The Best Health Care System in the World - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/09/18/upshot/best-health-care-system-country-bracket.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=first-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0 <comment><USER2> ___Spoiler alert_ __

They conclude that Switzerland is the best system in the world.

But different judges seem to have different priorities and it's clear that at least some of them are judging not the best healthcare system in terms of just cost or quality of care, but on how feasibly the foreign system could be implemented in the United States.

In any case, it's a stupid metric. Unless there was a single healthcare system that had the best healthcare at the lowest cost, which I think is the combination that most people are looking for, there is clearly no objectively "best" system. Even determining things like quality care in the first place is difficult.

Still, it was interesting to read comparisons of the various countries' health systems. It's a worthwhile read.

<comment><USER3> If you live the United States, it is not a stupid metric. We should be focused on improving our system in ways that realistic and possible to achieve.

Discussion of great ideas that could never be implemented would be largely academic when considering how the American system can be improved.

<comment><USER4> Fair enough, but, at least, they should speak about how those reference countries are doing against the rest.

In the World Health Organization ranking (1), of all the countries compared in the article, the only one that appears between the first ten in any of the categories (except cost) is France and, in only one metric, Australia and the UK.

Not pointing that seems a strange omission.

1\. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Health_Organization_rank...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Health_Organization_ranking_of_health_systems_in_2000)

<comment><USER5> That's not correct - are we looking at the same table? There are more of the reference countries in the top 10 of the various categories (except cost). Here's the number of times each appear in the top ten categories in the Wikipedia article you posted:

Canada: 1

Singapore: 1

Germany: 0

Switzerland: 3

France: 3

UK: 2

Australia: 1

The other larger* countries that feature in the top-ten of these categories - Japan, Sweden, Spain, Austria - all have universal healthcare. I'm not sure where you stand, but it seems that no matter how you slice it Americans are getting a raw deal with their healthcare.

* = those roughly the same population as the smallest country on the list - Switzerland - or more

<comment><USER4> You are right, I was wrong.

Specifically, I don't know how I missed Switzerland there. Obviously, I should double check before posting.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> The Swiss health system is very good in terms of treatment, but the costs are rising every year by 5-6%. It is also a two tier system - everyone must pay for basic health insurance, but supplementary cover is extra and is subject to acceptance. This means that you may not be able to get the latest cancer drugs, latest technology or be treated by the senior doctors unless you have the supplementary cover. I don't offer a better solution; but merely state the facts.

I guess there is no perfect healthcare system, but in my limited experience I am not surprised the Swiss system ended victorious. Having to cater for only 8 million people surely helps them though.

As a final remark - I bumped into another British expat over here a few weeks ago and he was walking on crutches after a hip replacement operation. When I asked him how he thought it would have played out on the NHS, he said he'd still be waiting to see a consultant!

<comment><USER7> > "As a final remark - I bumped into another British expat over here a few > weeks ago and he was walking on crutches after a hip replacement operation. > When I asked him how he thought it would have played out on the NHS, he said > he'd still be waiting to see a consultant!"

I wouldn't read too much into that remark. The NHS has been underfunded for decades. There was a time when the NHS was one of the most cost effective healthcare systems in the world, but it's been seriously undermined by both Labour and Tory governments over the past 25 years. There's no reason it can't be a well-run healthcare system again, but it will take time to undo the damage that's been done.

<comment><USER8> The health/economic experts in the article cite the British system for its quality, efficiency, competitiveness, and access. If that's true, it's sounds like it's funded "enough" for the current responsibilities.

If it was underfunded - especially for decades - then some of those things would be big problems, right?

<comment><USER9> I think it's more of a credit to the British system that, even underfunded relative to ideal the NHS produces still excellent outcomes.

I imagine that, if it were funded with another 1-2% of GDP it would truly excel more like the French system.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Having grown up in Australia and lived my adult life in the UK and Switzerland, it is hard to argue with the result. The level of care in CH is outstanding, even at the basic level. The NHS is very good when it's good (eg. IMO emergency care), but can be equally chaotic and disorganised at times (often the "less important" community level care). Waiting times can be a problem. I also had a great experience with the healthcare in Australia while growing up, but I was lucky enough that my family could afford good private insurance that could fill in the gaps. I can't speak for what it's like now though, haven't lived there for over a decade. Overall probably a fair article.

<comment><USER11> Emergency care is good everywhere, because the establishment uses it. They don't use the rest of the healthcare system, therefore there is a little incentive to fix it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> > "Switzerland has a universal health care system, requiring all to buy > insurance. [...] Almost 30 percent of people get subsidies offsetting the > cost of premiums, on a sliding scale pegged to income."

This is wrong. It does not matter how much I earn. (Nassim Taleb is right, New York Times is no good.) Healthcare is pegged to income in Germany but definitely not in Switzerland. I pay 279 CHF (300 USD) per month and pay all bills up to 2500 CHF per year myself. If my health-related costs during the year exceeds 2500 CHF the insurance kicks in and starts paying. In this way, people don't go to the doctor for tiny things but quickly go to see one for serious stuff. All health-related costs are deductible from my income tax.

More about "health insurance" in Switzerland in my blog post that I wrote after moving to Zurich in 2014: [https://medium.com/@iwaninzurich/eight- reasons-why-i-moved-t...](https://medium.com/@iwaninzurich/eight-reasons-why- i-moved-to-switzerland-to-work-in-it-c7ac18af4f90)

<comment><USER13> So it's quite similar to ACA? Everyone buys insurance, with the poorest subsidized. Plus, people are responsible for a deductible for the care provided.

<comment><USER12> I am not familiar with ACA. But I guess these kind of things are easier to pull of in a small country like Switzerland.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> You do not have to look at healthcare systems as a package. Each incorporate good and bad ideas that can be studied separately. I think overall the article was quite lacking in discerning the features of each healthcare system, especially considering that each is its own market with different market dynamics.

For example the way each system delivers primary care is quite different. In some systems, GP visits are free but very bureaucratic. You have to make an appointment a week in advance. Does not matter if your appendix is bursting. If you go to the ER they will send you to get a referral from an emergency GP clinic. In other countries GPs are just private clinics and it works just fine without any insurance.

I particularly do not like how employment is sometimes intertwined with health insurance. It is just a bureaucratic mess.

<comment><USER15> In the UK you have several options: If you are not sure and need some advice, you can ring 111 - they may direct you to A&E. If it is an emergency you ring 999 (which coves all emergency services. You can present yourself to the nearest A&E (Accident and Emergency) if you are able to get there on your own.

GP visits do generally require an appointment and you may need to wait for some days.

Prescriptions: Flat fee of less than £10 per prescription. There are many medical and means tested exemptions.

NHS Dental Care can be hard to find but is generally available with a three tier flat fee structure for a full treatment not per visit, again loads of exemptions. Eg ~£56 for an extraction or root canal.

Some anecdotes:

A few years ago I had a wisdom tooth problem that hit on the weekend which is out of hours for dentists. I rang 111 and was referred across county (40 min drive). The tooth was extracted within 20 mins of me arriving. I don't remember whether I even had to pay but if I did then it would have been £50. If I'd been on benefits - no charge.

A few weeks ago I fell in my garden and hurt some ribs. It bloody hurt. To be on the safe side I went to A&E. 20 mins later I was triaged to the front of the queue and X rayed etc. Three hours later (I was obviously non crit) I was seen by a doctor and then discharged.

About eight years ago (very long story short) my dad was flown by helicopter from Exeter RD&E Hospital after a couple of weeks of stay to the Royal Brompton in London because the best cardiac surgeon for what he needed was based there. After a couple of months of care, surgery and recovery, his ticker is still going. Cost of care? who knows? A lot in six figures. It cost me a fortune in bus fares visiting the old boy.

I have many more but that gives you some idea. We habitually whinge about the NHS (OK: everything) here in the UK about waiting times but when the shit hits the fan - it is always there to pick you up and stick you back together.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> It's nice to see a US newspaper acknowledging that other developed countries exist.

</comment><comment><USER17> Looks at select parts of the HC systems around the world and allows you to pick YOUR favorites. Would be interesting to anonymize the countries, submit as a poll to leading pundits on both sides of the fence, and see where the end result comes in.

</comment><comment><USER18> How is Japan not in the discussion?

I am not a specialist in medical issues, but I lived in Japan for many years. The health care was great for me.

Doctors are relatively autonomous. They get paid by the government (single payer?) plus a relatively small co-pay depending on your insurance (mostly based on employer).

Contributions from individuals vary from about $100 a year (for low income) up to maybe 4-5% of income at salaries most Japanese make ($25k to $100k usd). Employers also contribute.

I never felt financially fleeced, unlike the US (with great insurance, no less). I almost never had to wait -- just once for a few days for a minor surgery. The costs for treatment and meds were reasonable. The quality of care seemed comparable to or better than the US (for a young person, at least).

My only complaint was that doctors had a minor (but known) racket. If you had something that required 7 days of meds, they would give you a 3-day prescription and have you come back for a 1-minute second visit to get the other 4 days of prescription. A doctor friend told me that this was allowed and somewhat exploited because doctors were paid per visit. My doctor friend also told me that this was a way to balance payments -- that is, they would take longer on the initial visit to get the right diagnosis, but then they needed you to come in for the minor visits to get paid correctly for the time. Minor inconvenience, imho.

I also have friends who made sure to have their medical stuff done before they left Japan -- child delivery, hip replacement, lots of dental, etc.

Any other Japan folks have positive or negative stories to share? What about other Asian countries?

</comment><comment><USER19> I wish that there was a calculator out there that would allow you to build your own healthcare system, so to speak. You could tweak attributes such as funding mechanisms, etc. I imagine this hypothetical calculator could function like this [0].

[0] [http://www.crfb.org/debtfixer/](http://www.crfb.org/debtfixer/)

<comment><USER20> Yes, this is very much a multivariable optimization. For comparison of healthcare systems, it'd help to choose a common set of N disease therapies and services, then assess each for outcome and cost applied across perhaps three economic tiers of the public: zero, middle, and upper incomes.

I'd also like to know what protection each system provides against personal bankruptcy.

And which system allows life saving therapy for those .01 percenters for whom a cure is available but extremely expensive or inconvenient (e.g. hepatitis C vaccine or CAR-T therapy). At what percentiles are those lines drawn? How to the programs compare?

(For example, I have the sense that Canada disallows a larger fraction of expensive treatments and delays treatments longer than most other systems, especially near end of life.)

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> Since cancer and cardiovascular disease are by far thelargest killers, early detection coupled with survival rates would be the two most important factors with cost the third. Narrow the problem down to something much more measurable than most comparisons attempt.

<comment><USER22> Aren't early detection and survival rates somewhat linked?

I've heard it suggested that one of the dysfunctions of the US system is to detect cancers that would never have caused the patient any harm, leading to stress and needless medical interventions and expense. This improves both your metrics without actually improving healthcare, possibly actively making it worse, even before accounting for cost.

<comment><USER23> It's true that over-testing, over-diagnosis, and over-treatment all cause harm (and sometimes death).

But have a look at "most common cause of female death" here: [https://visual.ons.gov.uk/causes-of-death- over-100-years/](https://visual.ons.gov.uk/causes-of-death-over-100-years/)

Cancer is the most common cause of death in women from age 30 to 79, and also from age 5 to 14.

(Brain tumors in children, breast cancer from age 30 to 54, and lung cancer from 55 to 79).

Advances in cancer detection (including working out which are the cancers that need to be treated) and treatment are going to save lives.

<comment><USER22> Those figures might be slightly misleading e.g. the most common cause of death might only account for 7% of deaths at certain age ranges and the same time and money invested into other causes may provide more bang for buck.

Also which particular cause of death "wins" may be more about taxonomy decisions about what gets lumped together (e.g. for the very youngest "other misc." is the biggest grouping) and, as a result, I would guess that any deaths due to e.g. an unnecessary mastectomy of a potentially benign tumor leading to surgical complications would end up listed under the same cause of death as one left entirely untreated.

So advances will save lives only if they're truly advances, and not just throwing shiny technology at the problem without a full understanding of the benefits and costs.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> I'm sure I've read that "health" outcomes are to a surprising degree influenced by general welfare policies. Every time they mentioned good or better outcomes I wondered how much of that was down to the health care system in that country and how much to everything else.

They seemed to judge the systems in likelihood of being accepted in the USA and presumably the Euro style welfare would have a tough time being accepted if anyone tried a transplant.

</comment><comment><USER24> Relevant frontline documentary from a few years ago: [http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sickaroundtheworld/c...](http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sickaroundtheworld/countries/models.html)

</comment><comment><USER25> [https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/jul/14/nhs-holds- on...](https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/jul/14/nhs-holds-on-to-top- spot-in-healthcare-survey)

</comment><comment><USER26> The best health care system:

"In ancient China doctors were paid when their patients were kept well, not when they were sick. Believing that it was the doctor's job to prevent disease, Chinese doctors often paid the patient if the patient lost his health."

</comment><comment><USER27> The full article title is "The Best Health Care System in the World: Which One Would You Pick?"</comment>


Remove dependency on anything related to SimilarWeb - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/openstyles/stylus/issues/431 <comment><USER2> I imagined just a bit of possibilities that this would enable and found it to be very scary. While this is a dream that most of us have, I think that it opens doors that are better sealed tight.

<comment><AUTHOR> I installed Stylus straight away after malware was discovered in Stylish. But it doesn't mean Stylus is automatically safer because it's an alternative. Anyways just to be sure, I manually audit the source code of plugins before I install them. I typically do this by opening 10-20 .JS files in Notepad++ and inspect what all the files are trying to do. Firefox plugins are not compiled binaries so it's easy to extract them and then start inspecting the code.</comment></comment>


GCC gOlogy: studying the impact of optimizations on debugging - <AUTHOR> http://www.fsfla.org/~lxoliva/writeups/gOlogy/gOlogy.txt <comment><USER2> Does the same description exist for clang? They are up to -O6. I only know their pass descriptions [http://llvm.org/docs/Passes.html](http://llvm.org/docs/Passes.html) but nothing related to the O level and -g

<comment><USER3> Are you sure they're up to -O6 ?

Doing this in any autoconf-based program:

        $ ./configure CC="/usr/bin/clang-8" CFLAGS="-Weverything -O6 -flto=full" LDFLAGS="-fuse-ld=/usr/bin/ld.lld-8"

... fails (error: C compiler cannot create executables); same for -O5.

-O4 works, but generates this diagnostic:

        clang: warning: -O4 is equivalent to -O3 [-Wdeprecated]</comment></comment>


Why HTTPS will never be required in browsers - <AUTHOR> http://scripting.com/liveblog/users/davewiner/2016/02/01/0967.html <comment><USER2> This is ridiculous.

Free SSL certificates have existed for a _long_ time. And there is a lot of churn at the free end, driven by Let's Encrypt. I'd be shocked if there aren't new —more convenient— domain level options provided by web hosts in the very near future.

Maintaining a SSL certificate is only as important as maintaining the actual hosting.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> I don't agree with Dave, in particular because thanks to Let's Encrypt, my hoster offers SSL for free and many others do.

(Many of the Let's Encrypt sponsors are hoster – and they usually are sponsors because they have already implemented free SSL for their customers: [https://letsencrypt.org/sponsors/.](https://letsencrypt.org/sponsors/.))</comment>


Backtracking - Eight Queens Puzzle - <AUTHOR> http://naivnomore.blogspot.com/2010/07/backtracking-eight-queens-puzzle.html

<comment><USER2> I remember implementing an n-queens solver in Prolog for a programming languages course. Prolog does backtracking on its own. The style of programming is very different from anything else I've ever programmed in--it's a really interesting language. It doesn't get used much in production, but I've seen isolated instances where it has been. Initial implementations of Erlang were written in it, for example.

<https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Prolog></comment>


Marketplace: A language for network-aware programming - <AUTHOR> http://blog.racket-lang.org/2013/05/marketplace-language-for-network-aware.html

<comment><USER2> Sounds really cool, for anyone interested in the dns server and proxy implementation it is located in github: <https://github.com/tonyg/marketplace- dns></comment>


Hi I'm Mike Bostock, Creator of D3.js, AMA - <AUTHOR> https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/comments/3k3if4/hi_im_mike_bostock_creator_of_d3js_and_a_former/

<comment><USER2> Off point but I would love to see YC partners do AMAs on hacker news.</comment>


Donkey Kong scoreboard strips high score claim - <AUTHOR> https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2018/02/donkey-kong-scoreboard-strips-billy-mitchells-high-score-claims/ <comment><USER2> HA!

The 2007 documentary "The King of Kong: A Fistful of Quarters" is my favorite movie of all-time, I must have watched it at least 40 times. Trailer: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8hBs2oFjSWk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8hBs2oFjSWk)

For those who haven't seen the film, the contender Steve Wiebe sets a new record live at an arcade tournament in Funspot (NH) but reigning champ Billy Mitchell sends in a VHS tape with an even higher score.

The video gets fuzzy and looks suspicious but Mitchell's toadies in the group immediately accept the score, despite refusing to previously accept a VHS tape from the contender Steve Wiebe.

Since the movie came out both men were left in the dust by new players, but recently the score-keepers slow-mo'ed Billy's tapes and the Donkey Kong levels render the way MAME does them, not the actual arcade hardware. The current No. 2 ranked player (Wes Copeland) is basically corroborating this by running his performance through an app and determining the point ratios are off (e.g., too much from hammers).

Personally I don't think Billy's a bad guy, and the film actually shows him performing selfless acts for others, but if this allegation is true -- and it's hard to argue with the data -- I do think this seriously compromises his integrity and position in classic gaming history.

<comment><USER3> Here's a no-nonsense video chronicling the progress of the Donkey Kong world record: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LAQ2vEHq2N4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LAQ2vEHq2N4)

This guy has also made videos chronicling similar speedrun records for other games, and they're fascinating to watch.

<comment><USER4> Summoning Salt is one of the best gaming youtubers I've run across. He describes what he's talking about in both a technical and end-result sense, and really makes a viewer understand the passion for games that these players have.

<comment><USER5> I do wish _he_ had a little more passion in his voice about the subject. It's obvious he is thoroughly involved and cares from the material, but it sometimes sounds like a recording of the absolute worst teacher you've ever had

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> The claim that it's statistically unlikely to get those random numbers isn't entirely clear. When asked how unlikely it is, the response is "extremely unlikely", but it's important to quantify that. It's possible he's playing 20x more games than them, for example, and then we'd expect his best scores to contain more unlikely results. But it's hard to say if they would be as unlikely as what we see.

<comment><USER2> > It's possible he's playing 20x more games than them

Possible but unlikely b/c the person making this claim is the current No. 2 Donkey Kong player in the world Wes Copeland, not Joe Schmo off the street.

Even if Mitchell's disputed scores were accepted they would still be far off Copeland's scores. So when the No. 2 player speaks it carries more weight than just some random dude in his basement.

<comment><USER7> Wouldn't a pro player be playing _less_ games? They're playing longer, higher scoring games not lots of average scoring games.

<comment><USER8> Sort of. However, at that level, if you're in the middle of a game and aren't on track to getting a high score, you're probably going to abandon the game and try again from the beginning. Therefore there'll be a fairly high number of games, a sizeable proportion of which are abandoned.

It's like when speedrunners attempt to complete games in the fastest time. If they make a mistake at any point in the game that will cost them a lot of time, they will most likely abandon the game and keep trying until they are able to complete the game without making any costly mistakes.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> The Dragster Saga is quite an interesting read: [https://www.reddit.com/r/speedrun/comments/7tsd89/todd_roger...](https://www.reddit.com/r/speedrun/comments/7tsd89/todd_rogers_scores_to_be_removed_he_is_also_banned/)

</comment><comment><USER10> I can't tell you how relieved I am that this is finally resolved.

<comment><USER11> It's not resolved until Walter Day removes Billy's score and admits that he propped him up with some shady officiating.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> I saw _The King of Kong_ documentary when it first came out and remember Billy Mitchell was so hateable. There is nothing humble about a man who answers his phone: "World-Record headquarters, how can I help you?": [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wef2qDT5j3I](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wef2qDT5j3I)

He was caught cheating back then too, if I remember correctly, by sending a video that messed with the score. I am surprised they accept sent-in submissions from _anybody_ in an age where videos are so easily edited, let alone from a notorious cheater.

People like Mitchell will go as far as they can to win regardless of whether or not they deserve it, and I'm interested in hearing what the thoughts are in the industry around dealing with cheaters. I've seen some gamers beat records while on Twitch, which I don't really know anything about first hand but it _seems_ somewhat more legit than a sent-in video, as there are people watching both the player and the game he's playing in real time.

Are there any Twitch features that can tell if a game is really being played live?

Otherwise, are there any obvious moves that should/could be taken to ensure legitimacy in gaming world records?

<comment><USER13> [https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=o1BBiPeDXM0](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=o1BBiPeDXM0) here's a player getting caught cheating during a twitch run. He only gets caught because a very experienced runner was also watching at the time, at the end of the day faking is very easy, not sure what can be done about it other than using special locked down computers or something.

<comment><USER12> Wow, very interesting.

I recognize that name _Chibi_ and I think I've seen him getting picked on in some other videos. He clearly just wants attention, and part of me feels bad for him. Hopefully he's realized by now that cheating is no way to make friends.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I was recently playing through Super Metroid on the SNES mini, and I ended up watching a "World Record Progression" video on YouTube. Turns out there's a series of these videos[0] done for a number of games - they're pretty well done, and it's fascinating to hear the level of effort people put in to shaving time off a World Record.

[0] [https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCtUbO6rBht0daVIOGML3c8w/vid...](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCtUbO6rBht0daVIOGML3c8w/videos)

<comment><USER15> Oh, Super Metroid is such an amazing speedrun. Over the last week's time, Zoast has been setting new WRs at least 3 times and there's still at least 10 seconds to be saved with the current route + optimal RNG.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> This is a different doc for a different game, but it is an interesting story about the rise of MLG. It is called Smash and it follows some of the early luminaries of competitive Super Smash Brothers Melee. Highly enjoyable and fairly long.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NSf2mgkRm7Q&list=PLoUHkRwnRH...](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NSf2mgkRm7Q&list=PLoUHkRwnRH- IXbZfwlgiEN8eXmoj6DtKM)

</comment><comment><USER17> I knew it! Not really. I suppose it could be said that maybe him placing that (now apparently) artificial line in the sand made others go legitimately further!

</comment><comment><USER18> This reminds of [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borislav_Ivanov](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borislav_Ivanov)

Technically never proven a cheater but the evidence is extremely convincing.

</comment><comment><USER19> If he was using an emulator, why would he splice instead of just altering the output of the random number generator to be more favorable?

<comment><USER20> Because the latter requires more technical knowledge that he probably didn't have. He'd have to reverse engineer the machine code.

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> He made good money for several years before the cheating was exposed. A good investment.

<comment><USER22> In fairness he had lots of runs of DK and Pac-Man that were very good and indisputable cheating-wise.

<comment><USER23> It's important to remember that most cheaters are actually good at the game they're cheating at. They're just not as good as they want to be, so they cheat. It's too obvious if they're clearly just not good at all -- a new chess player playing like a Grandmaster because he is using some secret radio tech in his shoes is obvious cheating, but a Master or Expert who needs advice from his scheming coach for exactly one game to win a tournament? That's the more common scenario.

Todd Rogers is a genuinely excellent video game player. He's also a blatant cheater.

<comment><USER24> It's quite common for professional video game players to get so consistently good at the games they are playing that getting the top score becomes more about luck than skill.

Sometimes this causes them to think that a game owes them a certain score/time (maybe they they pass all the hard 1 in 20 RNG events and then a stupid 99 in 100 RNG fails them) and occasionally decide to cheat just to get that score/time.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


How would you sell (shares of) a painting via cryptocurrency? - <AUTHOR> Just received permission from a collector to sell two paintings via cryptocurrency. They are by one of the top 5 artists who regularly sell in the 8 and 9 figures.
So I pitched two ideas: 1) selling the first outright via cryptocurrency. The amount of bitcoin wallets alone with over $20m increases the potential buyer size greatly versus family offices, known collectors, etc. and 2) tokenizing up to 45% of shares with a discount in the second, the idea we collectively hold, creating an ROI through an outright sale.
How would you exactly go about this? For the first painting to sell outright, my plan is to create a landing page and share it every which way possible. For tokenizing, is it possible to do this without another ICO? Thanks everyone. <comment><USER2> here is a helpful article on 'tokenization': [https://www.nasdaq.com/article/how-tokenization-is- putting-r...](https://www.nasdaq.com/article/how-tokenization-is-putting-real- world-assets-on-blockchains-cm767952)

</comment><comment><USER3> There is a startup that was doing similar thing:

[https://email@example.com/we-could-have-had-it-all- but-...](https://firstname.lastname@example.com/we-could-have-had-it-all-but-we-are- happy-even-if-we-only-have-a-piece-66489451a54d)</comment>


TED - Inspired talks by the world's greatest thinkers and doers - <AUTHOR> http://www.ted.com/

<comment><USER2> How is this not a dupe?

(I love TED, don't get me wrong, I'm just surprised this hasn't been submitted before)

<comment><AUTHOR> Well I've never seen it before; that's why I submitted it.</comment></comment>


PyCruise 2016 - <AUTHOR> http://www.pycruise.com/ <comment><USER2> Cruise ships are kind of ecologically awful.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cruise_ship#Environmental_impa...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cruise_ship#Environmental_impact)

As a Mexican who has seen our beaches gradually destroyed by endless visiting cruise ships year after year, I feel compelled to remind people how terrible they are for the planet.

Not to mention, they are also super legally sleazy. They are often harboured at countries that have no legal protections. If something happens to you on a cruise ship, it's your own damn problem. Being registered in those tiny corrupt countries also means that they don't have to answer for their ecological destruction.

[http://www.cracked.com/quick-fixes/3-dark-facts-cruise- lines...](http://www.cracked.com/quick-fixes/3-dark-facts-cruise-lines-dont- want-you-to-know/)

I wish I could be excited about going to such an event. It seems like it would be super fun. But I don't want my fun to promote such evils. I am very saddened by the coral reef destruction I have witnessed first hand throughout my life.

[http://www.marineinsight.com/marine/environment/how-ships- ar...](http://www.marineinsight.com/marine/environment/how-ships-are- destroying-coral-reefs-around-the-world/)

[http://notigodinez.com/empresa-constructora-de-muelle- dana-g...](http://notigodinez.com/empresa-constructora-de-muelle-dana- gravemente-sistema-arrecifal-paraiso-en-cozumel-unico-en-el-mundo/)

</comment><comment><USER3> This is the coolest thing I've seen in a while when it comes to conference. As someone with a young family, I cringe when I have to think about going to another city for a conference, which is all the time because I live in Cleveland. Its not the travel, I rather like traveling: its leaving the wife with the kids and just up and going. This allows me to take the kids and wife, and not feel too bad about abandoning them to fend for themselves for a week.

<comment><USER4> This is exactly why I'm organizing it. I have two kids (and a husband who likes to have me around), and it's always a bit of chaos when I leave for a conference.

<comment><USER5> Daycare really peeked my interest as well.

<comment><USER4> My kids both love the programs available, and they go all the way up to 17. For the teens, the format is about hanging out, and for the older teens, they even have exclusive excursions.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Have you sorted out internet connection onboard? That is often a problem / very expensive on cruises.

<comment><USER7> That's exactly what I was wondering. A boat full of software engineers is going to want some internet...

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Pretty cool. Ever since going solo I've wondered why more development conferences aren't in tropical locations so it can double as a vacation :-)

I worked at an agency that did work for pharmaceutical companies and doctors/med salespeople do this all the time! There were a couple of jobs in Punta Cana, DR alone each year.

<comment><USER9> There was such a company for a while; I spoke on the first two "Geek Cruises," which has since re-dubbed itself "Insight Cruises" ([http://insightcruises.com/](http://insightcruises.com/)). I'm not sure which market forces pushed them in this direction. We managed to see Alaska and the Caribbean, which was super fun.

I must admit that while those cruises were great fun and quite interesting, they showed my wife and me that it's not the kind of vacation or travel that is our style. Lots of other people do enjoy them, though -- and I'm happy to see that someone else is trying this!

The organizer might want to contact the Insight Cruises people; I don't think that they're in direct competition any more, and perhaps they'll have something useful to suggest from their experience.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> This might be an "obvious" question but where is the list of talks or call for authors?

<comment><USER4> It's going to be an 'Open Space' style conference, so there will be a call for Open Space themes later on.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> Don't know if the creator will see this comment, but the hover state of the signup button is still Bootstrap's default btn-success style.

</comment><comment><USER12> Wow, I wish there was something like this for JS

<comment><USER4> Once this is all over, I'd be happy to write up a road map for how I did it! Maybe someone in the JS world will pick up the banner.

<comment><USER12> Awesome, I look forward to it!</comment></comment></comment>


A Future Without Privacy - <AUTHOR> https://danielmiessler.com/blog/future-without-privacy/#gs.SZqMo_A <comment><USER2> Catchy title, but the blog post uses weird metrics and formulas that don't seem to make any sense. There are a lot of buzz words, given metrics and then multiplied together to make not-a-facts.</comment>


Assessing Kurzweil predictions about 2019: the results – LessWrong 2.0 - <AUTHOR> https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/NcGBmDEe5qXB7dFBF/assessing-kurzweil-predictions-about-2019-the-results <comment><USER2> TL;DR: 20 years ago, he was very wrong about VR.

He was surprisingly right about; People will have unbreakable crypto, but still have privacy concerns RE every move being stored in a database, and, IMHO, spinning media will be replaced by solid state.

<comment><USER3> My system doesn't even have a drive bay for an optical device. I also have no rotating HDDs in here anymore.

The same is true for most other people I know. So I thought that particular prediction was pretty correct, actually.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Can one make a tool that safely searches content of my browsing history? - <AUTHOR> The more time I spend on the internet, the more I wish I could have a search tool that only searches pages I've visited.
I would even like to be able to search through Facebook content I've viewed.  And, of course, I'd want this to be done locally to increase privacy and speed.
Does anyone have a hack for this?
I see a plugin on Chrome called "Full History Search" [1].  I do not trust anything other than a fully open source tool
I understand that there are privacy concerns with this, since you could be storing data locally that is otherwise not public on the internet.
I wonder if it could be done in a safe way.  Thoughts?
[1] https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/full-history-search/finikongkpikdjdhfofcinijoidlikej?hl=en <comment><USER2> _I wish I could have a search tool that only searches pages I 've visited_

To clarify: if you read an article on ArsTechnica, are you saying you only want your search to include that _specific_ article on ArsTechnica that you previously read, or the site ArsTechnica on the whole?

If you only want to search through your history (i.e. the former in the above), the major browsers (Chrome, Firefox, etc.) have a built-in search bar for your history file. You could use that to search only for pages that you've previously visited.</comment>


Ask HN: How to search online webcams? - <AUTHOR> I assume there could be 3 different ways of doing this as usual.
1) Live webcam re-director
Such as http://www.earthcam.com/mapsearch/  But this only re-directs you to other sites those provide live webcams.
2) Live webcam broadcaster
Still on earchcam.com . But this time it provides live webcam broadcasting. http://www.earthcam.com/usa/newyork/timessquare/?cam=tsrobo1
3) Webcam heartbeat locator
Some sites, such as shodan: https://www.shodan.io/search?query=webcam
You can even get a webcam URL from this. But it looks some of the results are not valid anymore.
So, here is my question. ###### How to search online webcams in codes? ######
Any tutorials? Thanks! <comment><USER2> Use the Shodan API -- [https://developer.shodan.io/](https://developer.shodan.io/)

You might have to write some logic to check the validity of the webcam, but I think that might be your best bet.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for sharing. I know Shodan API. But actually its API has request limits.

I am planning on creating a site like shodan which provides webcam search service. You know, detect webcams online and store them into databases.

Some ideas?

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Some good ideas?</comment>


Why Coding Bootcamps Don't Work - happy-go-lucky https://www.inc.com/geoffrey-james/why-coding-bootcamps-dont-work.html <comment><AUTHOR> > Computer programming is highly specialized work; it can't be effectively > taught in an intensive program.

You must be having a very peculiar view on programming as an industrial field. The parts that are "highly specialized work" are rare, most of the needs of business are boring gruntwork.

Bootcamps don't work -- if they don't work -- not because programming is difficult like rocket science or quantum mechanics, but because bootcamps focus on earning money (more students and more graduates' placements wherever) instead of teaching the craft.</comment>


Parents Behind Bars - <AUTHOR> http://www.ua-magazine.com/us-incarceration/ <comment><USER2> Generally you get put in jail for committing crimes. How about we try to fix the reasons leading to people committing those crimes instead? Why is it so outlandish to suggest that people shouldn't commit crime in the first place?

You break the law, you go to jail. You keep doing it, you go back. If you have kids, stop doing things that can out you in jail, like a reasonable human being. And if certain communities have a culture where crime is accepted, well, doesn't seem to be much choice if they don't want to change.

Why is that becoming politically incorrect to say?

<comment><USER3> "You break the law, you go to jail."

I think the argument is that there is nothing productive about sending people to prison. At least not as prison, prison time, and transitioning back to society is currently structured.

It's not better for society, it's not better for the victim (and what if there is no victim), and it's not better for the person going to jail.

So why do it? Why not take a more results based approach to preventing people from reoffending? Why not make it easier for them to reintegrate into society once they are out?

If all you want to do is punish people out of some need for retribution sure keep it up. But then you have to accept the costs that come with that need for retribution.

<comment><USER2> The productive part is preventing them from damaging public safety and the lives of others who choose not to do things that we have decided as a society to codify as illegal. If someone is robbing people in a neighborhood, say, how could not removing them possibly be the better choice?

<comment><USER4> How about removing the reasons they rob, or giving them the psychiatric help they need to prevent them from robbing someone?

I'd much rather have someone become a productive member of society then let them rot away in jail.

<comment><USER5> Psychiatry doesn't work that way, man. You can't take a pill and become greatest neighbor on the block. Or solve everyone's problems and then live happily.

Your otherwise cool idea has no real implementations (communism doesn't count).

<comment><USER4> Uhh, yeah, I never said it was easy or simple. It's gonna take a lot of hard work to get people adjusted, and I don't believe we even can adjust everyone. But that approach is more realistic and successful than "don't commit crimes"

> Your otherwise cool idea has no real implementations (communism doesn't > count).

Other than the fact that it has completely real and provable implementations:

[http://www.alltreatment.com/drug-rehab- infographic](http://www.alltreatment.com/drug-rehab-infographic)

[http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2012/12/18/prison- could...](http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2012/12/18/prison-could-be- productive/punishment-fails-rehabilitation-works)

<comment><USER5> First link seems to be irrelevant since it only covers drug addiction that can be treated as mental disease, but other potential crimes can not. Second article shows reduction of violence _in or after the jail_ , not reduction of violence per se. You cannot forcibly cure not-yet-guilty with that, and they aren't guilty until commit a crime. But it is great method on its own.

<comment><USER4> Those are just the first two links I found after 5 seconds of searching though. My points have been proven over and over and over by other studies.

<comment><USER5> No amount of studies can change the following: we still can't force non-guilty guys to psychiatrist (because they are free to just not go there), and guilty guys already are in jail. Where do you think this logic should be broken?

To not send them there and to cure instead? Organized crimes will grow on this scheme like mushrooms after rain.

To test and monitor everyone before they do something? That's what everyone is fighting with (Snowden et al).

Again, their idea is great, but it will never be elected in social context.

<comment><USER4> Oh yeah, totally. Using known proven methods for reducing crime is going to be a total waste of everyone's time. We should totally just put them in a box instead and not try to fix the root of the problem. Lets keep using the same methods that have been proven not to work because some people might be able to abuse another process.

/sarcasm

<comment><USER5> Okay, how would you implement that, exactly?

<comment><USER4> To be honest, I'm not sure. I'm not an expert in crime, prison, or socially integrating people back into society. I would start with listening to experts who have methods with reproducible results, however, which is something the US typically doesn't do when it comes to these issues.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> This is a direct result of the "tough on crime" laws from the 90's, combined with the fact that we treat our convicted felons like human trash. Ridiculous sentences for low level, non-violent offenses turn people who did one dumb thing one weekend into hard criminals, and then we throw them on the street with a twenty dollar bill and nothing else, prevent them from getting work at every opportunity, and wonder why the end up committing more crime.

And on top of all of that, there's NO evidence that higher sentences and harsher punishments have any effect on the overall crime rates.</comment>


Here are all 400 pages of the FCC's net neutrality rules - <AUTHOR> http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2015/03/12/here-are-all-400-pages-of-the-fccs-net-neutrality-rules/

<comment><USER2> The actual rules are in the 8 page appendix A which starts on page 283 of the PDF.

</comment><comment><USER3> [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9191007](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9191007)</comment>


GoPro Files For IPO - <AUTHOR> http://techcrunch.com/2014/02/07/gopro-files-for-ipo-as-the-action-camera-maker-prepares-to-go-public/ <comment><USER2> GoPro's an interesting company. Conventional wisdom would say that the market for dedicated mobile cameras is getting eaten up by general-purpose mobile devices. Think of what happened to Flip. And, yet, they seem to be thriving.

Anyway: They seem to have a good product and they definitely have been great at creating/expanding a new and distinct niche for mobile photography -- one not easily serviced by iPhones and other mobile devices.

So: Congrats!

<comment><USER3> I think the wisdom is "the market for dedicated _general-purpose_ mobile cameras is getting eaten up by general-purpose mobile devices", and Flip didn't have a compelling niche.

On the other hand, GoPro cameras have a reputation for usability in some very extreme situations, use cases outside of the smartphone story (if you are going to mount a device on your helmet or elsewhere, you better hope that it can withstand the elements and a crash or two

<comment><USER4> Flip's compelling niche was that it was easy to get the pictures off the camera. But as easy as an integrated USB plug is to use, wireless is even easier.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> My understanding is that they have difficulty with customer retention. Many people are drawn in by the amazing videos on youtube only to find

1) Video editing is tedious and often greatly underestimated.

2) Their product usability is wanting. I have both a v1 and v2, I still have to read the manual to figure out what the different modes are.

3) Battery life has been disappointing and I understand the v3 has issues too.

I've heard first hand evidence from insiders that loyal customer retention is a big challenge. Growing out of the niche they're in is hard to envisage.

<comment><USER6> I think the biggest killer for me has been battery life.

Video editing isn't that bad if you know what you're doing or willing to put in time to learn.

There aren't _that_ many different modes, you can pick most of it up in 15 minutes of looking at the manual (which is probably worth doing with anything you're spending $300+ for.

The battery life though - it's a bummer to be out in the middle of nowhere & expecting to capture some awesome footage to come home & realize that your camera crapped out halfway through.

<comment><USER7> Battery life is indeed bad. My advice:

\- Turn off WiFi. This drains battery faster than just having the camera record everything.

\- Take only "snippets". This makes editing easier later anyways, since it's usually more convenient to browse through smaller files than through one big long video over an hour. I try to keep every snippet < 1 minute. Most of the time, only 3-5 seconds of one snippet end up in my final video to give it a fast pace anyways.

\- Keep a spare battery pack.

But I have to admit that this won't help you a lot, if you're in difficult situations where you can't easily change batteries (under water for long periods of time, climbing somewhere, flying, driving).

<comment><USER8> I've been thinking about buy one - do you mind giving some details about approximately how long I can expect the battery to last in each of your scenarios above? Thanks.

<comment><USER9> Time to flat, when recoding, from [1]:

Garmin VIRB Elite #1: 2:21 (Marketed: 3:00)

Garmin VIRB Elite #2: 2:24 (Marketed: 3:00)

Garmin VIRB Regular: 2:36 (Marketed: 2:36)

JVC GC-XA2: 1hr 51m (Marketed: 1:48)

GoPro Hero3 Black: 1:29 (Marketed: 1:30)

Sony AS-30: 2:11 (Marketed: 2:40)

Pyle HD PSCHD60WT: 2:54 (Marketed: "More than 2 hours")

My Hero3 Black lasts well under an hour with WiFi enabled. I believe the Hero3+ is better - they claim 30% better because of software optimisation and a bigger battery.

I don't find recoding resolution makes a big difference.

[1] [http://www.dcrainmaker.com/2013/12/garmin-depth- review.html](http://www.dcrainmaker.com/2013/12/garmin-depth-review.html)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Nothing to do with the IPO but I found the Hero3 both hard to learn and operate. Maybe I'm spoiled by user friendly tech, but it seems the compromises in usability to achieve durability severely limits the ability for an average person to use the product. The tiny control interface and cryptic symbols required much time in the tiny but dense instruction booklet.

I was only helping a family member (as the resident family geek) but was left with the impression that it would take a solid weekend (or three) to fully understand the options and how best to get the footage you want.

To contrast I have a "tough" Lumix digital camera which is water, drop and generally abuse resistant that is drop dead easy to use, records in high-def and also has a large LCD and dedicated record/photo buttons that make operating it easy. And I'm not talking about normal recording conditions, I've used both extensively on the trail, in the cold (winters in Maine) and mounted on various vehicles and body parts.

I do think the reasoning behind many of these inconveniences is _toughness_ but the net result is a very difficult product.

/rant

<comment><USER11> To be fair, I always thought the Contour was miles ahead in form factor and usability, it's a shame that they weren't able to continue to compete with GoPro.

Edit: a couple of links:

[http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-08-21/three- lesson...](http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-08-21/three-lessons-in- the-wipeout-of-contour-cameras)

[http://www.geekwire.com/2013/investor-plans-revive- contour-r...](http://www.geekwire.com/2013/investor-plans-revive-contour- reaches-deal-buy-gopro-rival-19-million/)

<comment><USER12> I actually bought a Contour before I ended up selling it to get a GoPro 3 Black. The video quality just wasn't comparable at all. The laser level was a great concept, but the WiFi viewfinder is far easier to use, despite sucking down battery like there's no tomorrow.

There were 3 things I really liked on the Contour, though: the standard tripod screw on the bottom (that's an extra accessory on the GoPro), the battery life was far better, and the model I had was able to withstand a few feet of water without a big bulky case. (Snorkeling/swimming okay, SCUBA not.)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> 1\. I heard somewhere that GoPro hasn't produced any video for it's own marketing material - they just leverage user generated content. (genius)

2\. This company is going to get really interesting when it starts to compete with YT/Vimeo in specific verticals for video publishing. ([http://gopro.com/channel](http://gopro.com/channel))

<comment><USER14> 1) They do. I have friends that work for GoPro. They fly all around the world shooting video for ads. I am extremely jealous of their jobs.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> Interesting what causes a successful company to file an IPO?

I understand why some do it, they've reached a point where they need funding to scale and already have many private investors. Maybe thats not even right.

When I start a company one day I dont think I will ever want to take in public. It seems like you loose too much control over where you are going. Maybe its because I am a build what our customer want type person and not a lets return value to our shareholder by delivering a cheaper product type. Maybe that doesnt make sense.

<comment><USER16> If you want to stay private forever and always have full founder control, then you should never offer stock based compensation (maybe profit sharing instead) or have plan to cash out that stock based compensation in the future, that you communicate when you hire people.

<comment><USER17> It depends how you structure the plan. Publix is an example of a privately controlled* company that has wide employee stock ownership.

*the stock is held by a small group of owners and many employees. Transfers are limited by contract and by securities laws. Because of the large number of shareholders, the company does have to file periodic reports with the SEC but the shares are not listed on an exchange and not available to the public. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Publix#Publix_stock](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Publix#Publix_stock)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Not reported here, but they recently (i.e. a few months ago) brought their software consultants (General Things: [http://generalthings.com/](http://generalthings.com/)) in-house. General Things did all the work behind the GoPro website, and I always thought it was a bit odd that a company so big had almost completely outsourced web dev. Once they acquired General Things, an IPO seemed a foregone conclusion. Congrats all!

</comment><comment><USER19> The Russians have been using GoPros during the last couple of spacewalks they did (to install the earth observation cameras on the ISS). They have the regular helmet cams, but also a GoPro around their wrist in a little white box.

I'm not sure if they're 'stock' GoPro cameras. The temperature extremes are nothing to sniff at.

<comment><USER20> But... there is no temperature in space: [http://www.universetoday.com/77070/how-cold-is- space/](http://www.universetoday.com/77070/how-cold-is-space/)

<comment><USER21> > But... there is no temperature in space ...

That's misleading (and the linked article offers no support for your claim). A vacuum has no temperature, but objects in space certainly do have a temperature and all the normal thermodynamic rules apply.

If what you said were true, you could safely approach the sun as long as you didn't come into contact with it. But that's not true.

In the neighborhood of the non-planet Pluto, the median temperature is just 33 Kelvins.

In the extremes of space, between the stars, the temperature of an object falls to the CMB ([http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_microwave_background](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_microwave_background)), about 2.7 Kelvins.

The linked article makes the same points.

<comment><USER20> Of course. The way I think about it is this: when you go for a space walk, first you are inside the airlock where the temperature is about our usual 293 K or so. Now, you suck all the air out and are in a vacuum. You are insulated, except if you are touching another object, and the heat you are losing through radiating it. So the question is: given a GoPro camera strapped to your wrist, and say, a 30 minute space walk, what temperature will it be once you are back in the airlock and before you pump all the air back in? My hunch is that it will be pretty darn high. After all, it is connected to your wrist, and the inside of your space suite must be at least above 273 K for you to be able to do anything.

<comment><USER21> > So the question is: given a GoPro camera strapped to your wrist, and say, a > 30 minute space walk, what temperature will it be once you are back in the > airlock and before you pump all the air back in? My hunch is that it will be > pretty darn high.

Think about this. One of a spacesuit's key features is that it uses insulation to protect the astronaut from the temperature of space (meaning those objects, however distant, that exchange heat energy with the spacesuit via radiation). This means the spacesuit's exterior will quickly rise or fall to the temperature of its environment. That, in turn, means the GoPro camera will also rise or fall to the temperature extremes of its environment.

So, if the astronaut is located in a shadowed environment -- let's say on the moon -- the spacesuit exterior and the GoPro camera will fall close to the temperature of space, or the temperature of the shadowed areas of the moon:

[http://www.nature.com/news/2009/091217/full/news.2009.1149.h...](http://www.nature.com/news/2009/091217/full/news.2009.1149.html)

Quote: "Previous findings had identified the Moon as the coldest place in the Solar System, but the latest results push the temperature even lower, all the way to 26 kelvin ..."

The above refers to the shadowed areas of the moon. Pretty damn cold. :)

But -- if the astronaut walks around in the sunlit parts of the moon, the temperature will be very high. My point is the astronaut's temperature inside the suit isn't the issue, and the more efficient the suit, the less its external temperature reflects that of its occupant.

So the GoPro camera would have to tolerate a very wide temperature range.

> After all, it is connected to your wrist, and the inside of your space suite > must be at least above 273 K for you to be able to do anything.

A spacesuit that externally radiated any significant energy at room temperature would be a very poor design indeed. And the GoPro camera isn't attached to the astronaut's wrist, it's attached to the spacesuit wrist area.

<comment><USER20> I understand what you are saying about things like the Moon, Pluto, etc. If a bury a thermometer on the moon, and dig it up 5 minutes later, it will be very cold.

But we are talking about a space walk here. Let's phrase the question this way: if I have a 1 kg mass of plastic and metal in some proportion and I throw it out of the airlock with the initial temperature of 293 K, what will its temperature be 30 minutes later if it was (a) in the shadow and (b) in the sunlight? This is a different case than being in contact with a hot or cold satellite or planet. It's a rate problem. If we assume a near-perfect vacuum, the only heat going in and out is via radiation. So the question is, how fast does a hunk of metal/plastic radiate heat at 293 K.

Now, the radiation heat transfer out of a black body will be: q = σ T^4 A, where q is the Watts of heat transferred, σ is the Boltzman constant, T is the temperature in Kelvin, and A is the surface area. Roughly: 5.6703e-8 x 293 x 0.1 for a GoPro camera. That's 1.66e-6 Watts, or 1.66 microwatts. That's a pretty damn low transfer rate: we are talking about roughly 3 mJ of energy lost over 30 minutes.

Now, the delta T here is equal to Q/(mC), where Q is our 0.003 Joules, m is the mass, 0.135 kilograms, and C is the specific heat. The specific heat is tricky but let's assume this thing is made out of copper: 390 J/(K kg). That gives us a delta T of, drum roll please, 5.7e-5 degrees. So assuming we are in the shade and are not touching cold objects, the GoPro will come back at the exact temperature it left after a 30 minute space walk.

We can of course figure out what it will be in the sun, where I expect it'll heat up quite a bit, which is probably the more dangerous thing for a piece of equipment. The equations are nearly the same.

<comment><USER21> > Let's phrase the question this way: if I have a 1 kg mass of plastic and > metal in some proportion and I throw it out of the airlock with the initial > temperature of 293 K, what will its temperature be 30 minutes later if it > was (a) in the shadow and (b) in the sunlight?

To answer, I have to say first that radiation is a much more efficient way to transfer heat energy than convection, and in some contexts it rivals conduction. If it's in shadow, exposed to space and not the sun, the object in your thought experiment will radiate most of its heat energy rather quickly, and will ultimately fall to a temperature near the CMB, i.e. 2.7 Kelvins.

> Now, the radiation heat transfer out of a black body will be: q = σ T^4 A, > where q is the Watts of heat transferred, σ is the Boltzman constant, T is > the temperature in Kelvin, and A is the surface area. Roughly: 5.6703e-8 x > 293 x 0.1 for a GoPro camera. That's 1.66e-6 Watts.

In your calculation, you failed to take the fourth power of the temperature.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black- body_radiation#Stefan.E2....](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black- body_radiation#Stefan.E2.80.93Boltzmann_law)

j = σ T^4 (j = radiated power watts)

= 5.67 * 10^−8 * 295^4 Watts from a "unit square", presumably a square meter, or about 430 watts.

Remember that three-dimensional objects lose their heat energy more quickly as they become smaller in size (because their dimensions decrease proportional to the square of their dimensions, but their volume declines as the cube). This means the GoPro camera, initially at room temperature, exposed to space would radiate away its heat energy very quickly.

The linked article suggests that a person (at body temperature and in a normal earthly environment) radiates away a net power of about 100 watts. Remember about this figure that is is a net (radiation minus absorption) for a person of about 2 square meters surface area at room temperature.

If we calculate the example of a person exposed to space (in shadow) directly without any heat inflow, the radiated power would be about 860 watts.

If a person were shaped like a GoPro camera (with the same density) and we scaled it down proportionally, the rate of heat loss would increase (even though the power would decrease) for reasons given above. That consumer camera would not be long for this world -- in fact, it would probably expire faster than the hapless human in the above example.

> So assuming we are in the shade and are not touching cold objects, the GoPro > will come back at the exact temperature it left after a 30 minute space > walk.

Do take the fourth power of temperature. See how that turns out. :)

<comment><USER20> Ha! You are totally right. Yes, at 430 Watts we are talking about substantial heat transfer. Without getting into the calculus, if we approximate that the heat transfer will stay constant for a short period of time, then in the first second, we will lose roughly 8.2 degrees. Yup, you are correct, the thing will be damn cold.

<comment><USER21> Believe me, I'm not gloating. I can't count the number of times I've drawn a bogus conclusion after missing a critical calculation step.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> This is a big win for hardware startups! Showing that being a cash cow and having sustainable growth is signaling the market that the startup hardware revolution is upon us.

<comment><USER23> Completely agree which makes it such an awesome IPO. I'm really blown away by the popularity of their cameras. They seem like a really creative bunch so it'll be cool to see what's next.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> GoPro is like Apple for fans; screw the price; I'm getting one anyways!

As of whether there are better solutions or not, I cannot attest. I will however tell you that a friend of mine working at BestBuy (Florida) told me they sell those like crazy. It is normal to sell five cameras a week from all major brands combined. It is normal to sell five of GoPros a day!

Their product seem top notch and going around reviews, they mostly seem to confirm. I am not sure, however what will they do with a buffer or cash? Their approach is we wont screw people over X amount of years and introduce new things into our devices; we go all the way in in version 1. That's goPro. Where will they go from here, not sure...

<comment><USER25> _GoPro is like Apple for fans; screw the price; I 'm getting one anyways!_

Actually GoPro (& related action cameras) customers are probably very interested in expensive sports/hobbies. Many motorcyclists have one, and if you're interested in that you'll be spending a lot of money on the bike, the equipement, servicing, insurance, etc. So what's €300 for a camera?

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> Next, GoPro announces Google Glass competitor for recording video and taking pictures.

<comment><USER27> There's actually a company exactly trying to fill that niche called Recon

[http://www.fastcompany.com/3018645/fast-feed/this-google- gla...](http://www.fastcompany.com/3018645/fast-feed/this-google-glass- competitor-has-already-shipped-50000-devices)

[http://www.reconinstruments.com/products/jet/](http://www.reconinstruments.com/products/jet/)

<comment><USER28> Jet Recon looks very promising, but professional cyclists will probably not consider it until they iterate on the design and improve peripheral vision. Proper cycling glasses have unobstructed peripheral vision on the left/bottom/right, and sometimes even top. This is where Google glass slightly edges the Recon Jet, but the Recon Jet looks to have far more stabilization for sporting than the Google Glass.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> Beyond the fact that they have an amazing product, a good chunk of their success is due to phenomenal user-generated content. I can't think of any other recent company that has better user-generated marketing than GoPro.

<comment><USER30> Yep, so good 5 years ago I built a site to try and catalog the best ones! [http://goproheroes.com](http://goproheroes.com)

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> I've seen _a lot_ of advertising around GoPro lately, even on TV shows that normally have nothing to do with it. Now it's explained.

<comment><USER32> The latest spot with Red Bulls Stratos made me think: where do you want to go from there? We've seen those things can handle a jump from space. You can't do that. Nobody can do that anymore. This is the ultimate thing. Everything else we've seen already. All those crazy base jumps, flight suits, whatever.

There is nothing more to get there.

How do you sell a new product based on this??

<comment><USER31> They have been just iterating over basically the same product for a while. I don't think they will introduce any "new" product, just upgraded version with higher resolution, more FPS, etc.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Tangent: Why does _everything_ have autoplay videos these days? It's like we're going back to the terrible days of geocities.

</comment><comment><USER33> wow he is a fellow UCSD alumni, respect.

" featuresBack to SchoolA Full Ride to Fulfill DreamsThe Best Ride of Our LivesGame ChangerBeyond the Brew

The Best Ride of Our Lives

Nick Woodman still remembers the day he decided to become a surfer. He was eight years old, standing in his friend Brian's bedroom. Brian's family had a house in Hawaii, and his walls in California were plastered with tearouts from Surfer magazine depicting palm trees, beautiful people, and the curling turquoise waves of the North Shore.

"I didn't even know that world existed," recalls Woodman, Muir '97, who grew up surrounded by tech startups in the wealthy Silicon Valley community of Atherton. "But from then on, I knew I wanted to live in that world."

Thirty years later, Woodman is still in Silicon Valley, but he's tan and fit and has a cheeky freckled grin that suggests he's living the good life. He should be grinning. He's the founder and CEO of GoPro—one of the world's fastest growing camera companies, now worth an estimated $2.25 billion. He's created a device that helps people capture and share their passions from the North Shore and way beyond.

It started as a durable wrist-mounted camera for surfers to record their feats in the lineup—effectively helping them "go pro." Now the palm-size cameras, which sell from $200 to $400, can be fastened to helmets, handlebars, ski poles, and, yes, surfboards to document experiences both ordinary and extraordinary. Last October, the Austrian daredevil Felix Baumgartner—equipped with five GoPros—jumped from 24 miles above the earth's surface, breaking the world record for the highest and fastest freefall, and broadcasting it live for all to see. A few months later, the cameras were streaming 30-foot waves at the Mavericks Invitational surf contest in Half Moon Bay, Calif., and a few days after that, snowboard slides and backside airs at the Winter X Games in Aspen, Colo. For GoPro, this is every-day R&D. "

</comment><comment><USER34> I'm watching the Olympic Opening Ceremonies right now and a lot of athletes are walking in filming with GoPros- in past years it's been iPhones and other cell phones. They probably got them in goody bags, but still it's a pretty good sign.

</comment><comment><USER28> Anyone know when the GoPro Hero4 is expected? What is GoPro's release cycle?

</comment><comment><USER35> Now it makes sense why they were all up on 60 Minutes last November.

</comment><comment><USER36> I love GoPros and I wish the company well.

My favorite GoPro video is this:

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q2AfsBrpwRQ#t=1m10s](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q2AfsBrpwRQ#t=1m10s)

Skip to 1 minute, 10 seconds if it doesn't place you there automatically.

</comment><comment><USER37> ipo's keep making my rent go higher. Can't afford a house.

</comment><comment><USER38> They put cameras on the helmets? good enough to file an IPO...

<comment><USER39> They put cameras everywhere and sell a ton of them for quite a bit of money. Makes a lot more sense than losing money shoving 140 characters around the globe...

Check out their YouTube channel for examples of what their customers do with their cameras. It's pretty amazing.

[https://www.youtube.com/gopro](https://www.youtube.com/gopro)

<comment><USER40> We mount them in various locations on our aircraft during tests. GoPros have nice experimental science applications when you need a rugged camera with an integrated stable mount.</comment></comment></comment>