Bitcoin Drops Back Below $6,000 as 2018 Loss Approaches 60% - <AUTHOR> https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-06-27/bitcoin-drops-back-below-6-000-as-2018-loss-approaches-60 <comment><USER2> How do you value BTC? What is a fair price? $1m? $2m? $5bn? $10tn? Do you have a valuation methodology?

My biggest issue with BTC is that it's subject to how the market feels about it. There's no cash flow. When I buy USD, I can by 2yr treasuries yielding ~2.5%.

<comment><USER3> It's been said many times before, but as digital gold. Gold is worth about $8tn. That puts it at about an 80x multiple from where it is today. But let's be "conservative" and put a 20 to 40x estimate on it, from where it is.

It's obviously an assumption, not a sure thing. But the only thing that needs to happen is people sharing the belief that it is and/or can become digital gold, which is quite peculiar.

If large stable investors buy in (pension funds, endowments, etc) that will help massively to support price levels, after a period of value growth.

<comment><USER2> The same arguments I used above can also be applied to gold. Gold is intrinsically hard to value. So pricing BTC off gold feels tenuous to me.

Gold also has non-monetary use (i.e. jewellery) which I imagine is a substantial portion of demand.

5+ years ago, I used to be really into gold when I used to read Zerohedge. I feel like I'm hearing similar arguments for crypto currencies vs. fiat as back then when I read up on gold vs. fiat. People were fanatical about gold (me included) and weren't objective.

I owned shares in gold miners. I got burnt and lost a whole bunch of money. So personally I'm sticking to investments which produce cash flow.

As they say, "History doesn't repeat itself, but it does rhyme." I had better learn from my mistakes.

<comment><USER4> If you owned shares in gold mines and got burned, it had nothing to do with the value of the gold itself. The price of gold has seen a steady upward trend over the past ~17 years at least (that's how long I've been looking at it, anyway).

<comment><USER5> Adjust for inflation and look at the trend starting from the 17 years before that.

<comment><USER4> "adjust for inflation" on a 300% increase? Are you looking at a different graph than I am? Perhaps I don't understand what I'm looking at. Could you walk me through your reasoning?

<comment><USER5> Sure. Google "inflation adjusted price of gold since 1980". Or view [https://b-i.forbesimg.com/rickferri/files/2013/04/GoldFig22....](https://b-i.forbesimg.com/rickferri/files/2013/04/GoldFig22.jpg)

The giant saddle does seem to support the idea that gold is hard to value.

Then the next search phrase to look up is "inflation adjusted price of gold since 2011". It's not a pretty chart. I would not use the words "steady upward trend" to describe it. "Steady downward trend", maybe.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I bought BTC when it was 15$. I bought again at 17k and bought at 6k and really don't care what the price of btc is today tomorrow or next week. I understand how easy it can be to call someone an idiot in restrospect when everything is down, but you have to know too that some people don't really care where it is _now_ and is just interested in where it go few years from now.

It is like calling people idiot because they bought btc @ 1000$ and then it dropped @ 360$. I really don't think those who bought at 1k are idiots but that's just my opinion and it's OK if other people have different opinion than mine.

Warm vibes.

<comment><USER2> How do you value BTC? What is a fair price? $1m? $2m? $5bn? $10tn?

Do you have a valuation methodology?

My biggest issue with BTC is that it's subject to how the market feels about it. There's no cash flow. When I buy USD, I can by 2yr treasuries yielding ~2.5%.

<comment><USER2> Ouch - I was downvoted when i felt like I made some reasonable arguments without attacking anyone. Why was I downvoted?

<comment><USER7> You're challenging the conventional wisdom about how valuable Bitcoin is.

The way I see it, cryptocurrency gets a lot of its "value" from emotion--it signifies what people _want_ to be true. Cryptocurrency is, in some ways, a dream incarnate. It's backed by nothing except the dreams of those who believe in it--and energy expenditure (if one believes that).

It's like a religion: Challenge the faith and you will be burned as a heretic, so-to-speak. I think that has a lot to do with why rational comments are down- voted so much on HN. You're assuming the discourse is rational when it is actually quite emotional. Cognitive dissonance abounds.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Don't buy Bitcoin. It's going to crash: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XbZ8zDpX2Mg](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XbZ8zDpX2Mg)

<comment><USER9> I don't always buy bitcoin but when I buy it crashes

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Just for a second give thought to those who purchased bitcoin when it was at 18k.

<comment><USER11> Okay. The thought is "bloody morons".

<comment><USER12> That's cold blooded. I'm sure a lot of good people were financially devastated by that poor decision. A hopelessly bleak existence can do a lot to your capacity for rational thought. A few people I know asked me if I thought they should invest in Bitcoin at the time. I'm thankful my answer was consistently 'nope'!

<comment><USER13> > That's cold blooded.

Maybe, maybe not. For those that have never experienced a financial "lesson in violence" before, investing in Bitcoin is the equivalent of touching some strange shiny object that fell from the sky only to find out that the reason it's glowing is because it's bloody hot. Sometimes it takes the burnt flesh hanging off a bloodied stump to learn that maybe strange new objects that fall from the sky are to be avoided in the first instance, no matter how shiny they look.

To be honest, given the world we live in, and the knowledge that exists around basic investing principles I'm surprised that some people are surprised at how much they've lost.

For me, this just proves (yet again) that the human desire to get rich quickly is incredibly powerful and easily trumps logic and rational thought.

For the record, and just so people don't think I'm heartless, I lost $20K of savings back in 1989 In an institution whose interest rates were (on hindsight) obviously too good to be true. I was 23. The company was called Pyramid (yes, really. Australian)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> The BTC chart since last year looks very much like a classic bubble / burst sequence. Build up, running up to a hyperbolic frenzy, then precipitous drop, followed by long decline of lower highs and lower lows. This seems to be only punctuated by significant buys just around psychologically important 'support levels', which correspond with the several credible articles I've read about Tether coin being used to manipulate the currency.

The chatter is always about the next 'support level', and it always gets broken. I'm expecting it to slide down well into three digits (<= USD$ 999) before any real recovery, if there is one. The real use cases are materializing much slower than expected as the scaling issues and transaction times increase.

Edit: (& BTW, I'm a generally enthusiastic supporter of the cryptocoin concepts, just noticing that it is apparently much harder to really get there than originally thought)

</comment><comment> m-i-l There's fairly strong evidence that the rise from $6K to $18K was primarily the result of market manipulation [0], so in some senses it isn't a crash more like returning to normality. Although there is so much market manipulation going on it is hard to tell what normality is, e.g. the rise from $150 to $1K between Sep to Nov 2013 was due to the markus and willy bots [1]. That's one of the problems with a completely unregulated market where almost all the wealth has become concentrated in the hands of a few largely anonymous players.

[0] [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17302054](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17302054)

[1] [http://uk.businessinsider.com/one-or-two-traders-may-have- ca...](http://uk.businessinsider.com/one-or-two-traders-may-have-caused-the- price-of-bitcoin-to-rise-700-2018-1)

</comment><comment><USER15> Markets for speculative assets and commodities are generally down, and the dollar is up. So what do you expect?

</comment><comment><USER16> So everyone thinks that cause Bitcoin is down from its high that it was a bad investment? The top has been reached and it's all downhill from here?

Nobody who invested 1+ years ago is down so save your judgements for the future.

<comment><USER17> I just don't understand what the purpose of Bitcoin is. Everyone seems to be treating it as an investment, but its use as a currency doesn't seem to have obvious advantages over cash. Its value fluctuates wildly, transaction processing takes forever, every purchase you make is public record, the price is easily manipulated, and it takes a ton of electricity to operate.

What's the end goal of Bitcoin? What makes it worth investing in?

<comment><USER18> Greater fool theory; "I'm buying this thing early, so that when it hits the mainstream a load of naive people will buy it and boost my value". That has probably largely passed now, though; I see train station ads to buy bitcoin all the time.

I'd be somewhat surprised if it ever goes back to its beginning-of-year heights.

<comment><USER19> There might come one last hype cycle when/if the rest of the world (EU) enters a mainstream BTC hype. The last one was mostly US.

Or the network could collapse to 0 before.

<comment><USER20> Bitcoin was quite a hype in the EU around December last year, with it being talked about in bars, at the hairdresser etc. And people putting all their money in of course.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> If I'm honest I'm a surprised it hasn't fallen further, the only practical use seems to be buying drugs and it's not ideal for that.

<comment><USER22> This is a very one sided view on things. I regularly use BTC as alternative for international payments. It's cheaper, faster, more secure and honestly it feels nice to not pay into the hands of visa and master.

Namecheap and FastTech.com being 2 big examples, as well as 2 of 3 of the hosting companies I use accept it.

Not to mention that alternative chains like Eth very well have a practical real world use outside if monetary value.

Edit:// I also order pizza and Chinese with Bitcoin like once a week. Saved me plenty of fees compared to other prepayment methods.

<comment><USER18> So, current average fee is about a dollar. Plus you have to pay probably at least 1% to buy it, and the vendor has to pay similar to sell it again, and accept significant exchange risk. I struggle to see how this works out cheaper than, say, paying namecheap with a credit card...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> Bitcoin is a pathetic way to boost Global Warming so that a bunch of Chinese miners can separate Westerners from their wealth!</comment>


Ask HN: Which cloud provider to use in 2016? AWS or GCE? - <AUTHOR> Few years ago, I would have chosen AWS over GCE. Now, I am starting new project and need to reexamine which cloud provider to use. If you are starting new project in 2016, which cloud provider do you choose? AWS or GCE? They both seems to provide the services I need such as database, storage, scalability etc.<p>Correction: I meant to say Google Cloud Platform instead of GCE. <comment><USER2> If you have to pick one, GCE hands down. AWS has more features but is more expensive and more operationally complex. GCE may have less features, but the ones it has are better thought out and the user experience is in a league of it's own. Also keep in mind that if for some reason you want to take advantage of something like Amazon's video transcoding service, nothing says you have to build 100% of your app on a single provider's services.

<comment><USER3> GCE is less expensive than AWS for on-demand instances, but not compared to AWS's RIs.

Unless there's a specific feature that you need in GCP, AWS is a safer bet from scalability, stability, support and cost.

GCE has an edge on performance, per minute billing, custom machine types, and some datacenters in areas AWS doesn't cover, however they're learning how to be a public cloud, so you will run into beta level bugs, scalability issues, support issues (they also limit how many people can open a ticket in your org), and stability problems. If you do go GCP, make sure you have a rep and a high level support contract, otherwise it's going to be hard when you run into issues.

<comment><USER4> GCE is less expensive than AWS even with AWS's long-term contracts. If you pay money upfront (losing the interest) and reserve instances for 3 years, then you can beat GCE prices by a small margin. But, if you take into consideration of interest on upfront capital expense, lost flexibility due to reserved instances, cloud cost cuts, GCE beats AWS even with the 3-year commitment. We go to Cloud because Cloud gives us agility and enables us to create infrastructure in a matter of minutes without any constraints (Imagine singing up a contract with your electricity company agreeing that you will consume the electricity for TV for 3 years on a 24x7 basis. That what reserving capacity looks like). Reserving capacity does not belong to the age of Cloud, it belongs to the age of data centers.

<comment><USER5> > Reserving capacity does not belong to the age of Cloud, it belongs to the > age of data centers.

Nice, I really like that way of putting it. The promise of the Cloud is, indeed, that it is supposed to abstract you from that, but Reserved Instances reveal what is actually happening behind the curtain.

<comment><USER4> Yep, that's true. Capacity planning and reserving capacity should be taken care by the Cloud provider and users should be free to spin up and down the resources as and when they need them.

<comment><USER6> This is still the case, but I don't see the harm in offering the ability to reserve an instance for a discount. I prefer GCE's automatically applied discounts to AWS's reserved scheme, but there are plenty of cases where you will need both flexible capacity and have predicted use.

k8s master, or any number of internal tools.

<comment><USER4> > I don't see the harm in offering the ability to reserve an instance for a > discount.

There is no harm with the discount. The harm is only with lock in. Once you reserve instances, you can not change the type (different CPU / memory ratio), region or the number of instances. Once you reserve, you have to pay for your instances 24x7, whether you use it or not. If you require more capacity than reserved, you need to pay the full rate. If you require less capacity, then you need to pay for the unused capacity. You don't have all these headaches with Google Cloud pay per go and automatic discounts. You simply use as many resources as you want and you get the discounts automatically.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I've been using AWS for years, but the recent downtime for GCE got me to take a look at what Google was offering. (Makes no sense right? All publicity is good publicity?)

I was blown away by the UX of both the console and the instances themselves. Example: when you add a new user/public key in the console, it propagates to instances automatically. Sure, you could do that yourself, but the default features are just really nice to have.

<comment><USER3> You have to run their images however, but yeah, that's a nice feature esp. if your org uses GA already.

<comment><USER8> For users that are using their own images, we also provide source for all our customization to the images so you can integrate functionality into yours as required.

The code used on Linux to integrate the OS with the platform for ssh keys, startup script, auto-expanding root-disk, etc: [https://github.com/GoogleCloudPlatform/compute-image- package...](https://github.com/GoogleCloudPlatform/compute-image-packages)

For Windows, ssh keys aren't supported, however the platform has password reset built-in and starter scripts via metadata are also supported. Here's the code for the Windows agent: [https://github.com/GoogleCloudPlatform/compute- image-windows](https://github.com/GoogleCloudPlatform/compute-image-windows)

If running Windows, you will also need device drivers: [https://github.com/GoogleCloudPlatform/compute-windows- drive...](https://github.com/GoogleCloudPlatform/compute-windows-drivers)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Google Cloud wins hands down!

Places where Google Cloud shines over AWS: Excellent UI, Ease of use, Scalability, Security, Data services, Big Data, Machine Learning, Network, Disks. The only place where Google loses to AWS is Relational Databases.

Google Cloud Network and SSDs are about an order of magnitude better (in terms of performance / price) compared to AWS Network and SSDs. Googles Big Data tools (BigQuery, PubSub, Bigtable, Dataflow) can scale to petabyte scale without any problem. AWS can be OK for terabyte scale data workloads, but beyond that, it's hard to scale and manage. Other pieces like Kubernetes, TensorFlow and Dataflow (Opensource, if you want to run in-house) and available as native Cloud services, all services are fully managed makes Google Cloud the best Cloud.

<comment><USER9> I am very interested about Google Cloud and Machine Learning. Did you try to use other libraries than TensorFlow? What is your experience?

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> I think it's a complex question.

AWS is far ahead in terms of maturity of the service, breadth of services, ecosystem support.

On the other hand, Google Compute Platform is "up and coming", and in general it is trying to attract customers by offering lower-than-AWS prices on most comparable services.

AWS is also a safer bet. At the same time, Google is big enough that betting on it is not as risky as betting on another "startuppy" provider.

<comment><USER11> GCE is pretty much based on Google internal technologies and infrastructure. They had a low profile on GCE, they services are more hand picked, but it's a mature and complete service offering.

<comment><USER12> And in general, the comparable GCE offerings are LIGHTYEARS ahead in performance.

Compare instance launch times. Compare internal network performance.

I just cannot fathom using AWS for a new project. I guess if you MUST have some of the SAAS apps built on top of AWS and don't want to consider how you would run the same thing on GCE... but I think GCE would be a fantastic default cloud for 90% of people.

<comment><USER13> Do you have benchmarks on that? Not my experience for network speeds and CPU of individual machines but it's been 6 months since I checked.

<comment><USER4> Google Network and SSDs offer an order of magnitude more performance / price. Disks and Storage are about 2 times fast. Booting is 5 times fast.

Not just the performance, all Google Cloud services are fully managed (Think of S3 and Lambda on AWS). No servers! On AWS, only a couple of services are fully managed. Rest of them are a thin layer on top of EC2. If AWS is DevOps, Google Cloud is NoOps.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> How do HN commenters rank Azure amongst the three? I like the UI/portals quite a bit, but haven't explored any of the 3 major cloud providers in great detail.

<comment><USER15> Serious question: have you had to _use_ the Azure portal for anything?

Like much enterprise software, the new side-scrolling mess which hides necessary information has the distinct smell of something that was built to sell on golf courses to clueless middle and upper management, and not for people who actually need to do the work. The load times are horrible because of the number of HTTP requests and the weight of their payloads, making it practically unusable on, say, plane wifi or tethering outside of LTE service.

Practically this might not be the worst thing ever, because it might encourage people to describe their infrastructure as code instead of a pointy-clicky mess, but sadly this still appears to be outside the Microsoft-blessed way to do things - so most never will.

<comment><USER14> No, not for anything serious. I get some free credits every month for being a student, so I've used it minimally for configuring a few things for hobbyist projects, but I have never used it in production ready environments. Thank you for your perspective!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> I work with 40+ partner companies, and they are all using AWS. Moving big data sets around is cheap and super easy. And, it's not been very expensive to process large data sets on AWS. On average, I crunch through 20 TiB for like $50 a pop.

Given that no company that I work with uses Google's cloud, I'm curious who is using it. They're marking hard obviously. Makes me wonder what's an ad and what's not.

<comment><USER17> Off the top of my head, Spotify, Apple, and Snapchat run at least some part of their businesses on Google Cloud products.

<comment><USER18> So practically nobody ;) These are just garage firms.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> AWS, hands down. They're years ahead, and the support is just as lousy.

<comment><USER20> Serious question, when would you need to use support? I always wonder that when people say Microsoft is better than Linux because it has support, but actually I've never had a time when I needed Linux support.....

<comment><USER21> I've had to use their support many times for many complex problems around things like networking, outages, feature requests, and so on. It is truly a mixed bag. They have highly competent people working there. The problem is, they have layered in an intentionally incompetent tier of people in front of them. That's support.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> It depends on your state and needs. It's a no brainer if the majority of your customers are in a specific region where AWS has a nearby datacenter or when you need some specific service from AWS like DynamoDb, IAM, CloudFormation, ActiveDirectory, Workspaces etc.

GCE is preferred for any kind of big data or analytics scenario. It's a cheaper service with way better networking or disk io, fit's very well for an engineering oriented organisation. Per minute pricing or very fast scaling of the services are huge advantages.

</comment><comment><USER22> We thought a lot about this question to pick a cloud for Quizlet (~200 cloud machines) and ended up going with GCP. Here's a summary of our analysis, hope its helpful: [https://quizlet.com/blog/whats-the-best-cloud-probably- gcp](https://quizlet.com/blog/whats-the-best-cloud-probably-gcp)

</comment><comment><USER23> I'd go for AWS since it has already proven its trustability, stability and usability in the context of daily routine/providing solid solutions for hosting high access-content.

GCE is interesting however, I'll definitely keep that in mind for future "testing" but at the moment I'd take AWS as my "out of the box"-solution.

<comment><USER4> Give GCE a try and I am sure you will be blown away!

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> GCP is a non-starter for us due to Region support. No Australia, Singapore or even US west regions means that latency is too high. CDN / caching can make web performance acceptable, but service performance will always suffer. Unfortunately over half of .au traffic routes to Asia via the US west coast (due to lower cost), with the rest route via Japan, Guam or Singapore. This means Taiwan would be a 300ms route for a significant portion of our audience.

AWS is what we use for cloud provisioning, with Rackspace still hosting some legacy systems. We are moving our workloads off Rackspace as the cost is higher. Azure is a possibility but unlikely as they are as expensive as AWS and offers nothing that we feel is especially compelling as a Linux shop.

If Digital Ocean, Linode or similar offered an Australian hosting option I would be willing to look at it if the cost was under 2x that of a US region, as I could get a similar functionality having SaltStack handle provisioning. However knowing bandwidth and related costs in .au I really doubt many want to go through the cost & effort.

Most of the domestic providers are either too expensive ($40-$80 AUD a month for a 1 core / 1gb instance w/ HDD backed storage & 100 GB transfer), and/or aren't run to the scale that you can have confidence that they will be an ongoing competitive business.

<comment><USER25> FYI, GCP is getting new regions later this year. US Western region in Oregon and East Asia region in (Tokyo) Japan.

[https://cloudplatform.googleblog.com/2016/03/announcing- two-...](https://cloudplatform.googleblog.com/2016/03/announcing-two-new- Cloud-Platform-Regions-and-10-more-to-come_22.html)

<comment><USER26> And 10 more unannounced locations through '17\. I'd be surprised if a single AUS wasn't one of them.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> I think OP means GCP: Google Cloud Platform. There's GCE, Google Compute Engine, as part of GCP. GCE is also different from another GCP product Container Engine.

<comment><USER28> nit: GCE is Google Compute Engine, which is a raw VM product most analogous to EC2 in AWS. Google Container Engine is "GKE", which I guess is a clever resolution strategy since it's a hosted Kubernetes service ([http://kubernetes.io/](http://kubernetes.io/)). GKE is another compute-based offering, but helps you deploy autoscaling services on Docker.

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> How about using [https://cloud.google.com/storage/](https://cloud.google.com/storage/) for personal backup (photos, videos, files..)?

It seems much less expensive than paying a fee for a big Google Drive. The bandwidth needed for GCStorage would be minimum (just uploading from time to time)

</comment><comment><USER30> Are you talking just about the VMs ? Because if you're talking about the platform, then just the fact that Amazon has Postgresql RDS to take care of your databases is killer.

And if I'm already locked in to AWS for one service...

<comment><USER31> Lack of managed PostgreSQL is the reason I've not tried GCC for anything serious yet

<comment><USER32> Aiven provides managed PostgreSQL in Google Cloud, please check out [https://aiven.io/postgresql](https://aiven.io/postgresql) and [https://youtu.be/m1T0SHUoa8U](https://youtu.be/m1T0SHUoa8U) for a quick introduction to it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> Use Spinnaker and chose both or decide later. [http://www.spinnaker.io/](http://www.spinnaker.io/)

<comment> awinter-py the 1-click GCE image for spinnaker is estimated to cost ~$200 per month; not much next to payroll but surprisingly beefy.

</comment></comment><comment><USER33> I'd use multiple smaller providers, preferably non-US ones when possible.

</comment><comment><USER34> anyone know where GCE stands in terms of PCI compliance? i know AWS is a level 1 PCI-compliant service provider and makes it a bit easier during the audit process.

<comment><USER35> I'm not going to pretend I understand PCI compliance but their certifications are here: [https://cloud.google.com/security/compliance](https://cloud.google.com/security/compliance)

They appear to be PCI DSS v3 compliant?

</comment></comment><comment><USER36> Are they even comparable? AWS offers full virtual machines. I was under the impression that GCE offers a more high level platform where you run your code in their proprietery environment?

If I am not mistaken, using GCE means you are locked in and cannot migrate away easily. That's why I never looked into it closely. I don't want to be at the mercy of a provider.

<comment><USER37> GCE ~= EC2

GAE ~= Elastic Beanstalk

<comment><USER38> Might as well toss the azure comparble ones in here while we're at it.

Azure Virtual Machines ~= Google Compute Engine ~= Amazon EC2

Azure Websites/App Service ~= Google App Engine ~= Amazon Elastic Beanstalk</comment></comment></comment>


As Online Video Surges, the .TV Domain Rides the Wave - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/27/business/media/a-newly-valuable-virtual-address.html?ref=technology&_r=0

<comment><USER2> If this is as good for Tuvalu as .tk has been for Tokelau, I say hooray for the .tv age! Next up: The British Indian Ocean Territory rises with the deluge of .io domains.

<comment><USER3> According to a CNN piece from two years ago [1] Tokelau gets 1/6th of its economy from .tk domains, but it's GDP is only $1.2m. Compare that to Tuvalu, which according to this NYTimes piece first negotiated a deal worth $50m over 12 years, but now gets around $2m a year.

If I haven't screwed up my sums, that works out to roughly $150/person for Tokelau compared to $200/person for Tuvalu

(Population TK 1,300, from CNN piece. TV 10,000 from NYT piece)

[1] [http://edition.cnn.com/2012/06/13/tech/web/tokelau-domain- na...](http://edition.cnn.com/2012/06/13/tech/web/tokelau-domain-name- holder/?c=&page=2)</comment></comment>


Exploring Rust (from C#) - <AUTHOR> http://nblumhardt.com/2016/03/exploring-rust/ <comment><USER3> The annotated version of C# included in the blog post reminds me of Spec# [http://research.microsoft.com/en- us/projects/specsharp/](http://research.microsoft.com/en- us/projects/specsharp/)

Spec# has annotations and methods for object ownership. You can see an example of it in the "The Spec# Programming System: An Overview" slideshow (slide 39 onwards).

Also:

> C# has two families of data structures that dermine allocation behaviour: > structs and classes. If a type is a struct then values of that type will be > allocated on the stack:

Here's a primer on how the Microsoft CLR handles it, because it's more subtle than what's stated above. The end effect is that value types behave like values, reference types behave like references. Where they're stored is a function of where they need to be stored, not their type.

[https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/ericlippert/2010/09/30/the-...](https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/ericlippert/2010/09/30/the- truth-about-value-types/)

<comment><USER4> Ah yes, my bad - the "value types go on the stack" simplification is a bit sloppy. It's a useful way to describe it to make the comparison - <USER2> definitely not for understanding C# in this case.

<comment><USER3> All good. Also, thanks for alt-composition and stateless.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I like the author's attempt to explain Rust's borrow checker to a new audience by inventing a variant of C#. Lifetimes are certainly one of Rust's most unique features, and the existence of analogies to express unfamiliar concepts in terms of familiar ones is very valuable.

<comment><USER6> What I like about the concept is that as soon as you explain it, the first response you see is "Wait, that doesn't already happen in other languages?"

The idea just makes sense, it's "right".

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Hug of death. Cache [https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:EDeYMv...](https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:EDeYMvVfqygJ:nblumhardt.com/2016/03/exploring- rust/)

<comment><USER8> This is offtopic but what should be size of the VM to handle HN's front page traffic. I know a lot of it depends upon whether the website is static or is backed by DB and on various different factors. But many a times some of my friends ask me questions like this.

To make it simple, lets take 2 very basic websites.

1\. A ghost blog. (node.js) 2\. A wordpress blog backed by a mysql db. (php)

<comment><USER9> I had a ghost blog on a micro instance of a german VPN, a machine with 256mb of ram and not too fast processing power. Both times I reached HN home page, in one case for some hours, it worked without issues and only a minor slowdown.

<comment><USER9> VPN was meant to be VPS but I cannot edit the post

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Could someone explain why Rust is so damn popular/controversial?

<comment><USER11> I think a lot of people are looking for a replacement for C++ that isn't C#/Java. As in a language that is still low-level enough to offer stuff like pointers, but without the pitfalls and minefield which is C++ (a lot of which is due to historic reasons and backwards compatibility with C).

Some newer languages that try to fill the niche are D, Nim, Rust and Go. Can't say much about Nim, it seems to be in the background. Go started as a systems programming language, but since then they backed out on it and it's mostly pushed as nicer C and webservice language. That leaves D and Rust on the field. Both are competing for the same audience, but Rust has the advantage of a popular brand backing (Mozilla) and a potential killer app (Servo, Mozilla's new work in progress browser engine). It also seems to have a clearer vision because of Mozilla backing and constant dogfooding in Servo. Meanwhile D is more of a design by community, as a result it gets not always the features that are needed or people want, but the features people are willing to work on. Also, D gets a lot of backlash from the game dev and system programming languages communities for using a (not too great) garbage collector, whereas Rust uses memory management somewhat similar to C++ model with RAII/smart pointers, however greatly improved and with much stronger static checks.

I think people just view Rust as the language that could actually be the alternative to C++, because there is a place for a language that is safer to use than C++, yet performs at similar speeds and doesn't handhold you like C#/Java do.

<comment><USER12> > Some newer languages that try to fill the niche are D, Nim, Rust and Go. > Can't say much about Nim, it seems to be in the background.

Nim is frustrating, because to my taste it gets so many things just right while getting one particular thing so spectacularly wrong that I can't bring myself even to try it.

The one thing is its rule for when two identifiers are the same. They are compared case-insensitively, ignoring any underscores and en-dashes in either name, except that the first character must match exactly.

Consequence #1: if you have, say, something called user_sort (perhaps it's a function that sorts users) and something called use_RSort (perhaps it selects which of two sorting algorithms to use somewhere) then they will be _the same identifier_ , with results anywhere from compilation failure to silent malfunction you don't notice until a year later.

Consequence #2: if you want to search for an identifier using some obscure tool like, say, grep or Vim or Eclipse, you're out of luck. (You can make your own tool -- call it "nimgrep", perhaps -- and extensible things like Vim and Eclipse can be given the ability to search for Nim identifiers. But their built-in facilities, like what "*" does in Vim, will do the wrong thing if you are working on Nim code.)

<comment><USER13> > Nim is frustrating

I have used Nim heavily for more than a year now, and it turned out to be the most productive language I have every used. Nim could be considered a modern Lisp with infix notation and Python like syntax with native C performance. The macro system is incredibly well designed and easy to handle.

I also tried Rust, and it turned out to be much more complicated and time consuming. I would use it for systems programming only. Redox is the only reason for me to learn Rust.

> The one thing is its rule for when two identifiers are the same.

First it looked strange to me as well. However there are actually good reasons to avoid case sensitivity.

[http://blog.codinghorror.com/the-case-for-case- insensitivity...](http://blog.codinghorror.com/the-case-for-case- insensitivity/)

As for the user_sort and use_rsort example, such semantic errors can easily be fixed by qualification (a.user_sort and b.use_rsort). Errors like the following one however are very hard to fix in case sensitive languages like C++ and probably even Rust:

      module A:  func smart_func (x,y) = do_this
      module B:  func smart_Func (x,y) = do_that
      module C:  func Smart_Func (x,y) = do_something_else

main:

      import A, B, C
      smart_func (a,b)

hmm ... smart_func(a,b) doesn't work. Seems to be a typo. Which function did the author really mean?

Nim would reject such a mess in general.

The developers of Nim have implemented a lot of nice features. A really silly idea however are strong spaces. No serious developer would ever use such a dangerous "feature". It should be removed from Nim.

[https://github.com/nim-lang/Nim/wiki/Whitespace-FAQ](https://github.com/nim- lang/Nim/wiki/Whitespace-FAQ)

<comment><USER5>
      > Errors like the following one however are very hard to
      > fix in case sensitive languages like C++ and probably
      > even Rust

No, in Rust the compiler will emit a style warning if you have a function whose name includes capital letters. This can be toggled off (and also elevated into a hard error), but it's always on by default.

Furthermore, when you import a module Rust keeps it namespaced under the module's name, so you never need to worry about names accidentally colliding or being unsure as to where a symbol comes from. You have to use an explicit glob import to pull in all of a module's public items into the current namespace.

Furtherfurthermore, Rust warns when you import a symbol and then don't use it, so even if you name all of these functions differently _and_ ignore the style warnings _and_ glob-import the modules, then you'll get yet another warning when you fail to ever use two of the symbols.

Furtherfurtherfurthermore, Rust doesn't allow symbols with the same name to exist in the same namespace, so even if you went back and fixed all those functions to comply with the style warnings, you'd get compilation errors if you continued to glob-import any of the two of them.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Hopefully this is relevant but one of the things I had difficulty with in Rust is closures (or more specifically the lifetime and pointers of closures) and wiring up a system or library that needs lots of callback things.

See I'm used to Java where anonymous classes are closures (I really like that about Java/Scala/Groovy. One of the very few things I don't like about C# is that does not have anonymous classes).

So the problem is when I want a callbacky thing that has state it gets fairly complicated in Rust because you have lots of options that have limitations. For example there is bare functions or raw functions which basically stateless, there is traits but you'll need to use boxes and or cells, and then there is Rust closures which I had some various issues with because of bugs (they are probably fixed now).

I only bring this up because instead of so many tutorials on simple static programming stuff I would like to see how one might wire up a system with many callback components (ie manual dependency injection). I suppose I should look at how its done in Iron.

ie if your going to show something analogous to a Java/C# developer show them some wiring up of a complicated system that has interfaces and the components can be interchanged (perhaps that is just something you don't do in Rust but I'm curious how it would be done).

<comment><USER15> > One of the very few things I don't like about C# is that does not have > anonymous classes

Anonymous classes are lambdas in C#.

[http://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/195081/is- a-l...](http://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/195081/is-a-lambda- expression-something-more-than-an-anonymous-inner-class-with-a-singl)

<comment><USER14> Not all anonymous classes are lambdas.

There are many situations like async streams or even synchronous iterators that require multiple methods.

Erik Meijer even mentions somewhere in this video that he is remiss that C# doesn't have anonymous classes: [https://channel9.msdn.com/Events/Lang- NEXT/Lang-NEXT-2014/Ke...](https://channel9.msdn.com/Events/Lang-NEXT/Lang- NEXT-2014/Keynote-Duality)

Around 47:50 he says "feature request for C# anonymous inner classes".

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Does anybody know how good the Rust integration with Windows is? The language looks very good but can you interop with Win32, COM and .NET? Is there a debugger? Without those its usability is a little limited.

<comment><USER17> Haven't used any yet, but there are number of libraries.

Generated winapi bindings: [https://retep998.github.io/doc/winapi/](https://retep998.github.io/doc/winapi/)

A COM library, including a macro for generating a COM interface: [http://eljay.github.io/com-rs/com_rs/index.html](http://eljay.github.io/com- rs/com_rs/index.html)

Not exactly sure about .Net, but here is a tutorial for how to use a rust library from C#: [http://www.loekvandenouweland.com/content/using-rust-code- fr...](http://www.loekvandenouweland.com/content/using-rust-code-from-csharp)

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> Error establishing a database connection...</comment>


Slate: a Mac OS X window manager for power users - <AUTHOR> http://mauriciogardini.com/post/43348489262/slate-a-mac-os-x-window-manager-for-power-users <comment><USER2> For my 13" Macbook Pro I use two 27" screens and Divvy and hot keys:

        +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+
        |               |               |
        |       A       |       B       |
        |               |               |
        +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+

        +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+
        |       |       |       |       |
        |   1   |   2   |   3   |   4   |
        |       |       |       |       |
        +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+

        +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+
        |   1   |   2   |   3   |   4   |
        +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+
        |   5   |   6   |   7   |       |
        +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+

I can place a screen in any one of the boxes as above, with a hot-key. A and B are Cmd-Opt-, and Cmd-Opt-. The rest are based on number keys with modifiers. The two 27" screens are 1900x1080, and connected through a DualHead2Go DP edition.

<comment><USER3> >I use two 27" screens

The Window Manager is clearly aimed at large screens.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Am I the only one who hardly sees any value in window managers? About 99% of the time, I'm wanting only one window visible at a time, with others quickly accessible via cmd-tab and cmd=`.

<comment><USER5> Lots of people -- I'm one of them -- find that switching whole windows seems to pop the mental stack.

Whereas turning my head left and right does not do so.

Most programming requires at least 4 logical views, IMO:

1\. The code

2\. The result of the code (web page, test results etc)

3\. Documentation that supports coding

4\. A control mechanism (ie, a terminal)

No doubt there will be quibbling that some of these are really the same, blah blah. I don't care, I think 4 is the logical minimum and the physical assignment of those 4 basic information types is a matter for each programmer.

<comment><USER6> _Lots of people -- I'm one of them -- find that switching whole windows seems to pop the mental stack._

That's really interesting! I have the opposite problem - switching windows doesn't pop my mental stack, but if there's anything on the screen other than what I'm trying to focus on, it keeps diverting my attention and ruining my concentration. Fullscreen emacs on OSX (without even the system menu bar!) is just _awesome_ for me.

Here's a screenshot of what my entire desktop looks like when I'm working on code: <http://abstractnonsense.com/desktop-2013-02-17.png>

<comment><USER7> How do you get true fullscreen mode in Emacs on OS X?

<comment><USER8> With Emacs 24 you can use ns-toggle-fullscreen.

<comment><USER7> Emacs 24.2.1 here, no matches for "ns-toggle fullscreen".

Edit: no luck with the latest pretest (22.214.171.124) either.

<comment><USER9> for `M-x ns-toggle-fullscreen` you need `brew install emacs --cocoa`

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Back in the Dark Ages, before OS X was truly usable, I rocked ion on my FreeBSD machine and MachTEN (to run Emacs) on my Macs. This experience conditioned me to _not fight the platform_ \-- slate, as nice as it looks, seems to me a great deal like fighting the platform. Is it?

<comment><USER11> Maybe so. But I don't see a problem with that.

OSX window management currently satisfies average users, but not power users. And since power users are exactly the kind of people who can do something about it, they are doing it.

<comment><USER10> I think the distinction between "power users" and "average users" is meaningless. A user is someone who derives utility from a given platform.

<comment><USER12> Perhaps so. But what if said user is interested in tweaking things to bend entirely to their own way of (loose use of word) computing. So much to the point that they are willing to (develop and or/change the entirety of) some of the main points of the functioning operating system (window management).

Now the difference between that person and the guy thats fine with changing the windows theme to a different color....theres a distinction there the size of the grand canyon.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I use Better Touch Tool to bind keyboard shortcuts to window actions like halves & corners to achieve a similar result.

<http://www.bettertouchtool.net/>

<comment><USER14> I've always used BetterSnapTool from the same developer, which is basically the window management features of BetterTouchTool as a standalone app.

Not sure why it's not free, when BetterTouchTool is, but I'm not going to begrudge him that one-off payment for something I use every day.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> If you're looking for XMonad on OSX, check out OSXMonad(<https://github.com/xmonad/osxmonad>).

It's pretty usable at this point. One problem with it (and any of the other tiling solutions), is the drop shadows OSX adds to windows. When you have your windows flush with each other they look pretty bad. Shadowkiller(<http://unsanity.com/haxies/shadowkiller>) removes all of the drop shadows. It claims to be incompatible with 10.6+, but I'm running it with no issues on 10.8.2 and have on most versions of OSX since 10.7

<comment><AUTHOR> Okay, this is VERY interesting. I'll probably try that and compare to the user experience that I have with Slate currently.

Did you use XMONAD on Linux too? If yes, is the user experience similar?

Thanks for the link.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> Looks neat, albeit for me personally it might be a little over the top.

I use Moom (<http://manytricks.com/moom/>) for quite a while and I'm happy with it so far as it integrates perfectly into the overall UI of OSX.

You have of course also convenient (and customizable) shortcuts for actions like 'Move & Zoom Window to Left Half', which is quite handy for example for webdevelopment on a smaller screen (Macbook), where you might want your browser to occupy one half and your editor the other half of the screen.

</comment><comment><USER17> Slate is amazing, been using it for a few months. Biggest issue is it takes a bit of config to get it just right.

Here's my config file.

# Configs config defaultToCurrentScreen true config checkDefaultsOnLoad true config windowHintsShowIcons true config windowHintsIgnoreHiddenWindows false #config windowHintsDuration 5 config windowHintsSpread true #config windowHintsOrder persist config windowHintsFontColor 0;0;0;1.0 config windowHintsFontName Futura config windowHintsFontSize 70

bind e:cmd hint ASDFGHJKLQWERTYUIOPCVBN # use whatever keys you want

# Abstract positions alias full move screenOriginX;screenOriginY screenSizeX;screenSizeY alias lefthalf move screenOriginX;screenOriginY screenSizeX/2;screenSizeY alias righthalf move screenOriginX+screenSizeX/2;screenOriginY screenSizeX/2;screenSizeY alias topright corner top-right resize:screenSizeX/2;screenSizeY/4 alias bottomright corner bottom-right resize:screenSizeX/2;screenSizeY/4*3

bind down:ctrl ${bottomright} bind left:ctrl ${lefthalf} bind up:ctrl ${full} bind right:ctrl ${righthalf} bind ;:ctrl ${topright}

# Resize Bindings bind right:alt resize +8% +0 bind left:alt resize -8% +0 bind up:alt resize +0 -8% bind down:alt resize +0 +8% bind right:ctrl;alt resize -8% +0 bottom-right bind left:ctrl;alt resize +8% +0 bottom-right bind up:ctrl;alt resize +0 +8% bottom-right bind down:ctrl;alt resize +0 -8% bottom-right

<comment><USER18> Prepend four spaces to get a formatting-preserving view. Though you might want to plop that on a pastebin somewhere instead.

<comment><USER19> Actually, you only need to prepend two spaces. :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Slate has been discussed a few times recently. For more background, here are a couple other HN threads:

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4817000>

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4589658>

</comment><comment><USER21> For a GUI configurable and generally well behaved manager look at Divvy: <http://mizage.com/divvy/>

It's very customizable and has worked for me across at least three versions of os x.

<comment><USER22> Yep, I use Divvy on a daily basis and really enjoy it. Only thing I wish it had was a memory of the window size before it is re-sized with Divvy. Here's what I mean: In Windows, you can WinKey+RightArrow something to dock it to the right half (totally possible in Divvy), but then WinKey+LeftArrow returns it to its original windowed size. I use that technique a ton on my Windows box, would love to see an OSX window manager with that feature.

Edit: Hmm, looks like SizeUp has this feature with "snapback". Cool.

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> Is there a window manager for power users that don't like tiling window managers? Half my windows are too big to be tiled (browser, IDE, Inkscape, GIMP, etc.) Plus, I have the desktop background for a reason: I want to see it. I don't want an austere screen paved over with windows like a city with no grass. I like my large windows to not be completely maximized, so I have some empty space. I like having my windows a little disorderly, not quite properly aligned, for the same reason Japanese Go boards are a little too small for 19 stones to fit: nature doesn't create orderly grids.

I really miss sawfish, though. I like Alt-Tab to activate the actual window instead of a little a row of icons (it'd be even cooler if it would turn the inactive windows greyscale). I like being able to turn off window decorations per app. Sticky windows don't flicker when you change desktops, like they do on Lion. And, of course, a config file for the things you always want in the same place.

</comment><comment><USER24> I always found that 50-50 screen split impractical. Many websites want more screen estate. Some apps are sidebar-happy while some aren't. A terminal is just fine with 80 columns, thank you...

What I've been doing many years now is getting a 80 column terminal/editor/im client/whatever on one side of the screen and other apps on what's left. Seems pretty near perfection :)

</comment><comment><USER25> This looks neat. I'm going to have to play around with it soon. As of now I've been using SizeUp, which is way less configurable, but great at giving you that top/left/right/bottom (and corners) placement you may be looking for.

<http://www.irradiatedsoftware.com/sizeup/>

</comment><comment><USER26> I do find tiling wm without removing the window borders kind of ... well not really useless, but not all that practival.

Especially on OS X, where the hot keys are pretty well standardized and you can be pretty sure about what Command-Q does, spending all that room on window borders and few buttons seems so wasteful.

<comment><USER27> I completely agree with you. But once I found this interest setup where you'd map the caps lock key to ctrl/esc and then the ctrl key to cmd+alt+shift+ctrl. That mapping can act like another modifier key. Aside from some games, I have yet to find a program that gets in the way of my setup.

<http://stevelosh.com/blog/2012/10/a-modern-space-cadet/>

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> I use SizeUp for window management. Not perfect, but for most tasks I've found it more than good enough.

Will be giving Slate a trial period to see if I like it more.

(sizeup: <http://www.irradiatedsoftware.com/sizeup/>)

</comment><comment><USER29> Since it seems that everyone is posting their favorite flavor, here's mine: <http://spectacleapp.com/>. Open source and gets you hooked in minutes. I can't imagine using OS X without it.

<comment><USER30> +1. I've been using spectacle with great success. I previously tied the demo for Sizeup, which is a little more polished, but cost $20 at the time. The only thing that Spectacle is missing is the ability to move windows between monitors. I recently switched to a single 27", so I haven't been missing this feature. I'm definitely going to check out Slate — looks cool.

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> I've been using Cinch, which does a similar thing (albeit it doesn't have quarter sized windows) by mimicking the abilities of Aero Snap in windows (drag to the sides to make it half the screen, drag to the top to make it full screen).

</comment><comment><USER32> Or, if he wants something even closer to xmonad:

<https://github.com/fjolnir/xnomad>

It works really well. Been using it for a while. The only real complaint I have about it is that it's based on xmonad instead of dwm, so a chosen unfocused window swaps with the focused window when you change focus instead of the formerly focused window being pushed to the top of a stack. But for working as a userspace program on OS X with no real modifications, it's really nice.

I've tried Slate, Divvy, and at least 5 or 6 others. xnomad is the only one I like.

</comment><comment><USER33> I have used Slate for quite a while to manage my windows, and I think it's great, especially the snapshoting and layout functionality allowing me to go easily between an external screen and my laptop's screen.

One of the later versions added support for Javascript configuration which makes it extremely powerful: <https://github.com/jigish/slate/wiki/JavaScript- Configs>

<comment><USER34> What made me go 'ooh!' was the single-to-multi-monitor layout support over anything else, I've looked a few times for something to do that but never came across Slate.

</comment></comment><comment><USER35> I have been using Slate since that last post came out on HN (a few months ago?) and am absolutely loving it.

Combined with binding your caps lock key to "hyper", I have a whole suite of customized keyboard shortcuts that are super useful!

A recent version of Slate fixed automatically detecting your screen layout, so whenever I plug/unplug my external monitor it will automatically re-layout my screens.

</comment><comment><USER36> It looks like this allows setting focus without using the mouse and without tabbing. That's a great feature just by itself.

</comment><comment><USER37> Sadly, after all these years, ion3 still remains unmatched - on any platform.

Anyone who has used it will agree. Sadly most people haven't.

</comment><comment><USER38> Slate also recently started supporting configs written in JavaScript (<https://github.com/jigish/slate/wiki/JavaScript-Configs>) which is very powerful.

</comment><comment><USER39> I am currently use optimal layout (with expired trial, but size/tile position hotkeys still work) and have not used other tiling app since, i'll give this one a shot.

</comment><comment><USER40> And for all the 'not-so-power-users', you can use Spectacle - <http://spectacleapp.com/> (Free)

<comment><USER41> And if you don't need it to be free, there's Sizeup <http://www.irradiatedsoftware.com/sizeup/> . Spectacle looks nearly as nice as Sizeup though.

</comment></comment><comment><USER42> Xterm from GNUStep running over X11. All I ever need on OS X.

</comment><comment><USER43> I use Moom to do the same thing</comment>


Marionette Explained: Connecting Data to Your Views - <AUTHOR> http://benmccormick.org/2014/12/10/marionette-explained-connecting-your-data-to-your-views/

<comment><USER2> I've been using Marionette for about a year know for one project and in the past weeks I became a bit insecure if my decision was correct. It feels like Marionette is moving slowly, compared to other similar projects which have a bigger community. Is this a false impression? It's not that I'm missing any bigger features, but I'm afraid it might be discontinued sooner than other projects.</comment>


Cross platform desktop app development using C# uses windows Print Spooler API - <AUTHOR> <comment><AUTHOR> I know about Xamarin, Mono project, but not sure whether it will support Print Spooler API. I also needs to develop Windows service to monitor some print tasks, can it be achieved using Mono or Xamarin?

[https://msdn.microsoft.com/en- us/library/windows/desktop/ff6...](https://msdn.microsoft.com/en- us/library/windows/desktop/ff686807\(v=vs.85\).aspx)

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> [https://msdn.microsoft.com/en- us/library/windows/desktop/dd1...](https://msdn.microsoft.com/en- us/library/windows/desktop/dd162861\(v=vs.85\).aspx)</comment>


Army Deploys Psy-Ops on U.S. Senators - <AUTHOR> http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/another-runaway-general-army-deploys-psy-ops-on-u-s-senators-20110223

<comment><USER2> Single page: [http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/another-runaway- ge...](http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/another-runaway-general-army- deploys-psy-ops-on-u-s-senators-20110223?print=true)

</comment><comment><USER3> As a former PSYOPer, I am disappointed that Rolling Stone Magazine did not use the correct term which is PSYOP and not PSY-Ops or PSYOPS.

<comment><USER4> _That_ 's what bothers you? Not the subversion of democracy?

<comment><USER5> Can you provide me a single instance of democracy that is independent of PSYOP?

Human life is about effecting change from the first instance of cognition.

Perhaps you can share what it is that bothers you enough to prompt your question to me?

 __*Note: Ironic that with my username, I forgot my password.

<comment><USER4> "Perhaps you can share what it is that bothers you enough to prompt your question to me?"

I was noting the incongruity between: 1 - the weight of the article (whether you agree or disagree) and 2 - your criticism of the article (nitpicking capitalization). Hence my comment.

<comment><USER5> Nitpicking I think is perceived by the relevant knowledge/experience of the subject matter.

Mac to MAC. RAMs to RAM. Very different things.

There is no such thing as Psy-Ops/PSYOPS/PSYOPs at least according to the US Department of Defense. There is only the singular PSYOP. To have interviewed a commissioned officer and present a report whose whole article is on a single subject, I am disappointed that the magazine could not throughly investigate what it is they were reporting on. An article that implicates others (whether they are a general officer or not) in some light that is less becoming of their expected role bears extra responsibility to be a credible source.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Fascinating. I read the whole thing. Then I flagged it.

</comment><comment><USER7> This is most emphatically not hacker news.

<comment><AUTHOR> This is in relation to these from last week:

Air Force Contract for Persona Management Software [https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id...](https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=d88e9d660336be91552fe8c1a51bacb2&tab=core&_cview=1)

A rare look into North Korea's famed Propaganda School <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2238661>

New open-source project called "The Propaganda Project" (<http://www.propagandaproject.org/>) that is building a Web service that will enable people to identify and catalog instances of propaganda techniques used in mass media with the goal of getting more truth out of the networks by influencing them to eliminate propaganda from news-related programs.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> > ...and a photo of a warning inside a Port-o-John mocking Afghans – "In case > any of you forgot that you are supposed to sit on the toilet and not stand > on it and squat. It's a safety issue. We don't want you to fall in or miss > your target."

That sounds crass to Americans, but it's actually a big problem with Western- style toilets in countries that primary have squat toilets. Oftentimes people accustomed to squat toilets will stand on the toilet seat and it turns into a huge mess.

Even in nice places you'll sometimes see muddy shoeprints and mess on the toilet seats in Vietnam, for instance and it's a headache for people who want to sit on the toilet.</comment>


Ask HN:how do you manage time for reading news/links/articles? - <AUTHOR>

we have twitter, facebook , HN, techcrunch and some additional newspapers too. i am have a dayjob and working on my startup too but the everyday routine of going through the above resources though helpful but it takes away atleast two hours or more on a ordinary day. To manage this i am ending up adding lengthy articles to my bookmarks to read later and simply avoiding opening any news link which is predictable. Do you have any points or tips for managing such a huge infomation overflow in minimal time? <comment><USER2> I try to work in non-interrupted blocks (ideally; don't always succeed) and check Google Reader twice a day and go through everything, marking things unread that I'd like to read later and catch up on that Sunday evenings. I check twitter every few hours during an idle moment.

And while I am on the information hamster wheel, I'm not entirely sure it is good for me. I want to stop.

<comment><AUTHOR> i want to stop twitter account altogether otherwise day and night there is someone posting interesting startup related articles and it ends up eating my time.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> While they are chicken soup for the brain, they dun not equal profit in the P/L.

At home, after working on my todo list, I set my E.gg Timer to around 15-30 mins, and go through all these materials in my Google Reader. The best time to clear these materials is when I'm on the move(not driving) or waiting, I can afford a lot more reading time.

</comment><comment><USER4> Miss a day on reader and you are lost in a jungle of feeds. Up-to-date on feeds but still catching up on Twitter though.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thats another big problem, go on a holiday or some real life activities on somdays and will have to spend whole next week catching up with 100 articles/newsfeed that cameup during those days.

<comment><USER4> Yes, HN feed itself has over 100 articles a day. Plus i hate using marking all as read.</comment></comment></comment>


Center for Computational Biology - <AUTHOR> https://ccb.berkeley.edu/ <comment><USER2> How did ads make it to the front page

</comment><comment><USER3> yes, and...?

</comment><comment><USER4> what a disaster of a website on mobile

<comment><USER5> " _Please don 't complain about website formatting, back-button breakage, and similar annoyances. They're too common to be interesting. Exception: when the author is present. Then friendly feedback might be helpful._"

[https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html](https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html)

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Yes.</comment>


Ask HN: How to start a job - <AUTHOR>

It's my first software engineering internship, at a medium-large software company where the code base is enormous and company jargon flies over my head most of the time. I'm getting used to it, but was wondering, from either perspective: 1. What do you wish new hires would do? 2. How do you fit in and make an impact at your team/ company as effectively as possible?
I just wanted to know if HN had any advice.
Thanks in advance. <comment><USER2> Ask, ask, ask. I used to struggle with asking for help. I'd ponder over something way too long when the person sitting next to me could tell me in 2 seconds.

Here are some points that helped me and may help you :-

1) Every time you think of a question, write it down. If it's not the right time to ask now - when it is, you'll have them to hand.

2) If you're stuck with something consider where are the places you'll likely find help on it. When you go to ask a colleague, point out that you've tried here, here & here but still aren't sure and could they point you in the right direction. There's a big difference between helping you out and thinking for you. Ensure that with each problem you're taking a few investigative steps of your own.

3) Ask people to draw diagrams for you. Ask people in general conversation the same questions and compare their answers. Some people explain things in really awesome ways & some don't. Some have just 'lived' it that long it's second nature.

4) Keep organised documentation. When I'd learn a new process, I'd write it up & keep it in my file. It calms the feeling over overwhelm knowing that you are building your own backup. Also some tasks only need to be done every few weeks so there's limited opportunity to practice and notes from your first go will be very welcome.

5) Be enthusiastic and ask to sit in on conversations or discussions where possible.

6) Don't ever ever be afraid of asking someone to clarify something. It can be intimidating in a bigger company to say "could you just run that by me again" or "how do you spell that?" but it can save a lot of misunderstanding down the line - Terminology is key to be able to look up information at a later date.

Hope your internship goes well for you!

</comment><comment><USER3> Being at my 4th development internship (as part of my schooling) There are 3 pieces of advice i would give you.

1)Ask as many questions as you need, but find times that don't interfere with others too much. Your an intern, they understand that you are learning and expect to help in your learning process, especially since this is your first. As long as your not bugging everyone every minute you should be fine.

2) Read files in the codebase as much as possible. Someone mentions a bug in a file at a stand up? Go read the file. Someone mentions a funny comment made is one of the files? Go read the file. Slow day and you don't know what to do? Read as many files as possible. The first time you get access to a large codebase it can overwhelming, but the more you sit down and become familiar with each file, you will become more and more familiar with it. There is no replacement for just sitting down and becoming friends with the codebase.

3) Out work everyone. In my opinion the way you overcome a lack of knowledge is by putting the work and time in. If it takes you twice as long to do something but you work for twice as long per day you end up with the same output. Now this is an unrealistic example but you get the idea. If you are an intern and out work everyone, you will impress.

<comment><USER4> Great info. Reading code is one of the most basic and fundamental things to do to learn new systems and languages.

Please note your != you're.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> It's going to take you a while to learn the architecture of your company, and you will probably not learn all of it. It can take months to learn how even a simple distributed system works. My suggestion is to do the work that they throw your way.

You will most likely be working in a small area of the architecture (for example WebServices). Learn your small bit of architecture first, and become an expert on it. You will naturally start learning about other pieces of the architecture through your own (if you are building Services you will learn about where you are getting your data, etc). However, don't be complacent, force yourself to learn the pieces of architecture that connect to your piece, and move in a direction that makes sense for you. If you are starting out building services and want to do more front-end work, learn about the rendering stack, etc that is consuming your service. If you're more interested in the back-end, start learning whatever database you are consuming in your services really well.

As you grow in the company you should constantly do this. Once you become more of a value than a liability in one area move onto the next. This process should take months, if not years, so be patient and give yourself grace.</comment>


Project Oberon - The Design of an Operating System, a Compiler, and a Computer - <AUTHOR> http://www.inf.ethz.ch/personal/wirth/ProjectOberon/ <comment><USER2> What makes the new version of this cool (for starters):

> The decision for a new processor was expedited by the possibility to > implement it, that is, to make it concrete and available. This is due to the > advent of programmable gate arrays (FPGA), allowing to turn a design into a > real, functioning processor on a single chip. As a result, the described > system can be realized using a low-cost development board. This board, > Xilinx Spartan-3 by Digilent, features a 1-MByte static memory, which easily > accommodates the entire Oberon System, incuding its compiler. It is shown, > together with a display, a keyboard and a mouse in the photo below.

<comment><USER3> But can't you only clock a design on a Spartan-3E at 300MHz maximum?

<comment><USER4> Given that Oberon was originally designed to run on a 10MHz CPU, that won't be much of a problem :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Also, a language.

Oberon-2 language has Pascal-like syntax, with Java-like features (classes, single inheritance, interfaces, garbage collector, sane module system instead of includes). Unlike Java, no VM is required, at least in the system that I used. Like Java and unlike C, it is impossible to write unsafe code accidentally - you have to go out of your way to access unallocated memory regions or break type safety.

Decent module system and straightforward grammar has also allowed writing simple and very fast compilers. It was fun to work with.

<comment><USER6> Until a few years ago, Oberon-2 was the programming language of choice in the first year of CS at my university (except for a small course on C++). They use Python and more C++ now.

<comment><USER7> Modula-2 and Oberon-2 as first procedural and first OO language in my university as well (in Soviet Russia, no less :) )

<comment><USER8> I learned Modula-2 in my university (UMA, Spain) around 2000. they changed to C++ a year later. Even now days all the pseudocode used by many courses is strong inspired in Modula-2.

<comment><USER9> My Intro to Operating Systems class was in Modula-2 circa 1988. I really liked it. I was lucky enough to subsequently spend quality time with Modula-2 on the 8051 and Modula-3 on Ultrix (which was a really nice evolution of the language). Shame that line of innovation has withered.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> "Mostly thanks to the regularity of the RISC instruction set, the size of the compiler could be reduced significantly. It now measures less than 2900 lines of program and compiles itself in about 3 seconds, which is proof of its efficiency. The entire system compiles itself in less than 10 seconds."

Very nice indeed.

<comment><USER11> Wirth had (has?) a famous heuristic where he would reject any optimization of the compiler that didn't make it faster to compile itself. Since optimizations add code and thus cost something to compile, this is a clever way of testing cost/benefit.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> It's a small internet. I started the older version of this book yesterday after this [ [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mFo6eyEsDoA](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mFo6eyEsDoA) ] talk on user interfaces referenced it.

So far it's a wonderful read, and a good example of thoughtful systems design... Incidentally, it's also shows one of the real benefits of Literate Programming, cause although the source itself doesn't really concern me, the text is gold.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes, I'm totally impressed by the conciseness of the book and the added code.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> Many parts with Oberon system would have been perfect for passing code around in the the Internet. The one pass compiler, for example, was lightening fast and compact.

I think Oberon system is worth of study.

<comment><USER14> Yes: Michael Franz, one of Wirth's PhD students, now a professor at UC Irvine, implemented such a system back in the 90's: [http://www.jucs.org/jucs_4_5/open_standards_beyond_java/Fran...](http://www.jucs.org/jucs_4_5/open_standards_beyond_java/Franz_M.html)

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> It would be nice to see Oberon ported to MIPS. maybe the PIC32 would be a good target.</comment>


Google's New OS Will Offer Remote Desktop Capabilities  - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/external/readwriteweb/2010/06/11/11readwriteweb-googles-new-os-will-offer-remote-desktop-ca-79671.html

<comment><USER2> Google is clearly making a play for the enterprise using small to medium businesses as a beachhead.

It has been noted here that the world's most widely used database is Microsoft Excel. This is because enterprise software is about top-down control of workflow and processes -- it's solidified corporate policy/politics! As a result, enterprise software sucks. In order to work around maladapted restrictions imposed by enterprise software, the most productive workers take their processes and automation into spreadsheets like Excel, where they can adapt quickly to changing conditions. Often, the most successful of these processes are then built into enterprise applications, to become the new status quo.

Google wants small and transitional medium sized businesses to outsource much of their IT to them and to run their spreadsheets on Google's apps. Google hopes that this will allow them to do with ad-hoc processes in spreadsheets what they did with web links: organize and unify a huge collection of disparate linkages to create value. When a company has all of its spreadsheets in Google apps, users will be able to link data in disparate spreadsheets. This network of links will be subject to analysis. New business processes will be absorbed from the ad-hoc spreadsheets into the enterprise more quickly and efficiently. This will have tremendous value to companies, especially small and medium sized ones, some of which will grow into giant conglomerates. If this works, Google stands to dwarf the achievements of Microsoft.

EDIT: This remote desktop stuff is just a selling point in support of larger goals.

<comment><USER3> I don't subscribe to your theory that the wide adoption of Excel as a database system is due to corporate politics. My experience (mostly in smaller companies of <1000 people) has shown that people use Excel because of low barriers (easy to learn), quick results, empowerment, and ownership. Corporate politics certainly plays a role in some environments, but if you eliminated politics, Excel would still dominate.

<comment><USER2> _I don't subscribe to your theory that the wide adoption of Excel as a database system is due to corporate politics._

Well good, because that's _not my theory_. I never said Excel wasn't good on its own merits. What I am saying is that Excel is used for ad-hoc process and automation.

The phenomenon I actually described happens all the time on trading floors in the energy industry. Whatever trading system is in use gets in the way of something new. The processes to support the something new are run largely off of spreadsheets. If the something new is a big hit, higher-ups start a project to enable the new processes on the enterprise software where they can be better controlled.

 _My experience (mostly in smaller companies of <1000 people) has shown that people use Excel because of low barriers (easy to learn), quick results, empowerment, and ownership._

If Excel didn't have all of these attributes, it could never be used by non- programmers to support ad-hoc processes.

<comment><USER3> The trading example you mention illustrates how organizations can benefit by allowing people to innovate within the business units, see what works, and implement the successful ideas in a more scalable form.

One of the challenges is whether the person/people who developed the spreadsheet version and the enterprise development team can successfully manage a transition to a formal enterprise project. Sometimes, the people who build these spreadsheets see the job as their domain, and see outsiders as treading on their turf, while the development team is not always sensitive to the ownership issues.

<comment><USER2> _The trading example you mention illustrates how organizations can benefit by allowing people to innovate within the business units, see what works, and implement the successful ideas in a more scalable form._

Most often, the organizations I've seen see this more as a problem of _lack of control_ and wish they could stamp out spreadsheet use entirely.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> If I install Ubuntu today (and probably other Linux distros) I get the option to do a RDP connection to apps or a desktop on a Windows server.

How is this different?

<comment><USER5> With your Ubuntu solution, does the computer you're logging into remotely have to be on? Do you have to know its IP address? I haven't used it before.

The advantage with this is to connect you probably simply visit chromeos.google.com (or something) and log-in. You don't have to worry about the IP address of the machine you're using or firewalls or anything like that.

<comment><USER4> Usually when I've seen people using remote desktop connections it is to access internal ERP or LOB applications - things which Google are not going to be able to provide access to.

For "normal" desktop apps (e.g. MS Office) - wouldn't providing access to these kinds of things undermine Google's strategy of doing things in the browser?

I guess they could provide a LogMeIn/GotoMyPC kind of product - but that is hardly revolutionary.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Isn't Google just giving all these win32 apps a new lease on life? Forget HTML5. Just buy some Windows servers and move your win32 app to the cloud instead. It's the most practical thing to do if Google wants their OS running on lots of desktops but is it good for the future of the web? All I see here is more ad views for Google and more Windows licenses for Microsoft. We get stuck running win32 apps for the next decade because it's easier & cheaper than developing a native HTML5 app.

</comment><comment><USER7> That's a fairly standard linux feature (X+SSH), isn't it? Seems like Chrome OS going to be the long awaited commercialization of Linux for the desktop.

<comment><USER8> A small note: X+SSH isn't very fast. Other software like VNC or NX generally work better, and Google wrote an open-source NX-compatible server:

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

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> To be honest, I am actually looking forward to install this OS into my system. I saw their feature video on this stating that turning Google Chrome bypasses the BIOS startup. A few of my colleagues said this is impossible, but for what it's worth, this is Google we're talking about.

</comment><comment><USER10> Original post on RWW: [http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/googles_new_os_will_off...](http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/googles_new_os_will_offer_remote_desktop_capabilities.php)

</comment><comment><USER11> it sounds somewhat like a vnc plugin in addition to their native chrome applications (if these 'legacy' apps indeed run 'in the cloud'), but could also include wine for windows apps or perhaps a nested X server for native linux apps. but the majority of the article is speculation and a review of recent tech history, so who knows</comment>


Global sea ice records broken again - <AUTHOR> http://neven1.typepad.com/blog/2017/01/global-sea-ice-records-broken-again.html <comment><USER2> What will _you_ do about _your_ contribution to this effect?

Everyone seems to want to wait for government regulation or something to change other people's behavior. Governments will follow what voters do.

<comment><USER3> TL;DR: I don't know what to do and think most people don't, too.

I mean, private emissions, I heard, are insignificant compared to industrial. But then, industry exists because, in the end, we consume stuff. Right?

I'm sincerely hoping for someone who I can trust to explain to me how I'm making the world a worse place by purchasing, let's say, a car, _and_ that as if I'm a 5-year-old. Not because I'm easily bored, but because (I accept,) I'm still ignorant and I need to start from the beginning.

A meteorologist (I just googled "scientist who studies weather", not a native speaker here) telling me "hey, the temperatures will increase by X degrees and the sea level will increase by X meters so... we are doomed" makes me want to do something but I can't even begin to predict the effects.

Also there are these false data generated by (IMHO, crazy) deniers but while easy to catch on its own, they have this side effect of creating many false positives while trying to identify fake data in this ocean called the internet.

<comment><USER4> Private emissions are definitely significant, and it's important that people know this. Food, heating/cooling and transportation are the big household ones. And they're straightforward to make improvements in.

<comment><USER5> Transportation is the big one, and the one most people are least willing to cut down on.

Unfortunately the biggest impacts you can have are to stop flying, and stop driving a car, the suggestion of which many people don't react well to.

<comment><USER6> > and the one most people are least willing to cut down on.

Getting people to eat less meat or meat from less worse emitters or upgrading existing buildings to low emissions for heating does not seem that much easier.

Anyway, you can't fix the problem with a single change.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> For the period 1989–2014 this observation is interesting.

"We have analysed observations of the summer sea ice edge from the ship logbooks of explorers such as Robert Falcon Scott, Ernest Shackleton and their contemporaries during the Heroic Age of Antarctic Exploration (1897–1917), and in this study we compare these to satellite observations from the period 1989–2014, offering insight into the ice conditions of this period, from direct observations, for the first time. This comparison shows that the summer sea ice edge was between 1.0 and 1.7° further north in the Weddell Sea during this period but that ice conditions were surprisingly comparable to the present day in other sectors."

[http://www.the-cryosphere.net/10/2721/2016/](http://www.the- cryosphere.net/10/2721/2016/) doi:10.5194/tc-10-2721-2016

</comment><comment><USER8> Global warming is a natural consequence of capitalism.

Any system which rewards short-sightedness over long-sightedness is going to create long term problems.

Until we have a single world government, no single country is going to be willing to spend money protecting the environment while other countries keep profiting from its pollution.

<comment><USER9> It's not even short-sightedness, it's failing to internalise externalities[0]. And of course the current profiteers will do everything they can to keep things as they are, see e.g. the fate of carbon taxes whose entire purpose is to try and internalise some of the externalities into capitalistic frameworks.

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

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Previous discussion of the same graph with data up to mid-November last year:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12992777](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12992777)

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> More data and charts here: [https://sites.google.com/site/arctischepinguin/home/global-s...](https://sites.google.com/site/arctischepinguin/home/global- sea-ice)

</comment><comment><USER11> Whatever happened in Jul-Nov last year, it seems like ice is trending toward recovering back to within 2 sigma?

Of course "records" will continue to be broken through at least July when we cross over last year's breakaway point.

<comment><USER6> > trending toward recovering back to within 2 sigma?

I wouldn't bet on that. The graphs only show area. The shortened time the arctic ice has to grow means it will be thinner than previously and thus melt more rapidly during spring, again driving it away from the historical mean.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> And yet, this chart is a quintessential story of data representation manipulation, worthy of being included in textbooks (if there are any on this topic).

1) Lines for years with low ice area are marked bold, when high-ice years (e.g. 2013 or 2015) are shown with thin lines.

2) Color scheme is deliberately confusing, with some colors are almost identical (1993 vs 2015, anyone?)

3) The data set is started with 1978, one of the colder years. If it would have been 1979 or 1974, the story would have been less immediately visible.

While I am not saying there isn't a trend, and 2016 is clearly an anomalous year (but what about this year _was_ normal?), visible manipulations like these quickly destroy any remaining trust in climate science, advancing the other side's cause.

<comment><USER13> They show 28 overlapping lines, that many lines simply can't be individually coloured. To accuse them of deliberately choosing a poor colour scheme is plain dishonest.

It is a graph comparing the current year to the previous minimum area years, with the entire dataset for context. The choices they have made are completely legitimate for this purpose.

<comment><USER14> Fact of the matter is, the GP is right. Can we at least agree the color scheme could have been chosen better ?

You are also obviously showing a bias towards one conclusion, and accusing opposition to this conclusion of being "plain dishonest" is not constructive. This is data interpretation. Even attributing 100% to your prior (ie. ignoring the data) is not considered dishonest.

Furthermore, when push comes to shove, let me just say that as someone holding a masters in statistics, there is zero useful data on that chart. I think the the point is to show that we are more than 2 standard deviations from the norm ... And then we have a long list of issues with that conslusion. In increasing importance :

1) there is an obvious reason to pick the start of the time series, and that reason is NOT independent of the conclusion that is reached here. Needless to say, that is a huge no-no.

2) more generally the data supporting the conclusion is not randomly drawn from the distribution. Again, huge no-no.

3) is the relation between time of year and sea ice extent well established ? For instance, does the minimum drift ? How much ? (Why I pick that one: because if you ignore the time of year, flatten the data, we are suddenly very far removed from a 2 sigma deviation, and arrive at a much more sane conclusion : lowest extent ever, but not hugely different from before. And of course, seeing 2 extremes of a slowly evolving variable close together is not exactly strange. When you're climbing the hill, every step sets a "new height record". Focusing on that is misleading, to say the least).

How often do we hit "lowest ever" because the minimum extent falls at a slightly different point every year ? (looking at the data: quite often, for instance, we hit lowest ever and highest ever extents last year. Lines that hit "lowest ever" at some point: dark red, dirty green, thick bright green, thin dark green, thin light green, purple, orange and another medium-dark green. I can't be bothered to look up the years, but I think the point stands: lowest ever is not a rare occurrence, and therefore "more than 2 sigma below the norm" is not an accurate way to report that).

You are making assumptions just by choosing which 2 variables to graph against eachother. Are these assumptions valid ? Why ? If you don't have a reason, then please, shut up until you've done your homework.

It may make a lot more sense to plot the minima at the same points every year, to prevent normal noise from generating these extremes, or just only compare minima and maxima, and even then, smoothing out over 4-5 years seems necessary. Or perhaps just don't report things like this.

3) more fundamentally, why would the data be normally distributed at all ? This seems to me unlikely in the extreme.

Technically speaking, the data is contradictory: it leads to a conclusion that disproves itself. The steps work like this : if the sea ice extent is indeed dropping over time (the conclusion of the graph), then obviously it's distribution over time cannot be normally distributed. Unfortunately that is a necessary precondition for interpreting the data in the first place. If the data is not normally distributed, then there is nothing strange about a 2 sigma deviation, which at that point is nothing but an arbitrary numerical value that has nothing to do with the distribution.

If you want to prove that the data is indeed less than the data of the previous years, there's tests for that. This is not it.

4) that grey band obviously covers 98% of the data in the way years are reported here. Years are reported as special, when the 2-sigma deviation is based on days. The time series regularly dive outside of that band, and it's easy to see why: over (2016-1978)*365 days, we should expect ~2% 2-sigma events (days). That's a LOT of days.

5) we should keep our heads screwed on and ask ourselves if the data is really showing what we think it's showing. I would argue no. It looks to me like something prevented sea ice from reforming between August and December of last year. It seems to me unlikely in the extreme that such a sudden and big change would result from the minute temperature change that global warming contributed this year. Maybe not entirely out of the question, but that's an extraordinary claim, requiring extraordinary evidence. And frankly, this article is not off to a good start.

Or to put it more technically : it looks 2016 is drawn from a different distribution than the other years. That means you should find out what happened using other means, and stop using statistics. It cannot help you in this case.

Conclusion: there is something weird happening, true, but based on intuition alone. And let's be honest : chances are very good it's not global warming. Something changed, and it was not a 0.2 degree temperature change. This is way too big for that to be a valid explanation.

<comment><USER15> Yes, the one obvious reason to pick the start of the time series is the launch of the instruments to measure it

<comment><USER14> Exactly. And that launch was done because of the problem to be analysed. Feedback loop closed. Disastrously wrong results to follow.

<comment><USER15> > And that launch was done because of the problem to be analysed. Feedback > loop closed.

Oh, yes, the Planck satellite was launched because of the problem to be analysed. Feedback loop closed.

Meteo satellites were launched because of the problem to be analysed. Feedback loop closed.

GPS satellites were launched because of the problem to be analysed. Feedback loop closed.

Are you aware that you have arrived to a cnoclusion and you're trying very hard to bent reality to adapt to your conclusion even when your arguments are absurd?

>? Disastrously wrong results to follow.

And exaclty why the results are disatrously?

<comment><USER14> Look you're attacking the weakest of the points. I think you're being unfair in your comparison.

But pedantically the point stands. The planck satellite studies a phenomenon that exists independently of the satellite or the humans studying it. This satellite was launched to study climate change by people who claim they're causing it. There's a clear difference.

> And exaclty why the results are disatrously?

Because using data about something you're doing yourself to study that phenomenon invalidates the basic axioms of statistics. If you do that, all your conclusions about the data become wrong. Why ? Because you yourself are now a factor in the phenomenon under study. At that point, and I've seen this many times, there is no longer any real hope of being correct, as there either a big gaping hole in the model, or circular reasoning. Both obviously invalidate the model.

<comment><USER15> The satellites where launched to study the ices and is independent of who or what makes them change. As I said, you clearly have a conclusion beforehand and even if facts kickball you will deny it like you're doing.

You don't have provided any rational argument for you criticism, when you were proved wrong anon when the time series started, you changed the goalposts.

As I'm very tired of deniers like you, have a nice day.

<comment><USER14> Enjoy your feedback-based data. We'll see how correct it is.

Funny how your criticism of me consists of 2 things :

1) I have a predetermined conclusion

2) and it's the wrong one (obviously you have a predetermined conclusion as well and it doesn't seem to tolerate people of different opinions)

My big argument is this : why don't we look at the main point ? Obviously that last year of data doesn't fit the data series. Obviously it's an outlier (just freaking look at it). That means it should be treated as an outlier : don't base conclusions on it, and figure out what has changed.

And it's an outlier so let me tell you: the effect seen here is NOT (directly) related to a very slow change that started in 1850. It is something else.

This also means, don't use statistics to analyse it. It won't work.

<comment><USER16> Could you please explain how the satellite observing the arctic sea ice affects climate change? As far as I can tell, until this past year (the paris climate agreement) that hasn't been a significant effort to reduce carbon emissions on a global scale, which almost certainly wouldn't have an appreciable affect on the extent/surface area of arctic sea ice (carbon cycles through the atmosphere very slowly (the fastest processes take about a year and the slowest take millions of years[0]) so it will take a while before the affects of human intervention actually propagate to the scale of global climate).

Also, you can certainly study outliers with statistics. In fact, most scientific discoveries (these days) all start out as outliers or statistical anomalies. The Higgs boson, Top quark, J/Psi,... every single particle described by the Standard Model (the most accurate scientific theory by far) all started out as anomalies and outliers. The fact that this years sea ice measurements are outliers doesn't mean they are necessarily a large statistical fluctuation, it could be that there is a new climate phenomenon taking place (look up the runaway greenhouse effect). I'm not saying that is what is happening here but we have no idea a priori which is the truth at the moment: it's a statistical fluctuation or it's a sign of a new climate phenomenon. Clearly all we can do is continue to study it using, among other tools, statistics.

[0] - [http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/CarbonCycle/page2....](http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/CarbonCycle/page2.php)</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>