25 years after apartheid, black people cannot live in this South African city - <AUTHOR> https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2019/oct/24/an-indictment-of-south-africa-whites-only-town-orania-is-booming <comment><USER2> > Afriforum recently met with US president Donald Trump's administration and > Tucker Carlson of Fox Nows to tell them that Afrikaners are facing a widely > discredited genocide.

They source the 'widely discredited' claim to africacheck.org. Which tries to discredit genocidewatch.net's placement of South Africa at stage 6 of 10 of genocide [1] (stage 6 is polarization, 7 is preparation, 8 is persecution, and 9 is extermination. 10 is denial). With prominent politicians such as Julius Malema (leader of EFF, which has 10% voter support [2]) saying "We [the EFF] are not calling for the slaughter of white people' at least for now", and singing "shoot the boer", and then receiving support by the ANC (largest party, with 57% of the vote) to avoid any legal repercussions [4], it takes some very motivated reasoning to conclude polarization is not taking place.

The Guardian also saw fit to include vivid testimony of a black couple harassed by whites. Yet whites were limited to a single, tepid line about 'warzones', without any mention of what happens in warzones. How different an impression would the article make, if it were instead balanced with a vivid retelling of an incident such as a mother shot and raped in front of her children [5]. With a murder rate 7x that of the US [6], I'm certain they could have found something more visceral, had they wanted to.

Instead, the Guardian does its best to make white people fleeing to a place of their own look as sinister as possible.

[1] [https://africacheck.org/spot-check/claims-white-genocide- sou...](https://africacheck.org/spot-check/claims-white-genocide-south-africa- unsupported/)

[2] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_Freedom_Fighters#Elec...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_Freedom_Fighters#Election_results)

[3] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_National_Congress#Elec...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_National_Congress#Election_results)

[4] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_National_Congress#Raci...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_National_Congress#Racism)

[5] [https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9310908/farmers-wife-shot- and-...](https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9310908/farmers-wife-shot-and-raped-in- front-children-south-africa/)

[6] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intention...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate)</comment>


First came the Breathalyzer, now meet the roadside police "textalyzer" - <AUTHOR> http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/04/first-came-the-breathalyzer-now-meet-the-roadside-police-textalyzer/ <comment><USER2> We have this odd fixation in the US (and perhaps elsewhere) that we believe we are powerful and smart enough to prevent all badness - Make It Never Happen Again. Never mind that smoking causes two orders of magnitude more deaths annually in the US, 3400 people die from distracted* driving! It could be your daughter next!

What's happened to critical thinking and moderate stances? Why can't people be reasonable any more? To echo a sentiment I first read here (the provenance of which I am unsure), "Our increased reliance on laws to regulate behavior is a measure of how uncivilized we've become".

*- Distractions also include: pets, sandwiches, passengers, and beautiful people.

<comment><USER3> Very very good point about the other distractions. I've read stories in the news of people getting distracted driving tickets for eating a burger while driving.

The only thing about your argument (and I come from this side as a motorcyclist) is the odds of 2nd hand smoke killing me is pretty low. But the danger in which you put everyone else around you is magnitudes higher by distracted driving.

<comment><USER2> While I understand your concern, you are, statistically speaking (and according to the CDC), still 12x more likely to die from secondhand smoke than you are from another motorist's distracted driving.

The CDC states that smoking causes 480,000 deaths annually, 41,000 of which are from secondhand smoke. Dying from someone hitting you while they swill a triple mocha may sound scarier than dying from cancer, but dying is dying.

<comment><USER4> Why does the fact that smoking cause 480,000 deaths have any relation to trying to prevent 3,400 needless deaths?

<comment><USER5> It doesn't. Not sure of the official name but Appeal to Worse fallacies are some of the worst I've come across. The smoking example is pretty much one of the worst ones considering what we're talking about anyway. Smoking has gone through a ton of regulation over the years. And is already rarer and rarer.

Perhaps scientists should stop finding a vaccine for Zika since it isn't as bad as cancer and other deadly diseases.

I think the actual issue is trusting the American government with our privacy. They've shown repeatedly that they don't care about it through various initiatives.

<comment><USER6> The only time it makes sense to me is when the minor issue gets an unreasonable amount of attention based on emotions rather than science to the point that other issues that may actually be far more important are ignored. Such as shifting limited resources from the major issue to the minor issue for little gain.

Then there's the problem of the minor issue involving a law that can be used for revenue generation.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Part of what bothers me is this notion that "texting while driving impairs a driver to the level of .08 blood alcohol level." (This quote comes from the NYS Senate bill mentioned in the article.) If that's the case, can we expect that the punishment for texting while driving will be similar to the punishment for DUI? If not, why not?

If you ask me, this is just a lot of hysteria being put in the service of revenue generation and more money for our government's corporate partners.

[https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/bills/2015/s6325/amendm...](https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/bills/2015/s6325/amendment/a)

</comment><comment><USER8> Seems like this would be hard to prove, often my girlfriend will be using my phone while I am driving, how would this tell who was using it? I don't think there is a way. This means if the driver was the sole person in the car you could do this, otherwise it would be ambiguous.

<comment><USER9> or voice composition, i use software on my phone that came preinstalled to tell it to send a text message to my wife without even looking at it (I've actually used it on my motorcycle through my bluetooth helmet!)

<comment><USER3> I do the same with Siri. Read & compose texts with both hands on the bars and eyes on the road. I actually prefer it to trying to read something 10:1.

I have the iPhone 6+ in a ram mount just in front of the instrument cluster so I could attempt to read it if the screen would consistently respond to my gloved finger.

<comment><USER10> I really should figure out how to do this.

My phone is typically either in the dedicated compartment in the "Infotainment Center" or in the saddlebags. I almost always have my music playing (via Bluetooth) but I can control that (skip songs, adjust volume, etc., via controls on my hand grips). Because my phone is always paired via Bluetooth, I do get the audible alert played through the stereo system when I receive an SMS message -- and the ringtone and notification on my display when I receive a phone call -- but I can't hear or read my messages through it.

After thinking about it for a moment, I don't think Siri would be able to "hear" me, though, regardless of where my phone was (I don't have a Bluetooth earpiece or anything like that and I don't wear a helmet). I'm gonna look into it, though.

<comment><USER11> Don't many cars with an "Infotainment Center" come today with a cabin microphone so you could pair the phone to them as a headset?

<comment><USER9> Yes, but many will not pass that mic back to the phone until you are on a "phone call".

Why, i'm not sure, but it's infuriating whenever i get in my Mazda that voice recognition won't work any more (the phone ignores it's mic because it's connected to bluetooth that identifies as being able to handle that, and the car won't send that info back to the phone).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Sets a bad precedent. Next they'll be analyzing receipts and purchases an hour or two before to determine if you were at a bar, working too late (tired), or whatever. Submit your health data as well, maybe your decision making was impaired by poor diet and lack of exercise.

<comment><USER13> They already analyze bar receipts.

<comment><USER14> > They already analyze bar receipts.

Do you have a source for this? It wouldn't surprise me, but it's the first I've heard of it.

<comment><USER13> One example:

Bar Receipts are used to Indict Suspect in Fatal 2013 Hit-And-Run.

>> _Investigators interviewed witnesses and obtained bar receipts to determine when, where and how much McIvor had been drinking, said Sgt. Tony Landato, a Mesa police spokesman._

[http://www.azcentral.com/community/mesa/articles/20140206mes...](http://www.azcentral.com/community/mesa/articles/20140206mesa- bar-receipts-used-indict-suspect-fatal-hit-run.html)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Curious to know if it's even possible to know whether a driver has manually sent a text message / composed it via voice / given it to the passenger to compose text.

At least with breathalyzing, it's binary. You're either drunk or you're not, there's no middle ground or room for interpretation.

<comment><USER16> Breathalyzing is binary but "being too drunk to drive safely" isn't, they just made testing binary for the law's sake. It's possible to be under the limit for a test yet still have enough alcohol in you to slightly impair your driving if you're not used to drinking, it's also possible to be able to drink quite a bit over the limit and still be sober enough to drive safely, but the law just looks at averages and picks a spot to make it binary.

<comment><USER17> > _they just made testing binary for the law 's sake_

In Canada, I think, penalties are doled out based on a few ranges of blood alcohol content.

<comment><USER18> Laws are state specific in the US, but some do have levels below the federally-mandated .08% with lesser penalties.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> With all the proactive wiretapping and data accumulation, why don't they just ask the ISP/cell-provider for the data instead?

There's zero chance of me disputing that they messed with the phone and created fake entries to bust me for causing an accident.

The cynic in me thinks these are benefits they would lose if excellent public transport was available more readily than personal vehicle transportation. Therefore, why would they be in favor of more people using public transport.

<comment><USER20> Its a good PR campaign that they're not monitoring all our communications, therefore they need our cooperation to physically hand over the device, so we'll think thats they only way to be monitored. Of course they are monitoring the network, every byte.

<comment><USER19> The cooperation bit is funny, because if you have no choice by law, unless you like to spend your time with judges and maybe in a cell, how is it cooperation?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> What happens if you simply don't have a phone with you?

I often leave my phone at home when going on short (say, 30 minutes, tops) trips: to the grocery store, post office, bank, etc.

Statistically, I'm way more likely to be involved in a crash on one of these short trips close to my home, I've heard. Let's say that I was. How would the police know if I legitimately didn't have my phone with me or was refusing to hand it over? Short of searching both my person and my vehicle (which now gets us into other legal territory), they wouldn't know. Could I then face possible repercussions for _NOT_ having my phone with me? (i.e. "He admitted to owning a mobile phone but, when asked, refused to present it for inspection.")

</comment><comment><USER21> I can only assume that for this software to work, you will have to unlock your phone. Even if this software does only what it "promises" to do, what is preventing a hypothetically corrupt officer to use one of their other tools (such as the CelleBrite UFED) to dump the entire contents of the phone while it's in their custody, or compromise it with a state sponsored virus?

Seems like too big a loophole, with no real benefits.

Could I store my smartphone in the trunk to avoid such a compelled search? Probably not, as I think about it, since they could allege I put it there after the accident took place.

<comment><USER10> > _Could I store my smartphone in the trunk to avoid such a compelled search? > Probably not, as I think about it, since they could allege I put it there > after the accident took place._

I think their argument would be that even if the phone were in the trunk, you could still have been using it via Bluetooth.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> In Riley v. California, the Supreme Court decided unanimously to limit the ability of law enforcement to search cell phones while making arrests, requiring police to obtain a search warrant before examining the data contained in an arrestee's device.

IANAL, but I presume this sidesteps that by:

1\. Pinky-swearing that they won't look at the individual's other data.

2\. Coercing consent to a search by threatening to take away their license.

3\. Performing the search before arresting so as not to get into "search incident to arrest" (SITA) territory.

Seems dubious at best.

</comment><comment><USER23> So what would the evidentiary standard be in cases like this? As far as I know, no mobile device out there differentiates between a text sent via hands free vs one entered on the keyboard, so all this device could do is tell whether a text was sent, not how, which makes it nigh useless since "I was using handsfree" is unfalsifiable.

</comment><comment><USER24> Why not a mandatory gastroscopy to see if the driver has recently eaten? In many countries eating while driving is just as illegal as talking over the phone. Surely we want to have the full image of what was happening before the accident here?

</comment><comment><USER25> Can't tell if the guys making and marketing this are human cancer or genius capitalists.

<comment><USER16> I'd vote for your first option, personally.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> "the person's license or permit to drive and any non-resident operating privilege shall be immediately suspended and subsequently revoked should the driver refuse to acquiesce to such field test."

Wow. Driving without owning and carrying a smartphone means you lose your license because you're refusing to give up a smartphone for search.

On the other hand I can get a burner bottom tier pay as you go Android for my mom and MiL, toss it in her glove compartment, and tell her to give it to the cop to keep her license if she gets in an accident. Both aren't interested in smartphones and my MiL refuses to carry any sort of phone.

I've illegally driven without a smartphone a couple times when I've forgotten it at home.

Interestingly the punishment for driving without carrying your license (wallet left at home, etc) is lower, or used to be lower, than the proposed punishment for driving without a smartphone.

</comment><comment><USER19> The optimist in me thinks autonomous vehicles will solve this and put the burden on the web service and car if anything.

</comment><comment><USER26> Why not request the data via a warrant?

<comment><USER2> They're treating it precisely like the breathalyzer. You can refuse either and they will get a warrant for the search. In the meantime, your license and freedom will be revoked, because US law says driving is a granted freedom, not a right.

<comment><USER27> > granted freedom

Feel that? It's Thomas Jefferson spinning in his grave.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> A whole new form of intrusive search! With added presumption of guilt!

<comment><USER29> I love this cereal box sort of advertising. I often find myself adding "now in tablet form!" to random things I read.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Bit.ly Now, what happened to you? - <AUTHOR>

http://twitter.com/#!/clickabit<p>Bit.ly just got through raising $9M Series B funding, they're growing like crazy, and we've all heard about the amazing data (sic) that bit.ly is collecting. Is there more value to them selling this data to companies like NYT so they can all launch their own social news products vs opening up this firehose to the public? This is akin to Twitter only allowing a very select few have access to their firehose. It's not a far stretch to suggest that had Twitter done so their growth would have been stymied. <comment><USER2> What I don't understand is how something as trivial as a URL shortener is in a position to:

      - attract funding at this level

      - ever monetize it (so you get some click stats on a subset of the web, so what?)

      - is able to convince investors they're getting a 'good deal' at any valuation

URl shorteners are like a plague, I will never ever use them for anything voluntarily (some sites will do it automatically, not much point in fighting windmills there), they degrade the value of the web (indirections make the graph of the web harder to interpret and add another step to linking that could fail) and in general are a nuisance because they make a link unreadable, you never know what you're going to get from that particular box of chocolates.

They also make it much easier to spread 'bait and switch' links where the link title says one thing but the content is something entirely different.

Down with URL shorteners.

<comment><USER3> I can upvote your comment only once, unfortunately.</comment></comment>


What browser(s) do you use? (FF, Flock...) - <AUTHOR>

1st. FF (lov eit but it crashes about 34 times/day)
2nd. Flock (my favorite )
3rd. Maxthon (blocks ads like its noone business)
4th. I just downloaded Opera
5th. IE who? <comment><USER2> 1\. FF, just installed AdBlock Plus (yep, took me quite a while to finally be pissed off by ads)

2\. IE occasionally for pages that require it, there still is some (at least partner pages on some SW sales sites)

</comment><comment><USER3> Safari. It's a workhorse (at least now). Everything else is just for testing.

</comment><comment><USER4> I use Safari for 99% of my browsing. For dev I use FF because of Firebug. Safari's just feels light and it's faster than anything out there.</comment>


UniK:  the Unikernel Compilation and Deployment Platform - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/emc-advanced-dev/unik <comment><USER2> Incredible to find the project I co-authored posted by someone else! I will monitor this threat in case anyone has questions for us.</comment>


Universal, reusable virus deactivation system for respiratory protection (2017) - <AUTHOR> https://www.nature.com/articles/srep39956 <comment><USER3> (2017). Also, no pictures of the mice with the masks on.

The methods section seems pretty easy to replicate, just dissolve some salt in water (concentrations in paper), soak it in the masks, and dry in a low-temp oven.

<comment><USER4> Now that it's free and easy to take photos and videos, I don't understand why research papers don't come with copious attached media showing methods.

<comment><USER5> Journals often charge extra publication fees per figure. Any supplementary material also needs to be available decades from now

<comment><USER6> Can somebody in the academia explain to me the upsides of using journals to publish articles?

<comment><USER7> Institutional momentum and lack of legitimate alternative.

<comment><USER6> cloud computing is relatively cheap, could't the universities themselves or labs host their publications? I mean, the contents of the paper should be enough by itself to prompt momentum, otherwise is it worth publishing the paper at all?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> TLDR • 100% survival rate was observed in mice infected with virus penetrated through salt-coated filters. • Mice exposed to a dose penetrated through the bare filter showed rapid body weight loss, followed by death within 10 days after infection • (PP) microfiber filter, was coated with NaCl salt as an active virus negation unit • The coating formulations contained surfactant to enhance wetting of saline solution on the surface of hydrophobic PP fibers • The coating solution was prepared by dissolving sodium chloride NaCl in filtered DI water under stirring at 400 rpm and 90 °C, followed by the addition of Tween 20 to a final concentration of 29.03 w/v% of NaCl and 1 v/v% of Tween 20. • the mask bare PP filters were pre-wet to contain approximately 600 μL of coating solution by incubating overnight at room temperature. Any remaining dry areas were removed by applying gentle strokes with tweezers to the filters while immersed in the coating solution. Subsequently, the filters were deposited in the desired volume of coating solution (0, 100, 300, 600, 900 and 1200 μL, of which corresponding membranes are abbreviated as Filterwet, Filterwet+100μL, Filterwet+300μL, Filterwet+600μL, Filterwet+900μL, and Filterwet+1200μL, respectively) on petri dishes (60 × 15 mm; Fisher Scientific) to control the amount of NaCl per unit area and dried in an oven (Isotemp Incubator, Fisher Scientific) at 37 °C for 1 day.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> surfactant (Tween 20) is probably important for crystals to form on filter fibers and not bee loose in filter Could dishwasher soup or or Washing machine powder do the job?

<comment><USER8> Those might work if you pick one without anionic surfactants. (Those will bind sodium creating soapy residue.)

Most importantly, use deionised water, and measure how much salt is on the actual mask. (Electrical impedance submerged in deionised water vs reference mask would work.)

<comment><USER9> Are you sure you aren't thinking of calcium? Sodium carboxylates and sodium lauryl sulfate should already be bound to as much sodium as they want.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> So how do we possibly use this? What if I soak regular mask (I have a cache of simple ones, not surgical) in a strong saline solution and then dry it - <USER2> much effective is it going to be against flu and 2019-nCoV?

<comment><USER11> Without testing it, it seems unlikely you would get enough airflow. If it works at all then only through a perfectly sealing mask, as others point out. Maybe treating the filter of a cheap air purifier could have positive effects against airborne diseases indoors?

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> It is almost not a study about filters, but a study about an ad hoc vaccine by partially inactivating the virus by drying it on a surface with salt and surfactant.

<comment><USER13> Perhaps a 'virocide', but not a vaccine, since those prompt mobilisation of the body's immune system.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> Human and rats share some genes. But there are gene characteristics that are unique to one but can't be found in other.

Namely

1\. Disrespect / fail to see / Ignore the presence of life in other species. 3\. Superior complexity + Good thinking skills = Degrading survival instinct & arise of misconception-delusional science logics.

<comment><USER14> Yo downvoters. I'm counting for those 4 downvoters and everyone else who had much more less courage to at least put effort to talk.

Argue back

<comment><USER15> Not entirely sure what you expect people to "argue back". Why not dial down the hostility and request a debate instead?</comment></comment></comment>


24PullRequests – recommends projects to contribute code to over the holidays - <AUTHOR> http://24pullrequests.com/ <comment><AUTHOR> You can create a profile that will give recommendations about projects you might be interested in contributing to. Contributions are not just limited to code - improving documentation, creating/extending test cases, and submitting/closing open issues are all welcome. It seems aimed at getting newcomers involved with open source as well.</comment>


China sentences Canadian man to death in drug case linked to Huawei row - <AUTHOR> https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/china-sentences-canadian-man-to-death-in-drug-case-linked-to-huawei-row/2019/01/14/058306a0-17fb-11e9-a804-c35766b9f234_story.html <comment><USER2> At this point I think I'm too afraid to ever go to China. You can't get justice there, and you can be swept up into some stupid diplomatic spat.

Don't they realize how short-sighted this is? This is incredibly harmful to tourism.

<comment><USER3> He was already a convicted drug trafficker. I don't see any indication that his original 15-year sentence was improper. It is possible that he was falsely convicted, of course, but I don't know that this is more likely in China than elsewhere.

Suddenly changing his sentence to death is rather suspicious, but at least for me it doesn't make a huge difference compared to a 15-year sentence.

Random anecdote: I just got back to the US from several weeks in China. By far the most uncomfortable and worrying law-enforcement interaction of the trip was going through US immigration control on the way back.

<comment><USER4> Either China is doing this so they can have something to retreat on that seems gracious and careful (i.e., it's a complete ploy) or they're completely misreading Canadian sentiment. Canadians tend to give and give and bend and bend, but it really comes to it they snap in a way that I don't think the Chinese understand.

We have way more leverage over China than they have over us. We sell them commodities. They sell us electronics. You know what's the one good thing about commodity sales? Fungibility. If we start banning Chinese phones we'll buy American ones come in instead. If they ban Canadian grain it will be less efficient, but the world will shift around and that grain will be sold to someone. If they ban our wood, it will be less efficient, but we can make our own furniture or sell wood to Europe to replace the wood China is buying from elsewhere.

And if push every _really_ came to shove there is a _lot_ of Chinese owned property in Canada. Foreign ownership taxes can go way, way up.

It's a complete misread of the situation by them. We have extradition treaties with the USA. Our society runs via a rule of law. They're going to turn the entire Canadian business and political community against them if they keep this up. Take it up with the Americans for fucks sake. Even Maxime Bernier has walked back his pledge for a Chinese-Canadian trade agreement.

<comment><USER5> >If we start banning Chinese phones we'll buy American ones come in instead.

Huh? America doesn't make any phones, and worse, simply does not even have the technology to make phones if they wanted to. America does not have the technology needed to make the screens for them, most notably: the screen technology is all in Asia.

<comment><USER6> It doesn't have the technology or the manufacturing capability?

<comment><USER5> Neither. The technology is made in China or Korea, and owned by the Koreans. We couldn't build modern smartphone screens in the US without doing serious industrial espionage on our own ally, and even then setting up the manufacturing capability would cost billions, if we could get it working and not have a problem like the "capacitor plague" that happened when the Chinese tried stealing Japanese capacitor formulae back in the late 90s or early 2000s and didn't quite get it right.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Chinese leadership doesn't want Meng Wanzhou to talk, revealing the full extent of Huawei misdeeds. The new sentence for Schellenberg is - I believe - a message of solidarity for Meng's consumption and less an attempt to manipulate the Canadian justice system. Keep in-mind Shellenberg was sentenced to 15 years. A re-sentencing like this is unusual and experts say manipulated. The sooner Meng is extradited to the US, the faster Canada can get of the middle... though I doubt it will help Shellenberg's plight.

<comment><USER8> A message of solidarity, which when you unwrap it contains a subtle threat.

<comment><USER9> How subtle a threat is a death sentence?

<comment><USER8> It's interpretable as a subtle threat to Yang. The message looks on the surface like solidarity: "We'll step up tensions over your arrest. We're on your side. Hang tight." But really, it says, "We have no issues whatsoever with judicial murder so keep your mouth shut." It's not like Canada is going to release her to get a convicted drug smuggler out of jail after all.

Maybe it is not so subtle!

<comment><USER10> Why would they want to threaten her publicly, as oppposed to say through her lawyer?

I'm pretty sure whatever message there is, it was mean for Canada, US and the world.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> It's interesting to me how much China is behaving very much like a "gang", like the Crips or Bloods from the 80's. "You take one of ours, we'll grab some of yours." Doesn't matter what the reasons for the grabs are, it's just posturing.

It's sad when you're international relations are at the level of hoodlums.

<comment><USER12> That's always the case. Interpreting international relations as spats between gang members (or 8 year-olds) clarifies a lot of things.

<comment><USER13> Reminds me of the sarcastic and cynical inversion - referring to gangs as baby governments. Historically that isn't wrong given that strongmen charging protection fees (by consent or coercion) and making an example of any "bandits" harming his income by robbing them or harming their paying subjects. This creates the monopoly on violence and things can progress from there for better or worse.

Given an apocalyptic collapse and enough time you might see the Crip Nation eventually become literal.

<comment><USER14> people _really_ don't like this line of argument on HN. I am curious to find out why.

<comment><USER13> Probably because it often is too couched in ideals that seem for lack of better words childish - they already know that it is backed by a monopoly on violence and power vacuums tend to make any idyllic situations rare and short lived so there is little interesting there even to avowed anarchists. They're aware and usually consider it the lesser of evils unless things go /seriously/ wrong.

Better received are nuance and reality bound arguements. Talking about viable schemes to de-hiarch institutions and their limitations is far more interesting.

For instance one more viable concept is the "when everybody is the police nobody is" \- a situation where everyone has the same policing powers and a tribunal legal system would be very radical but it is interesting conceptually to explore.

Specialization still produces premiums so one could discuss in said hypothetical if there was a "security fund" that people pay in and could get paid by consent for operating as a dedicated policeman despite lacking any privledged position legally. Even if one thinks the whole operation would probably be doomed to failure by collapse or hierarchy entrenchment it gives plenty to discuss in facts and opinions.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> The moment anyone starts using a death row felon as a bargaining chip, the death sentence turns into a political murder.

<comment><USER13> Sadly history suggests the turn into part isn't new at all. Just look at pretextual abuses like troublesome political figures receiving it like union leaders and anarchists with only tennous links to crimes philosophically let alone evidentiary. And before that there was King Henry the 8th and he certainly wasn't remotely the first.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> I am confused by this article. It says, "Schellenberg was arrested in 2014 and received his original sentence in 2016 in a case that went unnoticed."

But according to the Chinese court[link 1], he was first sentenced for 15 years in jail on 2018-11-20. Robert appealed to high court. On 2018-12-29, the high court decided the original sentence was too light and asked the intermediate court for a new trial.

link 1: [http://court.dl.gov.cn/info/122_138614.vm](http://court.dl.gov.cn/info/122_138614.vm)

<comment><USER17> So he smuggled 220kg of meth, while 50g is death penalty in China.

<comment><USER18> China (vietnam, singapore, etc) has been executing drug smugglers for a long time now. Nobody really raised a fuss when they were executing africans who may not have been aware of the consequences. [https://www.bbc.com/news/world- asia-pacific-16137327](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-pacific-16137327)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> you could be imprisoned if in china police raid an expat bar and deported and in light of current events jailed and persecuted if police find traces of THC in your blood. They do raid expat bars regularly just to do this.

so really - reconsider going to china if you've been using any of recreational drugs in last while.

</comment><comment><USER20> If he is not Canadian, would it be different for such drug case?

<comment><USER21> Maybe, maybe not. I do believe that if he wasn't Canadian, we wouldn't be hearing about it.

<comment><USER22> > Maybe, maybe not. I do believe that if he wasn't Canadian, we wouldn't be > hearing about it.

For sure and the same is true before Huawei arrest. This has nothing to do with his case but with how China use Canadian in their country to threaten us (I'm Canadian).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> I don't feel good about buying Chinese goods anymore. Look at what has happened. Even if he's not killed the fact that they brought media in is a subtle as a finger sliding across a throat.

</comment><comment><USER24> In the United States, the guidelines penalty for trafficking in 200 kilograms of meth is life without parole. Canada's sentencing rules are more lenient. The question is whether Canada will go the wall in what is really a dispute between China and the United States. China does have an aggressive regime of trying to protect its citizens overseas--see, William Sampson--that the U.S. lacks. Sampson was at least arguably innocent while this trafficker is not. There is no doubt that Canada will suffer because of its extradition treaty with the U.S. The question that Canadians have to ask themselves is this: is helping the U.S. to apply its laws globally worth all this trouble in the absence of international consensus?

</comment><comment><USER25> Ren Zhengfei's first wife was Meng Jun (the mother of Meng wan Zhou), the daughter of the former Sichuan Provincial Vice Governor Meng Dongbo. Meng Dongpo served as deputy secretary general of the East China Military and Political Committee. Director of the Infrastructure Department of the Ministry of Metallurgy, Director of the Metallurgical Industry Department of Sichuan Province, Director of the Provincial Economic Commission, Secretary of the CPC Dukou Municipal Committee, deputy governor of Sichuan Province,etc

</comment><comment><USER26> I do not see the connection between the sentencing and Huawei's case other than the timing.

<comment><USER27> China took the highly unusual step of inviting western media to the man's appeal trial.

<comment> m-p-3 And the resentencing is suspicious.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> This man Winston Sterzel [0] has been predicting something like this will happen in China, as they have no tolerance for drugs due to the horrors of the opium crisis.

[0] = [https://www.youtube.com/user/serpentza](https://www.youtube.com/user/serpentza)

<comment><USER29> >they have no tolerance for drugs due to the horrors of the opium crisis.

Are you sure? They are the huge exporter of Fentanyl to North America while the Chinese Government turns a blind eye.

<comment><USER30> That's warfare.

<comment><USER31> Put like this, it sounds like repaying for opium.

<comment><USER32> What does Canada or the US have to do with the British and the opium wars?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> Does anyone actually know the reasons behind Meng's arrest?

<comment> T-A [https://www.scribd.com/document/395185756/Letter-from- the-U-...](https://www.scribd.com/document/395185756/Letter-from-the-U-S- Justice-Department)

<comment><USER33> thanks, I had been looking for a proper document such as this

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> dons tinfoil hat...

Chinese government unofficially encourages entrapment of high profile executives as bargaining chips.

Canada doesn't like when one of their citizens is ensnared, applies pressure by upping the ante - holding a legitimate financial criminal from China.

China sees a game of chicken and ups the ante further - to "death" the ultimate expression of raw state power, intended to intimidate.

What happens next? I just hope no one dies.

</comment><comment><USER35> whoops now that umm Huawei arrest is really going to hurt now.</comment>


Why I no longer trust EMC  - <AUTHOR> http://dbmsmusings.blogspot.com/2011/02/why-i-no-longer-trust-emc.html <comment><USER3> I was a paying customer of Mozy. Their 'restore' does not do resume. Yes, that means that after restoring 50 GB and losing internet connection, you have to restart.

Needless to say I was quite happy that I tried the restore before I actually needed it. And also that I'm not a Mozy customer anymore, although I'm still paying them so I guess technically I am - but that's just because they refuse to cancel my subscription and keep charging my credit card.

Lesson learned: stay away from Mozy, and EMC for that matter.

<comment><USER4> If they are charging your credit card at this point, go to your credit card company, now, and dispute the charges. By law the credit card company has to believe you, and won't pay them another cent.

<comment><USER3> Yeah that's what I thought, too. I'm in the Netherlands though, Land of Cheese, Clogs and Worst Customer Treatment Ever. Credit card companies cannot be contacted directly here, cc's are issued through banks, who then do the customer 'service' for these cards. So I called them and they basically told me that I could a) cancel my whole card, which would mean that I would have to change all subscriptions etc. that use this card; or b) file a complaint, but the lady at the customer service desk basically told me I wouldn't stand much of a chance 'because it's a subscription'. This doesn't make sense of course so I'm going to file it anyway - this is all on a card in someone else's name though (company card) and only the person whose name is on the card can make a complaint. So now I have to get my boss to call, wait for god knows how long to actually get someone on the phone, and all for getting a freaking cc dispute. Ugh.

<comment><USER5> Not entirely true. I have a card straight from Amex. Fortunately I can't tell you if that makes things better.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> 2 months, seriously?

Ignore Yale's process, go to the computer store that night get a new hard drive and swap it out. 500GB laptop hard drives cost approximately $60. What was the cost of not having your computer for 2 months?

Also, here's another case of don't outsource your bread and butter. You have no control over what Mosy does with your data, and you're relying on trust alone that it will be there when you need it. Why would you think that a company you aren't paying will treat you as well as you'd treat yourself?

If you want someone to be mad at, be mad at yourself for being a dumb consumer.

<comment><USER7> I have no idea what it's like at Yale, but I have known people in colleges in Ireland who are not allowed to do any maintenance on their own machines for IT union reasons.

<comment><USER8> What sort of union is this?

<comment><USER7> A workers union to which the IT department workers belonged, but the lecturers didn't. I don't know the particulars.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> TL;DR: He used free Mozy backup account. Hard drive failed. Replacement took 2 months. He never tried to recover the file within 2 months. Mozy's policy is to delete data of free accounts if no activity for 30 days. Data deleted. He went mad.

Does this mean "cloud" fails? Hell no……

<comment><USER10> At least they could have emailed him a few days beforehand saying "Hey, you haven't used our service for 4 weeks. We're about to delete the data!"

<comment><USER11> This was a customer service fail, in that they didn't notify him. But this isn't a cloud or enterprise EMC fail at all. I think blaming all of EMC for this is a little over the top.

<comment><USER12> He wasn't a customer. He was using a free service. Unless you're paying someone money, you're not a customer. If you live next to a coffee shop and use their wifi without ever buying coffee, do you expect the shop to help you reconnect if their internet goes down?

So no, it has nothing to do with customer service. Its someone who A) was using a free service and B) never bothered logging in to make sure his data was still being hosted by said free service.

<comment><USER13> Even free service customers are still "customers". Mozy could have even spun this warning e-mail off as a promo for their Pro service. Send out an e-mail saying "Warning, your data will be deleted in x days", then the body can say something like "Mozy Free customers need login at least once every 30 days to keep their account active. Please click the link below and login to let us know you're still using our service. If you do not respond your data will be deleted.

You can remove this restriction by upgrading to Mozy Pro, for only $9.95/month."

Wham. Informs the customers, let's them fix their problem & gives them an alternative if they don't want to do this every 30 days.

Instead they elected to delete his data w/o giving a warning besides something deep in their ToS. There was a failure with him getting back into his account. When he finally got in and found out his data was gone, they basically sent him canned responses from customer service reps who obviously don't have the power to help customers. The only thing that saved his data was being able to write a angry blog post which caught the attention of Mozy PR. Surprise! Surprise! The data actually wasn't deleted after all.

Needless to say, if they really didn't have the data, then that would make them seem better in my eyes. The fact that they did have the data, but their customer service rep didn't have the power or the training to find it - <USER2> maybe he did but was not allowed to divulge it to a non-paying customer just reeks of mismanagement.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I'm surprised that a computer science professor didn't have a better method for backups.

It seems common sense to me that you should have at a very minimum:

\- Continuous onsite backup onto a different physical device (e.g. Time Machine on ext. HDD)

\- Weekly or monthly backups onto a different physical device kept offsite (e.g. ext. HDD in a safe deposit box)

\- Continuous cloud-based backup (e.g. Backblaze, Mozy, etc.)

I personally use Backblaze as a last resort, in case my laptop HDD fails _and_ something happens to my Time Machine backups. The probability of this is so low, if it happens I'll be happy to pay $200 for them to send me a hard drive.

Also, IMHO it seems ridiculous to me to expect restoring tens of GB over HTTP to work flawlessly. One of the reasons I chose Backblaze is that they have the ability to physically send me my data. Web restore is for the files you can't live without until the package from Backblaze arrives.

(formatting edits)

</comment><comment><USER15> From the non-delivery of the "forgotten password" emails, I assume that you weren't checking the email you registered with any more (maybe it was an old one you no longer used)? However, I don't see this as Mozy's fault. They provide you with online backup for free and all they ask is that you regularly check in to show that you're still using the service.

Providing services costs money, and it's entirely acceptable for the provider to terminate non-paying users' services at any time. Of course, it's much better if they do it after a while and with a warning (which Mozy apparently did do), but it's unfortunate that the email was lost.

In summary, I don't think people have much right to complain that the service they were getting for free wasn't provided in perpetuity as well. If you wanted reliable service, I think the 5 GBP/mo isn't too much to pay to ensure that your files are safe.

<comment><USER16> It's also possible that Mozy's "forgotten password" function "succeeds" without showing any error messages to the user if the user has been removed.

<comment><USER15> From the post it seems that the user has their data deleted but the account remains (as he was able to log in still), but that is a possibility.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> I've been using Hybir Backup for online + offline backup, which I found out about on HN. The application can backup to multiple locations, including their online service. So I have a local ioMega NAS plus the online backup service. They keep your data as long as you pay.

Plus, Hybir does an image backup so you can use a boot CD to restore your HDD to the exact state it was in at the time of the backup. They de-dupe across all their clients so for online backup you only have to upload a small percent of your total data as much if (like Windows 7 files) will already be in their repository.

I certainly feel a lot better about having BOTH an online backup and a local offline backup. I believe CrashPlan offers the same option, but without the image-style backup/restore.

<comment><USER7> CrashPlan does better cross-OS support; Windows, Mac, Linux and Solaris, including, with moderate hacking, Nexenta. This works out well for my Nexenta NAS, which uses ZFS for multi-terabyte local storage. My home PCs can back up to both the NAS and the cloud, for redundancy and speed of restore.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> I'm slightly surprised that Yale University doesn't have a standard mechanism for backing up employee laptops!

</comment><comment><USER19> This does showcase an issue I've come across before: if there's a service that's important to you, make sure they have an email address on file that you check regularly. You never realize until it's too late that they've sent you "URGENT: WE'RE GOING TO SHUT DOWN YOUR ACCOUNT" five times at the spam-catcher account you never check.

</comment><comment><USER20> I don't trust this guy, especially given his connections to EMC's competitors.

</comment><comment><USER21> I would have a hard time going 2 days without a computer, let alone 2 months.

<comment><USER22> I agree, most of my business and personal life (sadly) revolves around access to my computer and pertinent data.

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> Mozy is a piece of shit. I'm forced to run it on my laptop by corporate policy. My very favorite bit is how it pegs my hard disk for _fifteen fucking minutes_ to backup a single 0 byte file. What those retards are doing in the meantime, no one knows.

<comment><USER24> Any good alternatives? I am nterested in cloud storage for backup.

<comment><USER25> One word: Backblaze!

<comment><USER26> Another word: AltDrive.com - Free two month trial.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> Freeloader demands what he thought he paid for, dammit!

oh wait</comment>


Save My Inbox - Gmail Dropbox Integration - <AUTHOR> http://www.savemyinbox.com/ <comment><USER2> Interesting app, I like the idea a lot.

I wish there were a service where by the results of a filter could be sent to a printer. Preferably one that formats emails better and turns entire correspondence threads into books. I'd like to archive some of the more meaningful relationships that are captured in all their twists and turns over the years in gmail. Sadly I have never found any such tool.</comment>


Building a website with C++ (CppCMS) - <AUTHOR> http://kukuruku.co/hub/cpp/building-a-website-with-c-cppcms-part-1

<comment><USER2> A friend of mine is recently writing C++ web framework similar to Python Flask.

It has many interesting features like compile-time routing URL parameter checking, easy and fast (probably fastest among C++ json libs) json implementation by taking full advantage of C++11. If interested, take look of following code and repository:

[https://github.com/ipkn/crow/blob/master/example.cpp](https://github.com/ipkn/crow/blob/master/example.cpp)

<comment><USER3> This actually looks pretty awesome :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> It seems (to me) like if statically typed, compiled languages are your bag, and you want to create web applications, Go is the right choice.

I recently finished the MVP for a weekend side project in Go, and I had a lot of fun (coming from a Node.js/Ruby background). I finally understood the draw of static typing (the compiler saved me a ton of time), but I didn't feel limited by the type system, nor encumbered by the syntax. The performance boost was also quite nice (not even optimized, and it still made the equivalent Node implementation's performance look mediocre by comparison). It's hard to imagine needing even more performance, since the Node version still would have been "good enough", and needing it so badly that it'd be worth muddling through C++ to get it (especially given the stark contrast of managing concurrency in Go vs C++).

<comment><USER5> > (not even optimized, and it still made the equivalent Node implementation's > performance look mediocre by comparison)

You're probably not doing it right. You should see a factor 10 or more difference, without optimization. Why ? Because any variable lookup in a dynamic language is always at least O(log N), and the mere fact that it needs looking up at all costs you a lot. So every single statement and expression of a compiled language is going to blow the socks off any interpreted language.

<comment><USER4> Are you saying I should have seen more of a difference than I actually did? Maybe I was doing it wrong, but I said it makes Node's performance look "mediocre" rather than "bad" because Node is still pretty damn fast compared to the rest of the field (also, I like Node.js a lot and use it daily).

Also, this was by no means a scientific benchmark - it wasn't a comparison of raw ops/sec, or anything like that: just the requests/sec on a few different routes (pretty close as far as implementation logic). I'm sure the chosen frameworks played into the results as well, but I'd consider that a more pragmatic benchmark anyways.

<comment><USER5> This is the sort of improvement you'd see if your program was fully IO bound.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> Surely, in 2014 we can do better than CppCMS...

 _srv.applications_pool().mount(cppcms::applications_factory <WebSite>());_

Not doing us any favours there, at all. C++ is crying out for a bit of 'hip' and there's really no reason, with C++11 now pretty ubiquitous, we can't have some Sinatra-inspired frameworks.

What is it that really holds C++ back from being a solid choice for web frameworks?

<comment><USER6> _What is it that really holds C++ back from being a solid choice for web frameworks?_

Its verbosity. I'll wager that it'll be a long time before a C++ web developer will be able to write faster code than an equally competent Python, Ruby, Haskell, or Clojure web developer.

<comment><USER7> The CppCMS blog implementation, according to CLOC, is about 3,200 lines. It supports comments, markdown, multiple database backends, LaTeX formulae, CAPTCHAs, caching, RSS feeds, and has an admin interface. That's a pretty dense result for an MVC framework without any magic.

And how do you account for PHP? Oodles of documentation, fast iteration, and swaths of libraries out of the box seem to have trumped basically every other concern, including its absurd verbosity.

Backend languages don't and shouldn't matter, especially when most webdev backend is no more sophisticated than your average CLI and you're probably going to end up spending most of your time dicking with CSS and HTML anyway. You could probably count equivalent productivity lost in tens of thousands of lines of C++, just scanning the dizzying array of loonybin.js frameworks for frontend work.

I'd gleefully do any backend job in C++ if it meant someone else handing me the database schema and the frontend ready to go.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> This could benefit from a template engine like Smarty because graphic design items have an order that is hard to describe in a programming language.

</comment><comment><USER9> not quite the same thing, but a few years ago i built a library that would print test results to a web framework (can dynamically add graphs, tests, analytics, etc)

Ran an example where i find the pupil of an eye: [http://users.ece.cmu.edu/~jsmereka/eye/imgtst2/index.html](http://users.ece.cmu.edu/~jsmereka/eye/imgtst2/index.html)

</comment><comment><USER10> That's very interesting, thanks for linking to it. I've never heard of it but it can come handy.</comment>


Show HN: Assent.js - lightweight inline form validation - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/adjohu/assent.js

<comment><AUTHOR> Quick note, I realise there are already well supported libraries that do this, such as the excellent parsley.js [1].

This was a just for fun project to work on my coding skills! The approach is different and it is very lightweight - working out at just 16kb before minification and 5kb after.

Enjoy.

[1]: <https://github.com/guillaumepotier/Parsley.js></comment>


Imperial College London charge £28,000 for their online MSc degree on Coursera - <AUTHOR> https://www.coursera.org/degrees/msc-machine-learning-imperial <comment><USER2> Also of note - this appears to be the UK-style of master's vs. the typical path a lot of us may be more familiar with, in the sense of very strong undergrads complete a 4th year and earn a Master's vs. finish an undergrad and then spend 2+ years (1 year classes, 1 year lab/thesis) as an in-betweener before Doctoral programs.

It seems very expensive for 2-yrs of part-time, online work. I did a MSc in Canada part time and it took me almost three years of year-round effort, completing the course requirements 2 or 3 per semester (which is more than 1/2 time). Because I was P/T I paid full tuition but it was still less than $5K/yr. F/T grad students were almost all on scholarship or covered tuition via RA pr TA duties.

IMO, if you want more than the credentials on your resume this would be an expensive and disappointing grad school experience and of limited value.

</comment><comment><USER3> One of the important parts of learning at a university is meeting fellow students, exchanging ideas, and building relationships. It seems for 36k USD you're really overpaying for losing this face to face time with other students, imo video calls just aren't the same.

<comment><USER4> I did an MSc online distance learning back in 2003 from Royal Holloway. I built a lot of useful relationships and had great conversations with my fellow online students.

Our lecturers said we were far more social than the campus students, who just went to lectures, the library, or home. Probably because we were all sitting on our own in front of a computer, so actively tried to counteract the loneliness of it...

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> One thing to note - if you're interested only in pedigree - nobody gives a sh*t about Coursera, Udacity, edX or similar "online" labeled stuff.

<comment><USER6> An important quote from the FAQ:

> Will my diploma state that I was in an online programme?

> No, your diploma will not state that this is an online degree.

Personally, I find this practice quite questionable and deceptive.

<comment><USER7> While I also find it questional, perhaps it will lessen the effect of a degree. In the end, you shouldn't need a degree if you have the skills. Nowadays, it can be hard for self-taught developers to get in the industry, just because they don't have a paper from a famous university.

<comment><USER6> > In the end, you shouldn't need a degree if you have the skills.

A university degree has multiple purposes.

As a student, you want to learn stuff and network with fellow students and get a paper.

As an employer, you see that the applicant has work ethic, knows the cultural norms, can obey orders, can interact with people in the field etc. And also that they have a fundamental knowledge of the field.

However, a university degree in computer science is not and should not be expected to be a developer training course.

It's very feasible to become a developer in a self-taught way and work productively in industry, building websites, CRUD apps, mobile apps etc. No need for a degree here.

It's much less feasible to self-teach computer science and math and so on. A university program will force you to do it even when it's not pleasurable. But it won't teach you practical web design skills etc. because that isn't its purpose.

What we have today is definitely a bad arrangement. Many students study a field they are ultimately aren't interested in and won't use, just to fulfill employers' requirements.

<comment><USER8> > It's much less feasible to self-teach computer science and math and so on. A > university program will force you to do it even when it's not pleasurable.

I'd wager that computing science autodidacts find study pleasurable for it's own sake. Advanced graduate and post-graduate work notwithstanding, the most advanced math you need to master CS fundamentals (and then some) is the predicate calculus and some analysis. These are nontrivial, but certainly much easier than what one would deal with in a typical pure math undergrad program. They are well within the abilities of an enthusiastic hacker with a solid high school education (up to calc 1) to master from textbooks without coercion.

> As an employer, you see that the applicant has work ethic, knows the > cultural norms, can obey orders, can interact with people in the field etc. > And also that they have a fundamental knowledge of the field.

As an employer, an autodidact who has mastered the subject has demonstrated to me the ability to be passionate and act on his own initiative. I personally value that higher than a proven track record of conformity and trained obedience. That said, organizations differ, and for many large companies where 90% of the work is busywork, the autodidacts will get bored and leave in short order. So don't hire them if the work is fundamentally pointless salary justification.

<comment><USER6> Out of 100 people who call themselves autodidact CS people, how many are like the ones you describe, who spend years to work their way through CS theory books to the extent that would be required by passing exams with good grades?

Let's ignore for the moment whether it's even needed, whether devs will just code stuff that doesn't need much math anyway etc. as that's a different topic. I want to focus on whether autodidacts get the same level of CS knowledge as university graduates (with good grades).

My CS education did have a lot of difficult math that I enjoyed but in a running-a-marathon way, not in an eat-a-piece-of-cake way. Having regular lectures, homework and topics given to you by experts in a logical order is very important for many people like myself, so they have no gaps and get a well-rounded overview of CS fundamentals. Designing your own curriculum is often how you end up being a crank as well (e.g. see "autodidact physicists").

And it's not just calculus and analysis, but also graph theory, complexity theory, abstract algebra, linear algebra, complex numbers, formal languages and automata, information theory, theory of compression and encryption algorithms, signal processing like Fourier theory, control theory, optimization and machine learning, and various other things you learn here and there, such as Petri nets, quaternions etc.

And also, outside of extraordinary life circumstances, why not get admitted to a university anyway, if you're so enthusiastic about all this theory stuff that you'd learn it to good-grade level just by your own motivation anyway? For example in Germany, university is free and if you prefer you can even skip all the lectures if you don't think they give you value and just take the exams, while studying in your preferred autodidactic fashion.

My default assumption, unless convinced otherwise by evidence, is that self- taught devs can put together functioning code and have familiarity with CS terminology but only a vague folk understanding of the details.

Most people who argue that university is superfluous are usually those who could not pass the exams due to a lack of interest and/or talent (or live in a country with tuition fees they cannot afford, such as the US).

<comment><USER8> > Out of 100 people who call themselves autodidact CS people, how many are > like the ones you describe, who spend years to work their way through CS > theory books to the extent that would be required by passing exams with good > grades?

Admittedly I've only personally met order dozens of them or so in the course of a decades long career, which is why I try to snap them up when I find them. I said it's a powerful signal, not that it's common or even an advisable path for those with alternatives.

> My CS education did have a lot of difficult math that I enjoyed but in a > running-a-marathon way, not in an eat-a-piece-of-cake way.

Makes sense to me, I enjoy it in a hitting-a-new-max-lift kind of way, which I imagine is pretty similar. I prefer to associate with people who, degree or otherwise, derive joy from improving themselves both mentally and physically.

> And it's not just calculus and analysis, but also graph theory, complexity > theory, abstract algebra, linear algebra, complex numbers, formal languages > and automata, information theory, theory of compression and encryption > algorithms, signal processing like Fourier theory, control theory, > optimization and machine learning, and various other things you learn here > and there, such as Petri nets, quaternions etc.

The predicate calculus[1] plus analysis is sufficient for effective study of every sub-discipline you list. Obviously I assume proficiency in algebra as a prerequisite of analysis. Complex numbers and quaternions become far less intimidating when you realize they're just 2 or 4 dimensional state spaces, which are trivial in scale and potential complexity compared to what any computing scientist deals with.

> And also, outside of extraordinary life circumstances, why not get admitted > to a university anyway, if you're so enthusiastic about all this theory > stuff that you'd learn it to good-grade level just by your own motivation > anyway? For example in Germany, university is free and if you prefer you can > even skip all the lectures if you don't think they give you value and just > take the exams, while studying in your preferred autodidactic fashion.

Deutschland ist doch voll geil, aber die meisten von uns wohnen nicht da.

> My default assumption, unless convinced otherwise by evidence, is that self- > taught devs can put together functioning code and have familiarity with CS > terminology but only a vague folk understanding of the details.

Funny, that's my default assumption for all CS grads who have a degree from anywhere other than continental Europe (including Russia) or one of the most elite US or UK programs. I had to stop asking "write a binary search on the whiteboard" as an interview question because after five tries nobody managed it correctly and they all had degrees from good CS programs.

[1] I assume you are German and CS programs in Western Europe are generally, especially with respect to theoretical rigor, superior to most in the USA, so perhaps you'll understand that I mean "predicate calculus" in the sense that Dijkstra and Scholten used in the tradition of Leibniz.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> The "offline" course prices are here. It seems like the roughly equivalent MSc degree offline would be £15.5K for home and EU students and £33,250 for overseas students. You would have to add to that living expenses which are considerable in London (perhaps another £20K) [https://www.imperial.ac.uk/students/fees-and- funding/tuition...](https://www.imperial.ac.uk/students/fees-and- funding/tuition-fees/postgraduate-tuition-fees/2020-21/taught-postgraduate- programmes/faculty-of-engineering/)

I did an MSc in Computer Science at Imperial (long before online courses existed) and it was by far the hardest academic thing I have ever done. Imperial is academically excellent, and likely the best university for science subjects in the UK and perhaps top 5 in the world. Having said that I'm sure much of the value is from being there with other students and teachers, and I don't know how much of that you're getting from an online course.

</comment><comment><USER10> My INTERNATIONAL FEES for my MSc in Bristol was in 2013 only cost £ 17k. This includes lots of face-to-face contact with lecturers who are research leaders in the field. With living expenses the total would only be £ 30k. Inflation makes the total closer to £ 40k today.

However, for £ 28k, Europeans can study at Imperial in-person and live (albeit on a budget) in London.

</comment><comment><USER11>
       What you get:
        Imperial College branded online MSc degree.
       What you need:
        At least a GPA of 3.9 and £28k+.

So, One year for a online masters at £28k also requiring a three year BSc degree at £25k of debt sounds like your really getting your money's worth. /s

(This is £14k more expensive than a normal masters degree at Imperial)

<comment><USER12> Where does it say GPA of 3.9? All I've found is 2:1 for UK universities and anywhere between 3-3.5 for US. Also they say it won't say it's online.

<comment><USER11> They don't need to say it, but because they said the 'minimum' is a 2:1 / 3 GPA it doesn't mean that you will be considered for an interview. If too many people basically applied with the minimum at Imperial, they will just select those with the higher results.

On the safe side, I intentionally said '3.9' GPA / high 1st because it totally beats their requirement of a 2:1 which the competition will try to match. If anyone is seriously considering this university, they should instead get a 3.9 GPA, not a 3 or 2:1.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> University education in the UK has become increasingly commercialised and increasingly expensive. Undergraduate tuition fees are over £9k a year (it was zero when I went to university 20 years ago). Those fees are capped by government but universities are free to charge what they like to overseas students so they are rather treated as cash cows.

<comment><USER14> > Undergraduate tuition fees are over £9k a year (it was zero when I went to > university 20 years ago).

That's wrong.

In 2000 the fees that the UK student had to pay was £1000 a year (£1700 in today's currency), and the government paid about £3000 - a total of £4000, or £6800 in today's money.

Students had to pay this upfront to study. In 2006 these upfront fees were dropped.

<comment><USER15> Student fees were introduced september 1998, or just over 21 years ago

Technically they're wrong but it's a very minor change to their point

<comment><USER14> Not really, they were still £4000, its just that the government paid the full amount rather than 75% (20 years ago)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Shamefully the Univ. of Illinois charges $21k for an online master of CompSci.

[https://cs.illinois.edu/academics/graduate/professional- mcs-...](https://cs.illinois.edu/academics/graduate/professional-mcs- program/online-master-computer-science)

</comment><comment><USER17> University is just an overpriced IQ test anyway.

We want to delude ourselves that everybody has the capability to be a doctor, programmer, engineer, successful business owner etc. We ban employees from using IQ tests, when SAT scores correlate strongly with IQ. Then the best companies hire from the best universities where the best students with the highest SAT go i.e. they just hire the highest IQ people in each year slot.

To fund this delusion we would then have to make university available to everybody, as if a degree is in a vacuum a token of value and not the fact that a degree is relatively scarce. A degree when everybody has one isn't worth as much as when only 50% of people have one.

And of course the law of supply/demand makes degrees more expensive when everybody has one, but makes the degrees less useful economically when everybody has one. Double-dipped.

<comment><USER18> You're effectively claiming that university teaches nothing, but good degrees teach independence, critical thinking (analysis, synthesis), research skills, writing, teamworking, presentation skills, and much more.

Added to that, your final grade indicates ability x effort. This is significantly more useful than a narrow measure of ability alone.

<comment><USER19> > good degrees teach independence, critical thinking (analysis, synthesis), > research skills, writing, teamworking, presentation skills, and much more.

Sadly there aren't a lot of those. Most degrees teach regurgitating what a textbook says in a fancy way that means you pass the "I understood it" test.

<comment><USER20> I was an Econ major in college, which is one of the most popular majors across all schools in the US. I don't remember even having a textbook beyond the first couple of statistics courses. We were only ever graded on problem sets or term papers with some kind of statistical analysis component.

That said, my American Economic History course was easily one of the most eye- opening learning experiences, and absolutely one of those courses where "I understood the reading" was necessary. It greatly expanded by ability to understand why the economic story played out the way it did, and how much of it was based on the societal and political context of the times, and not on the findings of bean counters doing stat analyses.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> That's about $36,000 US. Honest question... is that crazy expensive? How does it compare to other online and on campus programs? I'm guessing it's HIGH?

<comment><USER22> In The Netherlands fees are about $12k, so yea. You can do the same thing in Amsterdam, _and live here_.

It's still one of the reasons why I'm dreaming of starting up a coding school at Dutch prices and market it to US citizens.

If anyone is interested in starting this with me, let me know! I'm Dutch, if you're American and know the market, we might make an interesting team. I taught at the New York Code + Design Academy as a bootcamp instructor in Amsterdam before (some US citizens came here because it was cheaper).

<comment><USER23> It's cheaper in NL because the government subsidizes universities. How would your private coding bootcamp get that subsidy?

<comment><USER22> The $12K per year is not from the direct subsidy. That all Dutchies know about. Also, Americans can't get that subsidy. IMO, it's almost always a better play for Americans to study abroad since European uni's are qualitatively high and cheap (compared to US), even unsubsidized.

Maybe there are some subsidies I don't know about, but that would not be general knowledge among Dutch people then.

The subsidies from government work like this:

\- A student pays $2k per year (ok euro, whatever, can't find it on keyboard)

\- The government pays about $8k per year

That adds up to $10k, bachelors are sligthly cheaper (I only heard the numbers for bachelors).

So if you don't want to pay the subsidy, you need to pay the full $10k (bachelor), or $12k (master)[1].

[1] Prices vary per university between $12k to $25k. About 75% of all education is on the $12k level (I've looked at this a lot), some are at $25k such as dentistry and I think med school is a bit more expensive.

Here are some prices (click on master (pdf) ): [https://students.uu.nl/praktische- zaken/geldzaken/collegegel...](https://students.uu.nl/praktische- zaken/geldzaken/collegegeld/collegegeld-voor-studenten-met-een-graad)

I'm now seeing that they have jacked it up since I last checked. I'm wondering what other Dutch universities have done.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> Guess they want you to take this seriously!

</comment><comment><USER25> rip off Britain... nothing new

</comment><comment><USER26> British people are funny.</comment>


China is trying to police what people are saying about it around the world - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/02/technology/china-technology-censorship-borders-expansion.html <comment><USER2> China has great influence in Hollywood, where major studios edit their films to meet Chinese censorship demands. When Disney made a film about the Dalai Lama, several years later the CEO of Disney traveled to China and apologized in person, saying it would never happen again. The Chinese government is literally censoring political content in the United States and other Western countries.

Here's a cite for the Disney story. I've read about Chinese censors reviewing films, and Hollywood self-censoring, but I don't have time to find those cites.

[https://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/15/business/international/ch...](https://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/15/business/international/china- disney.html)

<comment><USER3> There's a bunch: [https://screenrant.com/movies-changed-for- china/](https://screenrant.com/movies-changed-for-china/)

<comment><USER4> The one that really sticks out is the recent Red Dawn remake. I mean, really, North Korea is going to invade the pacific coast? It was clearly written about Communist China, that's the only way the movie could have made the slightest bit of sense, but they kowtowed and turned it into a dumpster fire, and they _still_ didn't procure release rights there.

<comment><USER5> True, they requested that Red Dawn be re-edited, so that China was not the bad guy. I have not seen the movie, nor do I care to.

However, let's think about this situation for a moment, as rational adults. And if you can, then try to think about this from the other side.

There is a lot of bad blood coming out of American media about China. It's in the news, the movies, the TV shows, the literature, it's everywhere. Unless you are dense, then I think this can be established as a fact. China is continually being painted as the big bad scary commie, that's out to eat your children (or something like that), or at least, they're taking your iPhone assembling slavery jobs.

A movie like this, would add more fuel to the fire. You, as an intelligent individual may be able to distinguish that Red Dawn is a fictional movie, with good and bad guys. And this sells tickets. And Americans love this! They want a big bad evil enemy, that their country can destroy. And right now, China is it!

However, can you guarantee that another American, of lesser educational intelligence than yourself, can distinguish such a thing? That this is pure fiction, and not a proxy of reality.

Nobody wants to be painted as the bad guy. Americans movies will certainly never paint America as the bad guy, despite the fact that millions have died at the receiving end of American weapons. In fact, I can't recall any media where America is painted as the bad guy.

The Chinese people certainly don't want to see themselves as the bad guys. Especially not when it's a historical fact, that they have been severely dominated by Western nations. And hundreds of millions of their people have suffered and died. And to this day, there are certain white people, that are proud of what their race did to China in the 1800s. And if you find this shocking, please let me know. You can find this perception all over the internet, and you can poll your close friends, and ask them what they truly think.

Anyways, movies are political statements. When you make it too real, then it hits too close to home. And there are certain dangers with that kind of propaganda. And it will certainly upset the people on the receiving end of it.

Stick to making movies about aliens and their probing devices, zombies, and superheros in tights. Or killing the evil German Nazis. Nobody will question these kinds of movies.

<comment><USER6> I understand that no one likes being painted as the bad guy, but this is a very odd claim: "Americans movies will certainly never paint America as the bad guy, despite the fact that millions have died at the receiving end of American weapons. In fact, I can't recall any media where America is painted as the bad guy."

I'm not American but this suggests you have experienced very little of the variety of American movies or general media? There are not only plenty of American movies and media critical of America and American policy but there is a long history of such. Without going back too far in history, the media presentation of the Vietnam war, for example, may be something of a cliché but it's a valid example.

<comment><USER2> The GP comment has the hallmarks of Chinese gov't propaganda, which reaches even here. You'll see it every time criticism of China appears: 'The U.S. does it too.' Sometimes the application of it is just laughable:

> Americans movies will certainly never paint America as the bad guy

Wow.

> There is a lot of bad blood coming out of American media about China

The paranoid, we're-picked-on perspective.

Much of the comment is directly from the rhetoric of the Chinese Communist Party and government:

> Anyways, movies are political statements. When you make it too real, then it > hits too close to home. And there are certain dangers with that kind of > propaganda. And it will certainly upset the people on the receiving end of > it.

Everything is political. Avoid politics that challenge the Chinese Communist Party for reasons of public order, which just upsets people - the public doesn't want to think about politics and become upset. Promoting Chinese Communist Party-approved politics is ok, because that increases public order.

> Stick to making movies about aliens and their probing devices, zombies, and > superheros in tights. Or killing the evil German Nazis. Nobody will question > these kinds of movies.

Uh, I'll try to keep that in mind. We wouldn't want to make a movie that anyone questioned!

<comment><USER5> Everything you said, just reinforced my positions.

You can't even acknowledge that my positions may have some merit.

And that's the problem with trying to have a rational discussion on sensitive things like this. You get people like this guy, that only sees it from his angle. And this whole thing just becomes another echo chamber.

You should consider reading this:

[https://arstechnica.com/science/2017/03/the-social-media- ech...](https://arstechnica.com/science/2017/03/the-social-media-echo-chamber- is-real/)

At this point, you can have your say. And we can agree to disagree.

<comment><USER2> Right out of the playbook. The parent comment attacks me, but not the content of the discussion, which would be valuable.

EDIT: Deleted response to personal comments.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> _Facebook suspended Mr. Guo's account. In a statement, the company said the account published the personal information of others without their consent, which violated the platform's policies._

Zuckerberg wants to be in China in such a bad way. He's learned Mandarin, plays up his family connections (via his wife's family), and puts on the charm when visiting China. He's created relationships with officials at every level. His representatives have talked with companies which may be partners or acquired at some point.

It does not surprise me one bit that Facebook will bend over backwards to accommodate officials on censorship demands. This is the cost of doing business in China for a tech company. Media companies learned this decades ago - read up on how Rupert Murdoch was able to operate there, it's quite fascinating.

Now it's Silicon Valley's turn, especially companies that specialize in communication -- social networks, phone manufacturers, companies that sell networking hardware, etc. The Chinese government's survival depends on information control, and if they can't do it themselves, then they force local and foreign companies to do it for them.

Don't think that this issue will be limited to human rights activists. It doesn't matter who you are -- your social media comments, family relationships, WeChat and Facebook messages, work connections on LinkedIn, and other digital footprints that reflect your attitude or influence will be used to build a social media score that determines your level of access to the country and ability to do business in China.

The scary prospect is that other countries will do the same thing ... if they haven't done so already.

<comment><USER8> The way Zuckerberg has gone about it, I think he is awkwardly a sinophile, he isn't doing those things just to (or even primarily to) get Facebook into China.

<comment><USER9> As if he lets his personal whims, and not billion(s) of dollar FB profit dictate his actions?

<comment><USER8> Ya, isn't it obvious? The guy is definitely awkward. I think Chinese like to think he is doing it for the money, because they feel like it gives them face and they can't imagine anything else being possible. Americans look at it quite differently of course, they see some guy who obviously has a thing for China and is doing a bunch of cringey stuff because of that.

If he was doing that for the money, you'd think he would consult first with someone who actually knew better.

<comment><USER9> > _The guy is definitely awkward._

The guy is the CEO of a multi-billion dollar behemoth. He was always awkward, but he is also very calculated. He wants in on the Chinese market.

> _If he was doing that for the money, you 'd think he would consult first > with someone who actually knew better._

And do what differently?

<comment><USER8> > He was always awkward, but he is also very calculated. He wants in on the > Chinese market.

That is of course the only possibility Chinese can think of, while Americans just think he is being awkward.

> And do what differently?

Not do a bunch of cringe worthy stuff like asking Xi to name his child or jogging in Beijing smog.

<comment><USER9> > _That is of course the only possibility Chinese can think of, while > Americans just think he is being awkward._

Well, I'm not Chinese, and I think those who think he's being awkward are naive.

> _Not do a bunch of cringe worthy stuff like asking Xi to name his child or > jogging in Beijing smog._

Cringe-worthy to whom? Because the Chinese audience will probably eat-up that kind of soapy stuff, the same way Americans cherish the cliche stuff performed by people coming into the US and seeking their business (businesses, actors, etc).

<comment><USER8> I was there when it happened, there was a lot of cringe, especially in Beijing.

<comment><USER9> Yeah, but upon the public at large, or among more sophisticated audiences?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Australia is deeply involved in this. China are actively trying to control conversation with Chinese students and immigrants here. The govt has literally bought all Chinese language press and semi regularly run full page 'articles' in the major press. They have been caught out several time pressuring universities and placing disruptive people in lectures that discuss areas they don't want. I believed agents recently were found to have broken into lectures houses.

Its a delicate situation and hopefully the government will not be afraid to deal with it, whilst not turning it into a xenophobic support point.

<comment><USER11> Sources?

<comment><USER12> Yeah, some of that sounds way too far-fetched.

<comment><USER13> The various scandals have been reported on quite a bit by Australian news stations

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> > "I personally am not sure what the solution is for these companies," said > Mr. Rosenzweig. "I don't see a good answer because the Chinese government is > really putting them between a rock and a hard place."

I don't think this is _that_ hard of a decision, is it? Just say no and cut ties with efforts for China as a market. Any profits there are not worth jeopardizing all of the privacy and precedents that are being slowly pushed.

<comment><USER15> When profits come up against morality, profits will win every time. How do you think we even got to this situation in the first place?

<comment><USER16> This is not true. There are a bunch of businesses that use there moral positions as advertising to great effect.

This is why Apple doesn't sell away your data, why every city is filled with local and organic restaurants, etc.

The market does select for moral positions, you just might not like those positions.

<comment><USER17> Didn't they just move their Chinese icloud and keys to mainland China? [https://www.theverge.com/2018/2/28/17055088/apple-chinese- ic...](https://www.theverge.com/2018/2/28/17055088/apple-chinese-icloud- accounts-government-privacy-speed)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> _Facebook suspended Mr. Guo's account. In a statement, the company said the account published the personal information of others without their consent, which violated the platform's policies. A spokeswoman declined to comment on whether Beijing's complaints played a role._

 _Chinese authorities have also successfully persuaded Google to pull down content that had been available around the globe._

How do they use those standing desks without a spine?

<comment><USER19> +1 for originality: you don't seem to have cribbed the "standing desks without a spine" from any Googleable source.

</comment></comment><comment><USER2> (Pardon the bit of philosophy, but I think it's on-topic, well-grounded, and substantially novel (at least to me!):)

The myriad of issues of the present era seem chaotic, but I'm starting to believe I see the defining theme, the one that will characterize it in history books, and I see the story in the article as merely a part of it: The contest between democracy and liberty on one hand, and wealth and power for an elite on the other. People like Thiel say "freedom and democracy" are not "compatible" with "capitalism".[0] Similarly, the Chinese government (and Russian, and others) is a wealthy elite that keeps the power from its citizens and the bulk of the wealth to itself. It's aristocracy: The belief that power should be controlled by the elite and inherited, not delegated by a vote of universal peers with equal rights.

It's not really "capitalism" that that Thiel advocates, but economic power for the currently wealthy unrestricted by the democratic wishes of other citizens (i.e. simply more power for himself, the oldest, most base political instinct - again, see China). He has fellow advocates in the current US government: For example, the Secretary of State (another business elite) and others have openly said the US shouldn't sacrifice making money for human rights, and openly support brutal, oppressive dictatorships. In the US courts, conservatives have given corporations and wealthy far more power over the democratic will of the people - corporations have gained Constitutional rights of real humans; they and the wealthy have gained unlimited, anonymous financial influence in politics and elections; and they've gained protections from the courts themselves (class-action restrictions, arbitration requirements, etc.). Another example is one vein of extreme anti-regulation dogma that says, on principle, economic powers should not be limited by the will of the majority (I'm not saying all arguments against regulation are problematic, only the principle that the issues shouldn't be decided democratically).

At times there truly is an immediate tradeoff. Daimler-Benz, Google, Hollywood, and others have to deal with this real problem in China and it will affect their bottom lines. But from an historical perspective it's nothing new and is a minor sacrifice. Few of those companies would exist in their current state or enjoy their wealth if not for the massive sacrifices of life and wealth made by prior generations; there are 18-year-olds still at the bottom of the English Channel who never even set foot in France or fired a weapon. What are the corporations and we doing for the next generation? Will we be merely parasites that consume the benefits bestowed on us and pass on less, rather than invest in and expand freedom as our ancestors did? The U.S. Declaration of Independence ends "we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor" for liberty. It wasn't the opposite: they didn't pledge to give up their liberty for greater fortunes - but that's what Thiel, et al want.

In the long run, it's not a tradeoff. Giving freedom and opportunity to more people makes them more productive; it's a wonderful, mutually-reinforcing phenomenon between democracy and freedom on one hand and prosperity on the other. It has made the democracies the wealthiest, most free countries in the history of the world. It has given hope and liberty to more than a billion people; today's wealthy were yesterday's poor. It's worked throughout the world, from Japan to Latin America to Taiwan to Europe and the US to many more places.

But at times there are immediate tradeoffs and sacrifices that we must decide to make: Will we give up wealth for democracy and freedom? Do we want democracy and freedom (and long-term prosperity), or unbridled economic wealth and power for a nascent aristocracy? It seems like an easy choice to me once you think about it that way.[1]

[0] [https://www.cato-unbound.org/2009/04/13/peter- thiel/educatio...](https://www.cato-unbound.org/2009/04/13/peter- thiel/education-libertarian)

[1] Of course, it's even easier when I frame the question that I answer!

</comment><comment><USER20> This is just me soapboxing, but I would argue that situations like this illustrate a need for online social platforms run by the state. I realize the obvious vulnerabilities of such a setup, but if we believe free speech to be an essential element of our societies then we need social platforms beholden only to our own laws even if they simply exist in parallel to private platforms. The internet, and social media in this context, have become just as fundamentally important to discussions and grassroots politics as the street corner once was.

<comment><USER21> Conversely, it's arguable that we need social platforms that are immune to censorship by any state or private party. Such as properly implemented Tor onion services. But readily accessible from the open Internet.

<comment><USER22> You're posting this comment on Hacker News and not 4Chan for a reason. Censorship is absolutely essential to make an internet community tolerable to people outside a tiny cohort of edgelords.

<comment><USER21> That's true. But that's mostly about different userbases. HN is actually not all that censored. It's largely community moderated. Very little gets completely deleted, just downvoted and flagged to oblivion.

Disruptive users do get shadow-banned, but it's trivial to create new ones. With accumulating karma, there is some pressure to self-censor. But overall, I like it better than StackExchange or reddit, for example.

Edit: I just noticed that this submission about Bitcoin energy use has been raised from the dead: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16498776](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16498776)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> Whilst I think there's some merit in the recent increase in China articles here. The tone of this one seems sensational. What I find most intriguing about discovering China is what it says about me and the so-called West. China's influence is growing you say? My first reaction is concern, but my second is humility, as if looking in a mirror. I can't help but feel a little like this article immaturely criticises a topic that it never has an intention to understand. The entire premise of being able to so easily stir such ominous sentiment betrays the existence of the elephant in the West's room: Western power is so taken for granted we no longer know how to treat it as a privilege. It's embarrassing, in fact I think we have, at the very least, a responsibility to be embarrassed, that unironic, one-sided criticism of China is culturally acceptable. This is not at all to imply that China doesn't represent the absolute worst of human behavior, I'm not naïve. It's to say that the conversation about China is really the stirrings of a new awakening in the West's self-understanding.

<comment><USER24> This isn't about western power, it's about western values being protected in the west. I'm sure that people wouldn't be so concerned if China kept its censorship within its borders. As far as I know the west doesn't systematically subvert Chinese values within China.

<comment><USER25> The US sure tries to: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voice_of_America](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voice_of_America)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> Isn't everyone trying to police what people say online now? Least of all the nytimes and the rest of the media? Europe does it. We do it. The media advocates for it. Is it just bad when the chinese do it?

90% of the time everyone here seems to support censorship and control over social media. Then the story is about china and everyone is against it.

<comment><USER27> There's censorship, and there's kidnapping/threats against citizens in other countries

"After U.S.-Based Reporters Exposed Abuses, China Seized Their Relatives"

[https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/01/world/asia/china- xinjiang...](https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/01/world/asia/china-xinjiang- rfa.html)

"Chinese Police Are Demanding Personal Information From Uighurs in France. Officials have threatened to detain relatives of those who don't comply."

[http://foreignpolicy.com/2018/03/02/chinese-police-are- secre...](http://foreignpolicy.com/2018/03/02/chinese-police-are-secretly- demanding-personal-information-from-french-citizens-uighurs-xinjiang/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> This is rather biased against China. OK, so Chinese authorities have arrested citizens who have posted "illegal" material. I don't see that they've grabbed citizens of other countries off the streets, which the US and Israel have done. Or pressed other countries to extradite their citizens based on criminal allegations, which the US commonly does.

And about takedown requests to Google etc. MPAA and other "rights holders" do this frequently. Indeed, the US government uses DNS poisoning to censor sites that it considers illegal. Or requests that other countries raid hosting services, and impound servers. Has China done that?

Anyway, just sayin'. I do believe that everything should be takedown-proof, for what it's worth.

<comment><USER28> Gui Minhai, citizen of Sweden, was kidnapped in Thailand and secretly imprisoned in China.

<comment><USER29> citation please

<comment><USER8> That one is easy:

[https://www.google.com/search?q=swedish+citizen+china&source...](https://www.google.com/search?q=swedish+citizen+china&source=lnms&tbm=nws&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjgrZqH_c7ZAhUOyWMKHRoVBOcQ_AUICigB&biw=1378&bih=758)</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Facebook API Changes Lead to SharedCount Shutdown - <AUTHOR> https://www.sharedcount.com/notes/facebook_api_shutdown.php <comment><USER2> This was an unfortunate result, SharedCount and @yahel are awesome but understandably tired of fighting this. We're starting up engagedcount.com to pick up where they left off. We also have some ideas working for twitter counts in the pipeline.

Maybe it's a hopeless struggle but I think that with machine learning becoming as powerful as it is, this data is better off out in the world than behind these closed gardens.

</comment><comment><USER3> Ouch. This was cool data to have, and Facebook turning off the API tap ruins more than just this particular company's business model.

Let there be no mistake; these APIs are designed such that the house always wins. Facebook is not a 'Facebook Federation Protocol', and now they're following in the footsteps of Instagram and Twitter in limiting data outflow when it no longer benefits them.</comment>