New York City's highest-earning official is a debt collector - <AUTHOR> https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2018-confessions-of-judgment-millionaire-marshal/ <comment><USER2> > _In an archaic system dating to colonial New Amsterdam, he's one of 35 > mayoral appointees who compete for fees recovering debts. Marshals mostly > evict tenants and tow cars, but Barbarovich and a few others have become > cogs in a debt-collection machine that has crushed thousands of small > businesses. They use their legal authority on behalf of lenders who charge > more than some mafia loan sharks once did._

This needs to be fixed. Just e-mailed my City Council member, who is also the body's Speaker.

Irritated on so many levels. He is a public employee. He is abusing New York City's status as a financial hub. He's cramming garbage into our city's stretched judicial system, garbage protecting economic activity occuring pretty much wholly outside our city.

> _In June, Biegel faxed an order demanding money to a bank in Elmira, New > York, 173 miles northwest of the city. He claimed that a state court had > entered a judgment against a plumber named Orion Megivern. That wasn't the > case. The lender had tried to enter a confession of judgment at a clerk's > office in Staten Island, but the clerk there hadn't yet acted on the > application_

That's wire fraud!

<comment> barry-cotter It's only wire fraud if you're a private citizen. If you're a government employee it's an honest and excusable mistake.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> This is better than many U.S. states, where the highest-earning public employee is a football coach.

But let's also consider that in private industry, a great many people in finance make more money than almost every professor. In almost every major sport, a backup professional athlete makes more money than the U.S. general in charge of security and of every military asset and operation in the entire Mideast. How many professions make more than doctors who save lives daily? Than teachers?

The issue is that the current labor marketplace does not allocate resources to those who provide the most benefit to society.

EDIT: Added the last 2 paragraphs

<comment><USER4> I'd love to hear your rationale on that.

<comment><USER3> > I'd love to hear your rationale on that.

I'm not sure what you are asking for: Evidence for the third paragraph? That's in the first two paragraphs. My economic theory of why the labor market works out that way?

<comment><USER4> Saw your comment before the edit. I think you'd have a difficult time convincing just about anyone that a publicly employed loan shark debt collector adds more value to society than a highly paid football coach.

<comment><USER3> Ah, that makes sense. Well, I'd argue that the football coach adds zero to society - someone else could do the job and society would be unchanged. A more productive football coach only increases demand for productive football coaches.

But some people produce even less that that ...

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Related discussion: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18560153](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18560153).

</comment><comment> rv-de Is it to obvious or why is nobody expressing amusement upon the man's apt first name against the backdrop of the barbarism of what he calls his profession?

</comment><comment><USER6> It's not too surprising for a city where a policeman can make $150k (base and overtime) year just after 8 years in service.

<comment><USER7> If officers who put their life on the line in the most populated/congested city for 150k are overpaid, then I'd like to talk to some software developers in San Francisco.

<comment><USER8> Yes, because there are thousands of people who'd happily take their job at 60k and are just as qualified to do so.

<comment><USER7> And live in NYC? That's poverty level.

<comment><USER9> I really wish people would stop abusing the word "poverty" until it has no meaning.

$60k is not poverty in New York City. I know many families who live there, 100% of them make under $60k/family/year.

<comment><USER10> Probably renting outside of Manhattan. In Jersey. And commuting for 2-3 hours per day. That might not be poverty but it is suffering.

<comment><USER9> Stop.

No they don't live in Jersey, otherwise I would have said so. The demographics show is not remotely unusual.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I met an underwriter through synagogue who works at the predatory lending office mentioned in this article (Queen Funding LLC). I will have a talk with him about this..

<comment><USER12> Your friend will nod in agreement, but nothing will change. He went into the firm and is staying on mostly likely knowing what is going on, because the pay is too good.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> I am surprised New York still has such archaiac laws. Being a progressive state and city I would have expected these kind of laws to be modified.

<comment><USER14> Generally, the older the city, the more outdated and archaic laws they have on the books. Here are some interesting ones/quotes:

> "They go back to the 1700s," he explained. "They were designed really to > encourage and reinforce church attendance and they originally covered all > sorts of behaviors . . . no playing games, no sports, no sex. Back in the > day, George Washington almost got arrested for traveling on Sunday."[1]

> "It's easy to pass laws regulating people's behavior," he said. "It is very > difficult to repeal those laws."[1]

> A license must be purchased before hanging clothes on a clothesline[1]

> it is illegal to walk around on Sunday with an ice cream in your pocket.[2]

> it is illegal to have two or more people gather together in public while > each wearing any sort of disguise or mask[2]

> A man cannot go in public wearing non-matching pants and jacket.[2]

> it's illegal to wear your slippers after 10pm[2]

> While riding in an elevator, one must talk to no one, and fold his hands > while looking toward the door[2]

[1] [https://nypost.com/2016/06/19/new-york-citys-most- ridiculous...](https://nypost.com/2016/06/19/new-york-citys-most-ridiculous- laws/)

[2] [http://981thehawk.com/10-completely-bizarre-new-york- state-l...](http://981thehawk.com/10-completely-bizarre-new-york-state-laws/)

<comment><USER15> Are those laws actually on the books? Searching the laws of New York, I've been unable to actually find any of these supposed laws, and nearly everytime this comes up, the only citation for these laws still existing is other lists of crazy/insane/weird laws, with no one actually giving a specific reference to the law.

Edit: Actually, I did find a reference for one of the saner "weird laws": PEN § 240.35 paragraph 4 does define "Being masked or in any manner disguised by unusual or unnatural attire or facial alteration, loiters, remains or congregates in a public place with other persons so masked or disguised, or knowingly permits or aids persons so masked or disguised to congregate in a public place; except that such conduct is not unlawful when it occurs in connection with a masquerade party or like entertainment if, when such entertainment is held in a city which has promulgated regulations in connection with such affairs, permission is first obtained from the police or other appropriate authorities" as loitering.

<comment><USER16> With the advent of regulatory law the legal codes are no longer the full story. It's quite possible they are decisions of a regulatory body which will not show up in statute.

<comment><USER15> Even if it's supposed to be a regulation (which, given the claim that these are really old laws still on the books, is unlikely), regulations are still public, citable documents that are relatively easy to track down.

<comment><USER17> Public and online are two different and unrelated things. Regulations that are dozens or hundreds of years old aren't easy to track down. Many large counties and towns here in New York don't have _any_ of their records or regulations online at all. I recently had to go down to my (NY) town's city hall and pay with a paper check (the only accepted form of payment) to get a copy of my original land survey.

<comment><USER15> Here is a link to the code of NYC that took me about 30 seconds to track down: [http://library.amlegal.com/nxt/gateway.dll/New%20York/admin/...](http://library.amlegal.com/nxt/gateway.dll/New%20York/admin/newyorkcityadministrativecode?f=templates$fn=default.htm$3.0$vid=amlegal:newyork_ny) (I went via [https://www1.nyc.gov/nyc-resources/service/4080/nyc- charter-...](https://www1.nyc.gov/nyc-resources/service/4080/nyc-charter-laws- codes-and-rules)). Even my dinky little town in Massachusetts has a PDF of all of its regulations.

Again, note that many of the apocryphal stories about "weird laws still on the books" refer not to small cities, but the kind of large, old cities whose laws are easily accessible via the web.

<comment><USER17> The umbrella code of NYC is only a fraction of the regulations and codes that are on the books in every borough, town, municipality and numerous agencies in NYC.

[https://guides.ll.georgetown.edu/newyork-in-depth/local- gove...](https://guides.ll.georgetown.edu/newyork-in-depth/local-governments)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Unpopular opinion, but I really respect this profession and people making the most of their circumstances. My girlfriend had a shitty landlord that withheld her deposit. She won in small claims court. She had no way to get the money after that. I have very little sympathy for people who owe a debt to be collected upon. Especially when they've signed the papers allowing it.

Also good on this guy for increasing his income from 90k a year to 1m.

<comment><USER19> I take it you missed the first article in the series?

> It's like an arbitration agreement, except the borrower always loses. Armed > with a confession, a lender can, without proof, accuse borrowers of not > paying and legally seize their assets before they know what's happened. Not > surprisingly, some lenders have abused this power. In dozens of interviews > and court pleadings, borrowers describe lenders who've forged documents, > lied about how much they were owed, or fabricated defaults out of thin air.

> It said the Duncans had stopped making payments. That wasn't true. The > Duncans' bank records show that Yellowstone had continued to get its daily > $800 even after going to court. The company's sworn statement also inflated > the size of the couple's debt.

These loans are like a slumlord requiring a "I confess to all future claims of damage to the property, agree to not contest eviction, and will still pay the entire year's rent if evicted" _before the lease starts_.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> The only way to fight corruption, is to mercilessly reduce power of elected officials, or the officials appointed by elected officials. Via the vote.

There is simply no other way.

A hope for a powerful yet fair political elite without a term limit -- is analogous to believing that earth is flat.

These leaches will tell their voters, how they will 'fix things', and how the 'needy will be served', and how the unfair will be made fair, etc.

As long as they get the checkbook, the law enforcement and the media 'covering' for them.

There is little difference between the modern day enabled 'Progressive' politician, and the old day racketeering Mafiosi.

Both wanted to control their 'sphere of influence' by very similar methods. And both want their 'subjects' to be as powerless as possible (in both legal, and self-defense senses)

Both use a form of assassination to scare the opponents (mafia chose physical, and the progressive politicians go for the economic & character assassination first ).</comment>


Ask YC Community: What browser do you use and why? - <AUTHOR>

I just read that market share of Safari is increased by 3 times, which to me is not true unless all the users who downloaded Safari are also using it as their primary browser. So if you have safari but if you are not using it (for whatever reason) then you should not be calc as a part of market share. Just by forcing users to download your s/w doesn't increase the market share in reality. It would be interesting to know about popular browser within tech community and why (technically and by usability)? <comment><USER2> "which to me is not true unless all the users who downloaded Safari are also using it as their primary browser"

Market share is not calculated by the number of downloads of a particular browser. It is calculated by tracking the browser used to visit a particular website, or a set of websites. Net Applications, publishers of this particular fact, aggregates statistics across a large number of sites.

</comment><comment><USER3> I use Firefox primarily, but I am not completely satisfied by any means. It has memory issues, stalls sometimes, and crashes occasionally. I use it primarily for the add-ons, in order of importance to me: Google Browser Sync, Firebug, Web Developer, ForcastFox.

I also use both Safari (on Windows) and IE6/7 for development testing. I also use Safari sometimes personally when I don't need Google Browser Sync (bookmarks, passwords, tabs, etc.). I find it really looks better--something they are doing with anti-aliasing I think.

<comment><USER2> Safari uses its own text rendering engine, as opposed to the native windows engine. The engine is designed to render text the same way Mac OS X does, which differs from the way Windows does. There's a lot of discussion on the topic, here is a relatively good primer:

<http://www.joelonsoftware.com/items/2007/06/12.html>

However, it's worth noting that this behavior is going to change soon. The nightly releases of Safari are introducing support for text rendering that matches the native OS.

<http://webkit.org/blog/168/gdi-text-on-windows/>

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> To be honest, Safari is bloody fast. I was using it to fix some Safari JS bugs the other day, and then was just blown away by how much snappier it feels -- even at a perceptual level that makes a big difference. I feel bad cheating on Firefox, though.

<comment><USER2> The release version of Safari is several times faster than the release version of firefox. Firefox 3 will have pretty equivalent performance to the current Safari 3, but I suspect that won't hold true for long. The WebKit team has been doing an exceptional job at honing the performance of their engine.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Firefox as main, IE7 as backup. Do you have the link to the article that says Safari is up 3x? That's like saying Xobni has 50k users b/c 50k people have downloaded it.

<comment><USER5> Found the link: [http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/08/05/01/safari_for_win...](http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/08/05/01/safari_for_windows_market_share_triples_following_sw_update_push.html)

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> safari for everything, firefox for firebug and web developer and myspace(so when it kills the browser i don't kill my work flow)</comment>


Google NetStack: IPv4 and IPv6 userland network stack in Go - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/google/netstack <comment><USER2> A search for "ledbat" in github doesn't find any reference, which is a shame. Apple are the only one with ledbat support in the kernel[0] afaik, and it's functionality that's sorely needed -- it's ridiculous that there's no way to say "data on this connection is not urgent, only give it bandwidth as long as it doesn't interfere with other connections". Some programs, e.g. rsync, let you limit bandwidth - but that's wasteful; I want this 2TB rsync job to be downloading at full speed at all time I'm not doing anything else.

[0] yes, this is userland, but it's for fuchsia, so "kernel functionality" as far as its users are concerned.

<comment><USER3> From my brief look into ledbat, it seems like it serves a similar role to BBR, which is in the Linux kernel now.

Either way, it looks like the congestion control is just New Reno.

[https://github.com/google/netstack/blob/edcfca33ca347f59a139...](https://github.com/google/netstack/blob/edcfca33ca347f59a1393986a5d216a5f183ae28/tcpip/transport/tcp/snd.go#L344)

Also, this isn't an official Google product, per the disclaimer; just some code that happens to be owned by Google. Where are you seeing the reference to Fuchsia?

edit: oh, I see. Fuchsia codebase has references to this netstack.

<comment><USER4> LEDBAT is similar but works on L7 instead of L4 and needs support on both ends. BBR is excellent. It's the first congestion control strategy to really focus on fairness rather than trying to send packets as fast as possible.

Combined with fq-CODEL, BBR finally offers a way to load balance traffic on your NAT without allowing someone to monopolize bandwidth

<comment><USER5> Wow this is awesome, It bothers me that one computer on a LAN making a big download, takes over the other devices, causing high latency and connections disruption. I mean we are talking about connectivity, it should not happen.

<comment><USER4> Yup, it's because for the longest time TCP was as aggressive as possible to get the most bandwidth.

Over the last 10 years networks buffers have become gigantic and sending packets as fast as you can causes standing queues that can be a dozen seconds long. This is where the lag comes from when someone on your LAN is uploading/downloading.

The lag actually gets worse with higher connection speed because the devices tend to have even bigger buffers.

BBL and to some extent VEGAS are smarter going about things. They attempt to maintain constant latency instead of maximum bandwidth. For a few percent less connection speed all the buffers stay empty and delay stays minimal

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> A nice article about kernel vs. userland network stacks at Cloudflare: [https://blog.cloudflare.com/why-we-use-the-linux-kernels- tcp...](https://blog.cloudflare.com/why-we-use-the-linux-kernels-tcp-stack/)

</comment><comment><USER7> As opposed to the fuchsia netstack written in Go by Google [https://github.com/fuchsia-mirror/netstack](https://github.com/fuchsia- mirror/netstack)

Why so many netstacks in Go? I would imagine even the tiny GC pauses Go has would be undesirable for a netstack.

<comment><USER8> Fuchsia's netstack is based off this netstack. Fuchsia's netstack is essentially a wrapper of this netstack with link endpoint implementations to access NICs via magenta.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> So i'm not an expert in kernel context switches... would running a network stack in userland improve performance in any meaningful way for your average network service written in go? or is there some other purpose for this?

<comment><USER10> No, tcp is unlikely to be the bottleneck for a typical Go network server.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> It's the same netstack used in Fuchsia OS

</comment><comment><USER12> I wonder if one could abstract tcp on top of udp using this.

<comment><USER13> If by "abstract tcp", you mean implement reliability and in-order delivery then, yes you can. QUIC[0] is the most promising of such approaches.

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

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> Not sure to what extent keeping up with the Joneses is a factor here (or indeed which party is the one trying to keep up), but Apple recently moved to a userspace/in-process TCP/IP stack in iOS 11 (and in the corresponding watchOS and tvOS versions).

Seeing that this is for fuchsia makes that seem relevant.

</comment><comment><USER4> Yes! I've been waiting for a fast userland OSS network stack forever. There's things like DPDK for IP but nobody has taken up the monumental task of getting TCP working and reliable

<comment><USER15> f-stack, based on libuinet works over DPDK. [https://github.com/F-Stack/f-stack](https://github.com/F-Stack/f-stack)

Libuinet is the FreeBSD TCP stack in user space (including over netmap) [https://github.com/pkelsey/libuinet](https://github.com/pkelsey/libuinet)

There is also work in FD.io on userspace TCP & UDP. [https://github.com/FDio/tldk](https://github.com/FDio/tldk)

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> How does Google use this internally? Is it for cloud?

<comment><USER13> This seems to have been initially started as personal project by some Googlers. Now it is used in Google's upcoming operating system Fuchsia: [https://github.com/fuchsia-mirror/netstack](https://github.com/fuchsia- mirror/netstack)

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> Can someone explain what the use cases for this are?

<comment><USER18> a few things come to mind :

      - unikernel go
      - making better parallel abstractions over network streams without having to deal with the mess of a kernel interface
      - as a platform to implement more integrated network policy (like congestion control, or state management for ddos protection)
      - ultimately might be really helpful for portability by requiring only a raw packet interface from the host OS
      - much easier environment for tying in w/ SDN and QOS (which google seems to be pretty gung ho on)

there are probably a lot more. I looked a little at the repo, and they went for the most readable version that leans very heavily on the rich go runtime...which I think is a great call if you want to play around. messing with the linux network stack is a bit fussy and painful, there is a lot of .. stuff.. in there</comment></comment>


Facebook used contractors to transcribe users' audio messages - <AUTHOR> https://www.iafrikan.com/2019/09/03/facebook-transcribe-user-audio-no-permission-privacy/ <comment><USER2> CWs (contingent workers) were used so Facebook could pay them less money to do work that a full time employee should be doing. The fact FB did this is no surprise. They are not held accountable, even with a 5B fine so they will continue to push the legal envelope as much as they can..</comment>


Ask HN: Feedback on Pocket Workout, iPhone app for exercising - <AUTHOR>

The HN community gave us a lot of good advice for BreakkUp.com, so I figured you guys might be able to help me brainstorm on a product we're currently selling on iTunes called Pocket Workout. It's an exercise app for non-gym people, travelers, lifehackers, kids, etc… I originally designed the app for myself after using HundredPushups.com and wanted something more full-featured, but did not require equipment to perform.
It's been on the store for about 2 weeks, and people either "get it" or they don't. I think we've clarified the intention of the application so we're not receiving as many "confused" questions anymore, but there is a small problem in the equation (a very basic one) that we use to calculate the user's daily targets. Generally the improvement equation works fine, but there are instances when the equation just doesn't make a lot of sense for people that are in decent shape. So now we're trying to think of a better solution, here are our thoughts:
Option #1: Attach a timer for things like windmills and jumping jacks, which are two of the included exercises users have suggested "do not scale" with our equation. I tend to agree… some people can do 200+ jumping jacks in their initial test, at 150% improvement that would be 500+ jumping jacks… and could take the entire morning to complete.
Option #2: Or, figure out a more universal equation that can apply to all our exercises to gauge improvement and calculate daily goals. I suck at math and this is where I'm stumped, so currently we're leaning toward Option #1.
###
If you think you can help me with Option #2, please contact me and I'll give you a free code for downloading Pocket Workout.
Also, if this is an app you're interested in and will use – I would love to receive your feedback.  Please contact me as well if you don't have $1.99 on hand, especially college students, and I'll hook you up with free coupon. The developer and I aren't in very good shape so the small testing we've done has worked for us, but we need more feedback.
Thanks guys!! <comment><AUTHOR> Here's a link for more info about the app:

<http://saltlicklabs.com/pocket-workout/>

</comment><comment><USER2> You just want a logarithm maybe?

<comment><AUTHOR> Possibly, but having dropped out of calculus a few times... I can not confirm that's what we need. :)

<comment><USER2> Have a look at the graph on the wikipedia page - should help you visualise it

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logarithm>

You want a curve, so that if the number of reps is higher, the suggested increase is proportional.

Maths is easy. Let's go shopping!</comment></comment></comment>


Facebook's willingness to copy rivals' apps seen as hurting innovation - <AUTHOR> https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/facebooks-willingness-to-copy-rivals-apps-seen-as-hurting-innovation/2017/08/10/ea7188ea-7df6-11e7-a669-b400c5c7e1cc_story.html <comment><USER2> TL;DR - Among other methods, Facebook farms app usage data from a mobile VPN app that it acquired to ascertain which popular features should be copied into Facebook properties.

My take: The Big Four have simply reached a point where it's better to copy than acquihire in some cases. That should be good for advancing the leading edge of (consumer tech) innovation except that parts of the ecosystem are still enamored with "Social feature for X" ("SFFX") startups.

VC-types usually argue against or ignore feature-like apps because they aren't defensible. So it seems incredulous if any are claiming Facebook-copying kills innovation.

More likely IMHO, is that the rate at which they can flip the SFFX startups into quickly won acquihires is bottoming out. So innovation in this context will remain under assault until better investment theses around consumer tech (e.g. blockchain apps) are solidified.</comment>


Inter: FOSS Variable-Width Font for UIs - <AUTHOR> https://rsms.me/inter/ <comment><AUTHOR> After looking at _lots_ of font options for our project, we chose Inter and are very happy with it. My favorite feature is infinitely-variable widths from a single font, along with a huge variety of glyphs. And it looks great, too.</comment>


Ask YC: do you have a girlfriend/boyfriend? - <AUTHOR>

I just want to know that ^_^ <comment><USER2> Ask YC: a/s/l?

Seriously... this is getting stupid.

<comment><USER3> It is a reasonable question due to stereotypes, geek lifestyles, etc.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Broke up with mine when I moved out to the valley. It wasn't too serious and the distraction sux. For valentine's day I wrote my computer a poem in python.

<comment><USER5> I wrote mine in Ruby.

Surprisingly enough, she loved it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Married, and seem to have some curious small people running around breaking things. They scare me.

<comment><USER7> Married and the third child on the way!!!! They can be scary... yet so beautiful and amazing.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> yes.

even those holed up in a closet working full-steam on a startup need to socialize, whether with friends or a SO. otherwise, you'll go crazy and burn out.

</comment><comment><USER9> I just got married on sunday.

<comment><USER10> Congratulations!

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> Nope. Life as a computer science major in college and an overall geek leaves very little time.

<comment><USER12> If you don't even have time as a student, how will it be once you join the workforce?

<comment><USER11> I will worry about it once I am done with school ;) I see nothing wrong with having a girlfriend but I don't feel alarmed not to have one at the moment.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> This is liking asking in a prison how many people have nice cars.

</comment><comment><USER14> It's depressing to read things like "Nope. Life as a computer science major in college and an overall geek leaves very little time."

I'm sure you play videogames, read/post on non-industry forums or do SOMETHING not work related. Socializing with women will help you find "the right one" in the long run, and will keep you from being taken advantage of once you "make it."

Personally, I broke up with my girlfriend of three years before moving to SF, independent of deciding to start YC. Overall, not having to "keep up" has definitely helped me.

I've been single throughout the nosebleed "grind-and-build-and-demo" three month YC cycle, but I regularly went out in SF and even had some flings that were fun but shallow distractions.

I've recently started dating an amazing woman who's completing her studies while working in Los Angeles; she's at least as busy as I am and we're "dating" in whatever capacity is possible. Although we're both ridiculously busy we respect our space/priorities, and it's fun and affirmative.

To each his/her own I suppose.

</comment><comment><USER15> Had a girlfriend when I started my company. I haven't had any time for socializing since she left. Anyone else in this boat?

<comment><USER8> you don't consider posting on YC to be a form of socializing?

<comment><USER15> I was using "socializing" in place of "dating".

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> No. I'm married.

<comment><USER17> Man, that is sad.

<comment><USER17> Why all the down votes, I was simply implying that if your wife isn't also your girl friend it is a sad place to be.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Yes, and it actually improves my productivity. She edges me on to work when I feel like slacking off, and I can have intelligent conversations about whichever ideas I have as long as I can break them down to a non-techie.

</comment><comment><USER19> A boyfriend? Why settle with one? I have two.

</comment><comment><USER20> Girlfriend, we have been dating for 3 years and 8 months

We both are pretty hardworkers, and planning to start something toghether (she's been pulling me to apply to this YC's round). I think we are a good time, I understand computers and she understands people (BSc in Psychology).

I don't think having a gf need so much time, I always feel that I spend more time procrastinating that staying with her, and with the later I feel better! :)

</comment><comment><USER21> 47 comments, 8 points. Might be a new record for that ratio.

</comment><comment><USER22> I actually have a date with my wife tomorrow night! Just secured a babysitter. Our last date was on Valentine's day.

</comment><comment><USER23> I have a girlfriend, but the condition I made when starting the relationship is that she has to be ok with me being too busy certain weeks to see her. I promise to see her once a week at the least, and she's ok with that. She's not thrilled about it but feels that some of me is better than none, so she accepts it.

</comment><comment><USER24> Yes and its very distracting. Girlfriends are money/time/attention pits (but I mean that in a good way).

</comment><comment><USER25> I do. It helps that we're both extremely busy, so our "dates" often wind up being the nights when we both have portable work and can hang out together while we grind away.

</comment><comment><USER26> No, I'm married, and my wife won't let me have one. ;-)

</comment><comment><USER27> I'm in a long term relationship with my lovely girlfriend. We're currently living together, can't complain

So to answer your question: Yes

</comment><comment><USER28> All my exes live in Texas.

Seriously, I'm married, though with the amount of work I do, sometimes my wife fails to recognize me. ;-)

</comment><comment><USER29> Yeah.It doesn't matter as far as you know how to balance your personal life and work.

</comment><comment><USER30> married! (and pregnant!)

</comment><comment><USER31> Married to my cofounder

<comment><USER32> I realize every relationship/business is different, but how is that working out - both in the relationship and in the business (if you don't mind sharing)?

<comment><USER31> Generally, investors are wary of married couples, in that they've been burned before. So we need to be very cognizant of the way we act around each other to ensure they get the most positive impression. If you read accounts of the flickr cofounders, you'll also get anecdotal evidence (that I've never experienced) that some investors are assholes and don't take women seriously.

We have complementing skillsets, which is perfect on the work side of it.

On the relationship side of it, I have no idea how people do startups that have significant others _not_ involved. Not only do we spend the vast majority of our time on the project, but we talk about it when we aren't working on it. How could an uninvolved party tolerate that?

<comment><USER33> Michael and Xochi Birch are part of the founding team behind Bebo.com, which seems to have worked out rather well for them financially. I'm sure founding a company adds some extra stress to any relationship but you can certainly take proactive steps to assuage that.

One blogger (relatively well known) but I can't remember which (sorry!) blogged about how he and his wife set aside a monthly date to re-connect. They go out to dinner, and exchange gifts (big or small.) There was quite a bit more detail than that and I think it's a good ready for any of today's super- busy couples. After 30 minutes of searching around I just haven't found the link. Maybe someone else here remembers the piece (or wrote it?)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> No, of course not. Who has the time?

</comment><comment><USER35> dating, worse than having a gf i think, the mindgames are still in effect! grrrr

</comment><comment><USER36> No :(

</comment><comment><USER37> poll?

<comment><USER38> Don't ask us. You're the one with enough karma for it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER39> No, romance is dumb.

<comment><USER39> We know that romantic relationships frequently hurt people. This leaves some pro-romance positions available such as:

\- it only hurts foolish people; there are known solutions to all those problems

\- it's worth the risk of being hurt

\- there is a type of relationship that is different than conventional romance in a way that prevents being hurt, but is still romantic

So, anyone want to debate, or just stick to downvoting? None of the pro- romance positions are obviously correct.

<comment><USER40> It's a relevant and significant question. The west's views on romance are not the norm. For example, the Greeks considered the best relationships to be between men, since men were thought to be the most rational. This is similar in Islamic cultures too.

While I don't have a specific cite I can show you to back up the claims about the Greeks, it is pretty evident if you've read Plato and Aristotle. As for Muslims, this is pretty clear if you just look at how they treat women.

Frankly, I'm disappointed that there is so much knee jerk voting going on here. On the other hand, it is interesting that xLnt has really hit a nerve.

<comment><USER39> It's an L. XLNT. Abbreviation of excellent.

I don't mind the voting. It's useful information to find out that I hit a nerve.

<comment><USER40> Yes, but that doesn't mean I shouldn't be disappointed with the voting.

<comment><USER39> You expected more of YC? :)

<comment><USER40> Yeah, otherwise it isn't worth coming here. I can go anywhere else online and find people who'll just spout their preferences instead of respond rationally.

I made a submission out of this: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=149248>

<comment><USER41> You're paying too much attention to the voting. It just sorts the comments on the page and changes an arbitrary number next to your name.

<comment><USER40> You're paying too much attention to the posting. It just creates things to be sorted and changes arbitrary ascii characters next to my name.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Google investing in some eye-popping projects - <AUTHOR> http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-google-crazy-ventures-20101029,0,7103276.story

<comment><USER2> I think some of this is par for the course for a geek-run successful technology company. Back in the late 80's and early 90's when programmers still controlled Autodesk it was involved in projects like Xanadu, AMIX and even created the Cyberspace Developers Kit. All of these were very cool projects but far from the core revenue generating product AutoCAD. If Google follows the trajectory of other major tech companies there will one day be a down quarter, Wall Street will scream bloody murder and management will release a memo about "refocusing the company on it core competencies." And on that day you really want to be working on AdWords where the money is and not on the cool projects.

<comment><USER3> Did that happen when John Walker was still running it? Because I could see Larry and Sergey saying screw you to Wall Street, and just going on doing what they have currently been doing. Outing successful founders is extremely risky and the investors know this (imagine what would happen to Apples stock price if Steve Jobs was fired tomorrow).

<comment><USER2> I believe Xanadu and AMIX were canceled when Carol Bartz took over as CEO in 1992. That may well have been the right business decision to make, but it wasn't a programmer decision. And yes, it seems that Apple is a carefully crafted corporate machine that needs a design-focused highly-opinionated control-oriented person at the top. It will be interesting to someday watch Apple transition to being a post-Jobs company. (full disclosure, I worked at both NeXT and Autodesk)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> They don't see the relationship between some of these projects?

Google consumes a huge amount of energy for their massive server farms. Is it surprising they are investing in solar and wind energy? I don't think it is much different than the airlines trying to hedge fuel costs.

Google's primary competency is software engineering. Is it surprising that they are working on cars that drive themselves? That is defintely a lucrative problem and they are well positioned to tackle it.

There are plenty of other companies with smaller market cap than Google and a wider portfolio - just look at Yamaha (musical instruments to small gasoline engines? really?) or even Microsoft.

I think it is a good thing, maybe the 21st century Bell Labs.

</comment><comment><USER5> I feel as if projects like these, as eye-popping as they are, are considered a norm for Google. Also, of all the investments that cause "analysts" to scratch their heads leads me to believe that after all this time the world really doesn't understand tech. it's like Hollywood's inability to fathom why Zuckerberg would build FB just to build it</comment>


Why JavaScript development is crazy - <AUTHOR> http://www.planningforaliens.com/blog/2016/04/11/why-js-development-is-crazy/ <comment><USER2> Web components do a lot to alleviate this problem. You get a basic reusable component model in the browser with no framework, and without requiring first jumping into the world of npm/bower.

The vanilla JS example is barely longer with web components, and will be much easier to understand once it gets even mildly interesting:

        <html>
          <head>
            <script>
              class HelloWorld extends HTMLElement {
                constructor() {
                  this.attachShadow().innerHTML = '<h1>"Hello, world!"</h1>';
                }
              }
              customElements.defineElement('hello-world', HelloWorld);
            </script>
          </head>
          <body>
            <hello-world></hello-world>
          </body>
        </html>

</comment><comment><USER3> Besides overengineered apps, problem is that people start learning frameworks and libraries instead of learning how javascript itself works. They are so excited by the new tool/toy that they fail to realize that the same thing can be achieved in much simpler and more efficient way.

<comment><USER4> Serious question, do you write JS code professionally? I mean, the more you know about JS the better, I agree, but writing plain is a daunting task, and your bound to get a lot of things wrong.

It's not a well defined language with one authoritative guide like many others, the ecosystem is pretty crazy.

Example of a raw JS ajax call: [http://code.tutsplus.com/articles/how-to-make- ajax-requests-...](http://code.tutsplus.com/articles/how-to-make-ajax- requests-with-raw-javascript--net-4855)

Have you tried doing dom manipulations that is consistent across all browsers?

This is what you would have to do every time you need to select a class:

[http://stackoverflow.com/a/3808886/463065](http://stackoverflow.com/a/3808886/463065)

I agree that most devs should know more about JS than blindly rely on every tool, but still, right now, tools are driving web development speed to new standards.

<comment><USER3> > do you write JS code professionally?

I'm not.

> the ecosystem is pretty crazy.

I agree. I guess my point is, people should treat js with more respect, it is a powerful language after all. The lack of standards for sure makes it difficult to learn for beginners like me.</comment></comment></comment>


Goldman Traders Are Caught Up in a Bizarre, Tense Hedge Fund Battle - <AUTHOR> https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-12-07/goldman-traders-caught-up-in-bizarre-tense-hedge-fund-battle <comment><USER2> Surprised that HN likes this article:)

I'll start by laying out my biases and stating that I'm not a big fan of most PE firms.

I think most people understand that CDS are a few things.

1) usually bespoke in that each one is different, ie these are contracts that you approach a bank to write for you and not fungible like a share. This means they are generally illiquid and usually don't pay out.

2) These used to be used, and still are, as insurance for bond holders.

3) as everyone how as seen or read the Big Short now knows, they started to be used by third parties to speculate on bankruptcies.

4) They pay out only when the agreed upon terms are triggered

Blackstone, the PE firm holding the CDS's, is trying to get an otherwise healthy firm to "default" on some of their debt so that Blackstone can get the CDS payout.

The problem is that the firm doesn't need to default so Blackstone is enticing them with better funding rates for their debt if they just do a "tiny bit of defaulting".

Like I said, I don't really have alot of respect for PE firms.

This is dirty. If this is allowed to happen then who in their right mind would ever again underwrite a CDS for a companies debt if some other company can so easily force a default event.

I know that 2008 probably soured the term CDS for the average person but they are a very important part of the credit market and risk management.

Just to be clear, the companies bonds are trading at or above par value, indicating that investors have confidence in the company's ability to satisfy its debts as they come due.

<comment><USER3> I've always been so puzzled by these "synthetic" financial products. If someone wants to "insure" a corporate bond, why don't they just swap it with a bank for a cash flow stream guaranteed by the bank, minus some premium?

<comment><USER4> Uniformity is a major advantage of CDSs. Bonds are idiosyncratic- every one will has its own maturity date, coupon payments, and lots of minor details in the bond covenants. That makes bonds hard to trade. CDS are far more uniform- they trade with standard terms and maturities. Bonds are primarily a way to provide companies with funding, CDS are primarily an instrument for financial companies to trade.

Could a company "insure" a bond by writing a swap with a bank? Sure, a bank would be happy to write a bespoke swap with you, but they're going to charge more than a CDS would cost, and you're not going to be able to trade the swap to someone else.

CDS actually make it easier for companies to raise money. If you can hedge your weird, illiquid bond with a nice liquid CDS you're more likely to buy the bond in the first place.

FWIW I'm not a specialist in fixed income, so don't take this as gospel, but I think the general point is right.

<comment><USER5> Not sure I necessarily agree with the point about making it easier for companies to raise money. I agree with it at face value but not based on what usually happens in the market. Chances are, if there's liquid CDS for an issuer, they're not going to be issuing weird, illiquid bonds. On the other side, if all an issuer has are weird, illiquid bonds outstanding and without knowing anything about the issuer, I would say it is negative to have a liquid CDS market as that's probably a negative creditworthy signal.

I'm sure some academic has done a study about how CDS has shaved a few bps off borrowing costs for large IG issuers though.

Agree with everything else in there.

<comment><USER4> Thanks for the info!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> > Blackstone came along with what it pitched as a better deal, but with an > unusual provision: Hovnanian had to agree to do it in a way that would > trigger credit-default swaps, which are essentially side bets on whether the > builder meets all of its debt obligations. That would lead to quick gains > for GSO because it had been buying short-dated insurance contracts.

If this is true, it should be illegal (and probably is). CDS is a derivative, and derivative traders are generally not permitted to manipulate the underliers of their products. It would be like buying stock on a particular expiry date to push a much larger, cash-settled digital option into the money. Expect a flurry of legal action if things go according to plan for GSO.

<comment><USER5> Not going to comment on the legality of this but this isn't the first time BX has done this and nothing happened previously. See [0]. I actually don't necessarily have a problem with this as the underlying company theoretically should see a real benefit from this.

[0] [https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2013-12-05/blackston...](https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2013-12-05/blackstone- made-money-on-credit-default-swaps-with-this-one-weird-trick)

<comment><USER6> In the Hovnian case, there have been some indications that there will be legal action if the triggering goes through.

[https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-11-15/a-high- st...](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-11-15/a-high-stakes-hedge- fund-battle-erupts-over-hovnanian-debt-deal)

[https://www.wsj.com/articles/home-builder-accused-of- default...](https://www.wsj.com/articles/home-builder-accused-of-default-swap- scheme-with-blackstone-unit-1512168887)

Even if an individual trader buys stock in a company to manipulate a derivative and your price impact is beneficial for the shareholders, twenty executives, and a hundred pension funds, FINRA will not give you a free pass when they investigate him. No idea how complicated it gets at the institutional level, but I can't imagine there is a very strong argument for allowing manipulation to occur in this instance.

Even if the company gets a cash injection, all of the counterparties who sold protection via CDS will get housed. I don't know who those counterparties are, but it's easy to imagine that they are trading with money from many sources, including university endowments, pension funds, insurance companies, and so forth. So where do you draw the line between beneficial manipulation and detrimental manipulation?

<comment><USER7> So now CDS sellers are too big to fail?

I imagine Hovnanian and Blackstone are owned by pension funds, etc, too.

<comment><USER6> > So now CDS sellers are too big to fail?

Not sure how you came to this conclusion. The point is that you can't argue "this is good for the company/shareholders/lender" if you're selectively choosing the winners without mentioning the losers. It's not compelling, especially not to regulators.

The issue is that if you allow manipulation of derivatives, then the markets become totally useless and they reward only the large players who have the resources to make large trades and deals that custom-fit the triggers to their own payoff profiles.

Many of the counterparties in the derivatives market trade against the banks where they do business, in effect meaning that banks would be manipulating their own customers if you allow certain manipulative tactics.

And like it or not, it's an established fact that manipulation in the derivs market is, broadly speaking, illegal.

<comment><USER7> Derivatives are legalized gambling. And this wasn't manipulation, just two parties doing their fiduciary duties.

<comment><USER6> > Derivatives are legalized gambling.

I don't agree with you. There is a different utility to commodity futures, for example, than to bets on horse races or blackjack games. Derivatives allow tailored hedging of real-world risks. The regulatory stipulations are different, especially for dealers, and there is a far larger opportunity for people with predictive skills in the derivatives market.

> And this wasn't manipulation, just two parties doing their fiduciary duties.

By this logic, any profit from market manipulation would be justified because it generates a return for investors. Yet the reason these behaviors are prohibited is because they make the market worse for everyone, arguably including the long-run returns of those very same investors. "Is it beneficial to my investors" is a very poor test to answer the question, "is it manipulation?".

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> If I were in management I would take the deal from Blackstone, but only on the immutable condition that Blackstone defray all of the legal losses that may or may not arise from their proposal. See how much _they_ really believe in this idea. My guess: probably not a lot.

</comment><comment><USER9> Does anyone have Blackstone's side of the story here?

Would be interesting to see that for perspective.

</comment><comment><USER10> This will be nothing compared the crypto battle coming.</comment>


Next-Gen CPUs Will Only Support Windows 10 - <AUTHOR> http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2498097,00.asp <comment><USER2> That article is horribly written. Technical details in MS' blog post under "Our Commitment":

[https://blogs.windows.com/windowsexperience/2016/01/15/windo...](https://blogs.windows.com/windowsexperience/2016/01/15/windows-10-embracing- silicon-innovation/)

</comment><comment><USER3> Click-baity, misleading title discussed previously in response to equally laughable article from Verge.

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10917473](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10917473)

Why is something so atrocious voted up, I really don't know.

</comment><comment><USER4> The title & the article are worded so badly that I would go as far as to say it's just flat out wrong.

This isn't about CPUs supporting anything. This article is based on Microsoft's policy of adding support for fancy new CPU features to their kernel. Microsoft has decided to build the new kernel features into Windows 10 and either delay or even skip adding them to their older kernels.

The new CPUs will still be usable with older Windows versions, and with other OSes.

For Skylake, with the Speed Shift tech, the performance difference is about 2% according to tests made by AnandTech. [1]

[1] [http://www.anandtech.com/show/9751/examining-intel- skylake-s...](http://www.anandtech.com/show/9751/examining-intel-skylake- speed-shift-more-responsive-processors)

</comment><comment><USER5> "CPU does not support Windows XYZ" != "CPU Will not work with Windows XYZ"

<comment><USER6> True, we will have to see. If Windows 7 really doesn't work we might see some kernel hacks.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> I could imagine that being problematic for large corporations that have long software upgrade cycles (for instance, because it takes them two years to certify that everything they need runs on the new OS and then another year and a half to develop an image to use for the new OS on all machines in the organization, and then another year to polish the upgrade process.) What are they supposed to do when old desktops break down and they need to replace the hardware?

I assume that the new hardware will still run old operating systems under virtualization?

</comment><comment> awinter-py this article isn't really about microsoft breaking their policy of 'support everything from all time', but that policy is breaking and it's going to get worse. Drivers (especially printer drivers) are the first straw, followed by lots of old industrial control programs written for XP.

Cross your fingers that businesses who need to plan 10 years out will learn this lesson well and remember that the best way to do long support is shared source application code (even if behind an NDA) on open source platforms.

</comment><comment><USER8> What about alternative operating systems? Looking at Linux: Will a random Linux distribution work? Will a recent Kernel be required?

<comment><USER9> Bad wordings, I guess. Should be: "In the case of Windows, all next-generation processors built by Intel, AMD, Qualcomm, or others, will only support Windows 10"

I think...

<comment><USER10> Or maybe "Microsoft will only support the latest processors in Windows 10 and beyond"

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Probably lots of folks here are too young, but I remember Windows. That was the one I used to run until they integrated spyware... Some of my co-workers are stuck on it until legacy programs get ported, but I only run Ubuntu now.

I know they were trying to integrate Ubuntu into Windows, but it's a hack and now that they're introducing CPU restrictions, why would I go back?

</comment><comment><USER12> Misleading title -- the CPUs will _not_ support Windows pre-10. They _will_ still support Linux as well as they did before. It's not like they're blocking non-Windows operating systems.

<comment><USER13> I would argue that CPUs don't support operating systems at all. The operating system runs on the CPU therefore it's the operating system's responsibility to support the CPU architecture.

The title is flat out wrong and nothing more than clickbait.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> So as long as the user is not a programmer or a geek who messes around with different OSes, this shouldn't be a problem for anyone I think!

<comment><USER15> 99% of Windows users

<comment><USER14> yes exactly. They are users not builders

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> I think this is a good spot for this rant I've had brewing awhile...

<rant>

I get so tired of Microsoft's continual half assing of literally everything, but especially when it comes to things like this, where they're trying to move forward across multiple avenues to keep everyone happy. They do this constantly, it compromises their software quality, compromises driver stacks, because they are simultaneously trying to have new features AND legacy support, and they do this for EVERYTHING.

Apple does things all the time that I don't like (especially as an iOS developer) but my experience has taught me that though whatever they've done may suck in the short term, that there's a larger plan at work and it will probably benefit me in the long run. I have NO such trust in Microsoft, because every time they have a moment where they need to say "hey, this is fucked, we need to move on to something better" it's ALWAYS followed by "but don't worry we'll still be supporting all the old garbage to the detriment of our OS as a whole."

I have little love for Windows 10, I don't like the phoning home every ten minutes, I think the UI is ugly as sin, etc. but that is the future and I accept that. At some point I will need to make that leap in all likelihood, and this continued "well you really should upgrade but it's ok if you don't want to" crap just makes me terrified as to what kind of pandora's box is awaiting me when I decide to make said leap. Exactly how much stuff is going to be broken because they had to make DOS applications from 95 work on their NEW operating system?

Microsoft: Shit or leave the toilet. If you're going to bank hard on Windows 10 then make sure it's something WORTH BANKING ON.

</rant>

<comment><USER13> I would argue that Microsoft's greatest weakness is also their greatest strength.

My 13 year old scanner works just fine in Windows 10 with it's XP drivers, the same can't be said of my Wife's 5 year old scanner on her Mac. I didn't dare tell her it worked fine on Windows too for fear she might throw her Air through a window.

<comment><USER16> To be fair, printers and scanners in OS X are much like they are in linux: They either work perfectly immediately, or they'll never work no matter how much you try. There is no middle ground in my experience.

I don't know enough about how print services/drivers work to make any meaningful statements, I'm just happy I got a printer/mac combination that works well.

<comment><USER13> That's generally been my experience as well with Macs but I've never had much trouble getting a printer or scanner to work on Linux. That might just be a function of when I tried however because I remember around 2008-2009 when it was pretty futile to get WiFi working reliably on Linux, that is no longer the case.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Fog has declined in past century along California's redwood coast - <AUTHOR> http://www.sciencecentric.com/news/article.php?q=10021622-fog-has-declined-past-century-along-california-redwood-coast

<comment><AUTHOR> The 6 degree Fahrenheit drop in the coast vs inland temperature gradient has resulted in a 33% reduction in coastal fog drip.

This is definitely not good for our Coastal Redwoods in the Santa Cruz Mountains, given their reliance on high fog density. Such a reduction in fog will result in smaller trees and a reduced growth rate. As a result, the more aggressive tanoak and douglas fir species will proliferate and dominate the limited Redwood forests.

It sounds far off, but this is definitely news worth considering if you are planning a timber harvesting operation. Given that these trees take between 20-50 years to grow back, such logging operations could drastically change the surrounding ecosystem.

I believe that the Redwood forests are one of northern California's most amazing gifts, and I would be extremely sad to see them go.</comment>


That's what she said classifier using node-twss - <AUTHOR> http://twss.guan.dk/

<comment><USER2> I assume this uses some sort of trained Bayesian thing

<comment><USER3> See the previous HN discussion[1] or the git repo[2].

[1]: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3456255>

[2]: <https://github.com/DanielRapp/twss.js>

</comment></comment><comment><USER2> "Where's the beef?" said there's no joke here :/

</comment><comment><USER4> "that was amazing" yields 41%...</comment>


Show HN: Mapsaurus, the visual map of the Android Store - <AUTHOR> http://mapsaurus.com/

<comment><USER2> Neat UI, like the animation.

The idea is well executed, very slick, but I'm not sure how this site would help me discover fun new things as the friction is high (eg, have to remember your site first) - I'd almost want some sort of slide-like toolbar that scrolled apps with their descriptions at random at the bottom of my computer screen (yeah, that's distracting, but if I were into trying lots of different apps and had more time, that might be fine)

One more thing - you have the main headline "Discover great apps for your Android Phone" and a little below in green you say "Also available on Android" which seems unnecessary?

edit: I think my mistake might be that I was using it on my mac instead of using it from an android device (which I don't have) - so that use case makes more sense....

<comment><AUTHOR> Hey! Thanks for the input.

The subtitle "also available on Android" is a link to the Android Play Store because we're both a website and a native Android app. I think the Android app solves a bit of the problem with the friction; if a user has downloaded our app, they can easily go back to it later without having to remember the name.

I really like the idea of a sliding random list of apps (perhaps trending ones). The cool thing about our interface is that even if those random apps aren't perfect for the user, they can still provide great starting points for exploration.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> I really like the idea and I hope you will release it for the iOS appstore as well.

Just a small detail: While sharing it on facebook I noticed that the sharing popup was cut off by the navigation frame and it was a bit hard to complete the message.

</comment><comment><USER4> This <http://mapsaurus.com/static/javascript-warning.png> is amazing. Best "please turn on JS" ever. Dinosaurs have a tendency to do that.

<comment><USER5> Hi! I'm another member of the Mapsaurus team. Alice (<http://mapsaurus.com/about.html>) drew that up in the middle of a late night coding session. We think Rex is pretty awesome too.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Wow, this is awesome! How long did this take? What do you use for the map UI?

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks!

We built it in about 3 months.

We use SVG and d3.js for the web interface. In the Android app, we use native Canvas (and share Javascript code with the website-- about half of our code is shared between the Android app and website!)

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Great stuff!

Your Android app says "Double _click_ an app to start." I think it would be more fitting to read "Double tap" instead.

</comment><comment><USER8> "We're sorry, but our website doesn't work on Android."

A bit funny considering it's for finding Android apps.

<comment><USER5> Sorry, we're going to reword that message. The website itself doesn't work on mobile browsers, but that's why we provide a link to our native app.</comment></comment>


30 Hour Jobs - <AUTHOR> https://30hourjobs.com <comment><USER2> No listings, just email address harvesting.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for the feedback, I'm working on the first issue of curated jobs.

I'll be sure to add some listings to the page when they are ready.</comment></comment>


The North Korean number - <AUTHOR> http://thenorthkoreannumber.puyb.net/ <comment><USER2> That's a joke. There are a lot more numbers and area code. See [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telephone_numbers_in_North_Kor...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telephone_numbers_in_North_Korea)

</comment><comment><USER3> Did anybody succeed calling that number? Skype seems to require at least two more digits...

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> It's a joke indeed!</comment>


ApplePay.com - <AUTHOR> http://www.applepay.com/

<comment><USER2> From what I gather, it's a tokenized mobile payment system using NFC. The cool part would be the "dynamic security code" \- essentially a 2 factor authentication.

Most likely performs a card not present transaction on a back-end system. I imagine each merchant will have to get setup to acquire finds from this payment method.

I'm fine with this - I believe 2 factor authentication and tokenization is the way to go with payments, but I'm hoping for some innovation on the POS end so that the payment networks have a standardization.

</comment><comment><USER3> The launch webcast screwups are likely to hurt this more than the iPhone - between that and the 'nude selfie' thing Apple's reputation as a provider of online services looks bad, which is a pity as this seems to be a well thought- out product. But with so many strategic partners and a an inevitable large install base that's probably just a bump in the road.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> How is this not a problem for Apple's recent announcement that another company is already called "Apple Pay"?

<comment><USER4> They're actually AppleOne Payroll</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Fellow Germans - Why don't we have a German version of HN? - <AUTHOR>

Seriously - why hasn't anyone built this? <comment><USER2> If you're the one asking the question, the hacker ethic probably asks, "Why haven't YOU built it already?" ;)

<comment><USER3> why build it? isn't HN good enough for everyone?? just use it?

<comment><USER4> HN isn't in German. Not everyone works/learns/wants to spend all day in English

<comment><USER5> The number of people who do not use English all day in a tech/science environment is rather low, and the number of people willing to trade a global community against one speaking German is probably even smaller.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Thou, Robot: Humans remain in charge–for better and worse - <AUTHOR> https://www.city-journal.org/html/thou-robot-15288.html <comment><AUTHOR> Interesting to hear a take on the AI disruptions from someone outside of tech but competent to comprehend key distinctions.</comment>


Lisp Flavoured Erlang - <AUTHOR> http://lfe.io/ <comment><USER2> One of the particularly nice things about LFE is the team's commitment to documentation. Duncan McGreggor has done a great job.

</comment><comment><USER3> I think it would be nice to see some comparison to Clojure for example which is a JVM-integrated lisp-1. I have for example Elixir on my radar for a while but I'm very interested in seeing more lisp dialects running on popular VM implementations. My point is that I don't know how to compare this to Clojure (in my case). What advantages does it have and why should I use it?

<comment><USER4> I am a fan of clojure. I'm interested in LFE, but I've been focussing on learning Haskell lately, and don't want to switch gears yet.

The big thing that I miss in clojure are the data structures, and the ease of use of those data structures. Specifically vectors and maps. These exist all over the place, but no where (in my experience) are they as pain-free as clojure.

That combined with their immutability (yet easy to transform) is a really significant win for productivity.

As I've looked for other languages to learn, those sorts of easy to use and highly productive datastructures has been a top criteria.

Haskell has them, but I wouldn't put them on the easy to use list yet. However I'm still learning, and it might just come down to familiarity.

Chicken Scheme has them as an egg, but the syntax makes them far more encumbering than clojure.

If LFE has the same unencumbered immutable datastructures for maps and vectors, well, that would be exciting to me.

<comment><USER5> > Specifically vectors and maps. These exist all over the place, but no where > (in my experience) are they as pain-free as clojure.

You don't use vectors very much on the BEAM in general, so I wouldn't consider this very important. Maps are more popular, but have a complicated relationship with records and records have, due to historical reasons, not seen much light on the BEAM in general until lately.

Tuples, which you could use as vectors, sort of, can be written as follows:

(tuple 'hey 'ho "let's go") <-> #(hey ho "let's go")

Tuples are infinitely more important than maps on the BEAM and so they deserve special syntax.

I think insisting that everything should be like Clojure is a great way to not really see anything different. While I understand that your idea is that "everything else should see what's so great about Clojure", maybe you could take that to heart as well.

Edit, addition: I wonder what the stats on posts starting with "I'm/As a Clojure fan..." are. If someone is an Archlinux user, a vegan, a crossfitter and a Clojure user, which do they tell you first?

<comment><USER4> I prefaced with clojure fan to give context for my post. As a clojure fan, my point of view is going to be from a clojurist. It's a clue as to how to remove bias.

I don't think everything should be like clojure, I just think clojure gets datastructures right in ways that I haven't seen in other languages. I don't think I insisted on everything, or anything, being like clojure.

Right now my dream language would be mostly haskell with clojure maps. Next year it could be something different.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Recent discussion: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11302125](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11302125)

</comment><comment><USER7> As a Clojure fan, I tried using this, but I got the impression it has learned next to nothing from Clojure, so I ended up going with Elixir instead.

Particularly:

\- No data structure literals (?) - (except e.g., '(1 2 3) for lists)

\- Manual module exports, instead of just having 2 versions of def

\- Other small syntactic annoyances, like plain parens everywhere, instead of brackets in some cases like Clojure, and atoms (like keywords in clojure) started with "'" rather than ":"

<comment><USER7> In general, it seems like the authors of Elixir were able to capture more of the cool things about Clojure than LFE. Check out some of the top level functions in Elixir:

      update_in
      put_in
      get_in

[http://elixir- lang.org/docs/stable/elixir/Kernel.html#update...](http://elixir- lang.org/docs/stable/elixir/Kernel.html#update_in/3)

These are basically right out of Clojure. It may seem like a small thing, but consistent, well thought out functions like this makes working with immutable data structures much easier.

<comment><USER8> "update", "put" are already available in Erlang[0] and work with nested records[1] if I understand correctly. Likewise, it seems that LFE has map- update for the same use cases[2].

[0] [http://erlang.org/doc/man/maps.html](http://erlang.org/doc/man/maps.html)

[1] [http://erlang.org/doc/reference_manual/records.html#id86378](http://erlang.org/doc/reference_manual/records.html#id86378)

[2] [https://github.com/rvirding/lfe/blob/develop/doc/user_guide....](https://github.com/rvirding/lfe/blob/develop/doc/user_guide.txt)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I love the website!!!

</comment><comment><USER10> That cup of coffee in the logo suggests they are compiling to the Java JVM. If true, this makes me wonder why aren't they using Erlang itself as a target?

<comment><USER11> No, it is built right on top of Erlang for seamless integration, and of note is that it was created by Robert Virding, one of the original creators of Erlang along with Joe Armstrong.

LFE macros deliver true homoiconicity to Erlang. It is a Lisp 2, and supports function and macro definitions at the REPL.

I prefer it to Elixir, because I prefer Lisp. Robert has also created a Lua 5.2 written in pure Erlang.

Evidently, Erlang's actors and BEAM VM were influenced by the JVM and Scala, so I guess doing a JVM Erjang was in the cards. [1]

[1] [https://www.infoq.com/news/2011/04/erlang-copied-jvm-and- sca...](https://www.infoq.com/news/2011/04/erlang-copied-jvm-and-scala)

<comment><USER12> _Erlang Copied Scala 's Actors & Erlang's VM is almost a Clone of the JVM_ \- Apr 01, 2011

Erlang was released in 1986, Java in 1995, and Scala in 2004.

I wouldn't be surprised if LFE were older than Scala.

<comment><USER13> According to Wikipedia, work on BEAM started in 1992. Still earlier than Java.

LFE appeared in 2008, so it's newer than Scala.

<comment><USER11> Erlang was released into the 'wild' in 1988, but it had a Prolog-based VM, or JAM, Joe's Abstract Machine before the BEAM.[0]

The BEAM VM was being worked on in 1992 a year after work on Java in 1991.

[0] [http://erlang.org/faq/implementations.html](http://erlang.org/faq/implementations.html)

<comment><USER13> > The BEAM VM was being worked on in 1992 a year after work on Java in 1991.

You're right. What I meant by "still earlier than Java" is "still earlier than first public Java version", so there was no possibility to borrow anything.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


That's No Phone. That's My Tracker. - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/15/sunday-review/thats-not-my-phone-its-my-tracker.html?_r=1&hp

<comment><USER2> Subjecting a real problem to faintly ridiculous exaggeration and paranoia does not help. (I'm not sure whether to be surprised this made it into the New York Times or not.)

> Thanks to the explosion of GPS technology and smartphone apps, these devices > are also taking note of what we buy, where and when we buy it, how much > money we have in the bank, whom we text and e-mail, what Web sites we visit, > how and where we travel, what time we go to sleep and wake up — and more. > Much of that data is shared with companies that use it to offer us services > they think we want.

I have never heard of purchase history, bank balance, alarm clock settings (??? perhaps it refers to carriers supposedly tracking waking hours based on usage? that would make more sense, but is no different from dumb phones), or website history being tracked by anyone through a smartphone. "Whom we text" is tracked, but "whom we email" is worth highlighting as an item that _cannot_ be tracked by a carrier without installing malware onto your phone, assuming you use encrypted email. (The credit card company is tracking your purchases, and email providers may be tracking your email, depending on privacy policy, whether you're using a smartphone or not, but that's irrelevant. I guess if you count Gmail's algorithms reading email to offer services "they think we want"... I don't.)

> Scholars have called them minicomputers and robots. Everyone is struggling > to find the right tag, because "cellphone" and "smartphone" are inadequate.

That "phone" doesn't adequately describe modern smartphones is a valid point, but has literally nothing to do with tracking.

> Eben Moglen, a law professor at Columbia University, argues that they are > robots for which we — the proud owners — are merely the hands and feet. > "They see everything, they're aware of our position, our relationship to > other human beings and other robots, they mediate an information stream > around us," he has said.

Colorful, but ridiculously vague. There are many different types of information and they are all stored differently. With the possible exception of Facebook, there is no entity that sits up high reading all your stuff without a court order, and if you want to have completely secure conversations through email or other means it's easy to do so.

> A recent survey by O2, a British cell carrier, showed that making calls is > the fifth-most-popular activity for smartphones; more popular uses are Web > browsing, checking social networks, playing games and listening to music. > Smartphones are taking over the functions that laptops, cameras, credit > cards and watches once performed for us.

Also irrelevant to tracking.

> Turning it off when you're not using it will also help, because it will > cease pinging your location to the cell company, but are you really going to > do that? Shutting it down does not even guarantee it's off — malware can > keep it on without your realizing it. The only way to be sure is to take out > the battery. Guess what? If you have an iPhone, you will need a tiny > screwdriver to remove the back cover. Doing that will void your warranty.

If you are really concerned about malware preventing you from turning off your iPhone, you can hold down the home and power buttons to turn it off without going through software.

> "Don't have a cellphone or just accept that you're living in the > Panopticon."

A third alternative is to wear a tinfoil hat which will stop all the tracking???

> There is another option. People could call them trackers.

Okay but if hackers start hijacking peoples' sessions can we start calling them tracker-jackers?

Edit: Or more to the point - this is like calling all passerby "government agents" because they can be required to testify in court.

</comment><comment><USER3> I've been not carrying a phone with me lately, not because of tracking fears, but out of a sort of experiment to see if I _really_ need to be connected in the relatively short distances between my laptop having a wifi connection (which it has at home, at the office, in coffee shops, on trains, etc.). I suppose avoiding this dragnet is a nice bonus, but I wonder how long it'll be until not carrying a phone gets registered as somehow suspicious in itself.

<comment><USER4> What are your plans in case of emergencies?

<comment><USER5> At what point did that question become relevant to _every_ facet of life?

I honestly can't believe it when people ask that question. It's such a scare tactic.

<comment><USER4> FWIW my question wasn't meant to be a scare tactic. I genuinely wanted to know what the plan was in case of emergencies. I suppose I could have (and should have, since HN seems to value explicitness and literalism) elaborated to avoid assumption and/or presumption.

<comment><USER6> Don't buy in to the fear mentality that's strangling American discourse. People were dealing with emergencies just fine without cell phones... just _15 years ago_.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I'm surprised no one has mentioned putting the phone in a foil pouch. As 'antenna-gate' demonstrated it doesn't take a whole lot to make a phone unable to connect, with a conductive foil pouch you can put your phone in it and no matter what it is not sending out any info about you, but you can easily pull it out and use it.

The other thing they don't mention is disinformation. Phones do _not_ use the encrypted GPS channel, they use the regular one. And spoofing it can make you phone think it is somewhere that it isn't. Cell tower data screws with that (since if you cross correlate to cell tower pings you end up with conflicting data sets) but within the range of a tower its eminently doable. The recent 'drone hijack' example had an idea of how much it costs ($1K) to build a reasonably high powered GPS spoofer, to spoof the phone in your pocket would take a very small one (and no sense screwing up your neighbors phone right?).

All we need are a couple of cases where the cell phone data "proves" you weren't in the area of a crime and blam!

<comment><USER8> So, I don't know a lot about the internal workings of these phones, but I was under the impression that a phone manages its transmit power depending on the signal strength.

IF that's the case: Wouldn't your solution turn the device into a pocket heater that dies a couple of hours early?

What is the benefit of this 'clever' solution, if all you really want seems to be to turn it off..?

<comment><USER9> Phones generally "give up" if they have basically no power. I spend significant chunks of time in rural areas with no service, and battery life isn't ever a problem.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Well, there is another option: Have an open software and hardware phone that you know what it does and how it does it when you want it.

Eventually it will happen.

<comment><USER11> That's not really the point.

Having total control over your own phone doesn't resolve the more fundamental problem that, in order to do basic tasks such as make calls or send text messages, you are dependent on a cell phone provier who then, through ordinary usage, is able to collect a terrifying amount of data about you.

They can triangulate your location whenever your phone is on and connected to their network (24/7 for most people), and have a full record of your calls, text messages, as well as all the data you send through their network.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> In network parlance, isn't a general processor a "node"?

<comment><USER13> Node is a really nice word for what the article describes.

The word "tracker" doesn't roll off the tongue very well and I think it suffers from the same flaw that the article criticizes about "phone", namely that it focuses on a specific aspect of a multi-purpose device. Node seems a much better choice since it connotes all the important aspects of a smart phone:

      - Connection to a network for the purpose of information sharing
      - Being identifiable and addressable
      - Processing capabilities

If we choose to find a more suitable name, I'd suggest maybe "Personal Node" or "Smart Node".

<comment><USER14> I think the problem is they're not a "personal node", they're nodes working for Apple or Google or your telco. The idea of "node-ness" carries connotations (at least to me) of being more useful as part of a network than as individual devices - and that's way more true for the people/organisations with access to data from the whole network of nodes, than the owner/operator of a singe node.

I wonder if Google are collecting geo-spacial data about your social graph? I suspect they could, if they wanted to, work out which section of your online social network are people you meet in real life, and which are people you only interact with on-line?

<comment><USER13> If I didn't misunderstand, you're suggesting that "node" carries the idea of being an autonomous entity that connects to a neutral network (i.e. no node is more privileged than any other). In that case a more accurate term might be "slave node" as opposed to the master nodes operated by carriers which control and monitor the communication flow. But I think that's a subjective view. The internet also has privileged nodes which could be used to monitor and control the network or individual nodes.

"Tracker" simply ignores all the service aspects of the device and focuses on a single use for one of the parties involved (costumer, carrier, manufacturer). In that respects it is just as misleading a term as "phone".

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> The Times is On It! <https://twitter.com/NYTOnIt></comment>


The World Beyond Google Analytics – Piwik - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/@Voucherify/the-world-beyond-google-analytics-piwik-free-self-hosted-alternative-for-tracking-visitors-8c4dce0b8dc#.g06zaaev5 <comment><USER2> I've been running Piwik since it was in Beta a loooong while ago. Its stable, fast and easy to use.

Its an excellent alternative to Google Analytics and you can circumvent a lot of the privacy problems when using Google-products.

It also feels good to own all the data you and your visitors generate.

I would like an easier way to move installations but all in all its a solid piece of software and really easy to set up and use.</comment>


Killing Twitter Before It Can hurt Us - <AUTHOR> http://whydoeseverythingsuck.com/2008/05/killing-twitter-before-it-can-hurt-us.html

<comment><USER2> Does anyone else think that all this head scratching over what is the most trivial of problems is hilarious? Twitter is just another naming service. Instead of addressing someone as firstname.lastname@example.com, they're now just @foo. All that's needed to make twitter distributed is a new protocol for name resolution. It could be as simple as GET <http://distribtwitter.com/whois?foo> returning <name>[http://www.foo.com/mytwitterfeed</name>](http://www.foo.com/mytwitterfeed</name>). You could write it in a day as a wordpress plugin.

Then other people could come along and write recursive caching distribtwitter name servers so that they can still twitter at people they've never twittered before when distribtwitter.com is down.

The only conclusion I can draw from this is that web 2.0 rots the mind and turns trivial problems in to seemingly impossible problems.

<comment><USER3> Elegant though it is, I don't think that idea will work; people who I don't "follow" can "message" me in Twitter by including my name in a posting. That doesn't work if I explicitly have to be polling their server to see anything they say.

<comment><USER2> No, people who you don't follow can ping you saying they've sent you a message. Your software can simply drop them on the floor if you don't care to receive messages from people who you aren't following (AKA people who aren't on your whitelist.)

No polling is involved.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Open source distributed Twitter - No f-ing way.

The open source part is fine, its the distributed part that would never work. I don't think people realize the SMS infrastructure/expenditure needed to pull off something like Twitter.

Their 5 digit short code costs (at least) $1k/month in the US. Twitter has these in multiple countries. Each received message costs approx. $.03 and each sent message costs approx. $.05. Added up over 30mil. messages per month (avg. of $.04 per msg.) = $1.2mil. Twitter is almost certainly getting a better rate, but their monthly messaging expenditure is certainly multiples of $100k.

For those of you saying, 'Oh, but what about sending TXT msgs via email. I do that on my homebrew project, and its great!' Sending 30mil msgs (and growing) WILL NOT work via email, the carriers will NEVER let you do that.

I could go on about the technical reasons Twitter cant be distributed and FREE, but in any substantial mobile play you have to deal with the carriers, their infrastructure, and their fees. It is a totally different scenario than a website that has per page serving costs approaching 0.

<comment><USER5> If you get enough messages on your shortcode, the carriers start to pay you (since they make so much per a message). This doesn't mean an OOS solution will be able to pull this off, but I just wanted to note that twitter need not be stuck with that bill.

<comment><USER4> No, the carriers don't start to pay you, ever. The only scenario that leads to the carriers paying you are if you have a Premium (pay per message) billing agreement. Twitter does not.

Twitter has taken a significant amount of funding. They have not really expanded their team much, they havent added many new features. They havent been advertising.

I guarantee all of the money is going towards messaging costs and infrastructure. Two things that a distributed, FREE Twitter would have a very hard time accounting for. [But hey, Im all for it. I have many years in the text messaging space and would totally be into helping however i could. I just think that the solution would be far trickier than people might at first glance suspect.]

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> I do not understand how someone can look at a primitive 160-character web SMS system and suggest that it was open APIs that made them vulnerable to competitors.

<comment><USER6> The network effect is Twitter's barrier to entry. Everyone goes where everyone else is. If you can easily move the network elsewhere via the api, the barrier is gone.

<comment><USER3> I'm not sure what this has to do with the API. People are "going to" Twitter, not the Twitter API.

<comment><USER7> The point is that you can add an opensource and distributed intermediary because of the API.

<comment><USER3> Yes, if you manage to convert a critical mass of Twitter API users into Twitter-shadow API users. A similar "technique" converts all AIM users into AIM-shadow users.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Fairly obvious, I guess. It's always surprised me as well why no one has made Twitter into a protocol of sorts with a web app that you can host yourself instead of a centralized service.

(the reason I haven't done that myself is that I have absolutely zero interest in Twittering or Tweets or whatever that stuff is called)

</comment><comment><USER9> If Twitter went down permanently, all my tweets about Michael Arrington being a jerk and what I had for lunch would be gone. Nooooo! :(

</comment><comment><USER10> "This means the open source community will almost certainly be more clever about the solution that one tiny closed source company because there will be lots of heads focused on an easy to understand problem."

To be honest, I have to completely disagree. Lots of heads is not a solution to a pure computer science problem. Most companies are formed around a specific solution to a computer science problem. They then make everything proprietary and profit.

That's like saying, only smart computer scientists exist in the open source world. Not true. In fact, you simply cannot claim that there is a strong trend in one or the other. Many smart brains in open source... Many smart ones in industry as well...

<comment><USER11> Twitter isn't a "computer science problem". It's a nice GUI for subscribing to RSS feeds; RSS feeds that can only contain 140-character posts. Oh, and it can email new entries to your phone.

<comment><USER12> actually the scaling is absolutely an interesting problem. Its the reason they keep going down. because messages are not point to point it is a much harder problem than instant messaging. I have spent a fair amount of time considering the issue in detail because a friend of mine developed a caching system targeted at microblogging. It is non-trivial, and cannot be done with RSS feeds.

<comment><USER2> If you think it's a hard problem, you aren't thinking about it correctly.

When you say "@foo Hi, foo!" You're sending a message to some person named foo. That's a push. If you start thinking of it as a pull, then you get in to the sort of trouble you're mired in.

In a distributed system the process goes like this:

1) Sender queries name server: WHOIS foo? 2) Nameserver responds foo is <http://www.foo.com/mytwitterfeed>. 3) Sender pings recipient http//www.foo.com/mytwitterfeed?ping=messageid&origin=bar 4) Recipient queries name server: WHOIS bar? 5) Name server responds <http://bar.com/mytwitterfeed> 6) Recipient requests message text, <http://bar.com/mytwitterfeed?id=messageid> and verifies it actually is addressed to him.

From then on, you have to worry about spam but that's a solved problem (killfiles, Bayesian filtering, etc.) No caching is involved. Recipients store messages addressed to them, just like any other messaging system. This isn't at all a hard problem.

<comment><USER3> This appears to be a system that allows strangers to coerce my client into contacting their server.

<comment><USER2> What's your point? You might as well say HTTP is a method that allows strangers to get files from my server! While technically true, it doesn't say much.

Yes, people can send you false pings, which is why you need to go back through the name server and do a reverse lookup, and once you fetch the message you need to parse it and make sure it within bounds (less than 160 characters or whatever) and addressed to you (has @foo in the message text.) and is not spam (the name isn't in your killfile, is in your whitelist, akismet says it isn't spam, etc.) Rate limiting helps too, real people aren't going to send you 100 messages a second.

<comment><USER13> IMO: They are dealing with a tiny amount of bandwidth say there are 30million 1kb text messages a day that's 900 gb / month which is well easy for a single core CPU to handle.

Personally I would go with:

 _User Adam sends message to Bob:_ 1) Adam sends message to Twitter service. "Bob>Hi." 2) Twitter check to see if Bob knows Adam. 3) Twitter sends "Adam>Hi." to Bob.

(With optimal storage so Bob and Adam can see their old conversations)

Your system let's random spammers people find out people's address which IMO is bad.

PS: Or Adam could send a message to "All>I like this soup." and Twitter then sends the message to everyone that cares about Adam including Bob.

Edit: It looks like Twitter is sending around 2million Tweets a day.

<comment><USER10> You're thinking too qualitatively; imagine the spikes they get... Also most apps are I/O restricted, not CPU...

Also, all these proposed messaging architectures are somewhat flawed. Twitter isn't really "sending" messages to other people. It's more like a person's message history is bound to their account, and appropriate privileges are applied. Then, when people try to "read," privileges are obeyed and information is produced...

Am I the only one who believes the solution to Twitter does not involve a massive distributed system? Twitter is inherently centralized... people don't see that.

<comment><USER13> Ok I can't edit the old post but they are basically just reinventing mailing lists. Anyway, poling is fine if it's initiated by a user action or it's a vary limited number of systems but if you have a few million users you can't uses it per user. As to reading old log's that's a trivially parallizable problem see database replication for some hints. So you separate the active messaging that automatically adds new Tweets to a user's cell phone from the way users read old messages with the webpage and your home free.

PS: Text is cheep EX: Slashdot is running off of ~4 computers. And bandwidth is not a scaling issue until you need a single system to handle more than ~1GB of bandwidth per second. (Saturating an OC-3 line costs a lot of money but you don't need to change your architecture to do so.)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> twitter is only cared about in an extremely small community of uber nerds.

The ideas in this post are overkill, although social portability cough opensocial cough is already on track to assist.

<comment><USER15> I respectfully disagree.

While I confess that I am an ubernerd (in addition to other fine qualities such as being a well-known chocoholic), I see plenty of people on twitter who are not techie at all.

I follow a few quilters, for example; one of them has a blog with neat how-to videos. And for some reason a lot of real-estate people from Phoenix are on twitter (they follow me, I'm not too interested in them).

I realize that they can be invisible to techies. Like LinkedIn: you only see the people on twitter who you follow personally, so there's a sense that everyone is like yourself. But that's not the case.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> I like this post. I wouldn't mind being on the open source twitter effort.

<comment><USER17> Let's do it. I just registered the twitshadow domain and I'm willing to dedicate some of my company's resources to the project. I'm thinking about what would be the best language to do it in. My first choice would be Python.

<comment><USER18> "I'm thinking about what would be the best language to do it in."

"When you gotta shoot, shoot. Don't talk." Or, to put it another way: the best way to start is to cut some code, don't get bogged down in discussion.

<comment><USER17> Good point. Off to the whiteboard I go, see you in a while :)

edit: I'm aiming to put something up on the wiki here by the end of today, we can go from there:

<http://code.google.com/p/twitshadow/>

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> This was actually a really interesting posit. I think that it's sort of like instant messaging. Someone is going to create the Jabber of Twitter technology but I think there will still be room for the Twitters and Jaikus to run the game.</comment>