relat...](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SmtQOB_KFzU&feature=related)

They have multi monitor support as well as the ability to play super mario bros inside of their game. That's pretty wicked.

I wonder if this engine will be released or whether zynga just swallowed it up.

<comment><USER2> Stretching a single browser window over 2 monitors isn't really 'multi monitor support'.

Not that the system doesn't look good, but give credit where it's due.

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Aves game engine previously discussed here: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1293816></comment>


Finnish Underwater Ice Fishing Mystery Finally Solved - <AUTHOR> http://www.npr.org/blogs/krulwich/2012/11/10/164817715/finnish-underwater-ice-fishing-mystery-finally-solved

<comment><USER2> The only mystery here is how the blogger failed to understand what was going on for an entire viewing of the clip.

<comment><USER3> The blogger is also co-host of Radiolab:

<http://www.radiolab.org/>

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Maybe it's me, but while this is one beautiful video, and they weighted it pretty well, the motion seems really natural, it's pretty obvious what's going on.

</comment><comment><USER5> 'There is no official explanation'

Science disagrees.

<comment><USER6> Also, curious who could be the official giving the "official" explanation? Maybe the elders of the internet?

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> This is cute but instantly obvious what's happening.

</comment><comment><USER6> I expected some actual fishing to take place. Would look funny, like catching fish from the sky.

</comment><comment><USER8> Crazy that this blog is on Hacker News at all, it´s an attempt to viralize the video.</comment>


Formula 1 2020: The secret aerodynamicist – are capes the key? - <AUTHOR> https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/51739796 <comment><USER2> There are a couple of aspects of Formula 1 that make it very compelling to watch (my opinion of course, take as you will):

\- Accessible aerodynamics (it's on the road in front of you, not up in the air)

\- Technological developments (e.g. this year, one of the teams has a steering wheel they pull toward/push away themselves to change the geometry of the front wheels)

\- Watching high-performing athletes demonstrating the ability to operate a machine at speeds over 200mph and still having the capacity to understand the strategic situations unfolding around them, even gathering information from the crowd in the grandstands, or the tv screens that flash past them as they navigate the track

\- Seeing an inter-disciplinary team design and operate a machine that fuses aerodynamics, mechanics and hybrid propulsion systems, driven by a human operator, monitored in realtime by a team of engineers distributed around the world

\- On-the-fly risk/reward decision making in race strategy from observing current data whilst incorporating gut feeling based on past experience to great effect

<comment><USER3> The balance of importance between driver and constructor is quite unique in sport. A sufficiently good car can make an average driver competitive (e.g. Bottas), but also a sufficiently good driver can make an average car competitive (e.g. Schumacher).

Plus everyone involved is such a drama merchant (or crook!) that the season often plays out like a soap opera.

<comment><USER4> The balance is probably around 90% the car and 10% the driver. In the years of RB dominance, a subpar driver like Webber almost got the championship. OTOH Alonso lost a decade in Ferrari and McLaren while being, tied with Hamilton, the best driver in the grid.

The 10% of what the driver adds to the mix is what makes Hamilton champion instead of Bottas.

<comment><USER5> Dunno if it's a valid comparison, but my kid races indoor karting. He's average level, that means he's within 1.5% of the best in race conditions (i.e. on a 40 seconds lap, he's about than 0.7 seconds behind the best on average). And given the time it took to reach that, I'd say that being a competitive pilot may be just 10% of the victory, but those 10% are super tough to reach.

<comment><USER6> I've been doing a bit of karting lately and the difference between a 58s and a 59s lap is crazy. Super hard to shave that second off, but it's also so obvious that the guy doing 58s laps is way faster.

Last year there was a hobbyist race on my local track and the person who won it was a guy who mainly practices at home on his computer. I imagine a gokart simulation is close enough to the real deal that training on it actually can help a lot. You can get much more fine-grained feedback on how well you're taking certain corners etc. One thing that trips me up is understanding the kart - my local ones have somewhat poor acceleration, so it seems it's not actually best to take the corners as sharp as possible and try to accelerate out of the corner, but instead try to maintain as much speed as possible going into the corner, even if you end up on a bad line. This would be easy to test in a simulation, but I just have to go by gut feeling.

<comment><USER7> how much do you weigh compared to the top drivers.

<comment><USER8> I don't think that matters as much as you might think. We have 3 race classes at our local track. The Pro guys (top level) are easily 1-2 seconds above the Pro-am guys (mid-level). Some of these pros are not exactly lightweights and are considerably above the minimum weight. Yet they manage to slaughter everybody else out there. You would think they had a disadvantage to the people who are running the baseline weight in the kart, but you sure can't tell it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Always tricky to see detail in this area of an F1 car, but the BBC really haven't picked the clearest photos ...

Hopefully a bit clearer here:

* Mercedes W11 cape: [https://i.imgur.com/LoDuge8.jpg](https://i.imgur.com/LoDuge8.jpg)

* Red Bull RB16: [https://i.imgur.com/lJ4SrYv.jpg](https://i.imgur.com/lJ4SrYv.jpg)

* Renault RS20: [https://i.imgur.com/XJVeFwN.png](https://i.imgur.com/XJVeFwN.png)

<comment><USER9> Even harder to see the J-vanes on the Ferrari (not helped by there being only 10 photographers round the tracks at the moment, so many fewer pictures than usual) but I've found a couple photos of the SF1000's vanes:

[https://i.redd.it/4awyalvl1al41.jpg](https://i.redd.it/4awyalvl1al41.jpg)

[https://i.redd.it/xrhjfzmj0ql41.jpg](https://i.redd.it/xrhjfzmj0ql41.jpg)

It'll be interesting to see if they change cape/J-vane philosophy with their much vaunted aero upgrade for Hungary in a couple of weeks. There certainly seem to be some pretty fundamental issues with their 2020 car at the moment. I'm sure their newly legal engine isn't helping them but watching some of Vettel's onboards from yesterday[0] there's clearly something aerodynamically wrong too, the car just isn't planted in any phase of cornering.

[0] - [https://twitter.com/deadlinex/status/1279825624719392768](https://twitter.com/deadlinex/status/1279825624719392768)

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> People who are not normally interested in F1 are finding the Netflix series Drive to Survive a more accessible version to spectate. It's not just highlights in chronological order, but a distillation of the main themes of the season, e.g., certain inter-team battles, intra-team rivalries, fallouts between teams and suppliers, regulations, etc. The behind-the-scenes glimpses are fascinating.

I remember (pre-family when I could easily give-up a large chunk of my weekend) tuning in to the beginning of TV coverage on Saturdays (qualifying) and Sundays (race day) primarily to watch all the build-up about the developments since the previous race, particularly all the new technical changes; the relentless engineering efforts are immense and we only get a tiny glimpse of it.

These cars could in theory be even faster. They stopped in season testing years ago; there are limits to the amount of high performance computing they can do; many parts are standardised. There's a tension in the way the sport is regulated to constrain the vast budgets of the larger teams so that smaller teams can try and compete, and ideally new teams enter the sport too. In addition, the aerodymics evolved to such a degree that the wake each car leaves behind makes it almost impossible for cars to follow closely and overtake, leading to uninspiring processions on race days. So regulations are constantly being added to try and ensure a spectacle (DRS, degrading tyres, forcing sub-optimal front and rear wings). But they continue to innovate at a staggering pace.

When DRS (Drag Reduction System -- used in set portions of the straights, a car that's within 1 sec of a car can deploy DRS, that causes the rear wing to have less drag and can potentially allow an overtake). But absolutely amazing lateral thinking from the teams saw innovations like the "F-duct" that was eventually banned and then the so-called "Double DRS". They are channeling relatively small amounts of air-flow through little vents and holes to create small but improvements to their aero performance.

And when in-season testing was removed, all teams rolled out state-of-the-art digital car simulators that have become incredible sophisticated; they design new aerodynamic parts, such as a tiny adjustments to their front-wing, then they test the part on the simulator before actually building and taking to the next race.

<comment><USER11> So I watched Drive to Survive and loved it, so much so that I would like to get into watching F1 proper, but when I tried it just doesn't hold my interest (although admittedly I mostly attempted to watch random races on YouTube). Do you (or anyone else) have any tips on what and where to watch to get into it?

Perhaps it's time I get a proper subscription for the TV coverage and watch it like you say over the weekend.

<comment><USER12> I think the more you understand about the race, strategy, technology, rivalries, and race-craft will definitely help you enjoy a GP much more. It's combination of all these things that make it that much more than just cars going around a track quickly. The Austrian GP just gone was very exciting, especially the end!

Try watch a few more races and even check out the F1 subreddit /r/formula1 - its a good community that share plenty of news, clips from new and old races etc - and if you have any questions, they're all very helpful

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> If anyone is interested, the software team I work for is hiring! F1 is definitely an interesting challenge and a unique work environment.

Find out more here: [https://jobs.redbull.com/at-de/bicester-scuderia- alphatauri-...](https://jobs.redbull.com/at-de/bicester-scuderia-alphatauri- software-development-team-leader-128988-047824?lang=en)

<comment><USER14> I'm probably not up for a move to the UK, but if you don't mind, could you tell us a bit more about your job?

What sort of projects have you been able to work on? What's the work culture like? Do you find the actual technical problems you work on exciting, or is it more the domain that excites you (i.e. building and operating a racecar)?

<comment><USER13> Sure. The role (and myself) are in the aerodynamics department, developing and maintaining software for the aerodynamicists. The role of the aerodynamicist is to develop the bodywork of the car (wings, ducts, chassis shape etc) to improve aerodynamic efficiency. This is done primarily in computational fluid dynamics simulations [1] (virtual) and scale model testing in a wind tunnel [2] (physical) before being tested on the actual race car. My group works on the software to analyse the data output. Think data science dashboards with lots of real time and historical data. Due to our requirements, the tools are designed in house with input from users. In my time here I have worked on interfacing with the HPC cluster, improving visualisations and improving our backend stack amongst other things.

For your last question, it is a bit of both. I went to university with the goal of working in F1 and the competitive aspect is definitely there but as I was not a comp sci student the technical problems are still interesting. Developing aero is very visual heavy as ideas are implemented as 3D CAD designs and often reviewed as such. So it's not just a more complicated stock ticker that needs to be shown.

[1]: [https://static.carthrottle.com/workspace/uploads/posts/2016/...](https://static.carthrottle.com/workspace/uploads/posts/2016/03/0b59df596795aa48e1ed670478d2b06a.jpg)

[2]: [https://images.cdn.circlesix.co/image/2/1000/425/5/uploads/p...](https://images.cdn.circlesix.co/image/2/1000/425/5/uploads/posts/2019/08/462980c00e8a3c285d85b9931da87a73.png)

<comment><USER15> This sounds like a great blend of Mechanical and Software Engineering. It would be a bit of a commute from the US unfortunately.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Watched a lot of F1 in 90s/00s, stopped after 2017 season. Current regulations make it very predictable. Most offending rules are:

\- limit on testing means that whoever makes the best car after regulations change will win until next regulations change (2010..2013 Red Bull, 2014.. today Mercedes), others have very limited means to catch up

\- scoring system introduced in late 00s rewards reliability over racing, and gives miniscule reward for 1st place: now you get 25 for P1, 18 for P2, and in 80s it was 9 or 10 for P1, 6 for P2, and in 1980s only 11 of 17 results counted towards championship, so drivers would often take more risks to get for results. Now they just drive home safely.

<comment><USER17> Limiting on testing is just taking away the unique Ferrari advantage. Previously they just took their design out on their private racetrack next to the lab. Now they have to test as all the others: virtually in computer simulations. And for a short time on the track.

It's much more interesting to do the simulations virtually. Some even do the windtunnel testing now virtually. But only the richest.

<comment><USER16> So how do you explain that now after each regulation change and until the next, one team wins every constructor and driver title?

Previously, dominance was never that total, not even during Schumacher/Ferrari era (and Schumacher was way better driver than Hamilton). But since 2010, no competing team is able to catch up.

<comment><USER10> On paper it looks like Mercedes are dominant and have been since the V6 engine era. For sure the first couple of years they had a massive lead.

But the stats disguise the fight; the fact that Mercedes have won didn't mean their position wasn't earned, frankly they've had a fair slice of luck in several races. For the last two or three years one could easily argue that Ferrari had the means to take them on and beat them, but their campaigns have unravelled for various reasons. Many races they've had to earn that win and many seasons where there was a fight throughout.

The fact that Maclaren has vanished into obscurity despite originally having a Merc engine, and RedBull and Ferrari getting in others faces so often has actually allowed Mercedes to keep their head down and get on with bringing home their maximum potential points haul per race.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> I read Adrian Newey's autobiography, "How to build a car", last year, and thoroughly enjoyed it. I'd recommend it to anyone with an interest in the engineering side of motorsport.

</comment><comment><USER19> Judging by yesterday's race, the real key is just having your car finish the race (said in jest but there were nine DNFs in yesterday's Austria Grand Prix and close to having a few more with Mercedes gearbox issues).

There is a ton of cool engineering in F1. If you are bored poke around [https://www.f1technical.net/](https://www.f1technical.net/)

</comment><comment><USER20> The true beauty of motorsports for me is the symbiosis of man/machine/environment interaction, the best drivers are are able to adapt their driving style to the limits of their car/setup in respect to changing weather.

</comment><comment><USER21> I used to like watching it, until it became boring.

The cars got wider and more sensitive to the car in front, that overtakes became rare, even with DRS (*Drag Reduction System - that allows the back wing of the car in the back to fold to reduce drag at certain points in the track, if the car is close enough to the car in front).

Also, Mercedes started dominating it, to a point that the only battle in the race was in the mid-field. The winners were almost always, already decided at qualifying (unless some reliability issues happened during the race).

<comment><USER22> TBH, I think its better now that they're trying to level the playing field. Before (circa 2006 when I used to watch every single race) it was basically whoever had more money to spend.

>The winners were almost always, already decided at qualifying (unless some reliability issues happened during the race).

I don't think that's fair. FWIW, in the 2019 F1 season only 8/21 races were won by the driver in pole position.

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> As someone who wishes to work in the field of motorsport specially Formula 1, what opportunities are present for software engineers at a junior role?

<comment><USER24> Most teams have career opportunities on their websites. I suggest starting there.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> I see the formula one body always trying to change rules that effect car performance. The goal, more overtaking and competitive racing. My question is if they were to have more technology limitations meaning less area of improvement would that balance of 90% car 10% driver change for the better. Say 60% car and 40% driver. Wouldn't that make it more competitive?

<comment><USER10> The problem is that a lot of the investment comes from the large automotive manufacturers. Despite the fans and media interest in the drivers' championship, what really counts within the sport is the constructors' championship (the two are strongly correlated, of course).

What makes the sport more interesting to the fans is not necessarily what motivates teams to participate. One could argue that there are many other formula and racing formats that get that balance between the car and driver, but it's not necessarily something that gets people tuning in. People watch F1 because it's supposed to be pinnacle of automotive engineering and racing. So if I'm a team boss of one of the top 3 teams, I'm not going to be interested in artificially handicapping the sport so that the smaller teams can get in the mix.

However, they've seen repeatedly that fans get bored when it's the same couple of teams who are wrangling for the podium and there's not much excitement per race. So teams at the top will begrudgingly let the regulations be altered to try and spice things up, but nothing too significant. Unfortunately it'll take a downturn in F1 rights income & viewership to make the teams think twice about how to fight this tension between the competitiveness vs status quo. But then the big teams will think, why am I investing hundreds of millions in F1 when I'm not winning when I can spend a fraction in DTM or Le Mans and start building up prestige from other events.

Take the Monaco race, the quintessential F1 race. Watch the pole position lap from the driver's viewpoint and it's the up there with the most amazing 70secs you've seen in sport. However, watch the full race and it's typically a dull procession. As a fan I'd be glad to see the back of it, but sport itself love it.

<comment><USER25> I think you captured this perfectly with your explanation. I did not take into account the teams. I was solely concentrating from a fans perspective in error or from being a fan myself. So this delicate balance won't really change much due to the reason you outlined. I'm curious in your opinion what do you think could change that will affect the sport in a positive manner (from a fan and business perspective)?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Bold move by this technician helping out their worst competitors. You normally don't do this, even if Ferrari looks really poor this year and would need some help. They are just redesigning their front, because their J-Vane is not good enough.

</comment><comment><USER26> It's only gonna get interesting when Tesla puts a fully autonomous F1 car racing against the drivers.

<comment><USER27> automated cars would obviously eventually become faster than F1 drivers, it's just there's no interest in it (unfortunately).

The biggest interest to most people are the drivers and they strongly dislike driver aids. I'd prefer every driver aid under the sun and have a real engineering battle. I'm obviously in the minority here.

Formula E is under very tight budget constraints in order to lower the barrier to entry. I look forward to the day when the series is established and they can start to compete on things like motor construction and battery tech to drive the field forwards.

<comment><USER28> > drivers and they strongly dislike driver aids

The racers like whatever makes them go faster. When ABS and traction control was allowed everyone was using it. It just made you faster. But the current rules ban them with the goal of trying to make the driver matter more.

One of the sports all time great (Micheal Schumacher) won all of his championships with traction control most likely. The teams used their own computers in the cars then so it was basically impossible to police and thus the ban was lifted in 2002. The ban was put back in place when the onboard computer in the cars was homologated (everyone uses the same computer by McLaren)

<comment><USER26> I think OP meant "viewers dislike"</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Collections of ants are both solid-like and liquid-like - <AUTHOR> http://phys.org/news/2015-10-ants-solid-like-liquid-like.html <comment><USER2> In a sort of similar notion, this is a really interesting read on how large crowds of humans behave like a liquid:

[https://np.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/3pcvfb/saudi_arab...](https://np.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/3pcvfb/saudi_arabia_hajj_disaster_death_toll_at_least/cw5vxtm?context=3)

<comment><USER3> Perhaps we should put them in a rheometer too?

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> If you find ants interesting, I recommend The Superorganism. It is an in depth a look at ants, bees, and termites through social lens.

Link: [http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/3426920-the- superorganism](http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/3426920-the-superorganism)

</comment><comment><USER5> As someone with a biology background, it's really funny when physicists dip their toes into studying life. It's like: "hmmm, what massive oversimplification can we make!"

They're intelligent agents that can choose whether or not to hold onto their neighbors, so of course they are both solid-like and liquid like.

I'm kind of expecting the next headline to be: "wood can be both solid-like and liquid-like, depending on how much we pulp it."

<comment><USER6> somebody had to say it

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> "Imagine the window were made of ants..."

Top work.

</comment><comment><USER8> I have been saying the same thing about bees for years: they're a semi-solid

</comment><comment><USER9> The first photo looks not very humane as for me, don't know why...

<comment><USER10> Unfair to ants.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> This is trivial. It's also borderline inhumane.

<comment><USER12> They're ants. I get where you're coming from, but they're _ants_. Your cellphone is smarter.

<comment><USER13> I don't disagree but it always makes me wonder if aliens are out there tearing a few of us limb from limb and saying... they're _only_ humans.

<comment><USER14> Whoa, this is a pressing situation, here.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> I believe the proper term is an Army of Ants ;)

</comment><comment><USER16> This seems to be incredibly cruel. Poor ants.</comment>


Min.us is now Minus.com - <AUTHOR> http://minus.com

<comment><USER2> I started something similar two months ago, <http://dropperganger.appspot.com/>

It's not even near to be as polished and matured as min.us

It's not even planned to be "open" to the public, it was just proofs of concepts and coding4fun...

I really like the idea of sharing file that way....

Great work with min.us

</comment><comment><USER3> I must ask: why?

Both "why was the change made" and "why would you not link to your own blog article detailing the change?"

[http://blog.minus.com/2011/07/21/min-dot-us-is-now-minus- com...](http://blog.minus.com/2011/07/21/min-dot-us-is-now-minus-com/)

<comment><AUTHOR> Heya. One of the main reasons was due to many user confusions surrounding the name. We are still displaying Min.us by default when users share new files, but it acts as 301 redirect for being short url. Just linked to the site as it was a bit faster :\ Sry about that. Cheers! ~ John</comment></comment>


Show HN: TinyMCE + Evernote + RegEx Search - <AUTHOR> http://www.managify.org/ <comment><USER2> I like the way the notes are organized. Simple, clean, and efficient. But, I do not want to go online every time I want to use this...needs to be available offline as well.

</comment><comment><USER3> Does not run offline. Need notes app to work in offline conditions.

Take a cue from Onenote/Evernote/Keep. A notes application MUST run even in shady/non existent internet connection.</comment>


Objective-Smalltalk - <AUTHOR> https://blog.metaobject.com/2019/11/presenting-in-objective-smalltalk.html <comment><USER2> This paper (storage combinators are talked about in the slides) [https://2019.splashcon.org/details/splash-2019-Onward- papers...](https://2019.splashcon.org/details/splash-2019-Onward- papers/7/Storage-Combinators) is absolutely insane. It's perfectly readable, has numerous concrete examples, i love it.

My only problem with the presented technique is that it requires a highly dynamic runtime environment, and so we would be back to abandoning compile- time type safety.

Has there been any attempt to port the idea of storage combinators to compile- time type-safe programming languages ?

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks!

I haven't yet made any credible attempt at typing this, my first priority was trying to get it to work and understand it.

And while currently a highly dynamic system is required, I don't believe this is inherent, it's just that this stuff is different enough from current practice that you need something dynamic enough to allow the deviation.

Now that it's working, I have started to look more closely at typing it. I think it should be possible.

As a matter of fact, SCs and PIs _should_ actually make things more static, because the combinators are configured once and then pretty much used as-is.

Any help gladly accepted and appreciated.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> TIL "Ma":

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ma_(negative_space)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ma_\(negative_space\))

Ma (negative space)

Ma (間) is a Japanese word which can be roughly translated as "gap", "space", "pause" or "the space between two structural parts." The spatial concept is experienced progressively through intervals of spatial designation. In Japanese, ma, the word for space, suggests interval. It is best described as a consciousness of place, not in the sense of an enclosed three-dimensional entity, but rather the simultaneous awareness of form and non-form deriving from an intensification of vision.

Ma is not something that is created by compositional elements; it takes place in the imagination of the human who experiences these elements. Therefore, ma can be defined as experiential place understood with emphasis on interval.

Ma has also been described as "an emptiness full of possibilities, like a promise yet to be fulfilled", and as "the silence between the notes which make the music" (cf. Isaac Stern's comment below).

Other illustrations appear in this old poem:

Thirty spokes meet in the hub, though the space between them is the essence of the wheel;

Pots are formed from clay, though the space inside them is the essence of the pot;

Walls with windows and doors form the house, though the space within them is the essence of the house.

<comment><USER4> This is a pretty fundamental idea in traditional Japanese design of ... everything. Dance, calligraphy, martial arts, learning, home decorating, plates of food, pregnant pauses in poetry or drama, sometimes even in manufacturing processes.

And yet they still hound you with those 2am meetings (from wherever I am) with corporate and (still) faxed documents back and forth. Those folks still love their hand-written faxes. (I love so much about working with them, my friends, that I guess I can accommodate this quirk).

<comment><USER3> In Understanding Comics, Scott McCloud writes about gutters, the space between frames of comics / graphics novels.

[https://comicbookglossary.wordpress.com/gutter/](https://comicbookglossary.wordpress.com/gutter/)

[https://understandingcomics177.wordpress.com/about/1-2/2-2/](https://understandingcomics177.wordpress.com/about/1-2/2-2/)

[https://thesequentialpress.wordpress.com/2012/01/19/transiti...](https://thesequentialpress.wordpress.com/2012/01/19/transitions/)

[https://seths.blog/2010/01/in-between-frames/](https://seths.blog/2010/01/in- between-frames/)

<comment><USER5> He also mentions how Japan developed a very different relation to space and time in their visual language of comics. Notably there is the technique where certain scenes do not have frame borders on the side of the edges, as if to imply that the scene is unbound and extending forever beyond the paper, just outside our view. This is not unusual in Western comics now too, but it originated from Japanese manga. Given the concept of "Ma" it makes a lot more sense now that this technique was first developed in Japan.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Who actually uses Smalltalk? All I've ever seen is people talking about how great it is. What are some big examples of popular open source or commercial software built with it?

<comment><USER7> I know Intercontinental Exchange (a sort of meta exchange that owns other exchanges like the NYSE) uses Smalltalk pretty heavily. They use Gemstone as their DB.

<comment><USER8> >(a sort of meta exchange that owns other exchanges like the NYSE)

You mean the _company_ that owns NYSE.

<comment><USER7> I mean what I said.

<comment><USER8> OK, maybe I am wrong. There is a _company_ called Intercontinental Exchange, Inc.

Please provide any evidence that there is an _exchange_ or meta exchange named Intercontinental Exchange.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Where does the name Objective-Smalltalk come from? Isn't that a bit of a pleonasm? (about to watch the video, maybe it is addressed in there)

Anyway, very curious about this!

EDIT: first slide: it's because of its relation to Objective-C. Still a funny pleonasm to me though ;)

<comment><AUTHOR> :-)

Yes, the name is a part joke...but also part serious:

Yes, Objective-C is Smalltalk added to C, so at that level it doesn't really make sense. It does signal that it is very similar to Objective-C, but no longer with "C" as the base and Smalltalk added on top, but instead Smalltalk as the base with some ability to branch "down" to C. So same programming model, different emphasis.

That's one part of it.

The other part is realising that Brad Cox was after the concept of a _Software-IC_ [1], and dynamic messaging was just one possible IC/Module interconnection mechanism. I like the description of Objective-C as "COM with language support".

Objective-Smalltalk extends what the "Objective" part means to cover pretty much any sort of architectural connector, in order to avoid architectural mismatch caused by our implementation mechanisms not matching the structure of the systems we want to build.

[1] [https://blog.metaobject.com/2019/03/software-ics-binary- comp...](https://blog.metaobject.com/2019/03/software-ics-binary- compatibility-and.html)

<comment><USER4> This reminds me of the General Magic / Kaleida / Taligent /Pink stuff being sorta/kinda done by Apple in the late 80s (early 90s? Both?).

There were agents and software ICs and messaging in the air! (I don't know why, because interconnect in-system and out-system all more-or-less sucked).

Like Xanadu, this was all kind of "ahead of its time" stuff, and I've never understood why it wasn't resurrected in simpler form since (yet).

What are you trying to ultimately accomplish here? It all appears quite elegant, but I'm not sure I can infer the end-game of the project or enterprise.

EDIT: Forgive me. I'm running on time-lagged batteries, and I suspect that you suggest more than I am picking up on...

<comment><AUTHOR> The endgame is I want to change programming. It's been too sucky for too long.

 _Certainty of death. Small chance of success. What are we waiting for?_

Quite frankly I'd be happy if someone else were to do it, but since nobody stepped up I reluctantly started (a) figuring out what was wrong and (b) fixing it.

<comment><USER5> So I have finally watched the video, read the accompanying blog post and then the "Storage Combinators" paper. All I an say is: you have a new RSS subscriber to your blog.

Have you considered showcasing Objective-Smalltalk on lobste.rs and /r/programminglanguages?

[0] [https://lobste.rs/](https://lobste.rs/)

[1] [https://old.reddit.com/r/programminglanguages](https://old.reddit.com/r/programminglanguages)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Are the slides mentioned in the article ( [https://github.com/ESUG/esug.github.io/raw/source/2019-Confe...](https://github.com/ESUG/esug.github.io/raw/source/2019-Conference/slides/05Friday/2-ESUG19_ObjectiveSmalltalk.pdf) ) dead for others too?

<comment><AUTHOR> The slides are JPEG2000 compressed images in the PDF, which GitHub PDF preview doesn't handle properly, same for some Linux PDF viewers.

Fine in Adobe Reader, Apple Preview etc.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Cool, reminds me of MacRuby.

Now that Swift is open source and supported on multiple platforms maybe one day we'll see a MacRuby revival.

<comment><USER11> MacRuby kind of lives on as [http://www.rubymotion.com/](http://www.rubymotion.com/)</comment></comment>


Clever browser linkspam game -- would work very well as a facebook app - <AUTHOR> http://rms.myminicity.com

<comment><AUTHOR> It's the type of linkspam game that is the only way to make a successful facebook app game. They have great art design, but the game could be made much more interactive.</comment>


No longer deaf people of Reddit: which noises surprised you? - <AUTHOR> https://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/9wdvtk/no_longer_deaf_people_of_reddit_whats_something/ <comment><USER2> I had progressive hearing loss from the age of 3, had severe hearing loss by 6, and profound hearing loss shortly thereafter. I got a cochlear implant at 16.

So I wasn't Deaf, but I was certainly deaf. I'd lost my hearing at an advanced enough age to be verbal, but early enough to not really remember what I was "supposed" to be hearing.

After I got my cochlear implant, the thing that surprised me (and continues to surprise me to this day) is that there was just so much noise I couldn't even have begun to imagine. "people hearing something I couldn't" was just an abstract concept, like being taller than me.

If every sound were given a loudness on a scale from 1 to 10, I could only hear the 9s and 10s... but after the cochlear implant, I could hear everything from four to 10. The variety of sounds out there were just ridiculous -- I remember being startled at the sound of my mother cutting vegetables because I'd never heard a knife on a cutting board before.

Even today, about 17 years later, I still find that there are lots of things I can hear but not categorize. I thought my coworker sighed in frustration earlier, but when I asked him what was wrong, he said he hadn't sighed -- we figured out that I'd actually heard someone sneezing a few offices away.

I wonder how long it'll take me to build a filter to categorize and ignore that kind of thing. I know that the cochlear implant processors can filter out noise, but I really don't want them to -- it's skill I'd rather have for my own so I can enjoy hearing sounds and making my own judgments.

\</comment><comment>--

If anyone wants to ask anything, I'm certainly up for answering. If it's a private question (say, if you're trying to decide about a cochlear implant), then please feel free to e-mail me (my address is in my profile).

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> I particularly enjoyed this comment:

\---

stopstaringatmeswan4

Born severely hearing impaired, got my first hearing aids at 12 years old.

Honestly, just about every noise surprised me. I was not prepared for how obnoxiously loud the whole world is. My hearing aids practically turned me into a librarian, just walking around shushing everything and everyone.

The audiologist gave me my hearing aids for the first time and wrote something down then put her pen on the desk. I just about jumped a mile, sounded like she slammed it as hard as she could, but she just placed it down.

I got up to walk out and thought I ripped my pants because of the noise, but it was just my windbreaker rubbing on itself.

The laughing child in the waiting room caused me actual physical pain from the strength of the noise.

I closed the car door and waited for dad to yell at me for slamming it because it was so loud it sounded like what I imagined a gunshot would sound like. I didn't actually slam the door.

Dad started the car and I thought there was something wrong with the engine. How could a car sound so loud and NOT have anything wrong with it? The car was fine.

The radio came blaring on and I finally understood why my parents were always telling me to turn that damn volume down. People actually listen to this painful shit for fun!?!

I was almost in tears by the end of dinner. The cutlery scraping against the plates made me want to tear my hearing aids out and stomp them to pieces.

I thought mom was angry when she was cleaning up after dinner and slamming everything around. She wasn't angry.

After dinner, 3 hours after I got my hearing aids, I was thoroughly overwhelmed and decided to go to my room, take my hearing aids out and get some peace and quiet. I closed the door to my room and heard a quiet, almost peaceful sound. It was the first sound I heard that I didn't hate. I spent a long time searching for the source of the noise before I realized it was coming from outside. It was the sound of the rain.

It never even occurred to me that rain would make noise. I mean those tiny little drops are practically weightless, how could they possibly make noise?!?! I just sat there and listened to the rain for hours.

If it had not been raining that day, there's a good chance I would have never worn those hearing aids again.

It has been 30 years since then and I have grown more accustomed to how loud everything is, but I still get overwhelmed in noisy situations sometimes... I love coming home after a long day, taking my hearing aids out and just basking in the peace.

<comment><USER3> > I was almost in tears by the end of dinner. The cutlery scraping against the > plates made me want to tear my hearing aids out and stomp them to pieces.

I have never been deaf, but this bothers me too. I guess it's mild Misophonia.

When someone is eating something in the other room, the scrape of the cutlery on their dish means I can't work until they're done. Often with the door closed too.

I live with someone who seems to take 10 minutes to crunch around a chocolate bar wrapper before/while eating it. This raises my adrenaline for no reason I can discern.</comment></comment>


HAL-PC, once the nation's biggest computer user group, is no more - <AUTHOR> http://blog.chron.com/techblog/2014/06/hal-pc-once-the-nations-biggest-computer-user-group-is-no-more/#24655101=0

<comment><AUTHOR> As a teenager in the early HAL-PC years I really appreciate the mentoring I received through CHUG and later HAL-PC.

These groups were directly responsible for my advancement into the field of software development which has served me well these 30+ years.</comment>


Vim Icon Replacement - <AUTHOR> http://dribbble.com/shots/1100850-Vim-Icon-Replacement

<comment><USER2> I will assume this is a work of humor.

</comment><comment><USER3> I prefer this for MacVim <http://dribbble.com/shots/337065-MacVim-Icon- Updated>

<comment><USER2> It's got python in it, nice.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Maybe I'm just an old fart, but I much prefer the {g,Mac}vim icon.

Most of it is tolerable, but the sparkles just went too far imo.

</comment><comment><USER5> I don't use Vim, but love the logo. Very reminiscent of the early '90s WWF logo.

</comment><comment><USER6> The glitter, the bling… it looks like a perfect icon replacement for Sublime Text.

Whoever created that icon doesn't get Vim at all, IMO.

</comment><comment><USER7> Looks like a super hero icon.

Better then the current gvim icon that's for sure. That icon is fugly.

<comment><USER8> To call it "dated" would be kind.</comment></comment>


Structural Typing for Clojure - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/marick/structural-typing <comment><USER2> This seems to me like a very practical way to approach Clojure typing. Similar to the author, I have often needed to make a series of transformations on complex objects. Those transformations mostly depended on the presence of certain keys, so having strict types was unnecessarily rigid. Derived typing would also be useful, of course.

One point to appreciate about this approach is the flexibility in only worrying about the relevant pieces. In my case, I may be worrying about whether a continuous variable has been tagged "datetime", requiring additional processing steps. Merely checking for such tags allows the input data to implicitly direct the flow of the program, reducing the coupling between data and specific processing implementations.

</comment><comment><USER3> I've had good luck with prismatic schema [https://github.com/Prismatic/schema](https://github.com/Prismatic/schema), which seems to be along a similar direction. It's fairly low commitment and can lead to big gains fairly quickly. I assume this would be similar.

<comment><USER4> Prismatic Schema is wonderful. One useful property is that a schema is just a regular data structure (often a map). So you're free to use regular data structure processing functions:

        (def Customer {:customer-id s/Int, :address-id s/Int}

        (def ProcessedCustomer (merge Customer {:external-id s/Int}))

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Important to note that this isn't STATIC typing (which detects errors at compile-time), rather this is more like a validation library to make sure structures have certain properties at run-time.

Not saying it isn't useful, in fact I have a project in which this would be a very good fit and I might even implement it there.

<comment><USER6> Indeed. Elm implements extensible record types that can be inferred and checked statically. Similarly to object types in OCaml, which additionally supports structural subtying of of other sorts as well (e.g., polymorphic variants). It's a little strange to compare this library with Elm.

This looks like a contract library, which I assume already exists in Clojure. It'd be interesting to see what's unique about this implementation, if anything.

</comment></comment><comment> dj-wonk I've also been thinking about types, validation, and structure. I see room for various approaches, including static typing, validation, and more. For example, here's an in-progress library that I plan to build out soon: [https://github.com/bluemont/shape](https://github.com/bluemont/shape)

</comment><comment><USER7> It would be interesting to see a "When structural-typing is better than prismatic/schema" section in the readme. I read the readme, and I don't see why you can't use something like s/validate instead of built-like. So instead of:

        (type! :Point (requires :x :y))
        (some->> points
             (all-built-like :Point)
             (map color)
             (map embellish))

To keep it simple, as in the first example of the whirlwind tour, we could use:

        (def Point {:x s/Any :y s/Any})
        (some->> points
             (s/validate [Point])
             (map color)
             (map embellish))

It's good that structural-typing does not use macros, instead building ontop of specter which is pretty cool. So is there a performance enhancement?

It's clear that one should use structural-typing where an expertise with specter has been attained, Not sure when else it's the best choice.

</comment><comment><USER8> Our software system currently uses Redis as a central bus, and around that we have a dozen apps that send a hashmap back and forth among themselves. We use Carmine/Nippy to serialize and deserialize the hashmap, so we never have to think about anything other than a hashmap. All the bugs we face are because of missing or misused fields in the hashmap. For us, a combination of structural typing and Nippy could potentially protect us from 90% of the bugs we have seen so far.

</comment><comment><USER9> "somewhat inspired by Elm". We are seeing a trend here.

Speaking as one who is trying to use more functional languages and starting to love Elm.</comment>