Could Glenn Greenwald go to jail? The law is alarmingly murky - <AUTHOR> http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/06/26/could-glenn-greenwald-go-to-jail-the-law-is-alarmingly-murky/?tid=rssfeed <comment><USER2> Previously I would say the American public would riot in the streets should a reporter be charged with the crime of journalism. Based on the reaction to the revelation that the NSA is watching every single piece of Internet communication in the world, now I'm not so sure. The apathy to all matters beyond "Kim Kardashian is fat now" is so thick you could cut it with a knife.

Edit: Just wanted to add in a thought. The _only_ thing keeping a lawless government from pulling stunts like this is the fear of citizen revolt, and even then they generally proceed if the projected revolution strength is sufficiently weak.

<comment><USER3> Because rioting is an immature, knee-jerk reaction people in countries without proper avenues of political expression, e.g. the poor or uneducated, take? Riots are a way to signal the elites that the population feels some way. The U.S. has non-destructive ways of doing that, even if less emotionally satisfying than burning shit to make a point.

Note that present polling indicates Americans, while holding a positive opinion of Snowden, still feel he should be prosecuted.

<comment><USER4> Non-destructive ways of doing that, like what? Electing a new President who very believably promises to do the opposite of what the last one did?

<comment><USER5> However, the problem is not that elected officials are not listening to the people, it is that there is little concern from the electorate about privacy rights.

Ultimately, the country does belong to you more for understanding the problems of eroding privacy rights more than someone who doesn't. One could argue that rioting would change the conversation in a productive way, but I expect it would further the cause of authoritarians if a group of people behind a minority viewpoint tried to advance their cause through the violence of rioting.

I firmly believe that democracy can only function with transparency and a free press, but those are means to democracy, not a goal in themselves. It makes no sense to wish for riots, which are intrinsically anti-democratic when not expressing the will of the majority, for the sake of making a country safer for democracy.

Much as when our country was torturing people, the problem is less that of a disobedient set of elected officials, and more that of some really bad ideas that are held by a large portion of the population. Unfortunately, right now the problem is not politicians who can be easily demonized, but a population that for now is largely ignorant about the power of data.

<comment><USER4> I'm not necessarily wishing for riots with innocent shopkeepers' livelihoods being trashed.

But I am saying that the normal democratic methods seem to fail us here -- this is a real "don't blame me, I voted for kodos" situation. If Obama, who was the most strident advocate against this stuff out of both parties in the 2008 primaries (except for maybe Kucinich), doesn't follow through on this stuff, what are the democratic options?

<comment><USER6> Has anyone considered that maybe Obama felt that he was actually able to tamp down the excesses he railed against, and was able to be convinced of the _use_ of the NSA once he took office and was able to be briefed on what they actually do?

America wouldn't have lasted very long if a minority group set the cities on fire each and every single time an unpopular decision was made public.

P.S. the democratic options involve letting your representatives and elected officials know that you are pissed, whether that's through letters, complaining to the media, _peaceful_ protests, or all of the above.

Sometimes the people don't naturally do what _jbooth_ personally feels is right for the entire nation. Welcome to Democracy.

<comment><USER4> Did you read the first line of my comment where I said I wasn't in favor of actual violent rioting? It's right up there.

I've knocked on probably 1,000 doors and made probably 5,000 phone calls for democrats over the last 10 years. I'm not some slacktivist, and I'm not saying that the whole world needs to agree with me, although the accusation of arrogance is well taken.

We've seen no evidence that Obama changed anything about NSA wiretapping and a fair amount of circumstantial evidence that he probably didn't (how those drone strikes coming, and the medicinal marijuana crackdown)?

When someone runs and is elected by a majority as being "the opposite of Bush", it'd be nice if he actually did something different.

<comment><USER6> > We've seen no evidence that Obama changed anything about NSA wiretapping

The FISA was changed to require warrants in 2008 (though Obama was a Senator then, not sure what part he played in that as I don't remember the discussion from the time it occurred). The "watch list" the NSA was using was gigantic when Obama took office and was shrunk down to focus on those who might actually impact national security.

> how those drone strikes coming

Better than what we used to do, invade entire countries and drop 1000kg JDAMs everywhere, which involved _far more_ "collateral damage".

That is, of course, unless you're saying that we should simply wait until a group blows up something in America and _then_ go destroy whatever state the operational cell was working out of. I personally prefer disrupting the cell and leaving the state intact (as do the states that we surreptitiously work with...) as it involves less human sacrifice on both sides, but that might just be me.

> the medicinal marijuana crackdown

Yeah, I got nothing. The sooner we move away from giving a shit about marijuana the better, as far as I'm concerned.

> When someone runs and is elected by a majority as being "the opposite of > Bush"

They were both "opposite of Bush" so I hope you had more in mind than that when you voted. As it stands though, if you think Obama is _just like Bush_ then you might want to re-evaluate history, as time has a habit of helping us forget the bad and remember the good. There was a reason that as far back as 2004 that Bush was already well down the road toward becoming the most unpopular President in decades, and that's because there was much worse things going on than drones...

<comment><USER7> > The FISA was changed to require warrants in 2008

No, it wasn't. FISA _always_ required warrants for certain surveillance, and the 2008 FISA Amendment Act _increased_ the time period for warrantless surveillance, and added new exceptions to the warrant requirements, and it explicitly blocked investigations of illegal wiretapping that had occurred before the Act.

<comment><USER6> Well that was not what I had heard, so I'll assume I'm mistaken and apologize.

And then go read the damn law for myself. (Perhaps it's a good thing I mentioned Obama wasn't President at that time. :O)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> The question that keeps coming up is whether being a journalist means you get special privileges. It's hilarious that David Gregory suggests Glen Greenwald be charged with a crime, seeing as Gregory, it will be further recalled, illustrated an anti-gun law by violating it on the air. [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m3Hb6c2tWl0](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m3Hb6c2tWl0)

So if you go along with the idea that a journalist gets special privileges, what defines a journalist? Is Ariana Huffington one? Howard Stern? How about Rush Limbaugh? How about a famous blogger? How about a not-so-famous blogger? An anchor for Fox News?

Hmm. For many, these are uncomfortable questions. After all, what happens when journalists fail to do their job, because they either can't get the info or won't report on it? Julian Assange is proof of that issue. Is he a journalist?

Once upon a time you just needed to be bureaucrat. Today the thing to be is a bureaucrat with a badge. Bruce Schneier calls this phenomenon "privilege escalation". He cites the example of transit cops whose main ambition was to drop the "transit" part of their job description.

Fascinating commentary here: [http://pjmedia.com/richardfernandez/2013/06/24/do-you- know-w...](http://pjmedia.com/richardfernandez/2013/06/24/do-you-know-who-i- am/)

It becomes a matter of "who you are" instead of equal application of the law to everybody.

Frankly I despise the idea that journalists should have a different set of rules from the rest of us. Equally-applied laws make should be beyond question ... I can't believe people are even arguing whether laws should be applied to everyone equally.

Especially defenders of the 1st amendment.

<comment><USER9> The companies behind an Investigative Journalist are ultimately responsible for the content they agree to publish through their respective channels. In the case of classified information, Greenwald received the information and ultimately it was vetted by others in his department what could and could not be published.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Again the conversation shifts away from the bureaucracy and towards those who threaten it. While TFA brings up an important and interesting subject, we would as a nation be better served by focusing energies on the NSA and the various other intelligence agencies.

<comment><USER11>
      | Again the conversation shifts away from the
      | bureaucracy and towards those who threaten it.

Journalism _is_ about presenting both sides of a story so that the reader can make up their own mind. It's also worth noting that you're bringing up a single article to show that "the conversation is shifting." By this logic, I could bring up any story in any publication that doesn't have anything to do with the NSA and claim that the MSM is trying to bury the story by reporting on Hollywood gossip or something else.

I agree that the focus should be on the NSA, but hopefully all of the stories about the subject matter keep the topic in the public's thoughts. Possibly enough for some people to do more research and change their minds (from "All the way NSA!" to "Hmmm. Maybe they went too far").

<comment><USER12> "Both sides"? What about Rashomon? Please don't fall in the bipolar disease typical of modern politics. _All_ sides in a story should be covered.

Still, you have to agree that the MSM way too often derails the conversation towards personalism and unrelated issues and away from actual policy topics, usually following this or that agenda, just because novels sell better than political essays. This should be taught in journalism school, nowadays, but it's clearly not the case.

<comment><USER13> >All sides in a story should be covered.

So I should let creationists speak on stage on the same level as everyone else?

There was an editorial by (I think) the EIC of Nature. In it he talks about how giving people the floor for discussion in some way validates their positions, no matter how absurd, so the best solution is simply not to give them the floor.

If someone knows what article I'm talking about , please link it, it was extremely interesting read.

<comment><USER14> That's not what I took toyg's meaning to be. All legitimate sides of a stories should be reported. Sometimes that's two sides. Sometimes it's one. There might be times when it's thirteen and there might be other times where it's zero. The disease of modern politics is assuming it's always two.

<comment><USER12> This exactly.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I hope they do arrest him. If that doesn't start some sort of rebellion then nothing will.

We already allowed Obama's administration to create laws that stop whistleblower's from coming out of the shadows. Now the law is 'murky' on the people that would report it in the first place?

What the hell happened to the country we (as in US Citizens) love? I didn't pledge allegiance to this? If anything this sounds like a government that is threatening our freedoms more than any domestic or international terrorists ever could!

</comment><comment><USER15> I don't know what the actual legal position on this is, but I think that public sentiment usually recognizes that:

1.) There is a legitimate need for classified information within a government;

2.) The purpose of classified information is not to cover up illegal activities by the government.

So when it comes to revealing classified information, if it is done to expose a crime, I think the US public generally supports that. But in this case, near as I can tell, no crime was exposed. Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't PRISM conducted within the bounds of the law?

So now there's the question of whether or not PRISM should have been legal, and whether or not exposing classified information to put a spotlight on that discussion is legit. And I don't know how I feel about that let alone what the public at large thinks about it.

<comment><USER2> >Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't PRISM conducted within the bounds of the law?

Remember, even the Stasi was legal. But no, these programs violate the 4th amendment.

<comment><USER16> Not technically, as they only get to search collected data with a warrant from the FISC. Now we're getting into the territory of strict vs. liberal interpretations of the Bill of Rights. In a world that could not have foreseen the ability of the US government to quite literally record _everything_ , and thusly didn't include in the 4th amendment a protection against ex post facto search and seizure, something beyond even sci-fi at that point.

<comment><USER17> Putting aside Prism, I don't see how the cell phone metadata is compatible with the fourth amendment at all. The 4A exists specifically to ban general warrants that allow the government to seize whatever they want without any specificity. That's exactly what the FISC order authorizing metadata collection is. There really isn't any strict vs. liberal interpretation here that I can see.

<comment><USER6> Except this very issue about metadata was already deliberated in the courts decades ago when it first came up that phone companies maintained these metadata records, with the conclusion that they are phone company records, not _your_ records, and that therefore the government could subpoena them if they wished, as long as they didn't individually identify people (which would require something more substantive).

<comment><USER18> Phone numbers individually identify people.

<comment><USER6> Strictly speaking, phone numbers identify _phones_.

I mean, that's what we would say when the RIAA comes at us saying that IP address umpty-squat was used to download a movie, right? "Must have been my neighbor on my Wifi". "My friend was browsing my laptop".

But either way, that's why the NSA must get a separate subpoena to get the subscriber information for a given phone number, if they don't already have it from earlier. And only after that can they get a warrant to allow for grabbing the data itself.

<comment><USER17> First of all, I don't find the IP address argument persuasive and I don't think most courts have either.

Secondly, given that it is quite common for DHCP to give a single computer different addresses and nothing like that happens to phone numbers (which are intended to be persistent and not transient identifiers), I don't think your analogy works.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> The good news is that the law notwithstanding, the politics of arresting a journalist in a situation like this are unfavorable to the Justice Department. Holder recently gave Congressional testimony saying he thinks it would be a bad idea to charge journalists in leak cases. His words were: "That is not something I've ever been involved in, heard of, would think would be wise policy."[1]

Whatever you make of the rest of his testimony (and whether he lied about investigating Rosen), it would be harder for him to go after journalists after saying that to Congress.

[1] [http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/05/31/justice- dept...](http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/05/31/justice-dept-says- holder-didnt-lie-before-congressional-committee/)

</comment><comment><USER20> I think even the public can comprehend the 1st amendment. Could Greenwald go to jail? Possibly. But then the justice department would have every lawyer looking to make a name for themselves chomping at the bit. A case like that puts you on the fast track to the Supreme Court.

</comment><comment><USER21> It's baffling to me that country like America with strong 1st amendment and freedom of speech culture has people who think a journalist should be put in prison.

So, now, a whistle-blower needs to have strong anonymity and privacy to pass information on, and the newspaper needs to be strong enough to protect its journalists. And when this might mean that the editor goes to jail (contempt laws?) that's a lot to ask.

But would any sane government push things that far? Locking up the editor of a newspaper for not handing over the name of a journalist?

(I'm about to web-search, but have any American journalists been jailed for not giving up the names of their sources?)

<comment><USER22> I don't know about American journalists, but here's a thread worth unraveling: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdulelah_Haider_Shaye](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdulelah_Haider_Shaye)

With the War on Terror coming home, should Americans expect special treatment?

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> Funny that they don't mention that the Washington Post also published classified info, and that perhaps they "aided and abetted" Snowden, to some "extent"...

</comment><comment><USER24> And in a 5-4 decision the US Supreme court rules that he can be prosecuted (just looking into my cystal ball)

</comment><comment><USER25> I can't help thinking that the headline is more a suggestion than a question.</comment>


The origin of the at reply - Digging through Twitter's history - <AUTHOR> http://anarchogeek.com/2012/07/09/origin-of-the-reply-digging-through-twitters-history/

<comment><USER2> Related: Chris Messina invented the hashtag: [http://www.quora.com/How-did- the-idea-for-hashtags-originate...](http://www.quora.com/How-did-the-idea-for- hashtags-originate-on-Twitter)

I like the ad-hoc-thing-becomes-global-standard process. Hashtags are now showing up on movie posters, for goodness' sake.

</comment><comment><USER3> great article with a detail explanation of the origin of @</comment>


India wants to use more open-source software to build e-governance apps - <AUTHOR> http://thenextweb.com/in/2015/03/30/india-wants-to-use-more-open-source-software-to-build-e-governance-apps/

<comment><USER2> e-governance = e-redtape in India</comment>


100 Notable Books of 2018 - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/11/19/books/review/100-notable-books.html <comment><USER2> _Fatal Discord_ by Michael Massing and _The Library Book_ by Susan Orlean look interesting. And the list has too many (51 out of 100) fictions.</comment>


Ask HN: I can't stand PHP anymore. What else can I choose? - <AUTHOR> All my clients use shared hosting such as iWeb.com (which does'nt have Shell access). Mainly because they don't want to pay a lot for a _reliable_ webhost.
My problem is : As a language-snob (i know, it's sad), i'm immensely bored about PHP. I want to learn another back-end language that i can use on my freelance web jobs.
I'm considering learning Perl. But Perl needs modules to extends it's possibilities, this i cannot do without Shell access. And it's also better to run it as fastcgi or mod_perl, things that shared hosting does not always support.
I know Ruby, but hosting Ruby is not cheap enough, or accessible enough for my clients.
Do you guys have any idea of a web stack or shared host that does the job?
What do you do when you can't stand PHP anymore? <comment><USER2> Unfortunately, the reality is that PHP is dramatically easier to ship out to crappy shared hosting providers than any other language. Perl, Python, and Ruby are easy if you just use CGI...but they are increasing degrees of slow (with Perl generally being the fastest of the lot and Ruby being the slowest, when used in a pure CGI configuration). Perl is definitely the second most deploy-able language after PHP, due to its historic popularity, but it is still way behind when it comes to "untar the directory and everything just works" style deployment. And it isn't necessarily going to be _fast_ in the types of Perl deployments many shared hosts allow.

Someone suggested Java, which is way out at the farthest end of the "hard to deploy on shared hosting" scale. In fact, I doubt you can find any way to host Java effectively for less than $25/month, and probably more if your app is at all popular. It's just a horrible choice if deployment is a big factor in your decision-making process.

FastCGI is getting easier and easier to get in shared hosting environments, and all of the major web app frameworks in all of the major languages support it (including Catalyst in Perl, Ruby on Rails in Ruby, and Django in Python). Since FastCGI is a better way to run PHP in a shared hosting environment (mod_php has serious security implications), as well, I'd recommend you start insisting on FastCGI support from your host, no matter what language you use for development.

So, I think what folks ought to be recommending is that you go with a host that provides FastCGI and shell access. And then you can decide which language(s) you want to experiment with.

</comment><comment><USER3> "What do you do when you can't stand PHP anymore?"

Reevaluate what's really important to you.

I love to program, but it's NEVER about the language. I know many of them, and AFAIC they all have their pros and cons. I suppose that if I was a "language- snob", I'd be "immensely bored" too, no matter which language I was using.

So if it's not about the language, then what is it about? You already answered your own question with the first 3 words of your post.

It's about your clients. Always. They have needs far beyond their ability to express them. And they need you.

Stop being a "language-snob" and start being a "solutions-snob". You'll never be bored again. Promise.

<comment><AUTHOR> What do you mean by being "solution-snob"? Looking for the appropriate tool(language) for the given task? Thanks in advance.

<comment><USER4> I'm guessing no, that instead he means thinking more about what you're going to write than about what you're going to write it in.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Learn python. It's an excellent all-round language, you can also create desktop stuff later. Hosts like webfaction just cost $10 a month, surely your clients can afford that.

<comment><USER6> Try Google App Engine if you want to use python.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Look for webfaction as a hosting provider. It's cheap and you have lots more options than just PHP. Plus you get shell access. You can even set up your own apache instance.

Other than that, don't worry too much about the language. Find something you like and stick to it. Just remember to always learn new things and don't get set in your ways.

<comment><USER8> ++ for web faction. They're really inexpensive, straight forward to use, and you can use Rails, Django, Merb, Pylons, etc... Plus, you get shell access, and you don't have to do a lot of the server admin stuff if you don't want to.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> If you're comfortable with Linux, an option for you is running a Linode or Slicehost ($20/month) and hosting your clients on it. This will give you total control of the hosting environment, and a residual income. You'll have plenty of horsepower for Rails or whatever else you want to use, and as you grow, you can buy more nodes.

Beware, though: when you put on a system administration hat you're taking on a lot of new responsibilities, including backups and security. It's also a good idea to bring your friends in on it, so if something goes wrong they can look into it for your client if you're away.

So, it really depends on your level of comfort with sys admin stuff, and the kind of relationship you have with your clients. Good luck!

<comment><USER10> A basic $20/month Slicehost or Linode is probably going to be good enough for 2 "real" applications and maybe a few CGI pages, but not much more. The limiting factor is memory -- modern languages like to use a lot of it.

<comment><USER11> Remember the 80/20 rule. Most of the sites only have a couple of clicks per day. Right now we have around 15 sites and two rather heavy apps on a 512 slice. We always intended to upgrade it, but it turned out not to be the case. On a 256 slice we had all the sites confortably.

As for the few sites which get a lot of traffic... they should also generate a bit more income and an upgraded slice.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> You might want to have a look at haXe - a language that compiles to multiple backends including PHP, Javascript and Flash. It's not my favorite language by a long shot, but it's not PHP.

<comment><AUTHOR> I think that it's Exactly what i was looking for! Thanks a lot. I will definitely look at it! :)

<comment><USER4> Delivering work for paying clients in a vanity language because you're bored of PHP sounds pretty close to malpractice.

<comment><USER12> It does, but using haXe based on its merits isn't. It's not hard to find good reasons to avoid PHP as an implementation language; PHP is popular mostly because it's as easy platform for deployment. If a superior language[0] allows targeting that platform, it's a win-win situation. The obvious counterargument is that it makes finding developers harder, but I don't think that's the case. The Python Paradox applies here, and there are likely dozens of developers available who would jump at the chance to get paid to use haXe.

[0] I am not, at this point arguing that haXe is a better language than PHP. I don't have enough experience with haXe to make that claim, but it's not an especially high bar to clear.

<comment><USER4> We don't have to get into a debate about PHP (I don't use it either); its virtue in this scenario is that after this guy gives up on the client, someone else can easily step in and pick up the project, because everybody knows PHP.

<comment><USER12> I think the degree to which this works depends on the sophistication of the code. If it's a simple form handler, then sure, it's an advantage to be using a language that millions of people know. If it's more sophisticated, it may actually be a disadvantage; the non-technical client has to sort through hundreds of responses to a job posting with no useful means of telling applicants apart. A language like haXe currently only attracts those who are genuinely interested in better languages. Such people tend to be decent programmers, so any of the 5 or so people who respond is likely to be a good choice.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Is Ruby hosting that expensive? I've seen hosters that do it under five bucks a month (like <http://www.hostingrails.com/> ).

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for the info. I did not know about hostingrails.

<comment><USER14> <http://www.bluehost.com>

I personally use it for PHP, but it supports Ruby/RoR, it's cheap, and I've never had any problems with it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I don't think you should dismiss a language so fast for hosting reasons. Yes, they are a thing to consider, but "The Thing"?

We offer all our clients hosting on our slicehost server, for at least a year free (so far we haven't bothered to ask after a year either). It's clean, fast, cheap, and lets you do development and updates much faster. No system administration to speak of (long live apt-get).

</comment><comment><USER15> Prices for hosting Ruby should fall once mod_rails sees more widespread usage.

</comment><comment><USER16> Python + Google App Engine

<comment><USER17> After switching to this combo, I find myself reluctant to continue work on my apps still using PHP & MySQL. They feel somehow... fragile now. Before I used to check on my servers all the time, now I feel peace of mind that my app is still running, even though I haven't checked on it for a while. I feel like I might even be able to enjoy my coming vacation.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> Java! I may be in the distinct minority here and particularly prejudiced since I started with Java in 98.... Java has the best IDE (eclipse), a slew of open source libraries, Groovy if you have it up for dynamic language syntax and with JIT etc. innovations it's pretty much as fast as C++. I think Java is the perfect OOP trapped inside some slightly ugly, easy to compensate for syntax. Also, easy to deploy dynamic apps with Tomcat, great user community, stable API...

</comment><comment><USER19> perl:

You do not need shell access to install modules locally. Anything you can do from the shell, you can do from Perl with system(), backticks, or piped open(), but really... no shell access?

You want hosting that is reliable, supports shell access, rails, and 100% uptime, but your not willing to pay more than $5/month ?

<comment><AUTHOR> i completely get your point. unfortunately i dont choose my webhosts. my clients does. but when i can, i tell them to take a linode slice.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> Dreamhost is cheap and has shell, perl, ruby, and php.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes i tried them. That's why i mentioned "_reliable_ webhost" ;) . But yes, some websites could be hosted with them, it's just not good enough when we need something to be 100% uptime.

<comment><USER7> Plus, using things other than PHP is still pretty difficult with dreamhost.

<comment><USER20> It is? Here's a python CGI script:

<http://juliusdavies.ca/svn/viewvc.cgi/not-yet-commons-ssl/>

The viewvc.cgi starts with:

#!/usr/bin/env python

I just dropped the script into my ~/juliusdavies.ca/svn/ dreamhost directory. Didn't seem hard to me.

<comment><USER7> Well yeah. For a plain old CGI script it's not terribly difficult. But that just doesn't scale well nor is the script easy to write. Consider the instructions for setting up django on the other hand: <http://wiki.dreamhost.com/Django>

This is much more complicated than it needs to be. Especially when I can just log into my account with webfaction, click "install django application" and be done with it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> Python and Django!

<comment><USER22> seriously - this.

Django allows you to do far more with less code, and python is the finest language in which to code ( :) ).

I've advised loads of people to switch from php to django - and have had no complaints yet.

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> What framework are you using for your PHP work? If you aren't using a framework (because your work doesn't need one), then switching languages probably isn't going to change much, but if you are, there are several good, fun PHP frameworks out there. The best PHP framework I've used is Symfony (<http://www.symfony-project.org/>), which is actively developed, fun to work with, and really powerful.

<comment><USER24> I've worked in CodeIgniter, but these days I find myself using the Zend Framework (<http://framework.zend.com/>). They're actively developing it, and it has so much built-in functionality that I've been able to get stuff done much faster than before.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> Why not setup your own hosting for your clients? Problems always arise when you give the client options on the server. They do not know these things. Usually they always opt to have the cheaper plan -- they are not technical people.

I have been using PHP for years now - no problems so far. Especially when Zend Framework came.

</comment><comment><USER26> Your options are limitless, really but here are a few:

1\. Pick a framework to make your PHP work less boring (CakePHP, CodeIgniter, Symfony)

2\. Ruby on Rails or Python & Django

3\. Slicehost ftw.

These days you can find a cheap host for just about anything except the Microsoft stack and even that you can get for a reasonable price.

 _If your clients are that cheap, get new clients._

</comment><comment><USER27> I don't know whether you'd need shell access for Python (I'm only just starting to learn it myself) but that could be an idea to consider.

<comment><USER28> Using Python would have the same problems as using Perl, wouldn't it?

<comment><USER7> Not necessarily. You just need to put whatever libraries somewhere on your python path.

<comment><USER2> That's identical to Perl or pretty much any other dynamic language. Just as in Python, you can even modify your library path within the code itself, and use relative paths (so you can distribute apps in a directory and not require the end user to modify their webserver CGI shell execution environment).

e.g. something like:

        BEGIN { push(@INC, "./lib"); };

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> <http://heroku.com> isn't that expensive and it's easy to scale as needed.

</comment><comment><USER30> Heroku is great (and free) for building and trying Ruby on Rails apps.

</comment><comment><USER31> With such approach you will hate your next lang in no time.

</comment><comment><USER32> Asp.net MVC

<comment><USER18> What is the motivation for locking yourself into the micro$oft stack? Why not use Java with a javascript (jquery/yui/ext etc) front end or even (shudder) JSPs? Spring framework? Anything but .net lock in...

<comment><USER33> The tools.

Spend a week writing C# in Visual Studio.NET with ReSharper installed, then try to go back to your old language and IDE. You'll understand.

<comment><USER34> I spent a year writing C# in Visual Studio and ReSharper, and it is nice, but I'm happier now doing Python with Emacs and the command line.

<comment><USER35> You are the exception rather than the rule. I love VS even without ReSharper. I haven't found a better IDE than VS.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> i use newlisp for my web apps

</comment><comment><USER37> Java?

</comment><comment><USER38> Become a real solutions provider and lease a colocated server and move your clients to it by offering them competitive pricing. You might even make a profit.

</comment><comment><USER39> CGI, then use what you like. A few of my friends are building <http://werc.cat-v.org/> but it's teaching me CGI still has a lot to offer.</comment>


Tim Sweeney claims that Microsoft will remove Win32, destroy Steam - <AUTHOR> http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/07/now-tim-sweeney-thinks-that-microsoft-will-use-windows-10-to-break-steam/ <comment><USER2> The article states straight up that Win32 is used in way too many applications for Microsoft to ditch it wholesale in the foreseeable future.

What they can do is tweak around the edges to make Steam perform poorly and theoretically make the Windows app store more appealing, but that got a little bit tinfoil hat for me. I won't say it's unheard of, but they've already been under investigation once for these kinds of shenanigans and it doesn't look like we're going to have a friendly administration come in to pull their feet out of the fire this time.

<comment><USER3> Microsoft's ugly history is full of sketchy shenanigans, like the time it seemed like they were working to make sure WordPerfect wouldn't run in DOS due to subtle, breaking changes to the API ([http://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/ancient-microsoft- nov...](http://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/ancient-microsoft-novell-case- ends-in-hung-jury/)) or those occasions where they were suspected of kneecapping Lotus in much the same way ([http://www.proudlyserving.com/archives/2005/08/dos_aint_done...](http://www.proudlyserving.com/archives/2005/08/dos_aint_done_t.html)).

The new Microsoft leadership seems more interested in building bridges than in crushing and destroying companies Ballmer style, but I could be wrong. Removing win32 seems like a huge mistake both from an optics perspective and because of its impact on partners.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Whether Sweeney is right or not, this whole discussion illustrates exactly why it behooves everybody (except Microsoft, I suppose) to switch to an F/OSS OS like Linux or a BSD. Everybody is trying to make their platform a walled garden, and the "war on general purpose computing" still rages as well. Using an F/OSS operating system, and open hardware platforms as much as possible, is essential to keeping computing open to everyone.

</comment><comment><USER5> With more and more games coming out for MacOS and Linux I think there is a good chance that gamers would just jump ship. People are incredibly invested both monetarily and emotionally in Steam.

<comment><USER6> Jumping shift? We don't just use a PC for gaming all day. Read the article, please.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> dupe: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12172115](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12172115)

</comment><comment><USER8> And the author of the article disagrees.</comment>


Ask HN: Confused about career, need help - <AUTHOR> I am a 23 year old Indian Engineer. I started my career in one of the best startups in India, did some great work and learnt a lot. But after 2 years, the worked seemed kind of monotonous and I saw no growth ahead. So I quit.
I had an offer from another startup which had just raised Series A. They offered a 30% raise and I was happy. Their product was something I already used to use and it had immense potential and is definitely the next big thing in fintech space.
However, things went haywire after I joined. I have no idea why they hired me. The company is already overstaffed according to my opinion. The engineers are mediocre and do not follow any best practices. The response time of their app is in the order of 2-3 seconds. They have n+1 queries and n square complexity code all over the codebase. The code isn't modularised. It doesn't even have callbacks at model level. They asked me NOT to code, even when I am extremely good at the stack they are using.
I talked about this to the engineering lead and the response was like "You're in Devops. No need to look after code. You just joined a week back, you can't criticize people here just like that. We are not fools here."
Noone here is concerned about performance. They just want to acquire new customers and show MoM growth to investors. Engineering is in a very bad shape. It is so bad that, there is no way to test this code locally. You have to make a change, push it to staging and then test. Imagine the horror!
I got fed up of this and started applying elsewhere to companies that have been around for 3-5 years with proven engineering team. I have couple of offers now. I am confused about what to do.
1. It has been only 1 month in this company. Is it ok to quit too soon?
2. What happens if the new company also has a same situation? How long will I keep running like this?
Any help is appreciated. <comment><USER2> It sounds like a terrible place to work at. If I were you, I'd find a place where I'd enjoy working. I know changing jobs too often can look bad on resumes, but mediocre performance in a mediocre setting for two or three years will make it likely that you get similar offers next time you're job searching. I'd take the reins of my career now, really do some research and have an open mind while exploring the next opportunity. I'd contact employees of companies to find out about their work-culture. I'd also find out about what exactly they are doing and see some codes if possible (to get an idea about how my programming style would fit).

</comment><comment><USER3> Keep looking and don't think that "running like this" is a bad thing. If you don't like something then move on. I am also from India and I know how shitty the culture (engineering or other) in most companies is. In fact in most of the companies there is no culture at all. It would be best if you can figure out these kind of problems before saying YES to a company and you can ask about these things in the interview. Interview should not be a one sided affair, try to make it like a two way conversation and if that doesn't work then right away you would know that this particular interview is not worth it.

<comment><AUTHOR> This was just my second interview and given that they have a great app (atleast from outside) I didnt expect any of these. I'll be more careful in the future.

<comment><USER4> It is definitely worth asking "what is the approach to automated testing here?" in interviews.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> It's always ok to quit and write a company off if it's bad. You don't owe them anything. That said, sometimes you can learn from chaotic places as well. Look at all the exciting challenges you just laid out that could be fixed! (Especially that of leadership and eng culture!) You could start solving them (don't ask permission) and try to bring as many people along as you can. Possibly time box this experiment to six months and see how far you can go!

</comment><comment><USER6> First, I recommend reading Dale Carnegie and Switch for tackling cultural issues with diplomacy. You're going to need this at every company.

How is DevOps? Is there room for improvement or learning there?

If you are going to switch companies because you see no way to fix things, how did you interview those teams to ensure they don't have similar problems?

</comment><comment><USER7> hello !

one great way of learning is to be able to adapt to different organisations and scenario.

i understand that what you are going through is uncomfortable, but trust me, what you would learn, would be invaluable.

the reason is, there is more madness in this world, than method.

so who survives, the one who has seen the most madness and managed to grow through or the one who has been always careful or lucky to choose the structured way.

its been one thing, that i have experienced personally and I had the same thoughts, like you. In fact, I told my boss also, that I am quitting.

but then I told myself, that all good things have originated from chaos.

so let it be...

i took that as a learning experience and continued there.

cheers! abhishek

</comment><comment><USER8> I have a problem with them complaining about honest feedback. although, a companies focus should be on growth they need a good product to keep customers.

</comment><comment><USER9> Lol I'd kill for a job like that given my current job</comment>


Ask HN: Now can I cut down mySQL queries on dynamic pages? - <AUTHOR>

My products home page has 4 sections of data that should ideally be updated at every page load, how can I do this without killing my database server? <comment><USER2> The only way to improve it is cache it for maybe x minutes, and then update cache. Maybe you should provide the reason why it can't be cached for say maybe 5 minutes. If its a problem where they are reloading, the homepage to see results then you could do incremental updates of each section using comet technique.

<comment><AUTHOR> This is probably a more practical method.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> If it has to be updated on every page load I don't think there's anything you can do...I may be wrong I'm sure someone on HN will have some performance tricks. You can generate your headers and footers and store them in a file instead of touching a database every time. If you're killing your database server you're probably returning too many records or your queries suck. I wouldn't know without seeing them.</comment>


React Workshop – practical workshop for learning React at-your-own pace - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/jesstelford/react-workshop <comment><AUTHOR> Please note that this is aimed at absolute beginners and doesn't make use of any opinionated build tools, NO ES6 or Babel.</comment>


Ask HN: What Are Some Cool Websites That You Have Found Recently? - <AUTHOR> <comment><USER2> Um, isn't that what every single post on HN that isn't in the "ask" section is about?</comment>


Fakernews: Builds a Markov chain using HN post titles and generates fake posts - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/mb-14/gomarkov/tree/master/examples/fakernews <comment><USER2> This has existed for quite some time.

[https://twitter.com/HNTitles](https://twitter.com/HNTitles)

<comment> ainar-g A lot of these are so accurate it's uncanny.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> The first example just spat out [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17739320](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17739320) with "Show HN" in front of it.

</comment><comment><USER4> Similar to this on reddit is the Subreddit Simulator[0].

The subreddit is populated entirely by bots that make posts based on Markov chains, each one trained from the posts on a specific other subreddit. The bots even post comments based on the comments from their assigned subreddit. Some of the results are hilarious.

[0] [https://www.reddit.com/r/SubredditSimulator](https://www.reddit.com/r/SubredditSimulator)

</comment><comment><USER5> I'd like to see this applied to patents.

And then test how many of them survive the scrutiny of USPTO officers.

</comment><comment><USER6> > Feds Threatened to Fine Yahoo $250K Daily for Not Being Able to Print > Automobile-Sized Metal Objects

haha, Love it!

</comment><comment><USER7> What happens when you pit Markov chain fake news against Markov chain Donald Trump?

[https://filiph.github.io/markov/](https://filiph.github.io/markov/)

<comment><USER8> This seems to perform better than the OP's link. Does anybody know why that is? Are there certain forms of data for which Markov chains perform better?

<comment><USER7> As the sibling comment talks about, I think DJT's tweeting pattern helps. He often uses short sentences, so with Markov order 2 (every three words generated is a quote, more or less), there number of seams per sentence is lower. (By seams, I mean places where the generated text seems disjointed because the Markov chain consists of two non-semantic or semantically ambiguous tokens.)</comment></comment></comment>


How Digital Advertising Markets Really Work - <AUTHOR> https://prospect.org/article/how-digital-advertising-markets-really-work <comment><USER2> I've worked around the ad ecosystem for a long time as a media buying agency, then an ad network, then a publisher. I think this article is spot on. Few understand the iron grasp Google has on the ecosystem. Soon they are changing the model to allow for fair competition, but thus far Google AdX has had a massive advantage by having the first and last price in every bid request. They get to see what other ad networks are paying for each request. They get to optimize their profits using data from users, publishers, ad exchanges, and advertisers, mostly because of the absolute monopoly Google DFP/Ad Manager has in the ad server market. If I were a regulator that would be my first stop.

<comment><USER3> If AdX was more open, how do you think the market would change?

<comment><USER2> For starters that would revive the 3rd party ad server ecosystem, since currently the only way to access full AdX demand is to run DFP. It would put AdX on the same footing as others, meaning buying through Google wouldn't give buyers a price advantage. It would allow for privacy-centric ad networks on vetted, premium publishers to emerge. Maybe even header bidding could die, meaning front-end performance would increase 10X on many publisher sites (many header bidding stacks make 300-800 ajax calls in the first few seconds of page load!) which would eliminate the need for AMP. It would mean Google would have less influence over which publishers get to monetize their content. I could go on...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> > Consumers can pay for ad-free video subscription services like Spotify > Premium or Hulu—why can't they in search or social networking? Why are these > markets stuck?

The article has very pragmatic observatiosn but this is not one of them. This won't work, people won't pay with money for what they can easily pay with their targetting data. Private data is worthless in any other context than advertising, there is no opportunity cost.

I also think it didn't touch on advertisers themselves, who bear a big responsibility for this situation. Agencies like IAB have done less than nothing to fix this situation, they ve made things worse. We need more ethical ad platforms, but we also need more ethical advertisers.

<comment><USER5> The richest people are the ones who advertisers _really_ want to reach (in the article, the hypothetical beer ad sells at $2 CPM vs the hypothetical private jet ad at a $2000 CPM). At the same time, the richest people are the ones who can afford to pay whatever subscription fee FB or Google would charge. I don't think that there is a lack of demand, it's just that the people who make up that demand create an adverse selection problem, the users who would opt out are the ones who make your platform valuable.

I don't think that antitrust regulation solves this particular adverse selection problem. It's certainly difficult to compete against the established giants, for many reasons, but this theoretical opting out is definitely not some consumer benefit that we can expect.

<comment><USER6> It's not really the same thing you're talking about at all, but I think there's also an interesting conflict of this type between where the largest sites are getting their user growth from now, and the users that are most valuable as advertising targets to them.

The larger sites (Facebook, Twitter, etc.) are pretty close to saturation in North America and a lot of other English-speaking countries. There just aren't many people left here that don't know what Facebook is and might still be convinced they should start using it regularly. Almost all of the growth comes from other parts of the world, but the users from those locations are worth _far_ less in terms of advertising revenue.

If you look at Facebook's Q2 2019 presentation [1], their average revenue per user from US & Canada is now $33.27, Europe $10.70, Asia-Pacific $3.04, and Rest of World $2.13. One US/Canada user is worth more to them than 15 from "Rest of World".

However, 74% of their Monthly Active Users are from Asia-Pacific/Rest-of-World now, and that only corresponds to 28% of their revenue.

I don't really have a particular point I'm trying to make, I just think it's interesting. These companies worry a lot about showing continued user growth (or at least not shrinking), but the growth sources now don't have anywhere near the same value as the old ones.

[1]: [https://s21.q4cdn.com/399680738/files/doc_financials/2019/Q2...](https://s21.q4cdn.com/399680738/files/doc_financials/2019/Q2/Q2-2019-Earnings- Presentation-07.24.2019.pdf)

<comment><USER4> continued growth is good for their stock. It will of course reach a tipping point where the sheer amount of users will start yielding net negative revenue at which point there will be a reckoning

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> If you look at the acquisitions of Google in the 00's, it's pretty obvious : in 03 they buy AdSense, 05 Analytics and Android, then in 08 Doubleclick, having their hands every part of the supply chain.

Facebook then came along and followed the playbook with the social buttons.

Brilliant move, regardless of how we feel about that.

</comment><comment><USER8> It's the advertising market, not the companies, that are the root problem.

Go ahead and get rid of Google and Facebook and the rest overnight and all you'll do is find a new vector for advertising spring up virtually overnight.

Every ad tech company is responding to market incentives. Breaking companies up or killing them with regulation etc... won't make a dent in the long run.

Outlawing advertising as a business however will end the surveillance economy swiftly.

</comment><comment><USER9> I don't understand the conclusion: "But if we understand that user identity and user data are drivers of ad pricing, and that the terms that Google and Facebook are able to extract from independent publishers drive the health of the wider news ecosystem, it is impossible to continue to make this argument today."

Earlier, the article explains pretty well how tracking increases the CPMs that publishers can achieve. In the author's example, cross-site tracking increases CPMs by 200%.

This seems like a benefit to the "health of the wider news ecosystem". If the author believes Google/Facebook increase the pie for publisher, why then say that they "extract from independent publishers"?

<comment><USER10> This is a really important topic that I wish the author had addressed. The publisher often doesn't make more money from the $200 CPM ad than it does the $2 CPM ad. Most of the difference goes to the ad network.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> Also - pretty much all ad networks are rounding errors compared to Google and FB, which make up 85% of all new ad spend. The last 15% is mostly Amazon, LinkedIn, Twitter, Pinterest.

<comment><USER12> Yahoo/AOL have to still be in top 5 right? I'd think Microsoft (even outside of LinkedIn) and Snapchat should have decent percentages of the leftover too. At least the former.

<comment><USER11> Yahoo/AOL have terrible targeting and no bot protection, so generate very little revenue.

<comment><USER12> What do you mean? They generate billions in revenue. Are you saying they aren't ahead of every company you mentioned except Amazon? Microsoft as a whole would be ahead too, but you only mentioned LinkedIn. Verizon Media is certainly ahead of those.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Maybe the regulators can say to Google or Facebook that they can't collect those user data, or they limit the collection somehow. I can't imagine how else you can stop this duopoly. The problem with the whole ecosystem is that every system they have feed the other one, ie. Chrome gathers the search data to be used for Ads etc.

<comment><USER14> This might be solved with AI. Basically you will have a personal AI that will shadow browse with you in the beginning to understand your tastes. After some time, the AI will do the browsing for you, and if needed can take adversarial routes to confuse the ad networks.

Meantime, the AI can update a private site with content that interest you.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> One of the best articles I've read on the internet so far. Eye opening.

</comment><comment><USER14> The core issue here is that companies uses AI against humans. Humans can fight back only by using AI against AI.

An client side AI is the only way to make tracking useless.

</comment><comment><USER16> "That 22-year-old communications major has had to make way for data scientists, mathematicians, and computer programmers who, behind the scenes, use statistics, calculus, and linear algebra to optimize advertising campaigns, by micro-targeting users and constantly tweaking algorithms."

Click the source link, and it's an article about how companies are wasting money on data scientists when they only need data analysts, contradictory to the point made by primary article. This was an intriguing article, but I could not continue reading after noticing this.

<comment><USER4> You should read the rest - it's a good article. You are right about that point , and more broadly i m not convinced that advertisers can justify their spending and their bids well. Advertising seems to be a constant for businesses - they will spend those money to marketing regardless. And ads are effective to a degree - but i have yet to see a rigorous study of the correlation between amount spent or bids to ROI. Judging from the iffy nature of advertising statistics and google's "invalid traffic" alchemies, i believe google is also selling large amounts of bullshit along with their basic ad product. It's bizzare that an industry that is so valuable seems to be operating in a rather thick haze.</comment></comment>


Pretty funny take on the 37signals rip - <AUTHOR> http://67signals.com

<comment><USER2> dupe <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3531628>

</comment><comment><USER3> This is funny. I nearly fell off my chair. :)</comment>


The hugest model railroad you have ever seen - <AUTHOR> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PN_oDdGmKyA&hd=1

<comment><AUTHOR> I wish there was more in this about the computer systems that drive the trains. I have found that a lot of hackers are interested in trains, maybe because of the complicated and interesting problem of routing. I for one have often wished that the network of one of my company's computer clusters could be visualized as a model railroad.

<comment><USER2> bits and pieces on the website: [http://www.miniatur- wunderland.com/exhibit/technology/carsys...](http://www.miniatur- wunderland.com/exhibit/technology/carsystem/technology/)</comment></comment>


Microsoft Offering Reward for Return of Gaming Addicted Teen - <AUTHOR> http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/story?id=6180982&page=1 <comment><USER2> Darn, I was beginning to hope that we'd moved over the whole "abducted by a gamer he met online" stereotypes.

> But he said his worst fear is that his son has been either abducted or lured > away by a gamer he met online.

Anyway, I feel for the poor kid - I hope he returns safely. a game is, at the end of the day, just a game. No reason to get so worked up over it. A bit of a lack pf understanding from the parents though - internet and game addiction is real and some of us need help from it.

</comment><comment><USER3> A nice gesture on Microsoft's part, but unfortunately it's probably in vain: <http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/11/05/crisp-body.html></comment>


How not to test your startup idea; how to test your startup idea. - <AUTHOR> http://wademeredith.com/2010/12/how-not-to-test-your-startup-idea-how-to-test-your-startup-idea/

<comment><USER2> I dont think starbucks advice is that terrible. Even though mechanicle turk does seem like a good alternative, I would much rather go to a coffee shop or a bar where I know startup savvy people hang out and discuss it in person. But one of the best advice I ever received is - Start a blog and gain some traction for it before you launch your MVP. Discuss customer stories and problems you are looking to solve. Ask people opinion about your solution, discuss/debate in public. Use these discussion to keep on refining your direction and feature set. As a positive side effect you might end up creating a passionate community around your solution before launching and have list of people interested in paying you money beforehand.

<comment><USER3> Right. I feel that this article doesn't give strong arguments as to why the advice is terrible in the first place.

<comment><USER4> Lying to people and manipulating their sympathy to validate a business idea is wrong. I imagine the OP didn't imagine this was something that had to be pointed out to people--even if you don't agree with that viewpoint it's not exactly a difficult one to imagine, and it's better to state as a premise that it's a bad idea rather than bog down a blog post--which seemed more focused on discussing alternative methods--into a tedious moral argument that won't convince anyone.

<comment><USER5> You lie to people every day just to function normally in society. You must be a terrible sinner. Boo hoo.

<comment><USER6> While were at it let's throw in a good dose of violence, because that can help us get what we want as well.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Breaking it down -

 _"If you spend your time building something instead of conning in coffee shops, you can put a minimum viable product in front of someone"_

FALSE. I used to say that, until I think it was Harj who corrected me. His reasoning (paraphrased) was along the lines of "you'll spend 3-5 years if it's a great idea, wasting a few days/weeks pausing & checking your assumptions is insignificant time in the long run. It makes sense to spend few minutes/days making sure I don't waste weeks, months or even years.

 _Option A: Mechanical Turk_

MAYBE. It depends on your audience. If you are InDinero building a service for small businesses, it does not make sense to ask MTurk to vet your feature set. They're not your target audience.

 _Option C: Get people to pay/commit to it_

MAYBE. I bet I could ask 30 of my closest friends to commit simply because psychologically, people want to help. People will feel warm and fuzzy by giving you a few bucks to help you build your idea. Ask a business to commit $1,000+ - that's real validation.

<comment><AUTHOR> Breaking down why you're wrong about why I'm wrong :-)

A) 3 to 5 years to MVP? You're doing it wrong.

B) No solution is perfect for every situation, I'll concede that. It doesn't make me wrong. In fact it assures that what I said will be right, at least some of the time. I'm being snarky, but the point is, of course MTurk isn't going to work for every application. Use some judgment. Maybe the coffee shop thing would work better for you, I just think other alternatives are more worthy of investigation.

C) Once again, you're doing it wrong. You got it there at the end though. Ask _businesses or real potential customers_ to commit, not you're closest friends. In what scenario would _that_ route work?

<comment><USER7> A. MVP usually takes at least a month if not more. Do you want to waste a full month of your life? That could be avoided by 30 minutes of talking to future customers.

B. & C. - "Maybe" - not wrong, just maybe. There needs to be emphasis on "real potential customers." I've made the mistake of thinking I'm doing something great because friends (who might buy it) liked the idea. Just trying to point out the need for honest feedback.

(Sorry if I came off as snarky ;) apologies)

<comment><AUTHOR> No worries, publishing on the Internet for years has given me quite a thick skin. I'm also always willing tondo use counterpoints. It's the best way to refine an argument, or startup idea for that matter.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> See, now that he brings it up, I have the same issue about the Google Adwords campaign that most folks have with lying about your brother: you don't really have a product page or anything to sell, but your Google ad implies you do. You're lying to people to see if you can trick them into clicking on your ad, in the name of statistics. If I clicked on such an ad, I would be mildly pissed.

</comment><comment><USER9> I feel like these ideas could not have been used to test a Facebook. Asking people if they want to use a new social network without actually seeing and touching it would not have been insightful. You could describe to the wall but because the concept was so new I feel like most people including myself would not necessarily see the value of it right away. Asking people to commit to pay for it is even more of a stretch.

It doesn't apply to all situations.

</comment><comment><USER10> Showing people a minimum viable product is not feasable in most situations. You should try to validate your innovation idea earlier in your development process. Talking to potential customers is still best - I think.

</comment><comment><USER11> > Option C. Ask people to commit to pay for it:

This is probably the best thing you can do, if you are ballsy enough to do it. Personally I always feel a bit bad/like a con artist/ about going to people and saying "Hey, I totally have this great thing and I will likely be pretty much able to hopefully give it to you in maybe a few months, perhaps a year or so, if you would just buy it right now!" ... that's not a good way to conduct business. (imho)

Now, what _does_ work for this sort of thing (and my conscience) is Kickstarter (and others like it). If you can get a lot of money donated from people who know what they're getting into, then you're onto something.

<comment><USER12> You don't have to get people to buy hot air. What the author has in mind is probably either a) "Assume that this product is fully functional. Will you pay for it $X?" or b) "I am planning to build this product. Would you promise to pay me $X when I deliver this product?"</comment></comment>


Linus Tech Tips Meets TempleOS - <AUTHOR> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LtlyeDAJR7A <comment><AUTHOR> I submitted this as many on here will remember Terry and whilst may of read much about his passion of TempleOS, may not of seen it in action - <USER2> certainly fills in that gap. Enjoyable watch and recommended.</comment>


$12.50 to quote 5 words of an AP story - <AUTHOR> https://license.icopyright.net/rights/offer.act?inprocess=t&sid=36&tag=3.5721%3Ficx_id%3DD99Q89400 <comment><USER2> According to the T.O.S., you can't lawfully quote an article if you intend to criticize it?

Derogatory and Unlawful Uses:

You shall not use the Content in any manner or context that will be in any way derogatory to the author, the publication from which the Content came, or any person connected with the creation of the Content or depicted in the Content. You agree not to use the Content in any manner or context that will be in any way derogatory to or damaging to the reputation of Publisher, its licensors, or any person connected with the creation of the Content or referenced in the Content

<comment><USER3> If you pay them money.

If you quote them without paying, exercising your right to fair use, then you can criticize them all you want.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> I pasted my own work into the text box, and it tried to charge me money. It also let me buy, "fuck you, ever heard of fair use". (OK, I used a fake credit card number, but it got all the way to failing credit card authorization. Disgusting. Why do they think they can legally resell my work!?)

<comment><USER4> I guess it's an assumption that if you try to buy it from AP, then _you_ have already concluded that the text is copyrighted by AP. I doubt they have instant access to everything they've ever written...

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> This is just disgusting.

<comment><USER6> It's their data. They can do whatever they want with it.

<comment><USER7> "It's my business, I can refuse to hire blacks if I want to."

<comment><USER8> Haha that's a bit of a stretch! If it's their own internal data and they want to monetize it in this way, the market will decide whether the price they set is worthy of the product being sold.

While I might disagree with the usefulness/pricing of their data considering widely available alternative sources it isn't exactly on par with maligning someone's civil rights :D

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Apparently it's not news: _Founded in 1998, iCopyright has generated millions of dollars in new licensing revenue for online publishers, and has seven patents pending in the field of automated copyright licensing and permissions._

But it's not really that big if in 11 years they generated just millions of dollars...

<comment><USER10> they're actually probably a company that makes no sense at all and whose short-lived moment of (apparent) grace has just come (and will vanish soon)

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> No problem. Using my handy AP obfuscator...

 _For compliance reasons, please identify the web site where you will be posting or linking this article._

becomes

For compliance reasons, please aardvark identify the web site aardvark where you will be aardvark posting or linking this aardvark article.

A new market for Firefox AP de-obfuscation plug-ins?

<comment><USER12> You could always quote the AP article and just remove all the spaces, turning it into one gigantic word.

Sort of like:

_Forcompliancereasonspleaseidentifythewebsitewhereyouwillbepostingorlinkingthisarticle_

That would bring it under the 5 word threshold for which you need to pay, although it would definitely cause havoc with layouts on websites.

<comment><USER13> how_about_underscores_and_a_greasemonkey_script?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> They don't appear to be escaping the input when you click preview. I wouldn't be handing these fools my credit card.

</comment><comment><USER15> I'm thinking this is a good time to start an AP for blogs where bloggers can write articles to be syndicated among other blog.

<comment><USER16> What's the point of that? We already have hyperlinks.

<comment> onreact-com Many people don't click links in blogs, they mostly prefer to read their favorite sources.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Luckily, "The AP are idiots" is only four words.

</comment><comment><USER18> "are trying to find out what happened" - oops?

[http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/I/IRAN_MISSING_AMERICAN...](http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/I/IRAN_MISSING_AMERICANS?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2009-08-02-15-36-31)

oh wait, <http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#107>

</comment><comment><USER19> Don't worry - it looks like there's an educational/non-profit discount of 40%. So generous!

If only my work were valued at 50¢/word...

<comment><USER20> 2.50?

<comment><USER21> Hey, you can get 25 words for the price of 5 - a $50 value!

<comment><USER20> But wait, that's not all! If you respond now we will include a handful of prepositions and a huge pile of adjectives for no extra charge!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Good that Fravia didn't live to see this!

</comment><comment><USER22> WTF? Doesn't fair use exist?

<comment><USER3> Why not make a few bucks off of people that don't know their rights? It works for the criminal justice system...

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> What if you had somebody read the AP article, and then you quote that person?

"The AP reports that GM's sales are down last quarter, says John Smith."

Then you'd just be quoting a source. Would that be infringement?

</comment><comment><USER22> Wait wait wait, this is a sensationalist headline. The submitter obviously picked an AP story to frame them as evil.

iCopyright is the company that provides this Fair Use-violating service and here are some of their clients <http://info.icopyright.com/conductor.asp> * The Globe & Mail * REUTERS * Associated Press * The Toronto Star * Ziff Davis Media * The Boston Globe

<comment><AUTHOR> Because a company is a client of iCopyright doesn't necessarily mean they're using the same product/service as AP or employing the same pricing model. iCopyright, like most companies, likely provides more than one product/service.

<comment><USER22> If you read the page, you could see that all of them are using the same set of products/services, namely iCopyright Conductor which is the reprint/DRM bullshit.

Don't just tar & feather AP, tar & feather the whole bunch that are clients of this company!

<comment><AUTHOR> I think the pricing is more of an issue than the tech. If AP were asking for 12 cents rather than $12.50 for 5 words the reaction might be different. What are the pricing models of these other companies that you suggest are equally at fault?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> How long has the republish button been there?

</comment><comment><USER25> I think I owe them a lot of money. Do the words have to be consecutive ? In order ? In the same article ?

That's going to make the AP a lot of money I bet.

It's going to be hard to get on without them, but we're certainly going to try our best.

btw, I'm fairly sure there is a legally allowed minimum that you can quote from anything under fair use.

<comment><USER4> It is my understanding that the law says nothing definite about what is fair use, it only gives guidelines about what shall be taken into consideration when determining whether it is. That's a big part about why exercising your right to fair use exposes you to frivolous lawsuits that you have to be able to defend yourself agains.

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> So what would happen if a user posted a comment with an excerpt or submitted it to Digg?

Would AP force the sites to take the comment down or Digg to remove the story?

</comment><comment><USER27> whats the legal status if i translate it or use 1337speak?

</comment><comment> onreact-com I sell you 5 words for 10$. Also my words will rhyme and you can resell them. For each time you resell them you get a discount of 2$.</comment>


Ask HN: How should I impress 8th graders with web technology - <AUTHOR> Hello!
I'm a frontend develop for ~10 years, and I've been invited to a neighborhood school (8th graders) to present a one hour demo related to web technologies, mainly HTML, CSS, and JS.
To gain some context, I want to start with a brief explanation about basic stuff like what is a server, browser, how they interact and so on. Then explore a little bit the developer tools by modifying some pages in the browsers. For the final part, I want to edit with them a premade portfolio website so they can add their bio. It will be great if at the end they can say "I made a website".
The whole idea for this hour is to explain how web technologies work and what they can achieve with that.
I'd love to hear what other ideas you all might have to totally wow some teens or what experience you had in a similar situation. <comment><USER2> I don't want to rain on your parade, but it seems to me that HTML, CSS, and JS is not really where you should focus. The power and value of the WWW comes from what can be done on the web--search, communication, collective action, command and control, forecasting, and so forth and how it can be integrated into real life. The magic of the web is now machine learning, search engines, real-time translation, and the like.

<comment><USER3> drallison has a strong point - the values.

I also suggest that you proceed doing how you imagined.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Modifying sites with browser dev tools is a great step, and a good lesson in "it's trivial to fake a screenshot of a website" at the same time.

I'd recommend using glitch.com for the last part: Web editor, you can fork a template and it's actually online immediately.

A simple JS-game could be fun too, but it'll be tricky to show that effectively in the time.

</comment><comment><USER5> I'm a sysadmin and worked in education for 13 years. Most of the age group you are referring to don't understand the difference between who provides their broadband and their browser. My advice would be more show and less tell.

For example, setup an actual server in the classroom. Get them browsing/connecting to the server and then pull the plug (ethernet/wifi) on the server. Then they will see the connection.

Have the students deface their school website with developer tools. That will also go down well I'm sure.

I guess I am saying keep it simple. I did a lesson once on how the web connects with the students holding bits of string. The students enjoyed it and some staff passing by even sat in on the lesson.

Try your best to cater for all the students in the class and not just the whizzos and you will do well.

(Also be prepared to have 10/15 minutes of your time lost to students arriving and getting settled in.)

</comment><comment><USER6> Forms of instant-messaging are often good because they can be simple, immediately applicable, and inherently social so you have a chance of sparking a group of 3-5 nerdy kids running with it.

A neat thing would be if you can open up chrome developer tools console on two machines. Then, open up a websocket between the two so that you can talk between the two.

Bonus points if:

\- you can send images/gifs

\- it can be a chatroom

Post instructions on how to do this to a github page with a highly-memorable name. That way they can go home and do the same thing on the cheap chromebook their family can afford.

</comment><comment><USER7> The largest failure of the early web was that the innovators didn't realize how interested people were in having a little spot to call their own. I would take advantage of that and build a simple app for the kids to create their own spot. Let them build it, modify it, whatever... my guess is that it will generate some interest...

or who knows... I don't really know that much about 8th graders :)

</comment><comment><USER8> Build a real-time pain canvas using something like phoenix channels. anyone can join with a cellphone or laptop. draw with mouse or finger. even the seasoned dudes at elixirconf wowed when it happened live lmao

[https://youtu.be/qPiZTxUAaVM?t=1797](https://youtu.be/qPiZTxUAaVM?t=1797)

</comment><comment><USER9> One hour would be the right amount of time to teach them about cloud-based storage, services and apps. Either iCloud or google drive/apps work well as examples and would provide the students with the foundation for understanding more of the www</comment>


Well-known web sites that port-scan their visitors - <AUTHOR> https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/list-of-well-known-web-sites-that-port-scan-their-visitors/ <comment><USER2> """In our tests, uBlock is unable to block the port scans in the new Microsoft Edge or Google Chrome as the extension does not have adequate permissions to uncloak the DNS CNAME records."""

Seems highly relevant...

<comment><USER3> I remember when Chrome started making these permission changes and claimed that it wouldn't affect things like ublock, despite the ublock authors saying otherwise. Google is going out of its way to use the power it has as the dominant web browser to weaken ad blocking, and anyone who cares about a free web should run screaming away from Chrome based browsers.

<comment><USER4> Google's new permissions model and APIs are actually great for weakening the power and abuse potential of extensions. Honestly, the vast majority of them aren't very trustworthy. I've seen extensions from banks that simply take over the entire browser for "fraud prevention" or some other nonsense. The new declarative APIs are great because extensions don't actually get access to user data.

Blockers just happen to be so important and trusted that they shouldn't be subjected to these reasonable limitations. Extensions like uBlock Origin and Privacy Badger are so special and important that they should probably be fully integrated into the browser itself instead of being optional.

<comment><USER5> Exactly. Ublock and privacy badger is trying to make the browser a user agent again.

<comment><USER4> Exactly. These extensions empower the user to such an extent they should just become part of the browser instead. Browsers that lack these features could hardly be classified as user agents. They're more like generic clients for corporate websites.

Browsers are supposed to act on _our_ behalf by showing us the information we want to see. They aren't supposed to show us advertising noise for someone else's benefit, much less allow websites to track our every move. All such attempts should be resisted.

<comment><USER6> Ublock should just release a browser and be done with it

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I'm thinking that arbitrary domains should not have access to any resource on '127.0.0.1', for the same reason that browsers restrict access to resources at 'file://' without user permission.

<comment><USER8> It isn't just websites. It's everything really. The industry has proven to me time and again that it is not worth it to explain to user's what they are doing and why they are doing it. Doing so seems like a complete waste of time on the micro-scale, but on the macro-scale it builds confidence in the integrity of practitioners and the business they're hired by by customers, reaffirms positive social values/norms (asking for permission, politely explaining when asked a question, and respecting other's prooerty), and it increases the bar in terms of expectation, and helps educate users by shaping their expectation of what kinds of things one should expect a computer to be able to do.

There wouldn't be half the computational illiteracy there is if we'd take the time to explain the basics.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> I can understand banks using client fingerprinting for fraud detection, but Chick-fil-A? Are they worried that people might steal $5 of restaurant vouchers?

<comment><USER10> You'd be surprised, Chick-fil-a has a TON of fraud to deal with given their food's popularity. They push the "convenience" of the mobile app (and it is in some ways), but coupon fraud was also a big hidden reason driving that; basically all paper vouchers or barcode-based coupons moved over to app-only. Same for their Christmas calendars that used to be paper coupons + those receipt-based "Free Sandwich" surveys, etc... all have been clamped down with vastly increased security over the years.

<comment><USER8> There might be a bit more sympathy for their plight, and a self-correcting problem if they'd explain why they were doing it.

Sometimes just by pointing out that it's an issue, people will start to adjust their behavior to make it not an issue anymore. There'll always be some ne'er- do-wells, but if we let that deconstruct our expectation of positive respect for one another's time and stuff, well... You reap what you sow.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I am still so confused on why this vulnerability exists. For AJAX, you have CORS. Why was this even permitted for web-sockets ?

<comment><USER12> This vulnerability predates websockets (in fact, you can exploit it even without Javascript) - they just make things more convenient.

Apparently, the shit hit the fan a while ago, prompting Opera to implement 'cross network protection'[1], but other browser vendors did not follow suit.

[1] [https://web.archive.org/web/20121001002815/http://my.opera.c...](https://web.archive.org/web/20121001002815/http://my.opera.com/securitygroup/blog/2012/07/03/operas- cross-network-protection)

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> At what point does all this surveillance capitalism tech become "unauthorized access?"

Port scanning with no user consent seems borderline malicious to me. Since the late 1990s I've seen language in ISP acceptable use policies banning port scanning hosts without consent. If this is widely considered malicious by industry norms for decades then how can this be considered ethical for a random website to do against a user's machine?

<comment><USER4> The only difference is a terms of service nobody reads which "allows" them to do what they want, no matter how abusive.

<comment><USER14> In some of the cases there's no chance to agree with the TOS or leave before you are scanned.

> For example, Citibank, Ameriprise, and TIAA-CREF immediately port scanned > our computers when visiting the main page of the site.

<comment><USER4> Yes. Most if not all websites with typical "by continuing to use the site you agree to..." terms will drop cookies and fingerprint the user on their first visit, breaching their own contract. They do it even if lack of consent is made explicit by including Do Not Track in the HTTP headers.

These terms are obviously an attempt to get away with questionable behavior. Instead of simply not doing bad things, they insist and point people to the legalese when they complain as if it excused everything.

<comment><USER15> Exactly. It's very easy to be compliant with privacy law if you aren't stalking your users in the first place. The best example I've seen for doing it right was from godbolt.org, whose GDPR notice is refreshingly direct.

> The Compiler Explorer team believes the Compiler Explorer site is compliant > with the EU's General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). Specifically, we > store no personally identifying information, we anonymise the little data > that we do have and we do not permanently store any user data.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I'm increasingly convinced LexisNexis is an example of a pervasive monitoring/integration actor that has by this point scaled to the point their mere existence should be considered an attack.

The level of data aggregation, and the lengths gone through to acquire that data are just disturbing as all hell.

You can say, on the one hand that the fact they pop up everywhere is clearly a sign they provide a positive benefit to society, but nowhere I've been actually does anything to make you aware of what LexisNexis actually is, or what they provide. They're basically the Ur-example of the "Shadowy info- broker" tropeI've come across in real life.

The question that seems to be boiling to the top of life lately is whether or not there is a place in the world for a legitimate business whose business is to know as much as possible about everyone else's business.

The answer, from my perspective, is no, absolutely not. The market seems to deem otherwise.

<comment><USER16> They are also using Dating Sites and Student Loan websites to collect data.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> I wonder if there's a browser extension that will port scan them back.

<comment><USER18> I'm surprised any web site is doing something this risky to themselves. Say I'm an attacker. I visit their website, and they attempt to open a connection to me. I accept the connection and send back a target payload to their scanner, which is certainly less well tested than their public website's software. Even better, that seems exceptionally hard to prosecute: "wait, didn't you go out of your way to _ask_ the defendant to send you that data?"

<comment><USER19> Good thinking, but if I understand correctly, the javascript running the scan is running on your browser. So the scan is coming from the browser process, and both sides of the connection have IP address 127.0.0.1.

That javascript can then report back, or take other actions in your web session.

It's not a port scan in the sense of them opening a socket from their server to your computer.

<comment><USER18> But that report back need not to look exactly like they might expect.

<comment><USER20> It's not impossible. They could be doing something stupid like running eval on a JSON payload, or generating SQL insert statements from the unsanitised data. But I doubt it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> My understanding is that you can use WebRTC and other methods of JavaScript to port scan a computer. Heck, you can literally run BitTorrent on a website using WebTorrent. You could force users to download and share copyrighted movies or other illegal material in the background without their knowledge when they visit your website. The state of the browsers is a disaster and security nightmare. Wasm is only going to make it worse. Soon you'll essentially be running binary blobs when you visit a website. What was supposed to be a permissioned sandbox to protect users, turned into an advertisers and malicious hackers' wet dream.

I think there needs to be more alternatives to JavaScript at this point.

<comment><USER22> > Heck, you can literally run BitTorrent on a website using WebTorrent. You > could force users to download and share copyrighted movies or other illegal > material in the background without their knowledge when they visit your > website

Yes, I wrote this a few times in threads like this but for some reason this is mostly ignored. Having WebRTC enabled by default can get you in legal trouble (at least in a country like Germany where lawyers send you letters based on IP addresses).

<comment><USER23> Leaving javascript executing by default is the modern version of opening every email attachment.

<comment><USER21> It is the default for browsers, even after you install privacy protection extensions.

<comment><USER23> Because the browser standards are defined by ad and spying companies who require it and because in the past it wasn't what it is today: dangerous.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> TL;DR: Use Firefox with uBlock Origin to block the highest number of scans. Edge/Chrome/Brave let them through.

</comment><comment><USER25> This link sent me straight to a malicious ad page pretending to be Telenor

</comment><comment><USER26> Wow so if I use RDP or TeamViewer then what? They decline my order?

</comment><comment><USER27> Wondering if someone will take legal action. Port scanning still is legally a grey area in many jurisdictions.

</comment><comment><USER28> Is uBlock blocking port scanning by default, or one has to enable something in settings?

<comment><USER29> It's blocking the domains that host the port-scanning scripts.

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> No info about Safari

</comment><comment><USER31> I'm a bit confused by the ambiguity: is this a local JS browser client-side scan or a remote server-side scan?

<comment><USER19> Yeah, it's hard to describe accurately, because it runs in the browser locally, but is delivered from whatever URL is being referenced on their site.</comment></comment>


Spot the Robot Dog Trots into the Big, Bad World - <AUTHOR> https://www.wired.com/story/spot-the-robot-dog-trots-into-the-big-bad-world/ <comment><AUTHOR> "the software development kit is now publicly available on GitHub." ([https://github.com/boston-dynamics/spot-sdk](https://github.com/boston- dynamics/spot-sdk))</comment>


Announcing the Windows Compatibility Pack for .NET Core - <AUTHOR> https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/dotnet/2017/11/16/announcing-the-windows-compatibility-pack-for-net-core/ <comment><USER2> Smart move. Stuff like this helps ensure the long term viability of .NET, as Windows mind share goes down.

<comment><USER3> > as Windows mind share goes down.

These quotes always amuse me. Maybe in your particular developer bubble this might be true, but in the real world its Windows everywhere.

<comment><USER2> I'm not in Silicon Valley and I've worked on Windows my entire career (Linux on servers). Windows is now just one part of the IT scenery. We, developers, live in the bubble.

Many people will never use Windows for more than a few hours in their lives.

<comment><USER4> How many non developers are not on Windows?

<comment><USER5> 70% of internet resources are delivered on mobile phones or tablets these days - a market in which Microsoft has negligible foothold.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Is the source code on github?

I wonder what technology they plan to use for system.drawing on Linux

<comment><USER7> Yep [https://github.com/dotnet/corefx/tree/master/pkg/Microsoft.W...](https://github.com/dotnet/corefx/tree/master/pkg/Microsoft.Windows.Compatibility)</comment></comment>


Trump Lies. China Thrives - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/07/opinion/trump-china-trade.html <comment><AUTHOR> "C.E.O. of Career International, told me two of his hottest job openings in China are in "software and new energy" — everyone is looking for engineers for electric cars, solar and wind. Walter Fang, a top executive at iSoftStone, which helps design China's smart, sustainable cities, told me that "just two weeks ago I brought in about a dozen green energy start-up companies from Massachusetts" to show them opportunities in China."</comment>