Peter Higgs interview: 'I have this kind of underlying incompetence' - <AUTHOR> http://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/dec/06/peter-higgs-interview-underlying-incompetence <comment><USER2> Awesome article.

> One has since acknowledged that they were simply too late, and Higgs agrees, > "I think so, yes." The other two were invited to Cern in July last year when > the particle's discovery was announced, and complained about being ignored > by the press, but although he does say they "naturally felt a bit left out", > he doesn't look too troubled.

One of the saddest part of this article. We often forget that a lot of geniuses are left in the dark just because they were not here first. But they might have very interesting stories to tell as well.

> But his reluctance to embrace the technological developments taking place in > everyday life had nothing to do with incompetence. My dad, I tell him, is of > the view that the more gadgets we have, the less we can think, and Higgs > smiles and agrees: "I have a bit of that, too." His son gave him a mobile > phone two months ago, but he is yet to make a call, and no one outside his > family knows the number. "I resent being disturbed in this way. Why should > people be able to interrupt me like that?" Because they like to be in touch?

Damn true, the more gadgets we have, the less we can think. I feel overwhelmed by technology these last few years. The only moment I can feel really in control is when I only take a few math papers with me and go do my laundry. No phone, no internet, no tv, no nothing...

> It is true he has never liked the popular nickname for his particle – "the > God particle" – but not, as has been reported, because he doesn't want to > offend religious sensibilities. If anything, his objection is the opposite. > "For a start, I'm not a believer. Some people get confused between the > science and the theology. They claim that what happened at Cern proves the > existence of God. The church in Spain has also been guilty of using that > name as evidence for what they want to prove."

> People write to him claiming the God particle was predicted in the Torah, > the Qur'an and the Buddhist scriptures, which only makes him regret the > nickname more, "Because it reinforces confused thinking in the heads of > people who are already thinking in a confused way." He doesn't bother trying > to change their minds. "If they believe that story about creation in seven > days," he muses, "are they being intelligent?"

That last sentence, that's tactless. I like it.

<comment><USER3> What's especially funny is that the meaning of "day" has been largely lost in translation- if I understand corectly, the original meaning in the original language wasn't specifically 24 hours, but interchangable with "age" or "epoch". So people aren't even reading scripture literally, they're reading an over-simplistic interpretation of scripture literally.

<comment><USER4> That pretty much describes all literalist interpretations of the Bible. If you want to be shocked and amazed sometime, research End Times theories. It's incredible how much effort goes into "reading it literally".

<comment><USER5> Which is weird, because people in ancient times knew better.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> "How should we make it attractive for them [young people] to spend 5,6,7 years in our field, be satisfied, learn about excitement, but finally be qualified to find other possibilities?" \-- H. Schopper

The numbers make the problem clear. In 2007, the year before CERN first powered up the LHC, the lab produced 142 master's and Ph.D. theses, according to the lab's document server. Last year it produced 327. (Fermilab chipped in 54.) That abundance seems unlikely to vanish anytime soon, as last year ATLAS had 1000 grad students and CMS had 900.

In contrast, the INSPIRE Web site, a database for particle physics, currently lists 124 postdocs worldwide in experimental high-energy physics, the sort of work LHC grads have trained for.

The situation is equally difficult for postdocs trying to make the jump to a junior faculty position or a permanent job at a national lab. The Snowmass Young Physicists survey received responses from 956 early-career researchers, including 343 postdocs. But INSPIRE currently lists just 152 "junior" positions, including 61 in North America. And the supply of jobs isn't likely to increase, says John Finley, an astrophysicist at Purdue University in West Lafayette, Indiana, who is leading a search to replace two senior particle physicists. "For the most part, I don't think departments are looking to grow their particle physics programs," he says.

[http://sciencecareers.sciencemag.org/career_magazine/previou...](http://sciencecareers.sciencemag.org/career_magazine/previous_issues/articles/2013_08_29/caredit.a1300185)

A warning to non-western members about values at CERN:

"The cost [...] has been evaluated, taking into account realistic labor prices in different countries. The total cost is X (with a western equivalent value of Y)" [where Y>X]

source: LHCb calorimeters : Technical Design Report

ISBN: 9290831693 [http://cdsweb.cern.ch/record/494264](http://cdsweb.cern.ch/record/494264)

</comment><comment><USER7> _" I don't regard television as the outside world," he offers dryly. "I regard it as an artefact."_

Nice.

</comment><comment><USER8> The article gives the impression that he basically made one breakthrough in the 60s, never kept up with his field and hasn't contributed anything in 50 years. How far is this from the truth?

</comment><comment><USER3> I have a kind of underlying incompetence too! If only correlation implied causation. :(

<comment><USER9> Don't worry, it's probably just the impostor syndrome[0] acting up.

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

<comment><USER10> You're not supposed to tell him that. You'll only give him meta-imposter syndrome.

<comment><USER11> What happens if you now describe that?

<comment><USER10> I'm quite confident I would be unable to do so adequately.

<comment><USER3> That sounds like misplaced confidence, good sir. Your claims of inadequacy are likely inadequate. You're probably a genius.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> He does seem to reinforce the stereotype of the eccentric physicist, e.g. the rumor that Einstein couldn't tie his shoelaces.</comment>


Show HN: Grow an ASCII Bonsai Tree - <AUTHOR> https://andai.tv/grow/ <comment><AUTHOR> Hi HN! I made a little ASCII Bonsai tree that grows in the browser.

I was inspired by this bash script:

[https://p.teknik.io/Raw/EWWzQ](https://p.teknik.io/Raw/EWWzQ)

                  &&
                 &&&&&
               &&&\/& &&&
              &&|,/  |/& &&
               &&/   /  /_&  &&
                 \  {  |_____/_&
                 {  / /          &&&
                 .`. \{___\________\/_\}
                  \} \}\{       \
                  }\{\{         \____&
                 \{\}\{           `&&&
                 {{}             &&
           , -=-~{ .-^- _
                 `}
                  {

<comment><USER2> Beautiful! Any plan to make more versions?

<comment><AUTHOR> Thank you! :) I'm thinking about making it grow more slowly. Right now there's no representation of the tree apart from what you see, just particles that draw it as they go along.

Would be fun to come up with a ASCII rendering system... maybe it could sway gently in the breeze?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> Do these use Lindenmayer systems? [1]

[1] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L-system](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L-system)

<comment><AUTHOR> Not yet :) It's just a recursive drawing function. I'm thinking of making the tree actually "exist" though, so it can grow more slowly over time. Thanks for the link!

<comment><USER3> If you are thinking about using L-Systems, I would say for your purposes the L-System should be nondeterministic. One way of doing that would be to introduce a slight and deliberate error into the substitution steps.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> On Firefox mobile the page spawns about 10 print options dialogs.

Works perfectly on Safari mobile. Nice work!

<comment><USER5> I can confirm this. Firefox on iPad, latest version of both.

<comment><AUTHOR> Ahh, I named a function print(). I had no idea this was built in! Thank you.

Edit: Fixed! Also, looks much better on phones now.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> It would be cool if you could trim them like a real Bonsai tree and maybe have them grow more slowly. Store the state in localstorage and the user could come back again and again to grow their potted ASCII art

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes, I've been thinking about this! It might work as a New Tab page.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Nice piece of digital artwork, and inspiring.

I would like to see all the possible eventual shapes of all those trees beginning from the current state, given branch pruning choices.

</comment><comment><USER8> Very cute. I like it! Simple and to the point.

It told me to push CMD+U for the source. On safari, though, it's CMD+Option+U. Not that it matters much :) Good work!

<comment><AUTHOR> Fixed, thanks!

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> I was led to believe growing a bonsai tree involved a lot more trimming. Maybe I'm a natural.

<comment><AUTHOR> "Purposes of bonsai are primarily contemplation for the viewer, and the pleasant exercise of effort and ingenuity for the grower."

Still figuring out the second part!

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Gardening could be a cool genre of VR games.

\- Bonsai

\- Arboriculture: big bonsai

\- Topiary

\- Hedge mazes

\- Felling trees

\- Chopping wood

<comment><AUTHOR> That's a great idea! Gardening is so relaxing...</comment></comment>


Only 2 of 18 Presidential Innovation Fellows Are Women - But So What? - <AUTHOR> http://www.forbes.com/sites/kellyclay/2012/08/26/only-2-of-18-presidential-innovation-fellows-are-women-but-so-what/

<comment><USER2> "Yet, no one ever looks at the flip-side of this argument. Why do we never ask more men to consider becoming school teachers (86% are women) – and why is there no outcry for schools to train more men as nurses (89% are women)?"

Hear, hear! Similarly, where is the concern over the gender disparities in trades like roofing, plumbing, highway construction, etc.?</comment>


Correlated - questionable but thought provoking correlations  - <AUTHOR> http://www.correlated.org/

<comment><USER2> "44 percent of people who regularly check their horoscope also floss regularly; in general, only 28 percent of people floss regularly." So being a moron actually serves for something. At least their teeth looks better, and they are less prone to cavities. But still, they believe in astrology.

</comment><comment><USER3> I wish more people would use this service. I find it very entertaining.</comment>


Google Built End-to-End Encryption to Block Cyber-Crime, Not the NSA - <AUTHOR> http://www.eweek.com/security/google-built-end-to-end-encryption-to-block-cyber-crime-not-the-nsa.html

<comment><USER2> I'll just leave this right here: [http://news.softpedia.com/news/Google-Mocks- the-NSA-in-Code-...](http://news.softpedia.com/news/Google-Mocks-the-NSA-in- Code-of-New-Encryption-Tool-445357.shtml)

This is a crappy article in a number of ways, especially in not explaining the difference between encryption provided by and controlled by Google that leaves your data in the clear from Google's point of view and end to end encryption where you control the keys. It fogs up an issue that Google is, much to their credit, shining a light on with the End to End tool.</comment>


V-Lang Alpha - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/vlang/v <comment><USER2> Never heard of this lang before. How well known the project is? I saw it has a lot of starts on GitHub, but are people out there actually using it?

<comment><USER3> It's kind of infamous here in HN: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20250990](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20250990)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Interesting</comment>


With Amazon Probe, EU Takes Cue from 'Hipster' Antitrust - <AUTHOR> https://www.bloombergquint.com/business/2018/09/19/with-amazon-probe-eu-takes-cue-from-hipster-antitrust#gs.yYnCdk4 <comment><USER2> I think we've had _too few_ antitrust actions by governments.

Also, companies in a position of monopoly or near-monopoly in any market should not be allowed to buy out its smaller competitors, either.</comment>


Mars is safe from radiation – but the trip there isn't - <AUTHOR> http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn22520-mars-is-safe-from-radiation--but-the-trip-there-isnt.html?cmpid=RSS%7CNSNS%7C2012-GLOBAL%7Conline-news <comment><USER2> I opened that page and had 3 ads flying around, one that literally blocked the entire screen. what?

<comment><USER3> I amazed that an hn reader isn't using ABP, the web is a much better place thanks to AbBlock

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> "NASA estimates that a return human mission to Mars would take three years. During that time astronauts might receive more than seven times the radiation dose they get during six months on the ISS."

Maybe I'm misunderstanding (I.e. the dose per unit time is 7 times greater), but the way this is phrased, it sounds like the total dose, which isn't too surprising, because 3 years is pretty close to 7 times 6 months.

<comment><USER5> There must be a mistake there somewhere. In a Mars-direct style of mission (the current nasa reference mission), a crew would spend 6 months in space each way and 18 months on the surface.

<http://www.marssociety.org/home/about/faq>

The danger of radiation is seriously overstated. Technically there is not much missing except a political will to go ahead with it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Notwithstanding NASA's policy on lifetime astronaut exposure to radiation, if they can reduce exposure on a trip to Mars below a lethal dose, I don't think they'd have a problem finding people who were willing to sign a waiver on that policy.

<comment><USER7> I think as it stands there's probably people who'd either sign it over and take the chance on a there-and-back trip and potentially get cancer, or view it as a one way proposition. Not sure whether the ethics of sending people to their potential doom would fly mind.

<comment><USER8> Don't we already do that when people get launched into space? If someone wants to do it they should be allowed to as long as the benefits outweigh the risks which I do not currently believe they do.

<comment><USER7> Kind of, there's significant risks involved in shooting someone into space but not the risk of a long lingering death from radiation exposure. I think that's where the ethics committees get a bit hesitant.

I fully understand someone wanting to do it despite the risks, if its their choice then they've made their decision.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment> mkr-hn [http://www.nasa.gov/offices/oct/stp/niac/2012_phaseII_fellow...](http://www.nasa.gov/offices/oct/stp/niac/2012_phaseII_fellows_westover.html)

</comment><comment><USER9> Is this the big news from yesterday then?

<comment><USER10> I don't think so, it mentions the weather station and the radiation monitor being the instruments involved here, but the "big news" is from a sample collector.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> Didn't we already solve this?

[http://www.universetoday.com/20671/ion-shield-for- interplane...](http://www.universetoday.com/20671/ion-shield-for- interplanetary-spaceships-now-a-reality/)

<comment><USER12> No, we have ideas on how to do this. There will be a lot of engineering and research before it's real and reliable.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> Relevant: <http://xkcd.com/radiation/></comment>


Hacking Subway's $5 Footlong - <AUTHOR>

Today at lunch I went to Subway for a $5 Footlong.  The Italian BMT (whose initials apparently don't relate to the meats it contains)   looked tempting, but it was $6, and I wasn't too keen on the salami, though the pepperoni and ham sounded good.  I asked my sandwich artist if it were possible to either double up on pepperoni or ham and he said no.  Then it hit me...there is a $5 black forest ham sandwich, to which I could add pepperoni for $0.50, in effect giving me the substitution they wouldn't allow, with a $0.50 discount to boot!  Had they simply given me the substitution int the first place, I would have paid more.<p>Does anyone else have an example of hacking restaurant menus? <comment><USER2> Go to McDonalds; buy a $1 side salad with Southwestern dressing and a $1 Hot 'n' Spicy chicken sandwich. Cube the chicken meat (offer the bun to your kids if they're still hungry) and add it to the salad and dressing... instant Southwestern Chicken Salad for $2

</comment><comment><USER3> 6" Spicy Italian is $2.99, the meal which includes two cookies and a medium drink is $5.00. However, if you buy the drink separately at $.99 and the two cookies at $.99, I save $.02.

I often worry about their financial solvency when I do this.

</comment><comment><USER4> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wtfNE4z6a8>

Jack Nicholson getting his toast and not taking any shit.</comment>


Russia jammed GPS during major NATO military exercise with US troops - <AUTHOR> https://edition.cnn.com/2018/11/14/politics/russia-nato-jamming/index.html <comment><USER2> Seems like this would be a plus - more closely simulating real war conditions.</comment>


TSA Security Directive SD-1544–09-06 - <AUTHOR> http://volokh.com/2009/12/28/tsa-security-directive-sd-1544-09-06/

<comment><USER2> And people still ask me why I prefer taking high speed trains! Flying by plane is so nerve-wracking nowadays, what with dogs sniffing about and burly custom agents and you have to arrive 2 hours beforehand, wait in long lines, sit in an enclosed room and wait even longer, share a bathroom with hundreds of other people.

In euro style fast trains, you arrive 2 minutes before, walk in, you can go have a meal, there is electricity for your laptop, there are toilets everywhere.

For any journey that can be done in 6 hours with the train, the plane journey, which would take between 1 hour and 2 hours actual flying, will take much longer.

That high speed train china built is the way to go. Planes should be used for flying really big distances, and then trains should be used to go on. The entirety of europe should be connected with trains, the U.S should have 10 major airport hubs and the rest done with trains.

Nowadays, flying is just such a bother!

<comment><USER3> Terrorists blow up trains, too.

<comment><USER4> The "terrorists" aren't the reason he prefers the train. Terrorist attacks on both are so rare that they're not a real reason to prefer one over the other. However the overly invasive, rude and ineffective airport security is a strong reason not to fly when there's an alternative available. For some reason the trains, malls, schools, libraries, churches and stadiums around where I live aren't getting blown up by terrorists and they have little or no security at all.

<comment><USER3> The point being, if a few train attacks occur, you can expect similar TSA regulations being issued for that mode of transport.

Not that its very likely in the USA; with a few exceptions rail service is abysmal. It took me 48 hours to travel from Nevada to Chicago last time I took the train, what with mechanical breakdowns and other unexplained delays. Lost my luggage too. Never again.

<comment><USER5> The uk experimented with metal detector type screening at train stations after our bombings on the 7th july. It doesn't work with you have thousands of people streaming in and out of the gates- all you do is end up practically shutting down the station.

So now they focus on temporary gates and profiling - which turns out to be much more efficient than random screening.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Why even comment on this story? It isn't even security theater anymore, it's amateur's night at the corner pub, with knee-jerk policies that a normal five- year-old kid can figure out how to get around.

</comment><comment><USER7> I still really want someone to try and blow up a plane by dousing their clothes in some flammable/explosive/unstable chemicals.

Then we'd all be told to fly naked, or in airport provided suits.

<comment><USER8> I'm waiting for people to start blowing up expressways. Then maybe we can get some decent public transportation.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> The original posting (as best I can tell), which has additional information, is at the following site - [http://boardingarea.com/blogs/flyingwithfish/2009/12/27/tsa-...](http://boardingarea.com/blogs/flyingwithfish/2009/12/27/tsa- security-directive-sd-1544-09-06-the-fallout-from-nw253/)

This blog appears to have just repeated what was posted there.

</comment><comment><USER10> The terrorists have won.You don't have to bring down an aircraft to make flying a nightmare.

I know this sounds insane and the Terminally Stupid Administration will not allow it, but if someone came up with a "low security" airline, where screening was done by the airline itself using their own guidelines, I would be an enthusiastic customer.

We only need two things, an airline that values it's customers but is not willing to lose any planes and passengers who are alert and ready to take on any threats in the air. The latter attitude has been there since United Airlines Flight 93, the former is a mirage.

<comment><USER11> I agree. I don't see the need for such an invasive govt run organisation to get airlines to provide security - they already will have an interest in not losing their planes, they're expensive as hell.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> What do you think will happen after this directive expires?

      EXPIRATION: 0200Z on December 30, 2009

<comment><USER13> I was going to point that out also. This isn't a permanent change. It's still silly, but at least it's not permanent like the stuff with liquids and toenail clippers.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> The more scared people are, the easier they are to control.

</comment><comment><USER15> At least they are (so far) only enacting it for a few days. I really wonder what would happen if people consistently, politely resisted, by keeping things in their laps, by getting sick and having to run to the bathroom in the last hour of the flight, etc. Seriously, how are flight attendants supposed to enforce this stuff, and what are they to do about unruly passengers? An airplane is not exactly a high-security area.

<comment><USER9> The security on an airplane is the other passengers (and air marshals). I can guarantee that if you start resisting commands from the flight attendants you're going to attract attention from other passengers. Like it or not, the first thing that's going to pop into their heads is that you're planning on bringing their plane down.

Hypothetically, lets say that all passengers coordinate such an event - I'd imagine that's a really easy way to gain admittance to the no-fly list.

<comment><USER6> Seriously, if another passenger was arguing with the flight attendants about wanting to use the bathroom, the first thing that would pop into my head is that the guy probably really needed to go to the bathroom.

<comment><USER9> I wasn't necessarily thinking of the bathroom situation (although you certainly make a valid point).

My point I suppose was that flight attendants are in a lot of cases not going to be able to physically enforce their will on passengers. This is where other passengers step in, they are the ones who will come to the aid of the flight attendant to restore the peace. This doesn't mean that everyone will be throwing their own judgement out the window if someone has to use the restroom or complains about having to put their book away.

It should go without saying though that reactions will seriously depend on the situation.

<comment><USER16> I pitty the middle-eastern man wearing a turban with a suden case of the runs arguning the bathroom policy.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> It's true that these security directives don't seem to make much sense, but what is the alternative? I think what they are tring to accomplish is to simply reduce the risk of a repeat "accident" along the same line of the one that happened on Dec 25. After an incident like that, the TSA just cannot afford to have someone else pull a similar stunt, it would only further ruin their already low credibility.

The challenge is about striking a balance between having passengers bring whatever they want on a plane and having them fly naked and anesthetized, just like if they were cargo.

<comment><USER18> Nobody is going to pull the same stunt. The people building these devices aren't stupid. Kneejerk reactions never solved anything.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> The TSA has now officially become like an abusive, paranoid husband. Every event that has happened thus far has made him more suspicious and less rational, but the "lap burner" has at last pushed him over the edge into raging paranoia, doubling down with fevered lists of arbitrary, bizarre restrictions that make sense only to his unhinged mind.

And there's nothing we can do. We depend on him. We can't just walk out; where would we go?

</comment><comment><USER20> It sounds like these directives are based on specific intelligence of currently planned attacks and not meant to be broader long term regulations. What if there is good intelligence to suggest there are a dozen other attackers known to be trained and ready for this mission? If they are already in-transit and have a communication black-out from the leaders it seems entirely possible they would attempt it despite the failures.

</comment><comment><USER21> I've noticed though, that ever sense the TSA got their new dark blue uniforms (from the old white ones), they seem to be quite a bit more respectful at least.

</comment><comment><USER22> The liquids aspect of this sounds like a pain to enforce. At least in the US, the initial security screening (before you get to the gates) is supposed to filter out all liquids (over 3oz.), but once you're through security, you can buy gallons of drinks, etc. from the stores in the terminal. Thoroughly inspecting those liquids at the gate without advanced equipment sounds really difficult.

<comment><USER23> What's interesting to note is that I've found box cutters in the stores within the gates of one airport before. I wonder what the regulations are for airport merchants?

<comment><USER24> Often, restaurants 'on the inside' will give you knives with your steak.

<comment><USER5> Right, one large argument against the 'sterile area' joke is that it's very easy to acquire weapons - anything from workmen's tools to steak knives are easily accessible.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> "Disable aircraft-integrated passenger communications systems and services (phone, internet access services, live television programming, global positioning systems) prior to boarding and during all phases of flight."

Because you can't blow up the plane if you don't know where you are.

<comment><USER26> I think you're missing the point. The idea is to make it more difficult to stage an attack around a specific location, such as a heavily populated area or landmark.

<comment><USER12> I didn't notice anything requiring that window blinds must be closed though; it doesn't really seem to me that it would be too hard to just look out the window and figure it out.

<comment><USER26> Personally, I find it impossible to even venture a guess as to what my location is just by looking out the window at cruising altitude. It becomes much easier during final descent, but it still requires familiarity with the location. In any case, an attacker will have nowhere near the precision provided by GPS.

Passengers, beyond curiosity, have very little use for GPS during a flight. When I'm on a plane I could really care less what my location is. I'm more concerned with how much longer I have to wait before arriving at my destination.

The parts of the security directive that bother me most are the restrictions on access to carry-on belongings and items on your lap and not being able to get up from the seat.

<comment><USER27> Maybe he'll just use a chronometer.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> Notice how the thing is signed,

"Gale Rossides Acting Administrator"

In other words the TSA still doesn't have a permanent head even though the new administration has now been in office for a year.

</comment><comment><USER29> Keep in mind this is only about flights originating in non-US airports with destinations in the US. None of this stuff applies to your flight back home to New York from Kansas next week.

<comment><USER30> Not all of us are from the US.

<comment><USER29> No America-Centric implication was intended and I apologize if I came across that way. Just seemed important to bring up since the lead comment as of this writing is about using high-speed trains as an alternative. And unless there's something happening that I don't know about, there isn't a high-speed transatlantic train in the worls.

<comment><USER30> No worries mate :-)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> 2.1. All people wishing to fly must flap their wings. Airplanes are banned for being unsafe.</comment>


Debugging of CPython processes with gdb - <AUTHOR> http://podoliaka.org/2016/04/10/debugging-cpython-gdb/ <comment><USER2> Excellent! I occasionally resort to using PTVS (Python Tools for Visual Studio) for debugging c/c++ modules. It's particularly handy when dealing with PyQt.

Development on Windows remains the same horrid nightmare it's always been. Visual Studio and PTVS are top notch, but building dependencies and ensuring all of everything links against the same runtime libs is the worst bullshit ever.

These GDB scripts and tricks do the job, and I can delete my winpydebug VM. I don't care to estimate how many hours I've pissed away keeping that shit up to date. Plus, its image was the most fragmented thing on that ZFS volume, to an absurd extent. Die die die!</comment>


Show HN: show unread comments on HN (chrome extension) - <AUTHOR> http://hancic.info/hn-unread-comments

<comment><AUTHOR> Direct link to download the extension from chrome's gallery: [https://chrome.google.com/extensions/detail/fpndmkcfggkffpab...](https://chrome.google.com/extensions/detail/fpndmkcfggkffpablcooicmihgcgalil)</comment>


Check out these robot pics from #ICRA15 - <AUTHOR> http://robohub.org/icra15-photo-essay/

<comment><USER2> So much more industry interest at ICRA this year!</comment>


Volcanic eruption ruled out as the cause for Neanderthal extinction - <AUTHOR> http://www.pasthorizonspr.com/index.php/archives/03/2015/volcanic-eruption-ruled-out-as-the-cause-for-neanderthal-extinction <comment><USER2> Neanderthals were normal humans like us (with a little bigger brains than ours), living much longer than we live nowadays.

If you look at the facts, the only "evolutions" that really happened (and are still happening) are:

\- negative evolution (deceases...)

\- spiritual evolution (... ... ...)

<comment><USER2> ...and now go figure if this (read: the truth) is newsworthy:

Never Will Happen Ever. In fact, they (the majority) will always kill the messenger...</comment></comment>


China is spending billions on soft power - <AUTHOR> http://www.economist.com/news/china/21719508-can-money-buy-sort-thing-china-spending-billions-make-world-love-it <comment><USER2> I spent almost equal amount of my life in China / North America now, it's interesting to see and compare what one side think about the other.

In north America, what I get is China is controlled by dictators. Life sucks over there because there is no freedom, a lot of corruption, no respect to rules, and is generally a chaotic mess. While in north America, democracy and freedom is wonderful, and everyone has the power to make changes of society, and in the end the government has to care about people to stay in power.

In China, what I get is the US (Canada is usually less discussed) is controlled by a corrupt and impotent government. Life sucks over there because the majority of the people, who actually has the power, believes the doublespeak of the government and are easily manipulated by the wealth. While in China, people make jokes about the official media, and if the government decides to do something people don't like, people simply ignore it and with enough people (there is always enough people in China) doing this, the government has to care about people's opinion to do anything.

I'm a little worried about the situation of both sides now. They seem to go towards what the opposite believes: on one hand in China, the government starts to get better at propaganda and manipulating public opinion; on the other hand in the States ... there is enough happening in the past year.

<comment><USER3> Most of the Chinese people I know in the US are well educated programmers. They are not true believers in the Chinese Govt supremacy and wonderfulness. But then probably most people are not that well educated, just like the us. China is a large country and will have many diverse opinions, just like the US. I don't meet that many people in the us who are unthinking believers in the supremacy of our country or believe we are special and god loves us. But if you look at a trump rally, or listen to members of congress speak, its like they are from a different planet.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Paywalled article, so hope this is relevant.

Here in Kenya, infrastructure investment by the Kenyan government is very poor. Whatever money gets theoretically assigned to things like building and maintenance of roads and the power and water grids usually goes missing at various stages until the final project, if implemented at all, is shoddy.

Enter China, who have been directly funding infrastructure here. They are managing the supply chain and personnel themselves, and it's having a huge effect. Beautiful roads have sprung up around Nairobi in the last year especially, built using modern techniques and quality materials.

One can't help but wonder what concessions the Chinese government will eventually come looking for in return, because it's pretty certain that the debt will never be repaid in money.

<comment><USER5> A friend of mine spent a few years working in a few different places in Africa. He said that the impression of the locals was that the Chinese are the new colonizers, full stop. The labor conditions and treatment of African workers on Chinese run projects was really bad, and the out-and-out racism by the Chinese was crazy.

<comment><USER6> [https://www.quora.com/Is-China-colonizing-Asia-and- Africa/an...](https://www.quora.com/Is-China-colonizing-Asia-and- Africa/answer/Robin-Daverman?srid=o11a)

<comment><USER7> Case in point... that read like propaganda to me.

<comment><USER8> are you serious? It's crazy to see point blank the effects of western brainwashing on people. Open your eyes. What China is doing is nowhere close to colonization

<comment><USER7> How would you characterize what's happening in Africa with regards to China? Am genuinely curious.

<comment><USER9> This is highly anecdotal and based on personal (and professional) experience here in Kenya. Though the Chinese have been present in the country for a while, their signature project was the Thika Superhighway (2009-2012). This captured the imagination of everyone from citizens to the government. Since then, virtually all the major infrastructure projects have been undertaken by Chinese contractors that have set camp in the country. Their model of financing (through grants and 'cheap' loans), designing and building has ensured Chinese firms have an upper hand compared to local contractors. This has pushed many local contractors out of business and consequently rendered majority of local young engineers highly unemployed. Generally, there is a quiet uneasiness with the dominance of the Chinese in the infrastructure arena but as it stands; they're having a field day here in Kenya. I'm convinced this is playing out in many other African countries.

<comment><USER10> Were there really any local engineers? If so, why haven't they built anything before the arrival of China?

<comment><USER11> If you're a civil engineer in Kenya you can't simply create an infrastructure startup and build the country. Such a business requires many skills not related to engineering, for starters. You need to know which wheels to grease in government and how. You need to have appreciable investment to fund your equipment. You need to have reliable supervisors who won't steal and will keep the work on schedule. You can't simply start up, get funded and move fast while breaking things.

According to the Kenyan resident in the thread , it was corruption that was stymiying progress. That's something that Chinese contractors have bypassed.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> There's a soft power war going on in Asia. Korea has a major effort to make K-pop a major cultural influence. Korean drama has become an export. In response, Japan has the Cool Japan Fund [1], funded by the Government and some of the big banks. They now run the largest anime translation operation, and a large anime site, "daisuki.net".

(Somebody should propose to the Cool Japan Fund that they do something to make Japanese technology more visible in Silicon Valley. Everybody here thinks Shentzen, not Tsukuba.)

[1] [https://www.cj-fund.co.jp/en/](https://www.cj-fund.co.jp/en/)

<comment><USER13> Yeah I remember when Japan was hot (manga/anime) then it was S Korea (Haliu wave), at least in South East Asia. But the soft power war is not so clear cut though. Like Viki streams mostly K-dramas but it's owned by Japanese company Rakuten.

China on the other hand is definitely playing that game. Like only last month they banned most imported children's picture books, especially from SK and Japan, and they've pumped a lot of money into their content industry to match their nationalistic agenda and S Korea's. Hollywood seems to be helping too :)

<comment><USER12> China is getting better at this, but it's not going well. Too many Chinese movies are period pieces, fantasies, or are not set in China, because the censorship on present-day topics is strict. China's movie censorship is explicit; at the beginning of a movie you'll see the golden dragon logo of the censorship authority. This limits the topics of movies.

There are feature films produced directly by the People's Liberation Army, such as "Sky Fighters". This is the Chinese version of "Top Gun". It's not very good, because the entertainment takes second place to the propaganda. It's possible to do a good feature film which is also propaganda; "Strategic Air Command" with Jimmy Stewart is one such. But China isn't there yet.

<comment><USER13> Hmm. I know that propaganda and originality don't go well together, but strangely I've always felt that Chinese cinema got it right. I may be biased as I come from an Asian family. For sure they're different from Western cinema, most notably it's usually less cynical and multifaceted, and more linear and nationalistic. But there's such an adventurous spirit (those martial arts sequences help!) that I can look past all that. Perhaps because I'm Asian too, those anti-colonial sentiments are also more easily related.

But I don't know, maybe their creative machine really is running out of steam. I haven't really watch much recently (currently on a Scandi kick!) But I do recommend you to explore the classics like Once Upon a Time in China and Infernal Affairs.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> It's a digression (because honestly the fact that China markets itself is not hugely notable, nor "bad" or "good" no matter how effective or ineffective it might be), but:

Toward the bottom of this article is a favorability chart of China in different nations. And there is a huge crater (like 37% to 5%) in Chinese support among the Japanese between 2011-2013. Other nationalities see a little blip, but nothing like this.

What happened between China and Japan in 2011? I'm genuinely ignorant.

<comment><USER15> There was also the anti-Japanese riots in China in 2012. I was in Shanghai at the time and a lot of my Japanese friends living there were very worried. Some of them went back to Japan for a few weeks to wait for things to calm down...

And yes the LDP does not help things with their racist nationalist discourse. They tend to use foreigners as a scapegoat responsible for all problems Japan has... (Abe Shinzo might not be as bad as Trump but only just..)

<comment><USER16> Just to add to this, the anti-Japanese riots in China were a really big deal:

The Japanese Embassy advised Japanese people in Nanjing to stay in door.

Japanese clothing store "Uniqlo" temporarily closed all stores, and covered store windows with giant Chinese flags and removed/hid other visible branding for fear of rioters razing the stores.

Some stores around Nanjing would even give you a discount if you yelled "I hate Japan"

It was and unbelievable situation.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Smart move, the path is wide open for China.

The most remembered phrase of the orange demagogue inaugural address was "America first, always". As a non-American I'd argue that "me first" are words that a leader should never say, even when it is what he always believed.

I might start learning Mandarin, someday.

<comment> david-given I've heard it's a pretty straightforward language --- every syllable is a word in its own right, and multisyllable words are compound words[ * ]; and that the grammar is supposed to be really straightforward, at least for English speakers, with no inflection, SVO sentence order, limited tenses, and sentences made from gluing words together.

Unfortunately every written tutorial I've found seems heavily focused around ideograms, which I find completely impossible, so I don't know what it's like in practice. Can any beginner learners comment?

(It's also a tonal language, which I am completely unable to pronounce intelligibly. On a trip to Beijing a few years ago I tried to learn a few basic phrases, like 'hello', 'please', 'thankyou', etc. Ha ha fat chance.)

[ * ] It can be interesting to use Google Translate to turn an English word into Mandarin, then insert newlines between each ideogram and reverse translate it to see what it is literally. 'Grammar' is 语法, which is 'language law'...

<comment><USER18> >every syllable is a word in its own right, and multisyllable words are compound words[

This is an artifact of the writing system. Mandarin Chinese has multisyllabic words in exactly the same way that e.g. English does.

[http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=3330](http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=3330)

<comment><USER19> Despite the article's enthusiasm for polysyllabic characters, these remain _exceedingly_ rare in day-to-day use, whereas polysyllabic words in English are basically unavoidable. There's no equivalence here.

The writing system remains very strongly monosyllabic, in that one character corresponds to one syllable >99% of the time.

<comment><USER18> The point I was referring to is that the words are not all monosyllabic. The existence or nonexistence of multisyllabic characters is irrelevant. Character != word.

[https://www.jstor.org/stable/595185?seq=1](https://www.jstor.org/stable/595185?seq=1)

<comment><USER19> Ah, I see. I was confused because you linked to a LanguageLog article specifically about _polysyllabic characters_. Yes, indeed, "compound words" as mentioned by the GP post are just plain words that are composed of multiple characters.

<comment><USER18> Yes, I should have explained that I was just referring to the examples of multisyllabic words at the beginning of the post, sorry.

<comment> david-given I don't really follow here. One of the examples of a multisyllabic word given is fēijī, 飛機, 'aeroplane'. But this breaks down into 'fly machine', which is a classic example of a compound word.

Later on it talks about 'library', túshūguǎn, or 'picture book museum' (according to the dictionary I just found). Again a compound word, and one which raises fascinating questions about whether they had museums before they had libraries. The article says that it can be written as a single character, 圕, or as multiple characters, 图书馆, but surely that's just an artifact of the writing scheme?

<comment><USER18> The meaning of the compound words isn't predictable in general -- a library is not in fact a picture book museum. And remember that many multisyllabic words in English are composed of morphemes with a distinct meaning, with varying levels of compositionality. E.g. we would not say that "airport" is two words just because its meaning has something vaguely to do with the meanings of "air" and "port", or that "return" is two words because it can be split into "re" and "turn" (again with each component contributing some element of its usual meaning). But of course, you can imagine a parallel universe where the orthographic conventions of English are such that we write "air-port" and "re- turn", and such combinations are referred to as "compound words".

As far as I can see I'm not saying anything controversial here. As the article I liked to earlier points out, there are at most a few thousand distinct syllables in Mandarin Chinese, and it would be absurd to suggest that Chinese is limited to a vocabulary of a few thousand words.

<comment> david-given Do you have any examples of multisyllable words in Mandarin which _don 't_ break down like this? I have yet to find one.

Note that just because a word is a compound word doesn't mean it's not a word. A compound word has a meaning which is distinct from the sum of its parts; otherwise it wouldn't be used. But the meaning of a picture book museum, or fly machine, or language law, though, is still quite clear. But a library has nothing to do with lies or bras, and the last syllable isn't even a valid word.

('Airport's not a good example in English because it actually _is_ a compound word. Contrast with 'sea port'.)

<comment><USER18> >A compound word has a meaning which is distinct from the sum of its parts

Right. That's the point. This clearly shows that Chinese has multisyllabic words.

And yes, there are plenty of examples of compounds with meanings that have nothing to do with their components, e.g.:

[https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E8%8A%B1%E7%94%9F](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E8%8A%B1%E7%94%9F)

But of course, if you already have the preconception that the parts of a compound word are independently meaningful, it's easy to tell yourself some kind of story about how they actually do contribute something to the meaning of the whole. Similarly, there are cranks who insist that particular non- morphemic sound sequences in English carry an independent meaning.

It really is amazing how confused people can get by orthography. Chinese has words composed of multiple syllables whose parts are not independently meaningful. Period. Again, this is information that's available all over the place, e.g.:

[http://www.101languages.net/chinese/morphology.html](http://www.101languages.net/chinese/morphology.html)

Or from Wikipedia:

>The number of sounds in the different spoken dialects varies, but in general there has been a tendency to a reduction in sounds from Middle Chinese. The Mandarin dialects in particular have experienced a dramatic decrease in sounds and so have far more multisyllabic words than most other spoken varieties. The total number of syllables in some varieties is therefore only about a thousand, including tonal variation, which is only about an eighth as many as English.[b]

Or here:

[http://linguistlist.org/ask-ling/message- details1.cfm?asklin...](http://linguistlist.org/ask-ling/message- details1.cfm?asklingid=200365409)

<comment> david-given > Right. That's the point. This clearly shows that Chinese has multisyllabic > words.

...but I never said it didn't.

I think you're trying to respond to a different argument than the one I'm making. I'm not trying to say that Chinese only has single-syllable words. I'm saying that it has multisyllable words made up out of single syllable words --- that's what compound words _are_. All the examples you've given are clearly compound words, including 'flower born' (which I'll admit is not _very_ like a peanut).

The article you just linked to uses jī as an example of a word which is only used to make up compound words. But they're still compound words. jī has a meaning of its own (well --- several meanings, depending on context). You glue it together with another word to produce a compound word with additional meaning. That's pretty much the definition of a compound word.

I don't know where you're going here --- sorry.

<comment><USER18> >But they're still compound words.

Only in an orthographic sense. For example, the linguist list post that I linked to talks about the bound morpheme -zi. This is written using the character which in classical Chinese was the word for 'child'. But clearly there's no sense in which 'zhuozi' (table) is a "compound word" containing the word for child. It's just that since the final syllable of the word happens to be pronounced the same way as the classical Chinese word for child, it's written using that character. This is a purely orthographic fact. And in fact 'zi' cannot be used by itself as a noun in modern Chinese (except in a few fixed idioms).

It's as if English (a) was written like (b):

(a) I realize that.

(b) I real eyes that.

And we then said that 'realize' is a compound word made up of the monosyllabic words 'real' and 'eyes' (which of course "have a different meaning depending on the context").

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I wonder how much Japan spends on that front, or if it's even official state policy to make the world love it.

<comment><USER20> Where I live in DC, there are plenty of Japanese cultural events that I'm confident are funded in part by their government. My wife studies Chado, an intricate Japanese tea ceremony, and the cost-per-lesson is ridiculously low. No way they could charge so little if they weren't being subsidized from somewhere.

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> > Since 2004 China has established some 500 government-funded "Confucius > Institutes" in 140 countries. These offer language classes, host dance > troupes and teach Chinese cooking.

Sounds like a state-run version of Alliance Française (which is a nonprofit). I think that'll be really cool: China has a really old history and culture (the latter part wrecked with the rise of communism). The only thing though is that China should be prepared for increased immigration (it tends to happen when you go out and teach your language and culture, and your home country is a nicer place to live).

<comment><USER22> In the city Guangzhou there is a "Little Africa" of African immigrant workers. Though CNN has an article from last year, that they leave China again, as China has "hostile immigration policies, widespread racism, and at-once slowing and maturing economy":

[http://edition.cnn.com/2016/06/26/asia/africans-leaving- guan...](http://edition.cnn.com/2016/06/26/asia/africans-leaving-guangzhou- china/)

> Over the past 18 months, although concrete numbers are hard to come by, > hundreds -- perhaps even thousands -- of Africans are believed by locals and > researchers to have exited Guangzhou.

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> This is going to sound flippant, but I mean it very seriously. This is a _much_ better way to spend money than spending billions to make the world hate you.

<comment><USER24> You have your numbers wrong.

The US does spend... Well, hundreds of billions on making the world love US.

The actual problem is two-fold:

1\. We spend _trillions_ on making them hate the US.

2\. We aren't actually very efficient with the hundreds of billions we spend on making them love the US. It's spent on short-sighted projects that often transparently benefit the US at the cost of the locals. To some degree, this is getting better with leadership from eg, The Gates Foundation, but we could wield our economic power much more efficiently.

These problems stem from a fundamental lack of leadership in the US: the US population are emotional-high junkies who are led by a bunch of spineless, selfish people. This is crippling the US, at home and abroad, because we are unable to do anything but lurch between emotional highs, are unable to have an actual vision for the future (and make reasonable plans to see it through), and are unable to wield our power effectively.

The US is trapped in short-term optimization thinking because of the junky behavior of its population.

<comment><USER25> What kind of efforts are you talking a out? From my perspective the hate against the US. is only growing with barely anything holding against that.

<comment><USER24> The US spends huge amounts on food, medicine, and development aid -- 32 billion a year in economic investments (as opposed to military, which is another 10 billion a year).

Since 9/11, the US has probably spent around 500 billion on helping countries develop, fighting famines, curing diseases, etc. We've just also spent something like 3 or 4 trillion on ineffective and damaging wars, spy programs, etc.

My point is that we're spending the money on goodwill already, we'rr just undermining it with other actions and not spending it effectively.

<comment><USER25> I guess that is why this happens totally unnoticed to many other western countries, if you cut it down to percentage on national income this is nothing compared to anyone else. On that scale United Arab Emirates did 6 times as much as the U.S.

[https://www.theguardian.com/global-development- professionals...](https://www.theguardian.com/global-development- professionals-network/2015/sep/09/foreign-aid-which-countries-are-the-most- generous)

<comment><USER24> I'm sorry, I don't understand your point.

Could you explain?

<comment><USER25> I was wondering which affords the U.S. makes to be more loved in world. Your example is something that obviously nobody speaks about in other western countries as it is way less they contribute on a %/countries income factor than anyone else.

Nearly every country does a lot of foreign aid, the U.S. just happens to be one of those who do less than others so that surely does not help their global image.

<comment><USER24> Everyone I've ever spoken to who was serious about foreign aid and development spending was aware of the US, because they spend much more thab those nations by dollars.

I think you're just making a tangential nationalist dig, because this tangent has nothing to do with the US a) getting recognized for their work in poor countries (they do) or b) being able to use their money more effectively (which is what I was talking about).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> The difference between a communist and a capitalist society. With Hollywood, the USA _profits_ billions to make the world love it. :-)

<comment><USER27> I mean, China does have an active movie industry, as well. Along with Hong Kong, which many just collate with China heh

India has Bollywood.

Both have garnered quite a following in the West thanks to that.

<comment><USER28> I almost burst out laughing. China and India are nowhere close to the US movie industry's influence around the world.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> It's not nearly enough, it needs to be trillions for it to catch up to America.

</comment><comment><USER30> Dear China,

No need to spend billions. Just don't cancel my flight one week before I depart and everything will be fine!!! :[

</comment><comment><USER31> so China is

\- lead by a billionnaire dictator and son of veteran communist party member, who has shown to purge his enemies, jail innocents/reporters without trial, disappear others. He oppresses the will of hong kongers to self govern, and acts like a crybaby whenever Taiwan, a self-governing democracy, does anything political

\- controlled by a "congress" of billionnaires, who work together to exploit workers for pennies on the dollar, turn a blind eye to deadly air pollution/water pollution/poisonous food in favor of money, and when in danger, flees to Australia/Canada/US with billions

\- member in WTO, but never abides by any of the rules. Foreign companies are forced to give up tech, partner with locals, suffer 30% import tax, and eventually, leave due to unfairness. And other countries loses factories/jobs/communities. Internet companies are sometimes banned outright.

Of course China needs to spend billions spreading its false/hateful messages via its 50cents army on reddit, facebook, etc. It has a cruel and evil authoritarian dictatorship, that if unchecked, will swallow the world

<comment><USER32> Let's take a look at America:

They spy on you, regardless of if you live in the country or not, committing global espionage[0][1]

They do not observe human rights when imprisoning you [2][3]

They are happy to bomb civilians using automated robots in the name of freedom and enlisting you to their brand of freedom[4]

They are happy to arm terrorists then assassinate them when they are no longer relevant to their cause[5]

They will wage illegal wars when it is convenient for them[6]

They were happy to obliterate people's homes to conduct nuclear tests in the name of freedom[7]

They institutionally protect the interests of the people with the most access to wealth[8]

They have elected a narcissistic nepotistic sexist bigot for their president, and do not have free healthcare [no citations necessary]

I'm not here to spark a tally of which country has committed more atrocities or which country is better - the world is simply a dirty place, and to this day, humans are still as capable of committing human on human sin.

China is no doubt guilty of many crimes too but I find China bashing by other countries reeking of hypocrisy and evidence that our own nations' propaganda machines are well oiled and in full-throttle.

The victor writes history.

[0] [https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/mar/08/wikile...](https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/mar/08/wikileaks- revelations-intelligence-services-using-home-devices-to-watch-citizens)

[1] [https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/mar/08/wikile...](https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/mar/08/wikileaks- revelations-intelligence-services-using-home-devices-to-watch-citizens)

[2] [http://www.slate.com/blogs/crime/2013/10/23/marion_prison_lo...](http://www.slate.com/blogs/crime/2013/10/23/marion_prison_lockdown_thomas_silverstein_how_a_1983_murder_created_america.html)

[3] [http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/guantanamo-...](http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/guantanamo- bay-why-was-it-set-up-what-are-the-controversies-and-why-is-obama-looking-to- close-the-a6891516.html)

[4] [https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/03/the- oba...](https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/03/the-obama- administrations-drone-strike-dissembling/473541/)

[5][https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegations_of_CIA_assistance_...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegations_of_CIA_assistance_to_Osama_bin_Laden)

[6][http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/chilcot- report...](http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/chilcot-report-john- prescott-says-tony-blair-led-uk-into-illegal-war-in-iraq-a7129106.html)

[7][https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/oct/06/marshall- islan...](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/oct/06/marshall-islands- nuclear-arms-lawsuit-thrown-out-by-uns-top-court)

[8][https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13925858](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13925858)

EDIT: added an additional point

<comment><USER33> We can (and should) complain about this, but the sins of another do not dismiss your own.

<comment><USER32> Yeah - as I said, I'm not saying China is without sin. I just find China bashing to really be nothing more than an exercise of "pulling the ladder up". Europe was perfectly happy colonising the world in its heyday, as was America in the past. Now that they've entrenched their position in the world, suddenly it's not ok when other people are trying to climb the ladder.

<comment><USER34> You are implying that China _must_ behave this way in order to become a developed country and then they can adjust to modern standards. Seems silly to me.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> It would be cheaper to open up the country, introduce a democratic system and actual human rights, and abolish the death penality. Make peace with Tibet, agree with Taiwan on a good neighborhood. Support a democratic change also in North Korea.

These would actually make China a country I could support, but currently: no, thank you.

<comment><USER8> this is such a prototypical example of utter western bullshit. Likely near zero understanding of politics, just grew up with the words "democracy" being shoved into your ears repeatedly.

Do you really believe that China's 1.3 billion people would be better off if the country just switched itself to American styled "democracy"? Look at who our democracy just elected.

<comment><USER35> I prefer a western democracy over an easter dictatorship any day.

And only because the US democracy is going the way of Poland and Hungary and it is close to fail in Turkey doesn't mean it will fail everywhere.

Taiwan has a democracy, South Korea just ousted their president because of allegation that she is corrupt.</comment></comment></comment>


Sickness absence associated with shared and open-plan offices (2011) - <AUTHOR> https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21528171 <comment><USER2> PSA of the day: With practice you can learn to delay your sneeze by a second or two. That gives you time exhale all the air from your lungs so the sneeze has minimal power[1].

Tilt your head down too and with further practice you can learn to open your throat in order to minimize air velocity.

[1] Source: me, a former obnoxiously loud sneezer that always dismissed it as an unavoidable and comical physiological quirk because I am too big and manly to sneeze quietly. It isn't, it wasn't, and I'm not.

edit: added a step.

<comment><USER3> Expecting that people should control their sneezes is a ridiculous cultural norm.

<comment><USER4> Expecting sick people to not fill a room with hundreds of millions of aerosolized particles when that could be clearly avoided is a result of simple respect for those around you and evidence of manners and good breeding.

Cover your sneeze. Cover your cough. Stay home when sick. These are kindergarten-level cultural learnings.

<comment><USER5> > Cover your sneeze. Cover your cough. Stay home when sick. These are > kindergarten-level cultural learnings.

A friend/colleague of mine is suffering from Chronic sinusitis and she usually sneezes every morning for around 20-30 times (random number, I know!) over period of few hours. The 'sneezing fit' is 100% of the time non-contagious yet loud and 'full with watery substance', She covers her sneezing most of the time however it is not always possible to react in time.

Also, she's a single working mother raising two well mannered and cute children. Would you expect her to _always_ stay home when she's always 'sick'?

These kindergarten-level cultural learnings you are talking about are societal pressure, we inhale pollutants, pollens and smoke from cigarettes all the time!

<comment><USER6> Be realistic. We're talking about the 99.9% of other people who don't have that condition.

<comment><USER7> The point is not all sneezes are due to colds. There are other causes that account for much more than .1%. Don't reinfoce societal pressure with biased probability analysis.

<comment><USER8> >Don't reinfoce societal pressure with biased probability analysis.

They aren't saying don't sneeze, they're saying cover your sneeze. It doesn't matter _why_ you are sneezing, covering it is the standard.

<comment><USER9> Agreed, but I think what is ridiculous is training your lungs to minimize the effectiveness of your sneeze. That is absolutely ridiculous: your body is sneezing for a reason, let it do its thing (and cover it).

<comment><USER10> I think his tips were meant as an option. To be quite honest I'll be trying some of these, because it's not a huge amount of effort at all.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment> nils-m-holm Noise, permanent distraction, regular interruption, no privacy, and people spreading germs all over the place. No wonder that people get sick! I would rather be poor than work in a shared office one more time. (I have experienced both, so I know what I'm talking about.)

<comment><USER11> So have I. I wouldn't.

<comment> loup-vaillant I bet it depends on how poor you were, and how noisy the open plan was. Tolerances also vary.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> This makes me wonder how many of those additional absences in open plan offices are due to depression / introverts recoiling in horror rather than increased biological pathogen transmission.

<comment><USER12> That was my thought. When I worked in large open "bullpen" office I certainly did "take a sick day" from time to time just because I could not stand the thought of spending 8 hours in that environment on that day. I was never actually sick any more often than normal during that time.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> Too many variables to isolate on this study to provide proof that correlation equals causation. Even with the isolating they've tried to do with the 95% CI the range is:

1 Person Office: 1 (They didn't report a range here)

2 Person Office: 1.13-1.98 sick days

3-6 Person Office: 1.08-1.73 sick days (LOWER than 2)

6+ Person Office: 1.30-2.02 sick days

Great item to study further. This isn't scientific proof of anything. As a solo worker you may come in to the office when sick as well since you don't have to worry about getting anyone else sick and so many other variables they didn't control for make this interesting but far from proof.

Direct PDF link to full study: [http://www.sjweh.fi/download.php?abstract_id=3167&file_nro=1](http://www.sjweh.fi/download.php?abstract_id=3167&file_nro=1)

<comment><USER14> There is a perfect _positive_ correlation between smoking + alcohol consumption and health!

1 person: heavy smokers 15%, drinkers 16%

3-6 pers: heavy smokers 13%, drinkers 16%, sick leave +36%

2 pers: heavy smokers 10%, drinkers 15%, sick leave +50%

> 6 pers: heavy smokers 9%, drinkers 13%, sick leave +62%

Please drink and smoke more to fight sickness.

<comment> loup-vaillant They said they controlled for those confounding variables. I bet the raw data used in this study also says smokers and drinkers are more often sick than the others.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> I don't think it's about open-offices or not: Work environments just don't reflect work anymore.

There isn't any rational reason for knowledge workers to go to an office every day. Socializing and building a cult around a company might be the only reasons. But IDK if these are enough to justify an office.

There must be another solution we aren't aware of yet.

<comment><USER16> No remote working solution comes close to in-person collaboration, in my opinion. I can explain someone something in probably less than half the time in person than over some electronic link-up.

I'm not sure what it is (lack of body language? Lack of shared physical presence and tools?) or if it can be remedied by better technical solutions (it's possible), but it's the reality right now.

<comment><USER15> Yes and no. You can build great working relationships in the office but also remotely. You can have really bad conflicts in the office but also remotely.

I think the difference is that once you got attached to some people from your work that the motivation to see and talk to them is one key driver to work for the company every day. This attachemnt might develop faster in an office environment.

<comment><USER17> Nothings beats a white board for explaining something

<comment><USER15> Yes true but a missing whiteboard often leads to well executed specs and mockups.

<comment><USER17> What interactive online tool are you using to explain/come up with a solution to an issue?

<comment><USER15> There isn't any dedicated interactive online tool for explaining I am aware of.

The most powerful tool for collaboration and communication though is screen- sharing + your mouse cursor + your voice available in any video calling software.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Just a personal observation: when I first moved into a giant-open plan office in 2015 in a big German company, I got significantly more sick. It was horror. Also, bathrooms were unusually crowded, probably helping spread diseases. Since then, it seems my body got a bit used to it and I am sick less often. But is is still more than the times before.

What might also increase days that people are not there: at least in our office we actively encourage people not to come back from sickness soon. We urge them to stay at home to avoid spreading disease further. While I personally might come back to a single office after 2-3 days, as I can't that easily infect other people in my private office, I stay away for a week more often now.

<comment><USER19> This fits with my experience. My department has some cubicle farms and some shared but much more private office suites. The cube farm people are always getting sick. Somebody comes in with a cough and promptly spreads it. It then can take weeks before there's a week without somebody sick.

Getting people to stay home when they are sick has been harder to implement than you'd think. I've tried with my work team. A number of the developers are from cultures that have what I would call a very stubborn "must work at all costs" mentality. It can take some persuasion (berating?) to get some of them to see that taking a sick day doesn't make them a "bad worker," but showing up sick, getting other people sick, and pushing buggy code because they're sick does.

<comment><USER20> Ever since companies ditched vacation and sick leave in favor of combined PTO, I work while sick. When I had sick leave, I used it.

It may well be that they don't want to cut their July vacation short by a day because they caught a cold in January. And to compound the issue, it was probably a cold they caught at work, because the company leave policy reinforces the behavior. People who stay home when sick are punished with shorter vacations.

<comment><USER21> It's smallish things like this which make me realise how lucky I am not to live in America.

In this particular case though, possibly just how lucky I am to live in Australia. Here it's either just common practice at most companies, or possibly required by law, but everywhere I've seen the leave policies provides 52 weeks a year of sick/carers leave.

Usually this is broken up into ~20 days of leave where one isn't really required to provide any justification beyond "I felt bad that day" and beyond that a doctors certificate may be required.

But that's always entirely separate to annual leave.

<comment><USER20> Yeah, well, the biggest spiders I ever typically see are wolf spiders smaller than my thumbnail, so there is that.

Very, very tiny consolation. I'd live with a dog-sized spider if it would mean that corporate management wasn't filled with cold-blooded monsters.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> It would be interesting, but perhaps not terribly useful, to see how sickness absence varies between contract and permanent staff. In the past, when contracting, I have dragged myself to work when feeling dreadful.

<comment><USER23> that's funny, at work (a large, well known & appreciated software company) contract workers take pride in coming to work at 11h+ or just not coming in unless really required

<comment><USER24> That sounds a lot more like people who are trying super hard to become full- time workers.

That the situation one of my college buddies (and all his fellow contractors) endured for a couple years. They did everything the normal workers did, but since they were technically "contractors" in title, everyone treated them like second-class citizens. (Caveat: Major japanese company--but still in the USA.)

If that's not the case with yours, I'm glad they're not in the same situation. My friend eventually moved up to one of the top contracters and still couldn't get into the company proper so he had to seek employment elsewhere.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> The title makes it seem (to me) like they're finding that open plan offices reduce sickness.

But they're not reporting on the absence of sickness, but rather absence due to sickness, which they found occurred at a higher rate in open offices.

<comment><USER26> Where are you from? I'm guessing that how you interpret the title might depend on your native language/dialect.

Judging by the names of the authors, I'm guessing they're mostly Danish, or at least Scandinavian. As a native speaker of another Scandinavian language (Swedish), I understood the title as it was intended, but I'm not sure if the phrase "sickness absence" is the best way of expressing "absence due to sickness" to a native English speaker.

<comment><USER27> I'm American and I understood "sickness absence" as the intended "sick leave" or "absence DUE TO sickness" but it did take me a second.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> Root cause: bad sickness/time off/work from home policies.

<comment><USER29> I think this is a big part of it. I currently have 15 PTO days per year, which includes sick leave. If I'm feeling off, I'll ask if I can work from home, which I always get denied (which is odd, since I do after-hours maintenance and on-call incidents remotely).

So rather than piss away PTO, I dose up on drugs and drag my ass to the office. If I had dedicated sick leave, I'd just take the day off. But this miserly PTO policy results in me hoarding it.

<comment><USER30> What is PTO?

<comment><USER31> A bastardization of leave policies that lumps pleasure and rest time in with convalescence such that people new to an office often don't get to take real vacations after having spent all of their PTO on gaining immunity to a new germ pool.

<comment><USER20> Vacation leave and sick leave are mentioned in law, and companies are required to keep funds in reserve to pay for those balances. PTO was invented to stop people from using sick leave when they weren't sick, and to avoid having to keep the cash liability for leave balances on the books.

Usually, the combination results in fewer days of available leave, and since vacations are often planned months in advance, people are forced to come in to the office while sick or spoil their entire vacation by screwing up the itinerary.

<comment><USER32> PTO balances are typically still liabilities because they're owed to employees when they leave modulo accumulation caps or use it/lose it policies.

It's pretty much inevitable that pooling sick time and vacation time results in a lower total. People aren't really expected to use all their sick time in a given year if ever. But for those who do plan to maximize their use of vacation, it means there's not a lot of margin when they do get sick and it encourages behaviors that aren't good for anyone.

<comment><USER31> Even worse: so-called "unlimited" leave policies. It's basically "no obligation for leave at all". Hence why it's very popular with the startup crowd these days.

<comment><USER32> From an accounting perspective, there's also no (or very limited) liability associated with accrued vacation time. (There may be some associated with required sick days.) If someone leaves the company, there's no accrued time to pay off.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> Do they determine that people just take more sick days because they need some level of privacy while they work or because they are actually are getting sick more often? I would think its the former, tbh

<comment><USER34> Office design's impact on sick leave rates (2014) [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24460745](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24460745) investigated this question.

"Sick leaves were self-reported ... as number of short and long (medically certified) sick leaves... A significant excess risk for sickness absence was found only in terms of short sick leaves." Which supports your hypothesis.

<comment><USER35> How does that support the hypothesis? One might conclude that the non-open plans mitigate the spread of short term sickness (e.g. colds) instead.

<comment><USER34> Support, not definite evidence. It could be that both short and long sick leaves are affected. Compared to that, it supports "not actually getting sick more often".

<comment><USER35> It isn't clear to me how that is supported. Are you saying rates of short-term and long-term sickness ought to have the same correlation with office layout? Why?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> Table 2: median days of sickness in single person offices in last year: 1.0. Median days of sickness in 6+ person offices: 2.0. Respective means are 4.9 and 8.1.

<comment><USER37> What's your point? Simply comparing the median is not really going to tell you much, especially since you need to adjust for confounding factors.

<comment><USER36> When evaluating risk, I like knowing the absolute consequences, not relative consequences. The abstract has the relative consequences. My comment has the absolute consequences.

Since there are maybe a fixed 230 working days in a year, a thing that takes me from 10 absences to 12 absences is worse for me than a thing that takes me from 1 absence to 2 absences. I'd rather not compare the two as 20% up vs 100% up.

If anyone else felt the same, my comment would help.

<comment><USER37> That's fair enough, but the numbers you give are neither the absolute nor the relative consequences.

You can't draw any conclusions from simply comparing the medians. On one hand that completely ignores any confounding variables which could lead to either over- or underestimation of the true difference. And on the other hand the medians may not be particularly meaningful. For example, if the effect only occurred in the top 25%ile of employees, the median would stay the same even if all of the ones in open plan offices were sick for the entire year.

If you took the mean instead of the median the difference would already be 8.1 - 4.9 = 3.2 days.

<comment><USER36> I've edited the comment to include the mean values from the paper.

I'm comfortable with the two measures as a better summary of the results than the RR in the abstract.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> Let's not forget that it often makes sense to call in sick just to be able to complete work that requires concentration in a quiet environment.

<comment><USER39> I never get sick, so my sick time is just personal time for when I don't feel like coming in work. But mainly I just use it for working on my own personal projects. Silent environment at home is amazing compared to a busy office. I wish our open office space, was converted to sound proof cubes.

</comment></comment><comment><USER40> I am curious if sickness increase is caused by mental aspects of sharing the office or the transmittable diseases factor. Authors didn't get into these details the from what I see by briefly looking at the whole paper.

</comment><comment><USER41> I'm working full remote. My sickness absence is almost 0%, only a few days last year due to a flu.

<comment><USER42> I'm working in an open plan office. My sickness absence last year was zero.

That's anecdotes for ya.

<comment><USER43> With N=2 and testing all variables we conclude that working does not make you sick and keeps you healthy.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER44> Recognizing the ongoing discussion we keep having here about office planning, what other meaningful open plan research is laying around? Re productivity, roi, job satisfaction, creativity, etc?

</comment><comment><USER45> Please note that the study defines any office space shared by more than 6 people as "open plan". Also, although there's a (statistically) significant difference between 1 person offices and "open plan", there is no significant difference between 2 person offices and"open plan".

<comment><USER46> Not a bad metric. After about 4 people or so, it might as well be "open office". That is the chance of each one of those people being distracted by someone from outside the office, or a phone, or two of them talking about something is pretty high.

(Worked in a cubicle farm, 4 person office, 3 person office, 2 person, then my own office, now at home in my own office).

Top choice is work at home. Then own office. Then 2 person office. Once it gets to 3 person office, I'd pick a cubicle with high sound insulated walls.

Open office would be a nightmare for me. I'd get set just from stress of not being able concentrate and get my work done.

</comment></comment><comment><USER47> 62% more days of sick leave is an acceptable trade off for most employers. If the alternative is a separate office for everyone, the rent expenses will be more than the paid leave loss. And the only thing upper management cares about is the bottom line. So in a sense, increased productivity in the economy is partially paid by our degrading health. That's not something often mentioned in the Economics text books.

</comment><comment><USER48> When I get sick, I wear a surgical mask. You can buy them at any drugstore. You might get weird looks, but explaining that I'm sick and don't want to spread it usually turns those into thanks. It's apparently common/expected to do this in Japan, it would likely help if the practice spread elsewhere.

</comment><comment><USER49> My two years in corporate america was open floor; side by side plus in front of you. When someone was sick, it usually took down the people sitting within the quadrant. Since there wasn't sick days, everything was under PTO and Vacation > Recovering at home. Just not a good system.

</comment><comment><USER50> Getting more sick ==> More resistance against diseases? That's always something i'm wondering.

<comment><USER51> People being off for stress related illness doesn't necessarily protect them from future stress (unless their treatment includes resilience). It also increases pressure on colleagues, increasing their risk of stress related illness.

</comment></comment><comment><USER52> Seems like an intuitive result.

</comment><comment><USER53> (2011) - have there been any further studies or attempts at replication?

</comment><comment><USER54> as an HR manager, we had to adopt open plan, for our own reasons, however before we did so, we have made our hygienic rules 10x stricter, But I guess solely chalking up sickness to open plan is bit too far-fetched, there are still too many public places, commute, public washrooms etc that one can't avoid ... having said, this also depends higher than usual standards for hygienic at work.

<comment> loup-vaillant May I ask what were those reasons? I always hear why open plans are horrible, never why they're awesome —or needed.

</comment></comment><comment><USER55> Sounds like an OSHA issue. Open office plans plus stingy or non-existent sick leave policies now provably cause hazardous work places.

</comment><comment><USER56> Isn't this common knowledge? Kids who go to daycare get more sick in the beginning, less sick in general.

</comment><comment><USER57> I would have bet on it. Greater exposure to germs, probably worse hygiene and higher levels of stress.

</comment><comment><USER58> you mean like classrooms in schools?

</comment><comment><USER59> Has anyone been able to find the data used in the study?

<comment><USER60> Maybe in the PDF? [http://www.sjweh.fi/download.php?abstract_id=3167&file_nro=1](http://www.sjweh.fi/download.php?abstract_id=3167&file_nro=1)

<comment><USER59> I've read (mostly skimmed through) the entire paper and didn't see any mention of the data being public.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER61> in open floor offices you are elbow to elbow to somebody else all day long.

sick days are just a way to cope with that and get away from those people. especially with engineers. or take some time at home to do things online like buying tickets for a concert that you don't want to talk about in the office. its stressful to be watched every second. sick days and "have a cold, will work from home" are just a way to escape. doubt anyone was really sick.

</comment><comment><USER62> Three plausible reasons off the top of my head on why open offices would experience less reported sick days.

One: the same reason as experienced by garbage men or sewer guys; greater exposure causing improved immune systems.

Two: being in an open office increases the top-down butts-in-seat observability, causing employees to come into the office even while sick to keep up a better work image.

Three: (what happens at my work) perhaps the work places that can support an open office can also support working from home and so instead of sick days being days off, employees just work from home with minor ailments, reducing the number of reported sick days. At least for me, if I have a slight cold, I'm still up for a mostly productive day, but I don't want to spread a cold to others in the office. So I work from home.

<comment><USER36> Mate, the results are the opposite. More sick days in open offices.

</comment></comment><comment><USER63> <rant>

I call B.S.

1\. "associated" means nothing. "Anything" can be "associated" with "anything else". "significantly related" is almost as worthless. Correlation is better than association. Causation is better than correlation. Where's any of that? This is just a hypothesis, not a conclusion.

2\. I've been working in corporate offices for 38 years in every possible environment imaginable: private office, war room, open office, basement, hallway, double office, even a closet. One place someone came in and yelled, "Get out of here now! There's mold everywhere!" Sure enough, hazmat had to clean the office.

3\. I have NEVER missed a day of work. EVER. Some people say I'm lucky. That's probably a little bit true. But not really. Read on...

4\. Here's a list of things that I believe (without any supporting data or government research) have "significantly more impact" on sickness absence that open-plan offices: diet, lifestyle, movement of any kind, drug use, tobacco, alcohol, stress from work, stress from non-work, medical history, genetics, donut consumption.

5\. I loathe open offices for many reasons (mainly because those deciding these things have no idea how to achieve, but that's another rant). But cut me a break, blaming open offices for sickness absence is really a reach. Without proper controls, the statistical evidence presented by OP can be caused by many other co-factors. (See #4 above.)

6\. Never get health info from the internet.

</rant>

<comment><USER64> > stress from work,

Open offices cause me significant amounts of stress (for varous reasons), so... does that means that open offices are in your list, under the _"stress from work"_ category?</comment></comment>


Show HN: Play rock paper and scissors against a untrained neural network - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/victorqribeiro/jokenpo <comment><USER2> I hate to say it, but I'm not sure it's playing fair. I used random.org to play truly randomly, and the "neural network" beat me to 10 pts 6 times in a row.

<comment><USER3> The thing is, if you are playing randomly, that makes it easier to predict what you're (not) going to do next. A good random distribution would give fewer runs, which means your choice is less likely to be the last choice you picked and somewhat less likely to be other recent values. It can at least tie by choosing scissors if it thinks you will not pick rock.

This is kind of a shot in the dark because I am not familiar with RPS strategy, but I think it makes sense.

<comment><USER4> That sounds like the gambler's fallacy. Less runs than what? Most truly random input haa far more runs than what people "think" is random, and in fact that's one of the statistical tests for whether a data set was random.

You're essentially saying that a good neural network can predict the next value of a good random number generator. Good luck with that one!

Maybe while you're at it, have neural networks invert cryptographically secure hash functions :)

<comment><USER3> Here's what I'm thinking: The neural network doesn't have to be correct about which one you pick, it has to be correct about which you don't pick. Only one option they pick is a loss, so if the other party can be somewhat certain you won't pick a specific option, it can at least tie. So if a randomizer has pretty even distribution, I think it can win more than half the time, because it can gather roughly how likely the same choice is to be played in a row.

I'm basically suggesting a predictable distribution can be exploited in RPS.

Honestly, the bot could always be winning against the RNG by dumb luck. More experimentation would be needed to be sure. I am just making guesses.

<comment><USER5> > I think it can win more than half the time, because it can gather roughly > how likely the same choice is to be played in a row.

With a random choice, the chance of playing the same choice in a row is 1/3\. This does not give you any advantage over having no information (where each choice has a 1/3 chance.)

I think the misunderstanding is in > a randomizer has pretty even distribution

Having an even distribution over a long time does not make any specific choice less random. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler%27s_fallacy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler%27s_fallacy)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I have "beaten" it. Play initially like you would - typically a human would change his choice often. The network would learn from you and gain a lead of say 10 points. After this, if you pick something that gives you a win start sticking to it while it gives you a win. You will quickly regain the lost points and gain a small lead. This seems to work every time I try it. After 60 moves I always lead a bit. Btw, the game gets slow then.

Not sure a bigram or trigram model would not do better than the neural network.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> I have merged the first pull request that changes to the prediction first training after.

<comment><USER7> Nice. Seems to beat me. I performed significantly better when I used random.org to generate numbers than when I played with my own attempt at randomness.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Screw up the NN by selecting the same thing over and over at first. Then start alternating between two values choosing a new set of values when it starts guessing correctly again. Rinse. Repeat.

</comment><comment><USER9> I wonder about an arms race between two advanced AI's which play RPS.

I can't fully put my head around this, but what would it be like if each AI could read the architecture of the other's brain before each move. The AI's would be permitted to reconfigure themselves as they play. An "obvious" strategy may be to simulate your opponent and ask what they are likely to play. Though, simulating their behavior is likely to involve you simulating someone else simulating your behavior, ad-infinium, until your computing resources bottom out. It is like fighting the man in the mirror who can choose to mirror you or not.

<comment><USER10> don't you just end up with a (discrete) uniform distribution on both sides? anything else can be exploited by the opponent

<comment><USER11> Yep, RPS is only interesting to the extent that the players are imperfect. It's most interesting as an illustration of how bad people are at behaving randomly.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> This is my awstats after being featured here. Can someone tell how efficient is my code being served? I have no other numbers (or default values) to compare.

day | visits | pages | hits | bytes

26 Jul 2019 | 4,688 | 16,507 | 60,489 | 163.89 MB

</comment><comment><USER12> Hm in my limited testing of not looking at the screen and selecting as randomly as I could I was surprised to find it not end 50/50

Not enough trials or is there something else going on here?

<comment><USER13> 2 things to consider...

1\. Humans aren't good at random, try using a RNG or dice.

2\. If you toss 10 coins, what is the probability of 5 heads and 5 tails? It isn't very likely, even though it's the most likely outcome.

<comment><USER14> I let rand play it 500 times the results are as followed.

Player: 144, Computer: 179, Tie: 177,

Although I think I got more equal results when I did 1000 iterations, but failed to record that one.

[https://youtu.be/g9Zo771HYpM](https://youtu.be/g9Zo771HYpM)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Wow it's surprisingly good

<comment><USER16> Check the other comments, looks like it's cheating by reading the human's input before guessing.

<comment><AUTHOR> no, it's not.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> now with a new interface, thanks to [https://github.com/ocjojo](https://github.com/ocjojo)

</comment><comment><USER17> I expected to lose against a computer.

I was right.</comment>


Ask HN: What used laptop should I buy? - <AUTHOR> <comment><USER2> Many computer vendors have outlet sites, where you can buy cheaper laptops that are unused. And they often have intermittent sales, so worth waiting to see if prices drop even more.

E.g. [http://outlet.lenovo.com/](http://outlet.lenovo.com/)

Alternatively, Thinkpad laptops specifically are pretty well built, and _easy to replace parts_. They have a downloadable manual on how to do so even! So you can just buy one off ebay for $150 and it'll probably work just fine, and worst case you can replace the hard drive.

This is specifically Thinkpad; generic Lenovo consumer laptops are likely not designed for maintenance.

</comment><comment><USER3> To really answer that question, what are you going to use it for? That drives the memory, display, storage, OS, etc.

That said, I usually recommend a Thinkpad T420. You can usually find some decent refurbished ones on eBay.

</comment><comment><USER4> For the last few years Ive used new 15'' Macbook pros. I switched to a 2012 macbook air a few months ago.

Its been so good in comparison, despite the smaller screen, that Im now thinking of buying another and saving it for later use after this one dies.

I was lucky enough to have a stash of Nokia E71s that lasted years. These earlier model airs remind me of them. They simply work, and do the job without fuss. Battery is still fine too.</comment>


DuckDuckGo and Bing are down - <AUTHOR> EDIT 2: Seems that DuckDuckGo has returned. https://twitter.com/duckduckgo/status/897501100412030976
DuckDuckGo [https://duckduckgo.com]:
"No results. Try:" + Search suggestions + Instant answers
Bing [https://www.bing.com/]:
"It's not you, it's us.
Bing isn't available right now, but everything should be back to normal very soon."
EDIT: DuckDuckGo statement: https://twitter.com/duckduckgo/status/897497301106663425 <comment><USER2> It was every search engine except google. Hmm.

</comment><comment><USER3> It appears they are routing around issues at bing and yahoo: [https://twitter.com/duckduckgo/status/897501100412030976](https://twitter.com/duckduckgo/status/897501100412030976)

</comment><comment><USER4> I have been using DDG off and on all morning, as recently as 2 minutes ago. It was fine all morning but it was very, very slow. Apparently its heavy and steadily increasing use is causing issues for the site.

<comment><USER5> Still seeing lots of "No results" screens here for queries that definitely should have results, though every so often it works OK.

<comment><AUTHOR> It must be something with a US data center then, as every search returns no results fairly quickly.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Both fine here (UK)</comment>