Intel Fires Warning Shot at Qualcomm and Microsoft in X86 Birthday Blog Post - <AUTHOR> https://hothardware.com/news/intel-fires-shot-at-microsoft-qualcomm-with-x86-birthday-blog-post <comment><USER2> Would the Qualcomm chip have hardware hooks for X86 emulation? If so that would open up some legal issues depending on what they were, and how similar they were to Intel hardware patents, but it seems unlikely. In software, however, this has been done before without legal issue. Intel itself even touted the proprietary libhoudini as their answer to large ARM NDK codebase on Android when Intel was trying to compete in the smartphone/tablet space. [https://stackoverflow.com/questions/13005303/how-does- native...](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/13005303/how-does-native- android-code-written-for-arm-run-on-x86) I suppose ARM backed by Softbank and Qualcomm could argue for the right to perform binary translation of X86 on ARM citing Intel's own precedent in the reverse. If they fail, they could countersue for damages accumulated during time Intel was doing the exact same thing to ARM on the mobile platform. Seems like a dead end all the way around.

</comment><comment><USER3> Isn't AMD64 a _spec_? How would you sue an organization for writing something that emulates a standard?

<comment><USER4> Patent infringement of Intel's 338 patent. [http://www.cpushack.com/2012/09/06/intel-vs-the-world- the-33...](http://www.cpushack.com/2012/09/06/intel-vs-the-world- the-338-patent/)

I believe this is the main one they've used in the past to sue Cyrix, Transmeta, and other x86 clones.

Not arguing that makes sense for software emulation, but it seems to be the threat they are waving.

<comment><USER5> Would that 1990 patent be expired by now?

<comment><USER6> If not it should be very close. It's pre-1995 (priority date 1985, Filing 1988, Publication 1990) [1], so it'd be the longer of 20 years from filing date or 17 from date of issue as the basic time. However, there are compensatory adjustments for certain delays in issuance that could apply, Intel could possibly have submarined it to some extent (pre-WTO Uruguay Round), and #5,321,836 looks related [2]. I vaguely remember there have been issues with uneven expiration around the world for some older stuff too. So I have no idea exactly all that would add up, it'd be neat if the FSF or EFF or someone had done some calculations on it. Still, it's definitely an interesting question, we should relatively soon be approaching the point where, even taking into account 1990s IP extension shenanigans, all patents to tech from that era will expire, and expiration will become a lot more regular once the WTO-normalized ones are all that's left. There was a pretty rapid curve of basic developments in the 90s and early 00s, and as all that becomes available over the next decade there might be some interesting new possibilities in development.

1\. [http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph- Parser?Sect2=PTO1&Sect2=H...](http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph- Parser?Sect2=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=/netahtml/PTO/search- bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&d=PALL&RefSrch=yes&Query=PN/4972338)

2\. [http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph- Parser?Sect2=PTO1&Sect2=H...](http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph- Parser?Sect2=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=/netahtml/PTO/search- bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&d=PALL&RefSrch=yes&Query=PN/5321836)</comment></comment></comment></comment>


New Metal Can Become Soft and Stiff Like Human Muscles - <AUTHOR> https://www.inverse.com/article/11908-new-metal-can-become-soft-and-stiff-just-like-human-muscles <comment><USER2> It's not a new metal! This title is very misleading. They're just balancing a spring against something that contributes negatively to the spring constant that can be added and removed.

</comment><comment><USER3> Is there a more detailed explanation of this somewhere, and what range of stiffness variation can be achieved?

From what little can be seen in the video, it looks like the main spring is divided in half, and the center plane is variably tensioned perpendicularly, with the leaf springs so acting variably against the lower part of the string.

<comment><USER2> Prolly gotta read the paper. It relies on something called the beam column effect. It's been used for ages for making vibration isolators. You compress the flexure until you push the resonant frequency where you're happy.</comment></comment>


Numenta open sourcing their machine learning algorithms - <AUTHOR> http://numenta.org

<comment><USER2> I was so exicted when I read the title, but sadly the repo is still empty. I was one of those guys who watched numenta from the very beginning years ago.</comment>


Graydon Hoare Talks About Security, History, and Rust - <AUTHOR> https://thenewstack.io/rust-creator-graydon-hoare-talks-about-security-history-and-rust/ <comment><USER2> I'm always interested to hear (well, read) Graydon's perspectives on programming languages, with him having gone from working on Rust to working on Swift at Apple.</comment>


U.S. Bribery Case Sheds Light on Mysterious Chinese Company - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/21/business/china-energy-cefc.html <comment><AUTHOR> From the article (emphasis mine):

> CEFC has risen suddenly _from a little known Chinese company to a major > player_ in the global energy business, with investments in Europe, the > Middle East, Central Asia and Africa.

The whole little known to major player seems to be becoming a recurring theme for Chinese companies.

<comment><USER2> Nothing surprising. CCP is rather crude in the way they create proxy companies to hide direct involvement of the party.

They do not learn that it is always looks suspicious if a never heard of entity begins moving 10 digit sums around.

<comment><USER3> Maybe they don't learn, maybe they don't care: it's how they play ball in their home court, they bet they can do it elsewhere too.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> These are Chinese nationals working for a Chinese company in Africa. Why is the US DOJ involved?

<comment><USER5> If I were to guess, they have connections to American customers, supplies, investors or whatever who might be implicated in some sort of wrongdoing, breaking American laws.

There is no mention in the article of any such thing though.

Basically, there are just these tidbits:

1\. Mr. Ye has rubbed shoulders with some famous Americans, like Allen Greenspan and Henry Kissinger.

2\. Mr. Ye's think tank has some relationship with the UN and has organized conferences that that _" have featured senior American military officials and Chinese People's Liberation Army generals."_ (That being relayed information evidently gleaned from that think tank's website itself.)

So I think we have to fall back on general observations about US being the self-appointed policeman to the world. If anyone is bribing anyone's ass anywhere, and it ruffles U.S. feathers for any reason (like some U.S. ventures in that area are disadvantaged), it's a US DOJ matter!

<comment><USER6> It's stated within the first 4 sentences of the article...

<comment><USER4> It says the meetings happened at the UN, with which he has an official affiliation. UN headquarters has a special relationship with NY (and the US) and generally there is immunity involved and no ability for the US to refuse a visa. This was a key carve out for locating the UN secretariat in NYC.

<comment><USER7> You can't fly to the UN with your official affiliation to commit crimes. That's not the way that diplomatic immunity works.

<comment><USER4> It really is though. In most cases all they can do is kick you out. In some cases the foreign government can waive immunity to allow prosecution, but it's rare. This guy wasn't a diplomat though so diplomatic immunity doesn't apply. Regardless of that, my understanding from having grown up going to an international school in NYC where most of my friends were there because their parents were assigned to the UN, is that there's a weaker form of effective immunity that basically is just that the UN grounds are not trivially part of the US. So it's not clear to me why US bribery laws applied to a foreign national on foreign business inside the UN? My guess is that the practical answer is just that the US are world police and so they do what they want.

[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diplomatic_immunity](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diplomatic_immunity)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Bribes are the greatest investment in third world countries, or almost as profitable as lobbying in USA :).

The corrupt PM that demands $50 million for that wireless license or $1 Billion road doesn't care much about the equipment or prices, after all you paid him and he knows you have to make it back. He will remove all your troubles.

<comment><USER9> In the USA there may be one or two more layers but "lobbying" often boils down to "bribery" in the end. It's just not quite so flagrant.

<comment><USER8> Worse since it's legal. With "bribery" at least you risk jail and huge fines.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> How does this gratify one's intellectual curiosity ?

As per the guidelines:

On-Topic: Anything that good hackers would find interesting. That includes more than hacking and startups. If you had to reduce it to a sentence, the answer might be: anything that gratifies one's intellectual curiosity.

Off-Topic: Most stories about politics, or crime, or sports, unless they're evidence of some interesting new phenomenon. Ideological or political battle or talking points. Videos of pratfalls or disasters, or cute animal pictures. If they'd cover it on TV news, it's probably off-topic.

<comment><USER11> It's relevant as I'm applying to YC18 with Bribely, a bribery-as-a-service app that uses machine learning to discover which official to bribe, then properly launder the sum to avoid regulatory interference.

/s</comment></comment>


Groupon Reports Q3 2012 Earnings Below Expectations - <AUTHOR> http://techcrunch.com/2012/11/08/groupons-q3-2012-earnings/

<comment><USER2> Examples like this makes me scratch wonder about the sky-high valuations for Dropbox and Airbnb.

Kudos to Dropbox and Airbnb for executing on great ideas and building awesome companies.

Kudos to YC and other early investors for finding a diamond in the rough.

They'll all make tons of money :)

But those lofty valuations come with lofty expectations. Groupon has over $1B in revenue and a $2B marketcap but is perceived as a failure.

<comment><USER3> $1B in rev but $3 mm in losses without profitability in sight.

You can create a pretty "massive" company pretty quickly if you basically sell $10.00 for $9.97

Their size actually works against them. Lots of companies lose money in the early days, but are able to justify / demonstrate why and when they'll be profitable. If you already have $1 B in sales and are still operationally unprofitable ... how much more will it take?

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Does this surprise anyone?

<comment><USER5> I am not surprised. They've had a rough time since going public. Their model does not seem quite sustainable and entities that partner with them in offering deals must be either desperate or extremely confident that they can generate enough buzz and retain customers to offset their losses.

Sounds like a losing strategy to me.

<comment><USER6> Is there any winning strategy that revolves around 'generating buzz'?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> -14% after-hours. A close friend in a long-short fund I know will be celebrating this news all night. Value investors, I salute you.

<comment><USER8> You weren't kidding:

<http://www.google.com/finance?q=NASDAQ%3AGRPN>

Brutal.

<comment><USER7> This is what I said/discussed over 200 days ago:

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3870044>

It still has another billion to go (now at an equity value of $2.56bn), I guess that shorting now hasn't got the upside/return it had 200 days ago.</comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: Should tech ban the use of gender/race features in ML? - <AUTHOR> As machine learning becomes more commonplace, I think it's important to consider the repercussions of including gender, sex, race, ethnicity, etc features in the training data.  Many ML models have "greedy" optimization algorithms, resulting in models that may be eager to prioritize some features, like gender or race, over more nuanced combinations of features, like poverty, environment, etc.  The resulting models could then be used as evidence to reinforce stereotypes about groups of people.<p>What can we do about this?  The only solution I see is to explicitly ban the use of such features in models, to force ML researches to dig deeper into the datasets, and to prevent the resulting models from containing incendiary biases. <comment><USER2> An outright ban is not reasonable.

Medically speaking, gender or race can important. In the US the rate of sickle-cell disease is highest among those with sub-Saharan African descent, likely related to malaria resistance.

Or, suppose you want to analyze police stop-and-frisk records to see if there is evidence of racial bias. How do you do so without using race as a feature?

This sort of topic can be covered in an ethics course. ACM members are expected to follow the ACM Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct, at [https://www.acm.org/about-acm/acm-code-of-ethics-and- profess...](https://www.acm.org/about-acm/acm-code-of-ethics-and-professional- conduct) . See also [https://ethics.acm.org/code-of-ethics/using-the- code/](https://ethics.acm.org/code-of-ethics/using-the-code/) .

That said, it's a long way from having such a code, and understanding how to follow it. One was is through ethics courses. ACM accredited schools are, I believe, required to include an ethics course. You example is only one of many possible topics.

However, I don't think that those ethics guidelines are that influential.

Even less so if people think the goal of education is to train people for the needs of commerce and industry. Ethics guidelines exist to help identify which of those needs are immoral - not something most companies want!

</comment><comment><USER3> How in the world would you ban this? Perhaps you could convince governments not to use such features themselves, but there's no way you can ban this in general.

</comment><comment><USER4> This isn't a new problem, is it? It's just that the models are more complex.

Science shouldn't ban any type of input data, as long as it can be considered scientific. There's no scientific standard for determining race, so maybe the data should be excluded on that basis instead.

I'll point out that self-reported demographic data can be useful in health and social science, even if it's not scientifically tied to actual genes.</comment>


Is Facebook just a passing fad? - <AUTHOR> http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/features/is-facebook-just-a-passing-fad-1546399.html <comment><USER2> Was Friendster, Ryze, Myspace? a fad? Probably.

Digg? Yes.

Is it an essential cant live without it staple in your life? If you can't answer that question easily then its a fad for you.

For me its a fad, a willing participation on my part because so many others part of the fad- its still a fad though, eventually the flock will leap to the next fad, and the next, and the next.

<comment><USER3> Geocities?

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> No, it's not a fad there is too much value in the network. Now, once the social 'graph is made easily portable then things will change but right now FB has little incentive to do so.

<comment><USER5> I'm 20 and living in Denmark. 4 years ago I created my first MySpace profile, a year later 95% of my friends where on MySpace. It was where it _happened_ \- we arranged shit and kept in touch and whatnot. A year-a year and a half ago the tide turned in favour of Facebook. It happened damn quick. Four months or something, and all 200+ had abandoned MySpace for Facebook.

I see no reason why that won't happen again.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> It is not a fad, it is an addiction. My wife checks it more than email now.</comment>


Machine Learning Model Generates Hitler's Ethnic Cleansing as Humor - <AUTHOR> https://arxiv.org/abs/2004.13317 <comment><AUTHOR> I'm very sad as one of the machine learning engineers and surprised that this paper is accepted ACL2020. [https://www.aclweb.org/anthology/2020.acl- srw.21/](https://www.aclweb.org/anthology/2020.acl-srw.21/)</comment>


Ask HN: What Mobile Apps do You Frequently Use, Why? - <AUTHOR>

It'd be really interesting to know which apps the HN community have/ use frequently on their phones.<p>I'll give it a go first:<p>- Fantastical: Calendar on steroids<p>- Evernote: Note taking<p>- Dropbox: Easy access to all my files<p>- Kindle: Read books while commuting<p>- Reeder: Stay up to date with my RSS feed<p>- Trello: Used to manage my todos (I have the following board: doing, to do, goal, done, icebox)<p>- Clear: Awesome todo list I use for things that don't belong in Trello, such as groceries<p>- MapMyRun: Track distance/ time for when I go jogging<p>- Skype: Chat with the family that lives abroad<p>- i-Qi timer: Time I use to wake me up from Meditation<p>- Daily Goals: Track and measure small daily goals (read, call a friend, stretch, floss, etc)<p>- Spotify: Music on the go<p>- Audience: Awesome Google Analytics app<p>- AdSenseHQ: Keep track of my Google Adsense Revenue<p>- Embark NYC: NYC Transit app<p>- Groupon: I only use it for a daily deal this great nearby indian restaurant has :)<p>- Dictionary: Comes in more handy that I'd like to admit<p>- Google Maps: The name says it all<p>- 500px: Used whenever I need to see something visually appealing or need some inspiration <comment><USER2> Awesome list!

Also: \- Circa - heavily summarized news. Great for short reading. \- Instapaper - clean read later service. \- HackerNode - gotta get the Hacker News on the go. \- TimeHop - a "this day in history" for your social networks. \- Droplr - really simple file sharing service. \- Tweetbot - really clean Twitter app.

</comment><comment><USER3> My favorite is Quora... it's a great resource for knowledge</comment>


Seeing Theory - <AUTHOR> https://seeing-theory.brown.edu <comment><USER2> This is a well made website. I love the design and how fast it is. The only problem I have is that you can only seem to link to chapters but not paragraphs in the chapters. You sorta can with appending section1,section2, etc to the url as a hash but it's a bit off.

</comment><comment><USER3> This is really good. I'm fairly well versed in these topics already but I've sent this off to some friends who have only recently started their CS studies.

</comment><comment><USER4> previous submissions [https://hn.algolia.com/?query=https:%2F%2Fseeing- theory.brow...](https://hn.algolia.com/?query=https:%2F%2Fseeing- theory.brown.edu%2F&sort=byPopularity&prefix&page=0&dateRange=all&type=story)

</comment><comment><USER5> Did anyone else find the variance illustration completely baffling? It's got little to do with an intuitive feel for the variation in outcome for a random variable</comment>


Veertu – native Mac virtualization available on the App Store - <AUTHOR> http://www.veertu.com <comment><USER2> I love this app and can't wait to run Mac OS X VMs! Also for the CLI check out [http://www.xhyve.org](http://www.xhyve.org)

</comment><comment><USER3> Great! Just what I wanted. I'm gonna check it out. Is there a CLI available as well for things like docker?

It's only 20mb. Auto-downloads linux iso's, including debian and coreos

<comment><USER4> There will be soon!

<comment><USER3> And an osx-guest? I'm currently running vmware fusion for this. It'd be great to be able to ditch it and use something that's really native.

<comment><USER4> Currently in testing, in a few weeks we're hoping to release it on the AppStore

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Very small application. Works great!</comment>


Encrypted SNI Comes to Firefox Nightly - <AUTHOR> https://blog.mozilla.org/security/2018/10/18/encrypted-sni-comes-to-firefox-nightly/ <comment><USER3> Is it me or...

> If they're willing to convert all their customers to ESNI at once

Why does it seem like this is over-engineering at it's finest? Not only are CDNs now part of the problem/solution space, but they are now dictating.

It is now _that much_ harder to diagnose issues when they do crop up, instead of checking ping or nslookup. Now, you've got to see if the DNS-over-HTTPS/The DNS record itself/Host/client/any number of other steps is broken.

We've completely removed the ability for a poweruser to diagnose before calling their resident IT professional.

<comment><USER4> It's even worse. To use ESNI you need DOH. To use DOH you need a resolver with a server certificates, which is kindly offered by the same cloud providers. So now all your base are belong to cloudflare.

<comment><USER5> It's even worse because they talk like ESNI is some kind of standard, but there's only been a single draft at the IETF written by a Mozilla employee, and that draft is still at version 1. Calm down Mozilla, maybe other people would like to comment on the design before you go and implement it?

Doing it like this is a great way to end up in interopeability hell down the road when different parties have implemented different versions. I'm not saying they _have to_ wait until it's an RFC, but atleast wait for a couple more versions of the draft and let the IETF discuss it a bunch first. This is a big change.

<comment><USER6> > but there's only been a single draft at the IETF written by a Mozilla > employee

I can see why it might look that way, but actually draft-ietf-tls-esni-01 is the third draft of this document, and has been co-written by at least four named authors including Chris Wood at Apple. Also that "Mozilla employee" was one of the Working Group chairs.

draft-ietf-tls-esni-01 was preceded by draft-ietf-tls-esni-00 (it is usual for early drafts to have zero zero versions)

draft-ietf-tls-esni-00 was preceded by draft-rescorla-tls-esni which was Eric Rescorla's first write-up of this idea

Finally, though this document didn't exist twelve months ago, the "issues and requirements" document did. This document imports the thinking behind that document, it just provides an implementation and now Firefox is testing it.

The reason for the name change is a thing called "adoption". The TLS Working Group agreed by consensus to adopt this piece of work, rather than it just being independent stuff by a handful of people who coincidentally were working group members. When that happens the draft's name changes, to reflect the adoption (removing a single person's name) and sometimes to use more diplomatic naming (e.g. the "diediedie" draft got a name that didn't tell TLS 1.0 to "die" any more when it was adopted).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> So what's the plan for when IPv6 gains more adoption and we don't need SNI as much since every site can have its own public IP address (thus making tracking easier, subverting the benefits of encrypted SNI).

Do you think encrypted SNI and NAT will become preferred to using IPv6 for routing because of the privacy benefits of ESNI (either real or imagined, depending on who you trust, since this seems to be relying on centralized CDNs for adoption)?

Edit: I realize ESNI and IPv6 are orthogonal, however, I wanted to ask since I know that lack of IP space and using NAT/SNI are correlated.

<comment><USER8> IPv6 will never gain universal adoption.

Nobody wants their home or their datacenter machines exposed to the whole Internet all the time.

NAT is a feature, not a bug.

<comment><USER9> That side effect of NAT is easily replaced with a simple firewall. Even today, many home routers have this capability already by virtue of running linux. Enabling it would be a pretty simple step for manufacturers.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I'm curious why this is tied to DNS-over-HTTPS.

It looks like Cloudflare is including a public key in the DNS lookup, which is used to encrypt the SNI information.

Couldn't this key be stored in a TXT record for normal DNS lookups as well?

<comment><USER11> If the public key was stored in a TXT record and accessed via regular DNS, then someone snooping the connection could see that you made a DNS lookup for that domain, and could make the reasonable assumption that you were about to make a request to said domain.

<comment><USER12> Someone could still make a very reasonable assumption based on IP addresses and response sizes, which is where I believe the primary focus would shift if by some chance this encrypted SNI becomes impossible to circumvent. But also someone could just block DNS-over-HTTPS requests altogether and force Firefox into cleartext DNS and therefore circumvent encrypted SNI.

It also centralizes DNS requests at Cloudflare's POPs (a company from a mass surveillance, secret orders happy, police country by the way).

No, none of it addresses privacy and security, probably only makes it worse.

It's time to admit there is no future for privacy and security without overlay networks.

<comment><USER13> > someone could just block DNS-over-HTTPS requests altogether

If you are going to block DoH you'll need to block all HTTPS traffic altogether, don't you? I mean unless you are just blocking traffic to some list of known DoH providers.

<comment><USER12> DoH must be bootstrapped somehow to get IP addresses to make requests to. This is where it can be blocked. Either blocking DNS query or a known IP address or just an IP address with suspiciously tiny responses that responds to active probing requests as a DoH server. It's very hard to hide that fact, you need to actively fight those blocking attempts. And if it's done by some government, corporations just bend over backwards to help censorship, like they did in cases of Signal and Telegram recently for example.

<comment><USER14> >This is where it can be blocked. Either blocking DNS query or a known IP address or just an IP address with suspiciously tiny responses that responds to active probing requests as a DoH server.

This works great in theory but if it takes off then Google and Cloudflare can simply decide to serve DNSoHTTPS requests over their existing service IP space and you're left with the choice of block the internet or allow encrypted DNS lookups.

As far as government comments you're never going to deploy public infrastructure inside a state and be able to avoid the state so it's pointless to bring anything about that up.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> This sounds great. Does anyone know if any web servers are planning on implementing it?

<comment><USER16> ESNI is primarily a feature of the SSL implementation, not of the web server. As far as I'm aware, it's not in OpenSSL yet, but is likely to be added once TLS 1.3 has been finalized.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> Hey I just recently complained about SNI on a recent HN thread ([https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18223168](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18223168)). This is a lovely coincidence. Thanks Mozilla!

</comment><comment><USER18> I would love to understand why Firefox keep adding support for CloudFlare specific features.

<comment><USER19> Thats not remotely true. ESNI is a draft IETF spec - [https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tls- esni/](https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tls-esni/). It just so happens, that right now CloudFlare and Firefox are the ones that implement it. But any particular feature, regardless of how great it is or how well specified by a standards body, must have a first implementation by someone. And it's really not that shocking that a group like CloudFlare wants to be at the forefront of new web technologies AND also has the resources to pay for it. What does boggle the mind that is that everyone freaks out when a draft IETF standard is implemented. What do people want? For it to spring into existence fully formed implemented by all browsers, operating systems, DNS software and providers, etc all that once? That would be ridiculous - <USER2> worse, if there aren't a few experimental implementations to work out the issues, even if that could happen, what would be implemented would probably have significant issues that we'd then be stuck with forever.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> Does this mean that this change will add yet another roundtrip?

<comment><USER21> No, it's bootstrapped from an additional DNS record type (which presumably would be returned alongside the A record).

See [https://blog.cloudflare.com/encrypted- sni/](https://blog.cloudflare.com/encrypted-sni/) .

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> As a cancer survivor, using the example of someone spying on your cancer.org visit as a motivation for encrypted SNI seems a bit excessive and insensitive. There are definitely more neutral ways of motivating eSNI than invoking the fear of a stranger finding out you or a loved one has cancer. Shame on Mozilla.

<comment><USER23> I get you, but I suppose the most obvious alternative examples are things like porn or illegal sites, which they might not have wanted to use. What alternative examples would you have preferred?

Apple's contrived example from when they introduced private mode in Safari was shopping for presents and not wanting the recipient to find out, but that would be even less convincing when the person you're hiding your traffic from is the person next to you in the coffee shop.

<comment><USER22> The coffee shop being able to know all the domains you're visiting without your consent is already bad enough. I don't think they need to draw out a specific example. If the idea of the coffee shop knowing all the websites we visit is bad, we'll come up with our own examples, and that's something everyone can do. Almost no one researches cancer online.</comment></comment></comment>


Tom Petty, legendary rocker, is dead at 66 - <AUTHOR> https://www.cbsnews.com/news/tom-petty-legendary-rocker-is-dead-at-66/ <comment><USER2> Going to miss this guy – hell of an artist and I feel like he had a ton more music to give us at only 66. RIP.

</comment><comment><USER3> The Traveling Wilburys reunion is going to be pretty sparsely attended. I hope Bob Dylan and Jeff Lynne are looking after themselves.</comment>


Ask HN: P2P payments are the future? - <AUTHOR> Why are so many people making P2P payments apps/businesses nowadays?
PayPal for B2C convenience (1998) Lending Club (2006) Braintree for Payment APIs (2007) Venmo for direct P2P payments (2009) Stripe for Payment APIs (2011) Host of P2P Payment apps (2011 - Present)
Please share your thoughts in the comments section.
Disclosure: I made a P2P payment app for iOS and Android too, it's called AgreeOn: https://agreeon.app.link/p2p-future <comment><AUTHOR> Disclosure: I made a P2P payment app for iOS and Android too, it's called AgreeOn: [https://agreeon.app.link/p2p-future](https://agreeon.app.link/p2p-future)</comment>


Artificial Intelligence Sheds New Light on the Origins of the Bible - <AUTHOR> http://gizmodo.com/artificial-intelligence-sheds-new-light-on-the-origins-1769736018 <comment><AUTHOR> [http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2016/04/05/1522200113.abst...](http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2016/04/05/1522200113.abstract)</comment>


A Coffee Table Book on Programming Languages - <AUTHOR> https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/2030045192/hello-world-coffee-table-book <comment><AUTHOR> Hey everyone, Daniel from the kickstarter here! After learning several programming languages, and looking into many more, I thought about the shared experience all programmers have of getting a program to run for the first time. Whether it's your first time programming or the first time using a new language or framework, pretty much all first interactions begin with a "Hello, World!" command. I decided to turn this into an art piece, and the coffee table book was born. Would love to answer any questions people have!

</comment><comment><USER2> No shipping to Canada? :(

<comment><AUTHOR> Added to the international shipping reward!</comment></comment>


H.R.387 – Email Privacy Act - <AUTHOR> https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/387/text <comment><USER2> So frustrating that there is no easy way to apply the bill 'diff' to the underlying statute and then read the result.

Legislative workflow is in serious need of some better tooling.

<comment><USER3> yeah, I've been thinking of this tool for about 7 years!

First the entire US code would have to be on a git repo. And all the approved pull requests would also be there and you could roll it back to the very beginning.

All the contributors would be the politicians. And all proposed bills would show what they modified. And the branch they came from would have all the other things.

I like it because it would also be open to discussion and scrutiny. But transparency means a different thing to those people.

<comment><USER4> That is a fantastic idea. I'm not even American and I'd be fascinated by that. Every country should have this. During election time you could put in a candidate's name and see their history, what they voted for, any legislation they implemented etc. Truly open government.

There probably is something like this for the EU Parliament but buried somewhere that nobody can find

<comment><USER5> I'd be surprised if this wasn't already done in most countries. Checked my own out of curiosity, and they log all proposals, all votes on them, and provide the amendment text including how the new text would look with the changes applied.[1][2]

Granted, it's not as easy to go back and see all the changes to a certain law, but the data is there.

1 - [http://www.psp.cz/sqw/historie.sqw?o=7&t=964](http://www.psp.cz/sqw/historie.sqw?o=7&t=964)

2 - [http://www.psp.cz/sqw/phlasa.sqw?o=7&s=54&pg=17](http://www.psp.cz/sqw/phlasa.sqw?o=7&s=54&pg=17)

<comment><USER3> Yeah it really is not.

Should also be standard affair for state and municipal governments and all regulators.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Any analysis or summary on this for those who don't want to read raw bill text?

<comment><USER7> It would require a warrant for grabbing email versus today's law which only requires a simple subpoena after 180 days.

<comment><USER8> A warrant for who? The NSA apparently can just run roughshod over any laws.

<comment><USER9> Regular law enforcement, in cases that don't warrant (not intended) "parallel construction", presumably.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> > by striking "divulge" and inserting "disclose"

That appears frequently. Not sure what legalize there is between the two words.

There are many inclusions which sound like they are giving the government unlimited rights -- "nothing shall limit" \--

> "(i) Rule Of Construction Related To Legal Process.—Nothing in this section > or in section 2702 shall limit the authority of a governmental entity to use > an administrative subpoena [..] to

> "(1) require an [..] intended recipient of a wire or electronic > communication to disclose a wire or electronic communication (including the > contents of that communication) to the governmental entity;

So, no restrictions on obtaining a warrant to look at emails. Free warrants?

> "(j) Rule Of Construction Related To Congressional Subpoenas.—Nothing [..] > shall limit the power of inquiry vested in the Congress [..] including the > authority to compel the production of a wire or electronic communication > (including the contents of a wire or electronic communication) that is > stored, held, or maintained by a person or entity that provides remote > computing service or electronic communication service."

This sounds like Congress is giving itself no restrictions to obtain the contents of any email or electronic communications.

And then there is the "you cannot tell anyone about this warrant" clause:

> "(a) In General.—A governmental entity [..] may apply to a court for an > order directing a provider [..] to not to notify any other person of the > existence of the warrant, order, subpoena, or other directive.

> for delayed notification of up to 180 days

I understand the bits at the bottom to mean, "no weird interpretation of this act can be made to seem like the US Gov't cannot have access to your communications":

> Nothing in this Act or an amendment made by this Act shall be construed to > preclude the acquisition by the United States Government of

> (1) the contents of a wire or electronic communication pursuant to other > lawful authorities, including the authorities under chapter 119 of title 18 > (commonly known as the "Wiretap Act"), the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance > Act of 1978

Without having read the prior text, this sounds like it is giving the government fewer restrictions for accessing stored communications.

<comment><USER11> >So, no restrictions on obtaining a warrant to look at emails. Free warrants?

You're misreading a lot of the bill, it says that "nothing in this section or the one preceding shall limit the already existing laws for warrants." Similarly, the "you can't tell anyone" clause already exists, this just isn't changing it.

This bill is removing a section in the existing law that considers data stored on a server for more than 180 days abandoned, requiring only a subpoena to access. It's a good bill, though it only addresses a tiny part of the problems, which is why I expect it can get passed.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> Is this politically feasible?

<comment><USER13> Looks like it was proposed by a republican, so if they've got their parties buy in it could be. Could be related to Trump's tussle with the intelligence community?

<comment><USER14> I think an earlier variant of this already passed the house near-unanimously. It's the senate that balked last time round.</comment></comment></comment>


Abstract Your Key Value Store - <AUTHOR> http://yellerapp.com/posts/2014-05-09-abstract-kv.html

<comment><USER2> but all of these key-value stores implement different features and functionality, and what's easy in one is next to impossible in another. Why would you limit yourself to just using the common subset of each?

<comment><AUTHOR> like always, software development is tradeoffs. For this product, where I have a hosted thing, which uses riak (which has a very limited set of functionality), but may eventually offer an enterprise thing that uses a traditional sql database (just as a k/v store though). Furthermore, the ability to compose e.g. caching on top of storage has been super useful

<comment><USER2> if your needs are simple, why reach for a higher layer of abstraction, rather than just rewrite the simple layer in the first place? You will quickly find that your abstraction library doesn't handle everything you were thinking of post-migration anyway.

<comment><AUTHOR> That doesn't help if I want to support both kinds of installs using the same codebase. I'm pretty confident with this set of abstractions at this point - I've implemented maybe 15 different storage backends or storage wrappers, most of which were super easy, and I've never changed app code based on storage changing out from underneath it.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


If You're Too Busy to Meditate, Read This - <AUTHOR> http://blogs.hbr.org/bregman/2012/10/if-youre-too-busy-to-meditate.html <comment><USER2> In my opinion, Meditation and Mindfullness are not the same thing.

Meditation is a state, where the mind is completely silent, the breath slows waaaay down, the heartbeat slows waaaay down. Slowly ever so slowly, some bliss starts to bubble up from within. It is the climax of one pointed attention. Few people who say they "meditate" are reaching that point since it requires years of sincere effort. In Yoga, meditation is known as Dhyana, or the state resulting from the mind becoming one pointed for 100 seconds. Samadhi, which is considered a state of deep bliss is considered reached when the mind becomes completely still for 1000 seconds.

Mindfullness, is the act of being more aware during daily activities. Like watching actions and interactions. There is a gradual tendency to modify behavior to being more calm, collected and centered which helps to go deeper when attempting to meditate. The mind is still active during mindfullness, but it is being directed or corrected as needed throughout the day.

Meditation helps to develop deeper Mindfullness and vice versa. Meditation is like taking a shower, whereas Mindfullness is avoiding rolling in the mud and getting dirty. It is important to keep in mind that Meditation is literally a state where the mind is free from thought and that all the "meditation practices and techniques" are just different paths of reaching that same place.

<comment><USER3> If one were looking to get into Meditation, what is a good way of going about it? Preferably a DIY way if possible, but if a class is really _the_ way to go that's okay.

When you say years of sincere effort, are you talking devoting a full-time job's worth of time, or just keeping a routine?

I've been interested in meditation for a while, but it seems whenever I try and dig around I get completely lost in literature and terms and fail to see a proper starting point. I'm not looking to go crazy, I like the idea of Mindfullness and having a better understanding of how to control the ebb and flow of your thoughts.

<comment><USER4> I've read maybe a dozen books on vipassana meditation (the type usually posted to HN), zen, and mindfulness. The two best _practical_ books on meditation I've read are:

1\. The Miracle of Mindfulness, Thich Nhat Hanh

2\. Mindfulness in Plain English, Bhante Gunaratana. This one is free online, though the paid copy is a bit more edited for clarity.

My primary guide is 1. It's concise and provides just the right amount of breathing exercises to help me focus while I "sit." 2 is more comprehensive but I've found it a bit too scattered, with _too many_ tools to help with breathing that I go in circles attempting different ones. Most people I think employ a couple and ignore the rest. 1 is much better written and just a more cohesive book than 2 IMO, but they're both great books and either one alone works well as a guide to meditating.

<comment><USER5> I highly recommend the book Passage Meditation by Eknath Easwaran.

<comment><USER6> Reading it now. (ot: His commentary on the Gita is also quite lovely.)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> The misconception about meditation is that it requires one to give up everything and sit silently. This is not true in its entirety as it depends on how one interprets the word "meditation".

The meditation does not necessarily require you to give up one thing for the sake of another. The goal of the meditation is to "be in awareness" and you can achieve this same goal by being alert and aware with any activity your find yourself doing at any given moment. For example...

You are washing dishes but you are not really washing dishes because your mind is wandering with thoughts on what you need to do tonight at the place you need to visit. By the time your dishes are done, you have already planned for your future as your mind kept you busy with the thoughts of the future while you forgot what you were doing in the present (which is, washing dishes, which you really didn't).

The meditation is to be-in-present with whatever activity you do and love to do. If you had washed your dishes with full alertness and awareness, you would have achieved the same goal of meditation.

Let's go even further with another example.

You love to play music as your passion (or dance, or paint, or fill in the blank activity here) but you don't get enough opportunity in the day to do what you love to do more with passion. When you dance or sing or play music or run or exercise, you get the opportunity during that activity to forget yourself in the act (the subject merges into the object) and you become one with the reality, or you transcend that favorite activity by merging your self into it. That moment of transcendence is meditation, and you should find more opportunities to be in that meditation, in those moments.

Now, I am not suggesting that the type of meditation mentioned at the source is wrong or ineffective. What I am suggesting however is that people don't need to get stuck with one type of explanation of meditation because ultimately you can achieve the same goal by shifting the focus a bit.

<comment><USER8> Sorry, this is hard for me to understand. You seem to be saying--and I apologize if I misinterpret you--that it is better to focus on dishwashing than to use otherwise idle mental time to plan one's future.

Is that really the case? What gains could one expect from focusing on dishwashing, only to take time away from some other activity to plan one's future?

<comment><USER9> It's better to let yourself to be swallowed whole by your current activity (be it just doing the dishes) than to continue in the endless chatter of your mind. Doing the dishes can be fun if you pay attention to the textures, temperatures, smells and sounds. You can plan your future later, giving it full attention again. That's the idea.

<comment><USER3> _Doing the dishes can be fun if you pay attention to the textures, temperatures, smells and sounds._

I can't wait to do the dishes when I get home today.

<comment><USER10> It's harder than it sounds. Your subconscious will continually try to interrupt your mindfulness of the dish washing. The main trick of meditation is to be able to gently push those idle thoughts away and refocus on the dish washing (or whatever it is you are meditating on). Even if you don't end up enjoying dish washing more, meditating like this is an excellent workout for your focus and concentration and can be a real stress reliever as well.

<comment><USER11> It can get frustrating when you really try and yet constantly fail to maintain focus. It helps to remember that the purpose of the exercise is not to succeed in maintaining a laser-like focus, but instead to practice noticing your failures. That is how you level up your self-awareness into a skill that carries over into activities beyond dishwashing.

<comment><USER12> _It helps to remember that the purpose of the exercise is not to succeed in maintaining a laser-like focus, but instead to practice noticing your failures._

Right, and I would suggest that there are no _failures_ here — just notice what is going on in your mind, without judging it, and then gently bring your attention back to the breath. As we practice this over time the mind will more easily quiet down. Be the patient observer of your mind and know that you are not your thoughts.

I highly recommend some of Jon Kabat-Zinn's books, and/or some of his videos on YouTube. These have been very helpful to me.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Wait. Wait wait wait.

> Research shows that an ability to resist urges will improve your > relationships, increase your dependability, and raise your performance...

Great. Yes. Impulse control is key. Delayed gratification is part of how we define higher intelligence.

Meditation has what do with this, exactly?

> How [does meditation help]? By increasing your capacity to resist > distracting urges.

This entire article is predicated by this leap of faith, which as far as I can see has little to no justification besides, "Of course it does!"

> Meditation teaches us to resist the urge of that counterproductive follow > through.

One cannot just say things over and over to make them true.

<comment><USER14> Meditation is the focused practice of resisting distraction.

Have you ever tried sitting still for 15-30 minutes, doing nothing but breathing? Distractions come easily in this state. Sometimes it's your thoughts. Other times, it's very hard to resist the urge to get up and start moving. In order to successfully meditate, you need to deal with a wide variety of distractions and other obstacles.

<comment><USER13> > Meditation is the focused practice of resisting distraction.

Are we defining it this way? Because this does not jive with my experience of meditation, focusing, or resisting distraction.

> Have you ever tried sitting still for 15-30 minutes, doing nothing but > breathing?

Yes. As a matter of fact, meditation was part of a martial arts practice I participated in for 2 years. In all that time I tried very hard to do this, but never found much value in it. Eventually I settled on quietly and methodically reflecting on the day, which is something that seemed to have a lot more value than chasing a vague notion of emptiness.

And honestly I'm not convinced this is _any different_ from the "benefits" of meditation.

<comment><USER15> Are you familiar with the 10,000 Hour Rule? It says that the mastery of any skill requires 10k hours of _deliberate practice_ of that skill. Meditation is the act of deliberately practicing and developing one's ability to resist distraction.

The hypothesis is as simple as "Telling jokes is a good way to become funny". Would you demand empirical evidence to support that claim as well? It might be difficult to find research to back it up, as it's so obvious that no one took the time to do a study.

There's no guarantee that meditation will work for you, just like some people might tell a lot of jokes and not get any funnier. If someone was forced to tell jokes like you were forced to meditate, they probably wouldn't like it either. But the value of the meditation seems to be obvious - if you want to get better at resisting distraction, then sit down and practice resisting distraction.

<comment><USER16> > The hypothesis is as simple as "Telling jokes is a good way to become funny"

Right. So practicing meditation is a good way to become better at meditation. There's no guarantee that that skill transfers over to very different situations.

I'm not saying your intuition is wrong, however, I actually suspect it's right. But to claim that you can definitively say that it's right is not scientific.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> What the author calls "impulses" the Buddha called sankhara, or reactivity. The ones the OP is talking about are minor reactions.

These reactions do indeed impede our progress, as when our actions are driven by reaction we are not fully aware of what's going on around us. I first recognized the practical implications of this playing billiards - when I would strike a ball and miss, I would feel slightly dejected, and neglect to analyze what I just did to learn from it. When I would strike a ball and make it, I would feel slightly elated, and neglect to understand what I just did to learn from it.

My game got a lot better when I started playing the game, fascinated but detached from outcomes. There are a remarkable number of ways to strike a ball wrong - and it is interesting to consider _why_ , having learned the game sufficiently, one would ever strike the ball wrong. Where does the variation creep in? Why, if I examine a table and decide to put the cue ball "just so", can I not do that? The answer, of course, is that there is countless non- verbal data that your body is sending you on each stroke - feedback from your bridge hand, the hand on the cue, even your stance and the feel of the felt all factor into this.

If you are attached to the outcome, all of this goes out the window. There is nervousness, fear, and excitement instead of systematic understanding.

</comment><comment><USER18> I highly recommend to take a 10 days retreat in a Vipassana[1] meditation center. I know that 10 days is a lot to ask but in my opinion is well worth the effort.

I've been there twice in the past three years. I thought that I understood everything the first time. Boy, was I wrong.

[1] <http://www.dhamma.org/>

<comment><USER19> If those rules don't creep you out, then I don't know what does: <http://www.dhamma.org/en/code.shtml> No talking, no outside contact, no other forms of practice. This is not a healthy environment unless you know very well what to expect and are sure you really, really want this. It sounds very cultish to me, even though I do know somebody who goes on Vipassana retreats regularly and seems to benefit a lot. Those retreats are for laypersons, including beginners, but the rules are similar to the most intense meditation periods of monastic buddhist life. Compare that to western zen: There's a small zen temple in my town that will not allow people on 3 day retreats unless they have meditated for a while and know what to expect.

<comment><USER20> Cults have rules like that to cut you out of your old life, but in this case I think it's a legitimate desire to eliminate ALL distraction. I did one of their retreats many years ago and concluded that the changes in my internal life that could only happen in such an environment.

For example, after a few days my internal monologue petered out and for the first time I realized that a good portion of my mental activity was normally devoted to thinking about things I was going to say later on. Once I was out of the habit of talking all the time, I stopped cooking up little quips and observations about everything and really felt an expansion of non-verbal thinking.

So, although I had my doubts about the place going in, I left feeling that 10 days of intense internal focus was the only possible way to reach the insights I'd had, and that I was glad I'd done it. The months afterwards (while I kept up the practice, before I got "too busy"), were the most contented of my life.

<comment><USER21> I share your experience.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> I think the author has an excellent point about training one's ability to resist urges. Urges are spontaneous. They don't necessarily fit with our work flow. In fact, they interrupt it. Maybe a good analogy is the Time Management Matrix by Eisenhower (and popularized in Steven Covey's '7 Habits' book). Urges almost always present themselves as urgent tasks, but they aren't always important.

I'm not sure I agree with the conclusion that meditation will make you more productive. The evidence presented reminds me of a scenario from The Office, where Michael defends Monday morning movies by claiming they are more productive the rest of the day. Of course the reason they are more productive is because they have to be in order to recover the time spent watching a movie!

Rather, I think people don't realize how much spare time there is that gets wasted. Tasks expand to fill the time allotted. It's possible that meditation can help you identify those wasteful activities (urges) and address them appropriately.

</comment><comment><USER23> Happens to me all the time. I am working on a piece of code in the afternoon, and can't move forward or looking to identify a bug or optimizing some algorithm - wasting hours. After a meditation session I walk back to the computer screen, take a seat, and my hand clicks around the tabs, my fingers scroll around, my eye catches one obscure line of code which is EXACTLY where the problem sits. I had this happen so many times, it's a given by now. The article (and I am sure all who do meditate) shares the same kind of experience.

<comment><USER24> I can second this. I can't begin to count the number of times that spending five minutes walking and with my mind on anything _but_ a given problem has lead to the recognition of a major time-saving change in plans.

Think of it as pulling off of the highway for a minute to check your map instead of trying to unfold it in front of your steering wheel.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> I took a mindfulness meditation class a year or two ago and I thought this was a pretty nice introduction to some of the ideas.

For anyone interested in the science, I have found lots of good articles by subscribing to this mailing list: <http://www.mindfulexperience.org/newsletter.php>

The ideas have been around forever, but scientists have really taken to testing them in recent decades.

</comment><comment><USER26> "And you will have experience that proves to you that the urge is only a suggestion. You are in control."

This is the most interesting part to me. Don't we always act on the urge that is strongest at the moment? If I decide to continue to meditate even though I have an urge to stop, doesn't that just mean that the urge to continue happened to be stronger than the urge to stop? Did I really get to choose which of those urges was strongest at that moment? Of course, this gets into questions of free will, which has been discussed on HN before. But when I meditate, it becomes very clear that I am definitely not in control of my thoughts, feelings, and urges. I see that I have multiple, competing urges at any given moment and that I don't control which urge emerges as the victor and compels me to act.

</comment><comment><USER27> There's nothing in this article that isn't said better elsewhere. I'd recommend the (free, online) Mindfulness in Plain English: <http://www.urbandharma.org/udharma4/mpe.html> (also available as a "real" book).

</comment><comment><USER28> I've been meditating pretty much every day for a few months now, and the thing that got me into it was getsomeheadspace.com

I've found it incredibly helpful - having a different guided meditation to do on the train every day makes the London commute, whilst not blissful, certainly better.

</comment><comment><USER29> _Focus on your breath going in and out. Every time you have a thought or an urge, notice it and bring yourself back to your breath._

From what I've heard so far, meditation is based on focusing on your body in order to quiet your mind. Are there other schools/techniques?

<comment><USER30> Yes, the emptying of the mind is the style of oriental meditation. In contrast, there is an old tradition of Christian meditation which attempts to fill the mind completely with one concept.

For example, in the medieval Lectio Divina (<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lectio_Divina>), one takes a few words of scripture and repeats them and considers them and ponders them for many minutes. _The Cloud of Unknowing_ recommends doing something similar with the concept of God, or with a simple word such as "love".

This is actually a pretty tough mental exercise to do for even just 20 minutes.

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> When I meditate concentrating on my breath,my mind interferes with my breathing and it becomes uncomfortable if I dont relax

I believe this acts as some negative feedback for the control freak self inside me. Every time I exert unnecessary control it becomes uncomfortable.

Meditating long enough may show me that the mind will wander in its own ways regardless of what I maybe doing at the moment, and its best for me to let it wander on its own ways and focus on what I am doing. Thus helping me understand that all the thoughts about ego, and judgements is just come process on the sidelines, and different from the core of me, the core that is focused on what I am doing.

This is the impression I have of where meditation is taking me.

</comment><comment><USER32> What about comparative effectiveness? For example, if we did an experiment where we started subjects on the following regimes, which would have the greatest effects on impulse control: 1) Learning to program (assuming the subject is not already a coder 2) meditation 3) aerobic exercise

Then we would have to figure out ways to measure "impulse control."

Such a study would have a lot more credibility than the author's contention that "I control impulses while meditating; therefore, meditation makes me more productive."

One controls impulses during a wide variety of activities; the burden is on the pro-meditation crowd to provide evidence that meditation is an especially valuable form of practicing impulse control.

<comment><USER33> I'm curious why you seem to be indirectly asserting that learning to program and/or aerobic exercise will have some effect on impulse control.

</comment></comment><comment><USER34> Some of you pointed out it's not easy to control/stop the mind, yes, that's very true, especially for some people. To solve that, I suggest to read Ekhart Tolle's The Power Of Now, I think it's the modern book that explains the orignal Zen in a easy-to-understand way.

I used to think/worry/imagine too much about the future, and thus missed every actual moment I was living in, and it made me unhappy. I was living like that since I was very young and until I read the book The Power Of Now. So I highly recommend it.

</comment><comment><USER35> There was a study done by Sarah Lazar at Harvard Med a while back. They concluded that meditation can not only prevent age related cognitive decline, but it can actually physically reshape our brains, thickening our cortical structures. There's a TED video online, and the actual study is available online if anyone is interested (<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16272874>)

</comment><comment><USER36> Jonathan Haidt, the author of one of my favorite books, "The Happiness Hypothesis," points out–based on extensive research–that there are only three ways to change "automatic reactions" to circumstances like a flooded kitchen...meditation, cognitive therapy, and Prozac. Meditation is an inexpensive and natural alternative to the other two, it's been around for thousands of years and there are no negative side effects.

</comment><comment><USER37> I'm into the basic practice of mindfulness since years. I read research papers about it every month and also train people in mindfulness skills. Here is the essence of what I learned. [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sspY43lxqhE&list=UUh- TdJw...](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sspY43lxqhE&list=UUh- TdJwz4z0dN9hAYnCWZow&index=12&feature=plcp)

</comment><comment><USER38> For casual meditation, all that has been pointed out here is fair and good.

But if you want to delve deep into meditation, then I seriously suggest that you look up MCTB - it talks about several of the dangers that lie in that path.

www.dharmaoverground.org/web/guest/dharma-wiki/-/wiki/Main/MCTB

</comment><comment><USER39> I'm seeing quite an interest here for the principles and techniques of meditation. Here's a link for some talks given by a wonderful teacher, on mindfulness/meditation and other topics.

<http://www.audiodharma.org/>

</comment><comment><USER40> Read Pragmatic thinking and Learning for good explanation as well.. Meditation improves focus... this is not based on reports or data but from my own experience. That is always the best proof for me.. trying it myself.

</comment><comment><USER41> I use fishing for the same purposes. Helps me concentrate on just that activity and get my mind off work-related stuff. Every time after a fishing trip I feel really rested, although might be tired a bit physically.

<comment><USER42> Maybe someone will do some research on this at some point, but yes, it seems fishing is indeed the western male's (it's usually western males that do fishing for leisure, no?) version of meditation. It's not about catching fish, surely.

</comment></comment><comment><USER43> This excerpt from Shunryu Suzuki might add another approach to the conversation.

<http://www.kingstonkendo.org/mistakesinpractice.pdf> (PDF)

</comment><comment><USER44> I meditate while walking my dogs or taking a shower. Unless you are trying to achieve the title of Zen Grandmaster (which you probably are not) there is no need to sit still while doing so.

<comment><USER45> I think you are on to something here, but there is a difference between doing something relaxing and "meditating". I'm most relaxed while sitting on the pot and I get my best insights while taking a shower, but during neither of those am I meditating (in the zen sense).

A Zen Grandmaster can probably meditate while rollerblading through NYC and simultaneously debugging a kernel driver. For beginners, it helps to sit relatively still with eyes closed (or eyes focused on eg a candle, tree, waterfall etc. but not darting about), to chant or use beads to count breaths, etc.

</comment></comment><comment><USER46> For me, meditation is a way of separating myself from the issues I'm dealing with. The act of distancing my mind from the issue itself provides renewed vigor when returning to the problem.

</comment><comment><USER47> If I'm too busy to medidate, why will I have time to read this article (presumably on meditation)?

</comment><comment><USER48> (Yet) Another venue to for the competitive display of subtle nuances and arcane desiderata.

</comment><comment><USER49> Aw, I know the benefits. I hoped this would help me find a way to fit it in.

<comment><USER36> Hey Eric, at risk of sounding like I know a lot about this, there are two facets that make it hard to fit in. The benefits take days to appear and it's uncomfortable in the beginning. Like running, it's hard to start a practice of meditating, but if you do 1 minute, then 5 minutes, then work your way up to 20 minutes, there is a breaking point where you will do it because the benefits are clearly making your life richer. Colors appear more vibrant, sounds more clear, emotions more fully experienced. You will take more moments, like while stopped at a stoplight, to meditate because it allows joyful feelings rise to the top. Then, you won't ever think, "how can I fit it in," it will become part of you.

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> I have been meditating for forty years. For thirty nine years I did transcendental meditation (TM)as taught by Maharishi Mahesh Yogi. I sat for 20 minutes twice a day without fail.

Last year I switched to Vipassana not because I was displeased with TM but just for a change and because the Goenka community seems to be very professional. I have been sitting in this new way one hour a day for a year now. I am not as regular because Vipassana requires more arrangement than TM. I am satisfied with my practice and can see a path to grow in this community for the rest of my life.

I am not sorry that I have spent so much time meditating. It changed my life. Before I began meditating I was aware of a certain pervasive incompleteness. I am a programmer and I love programming and I have been married for forty seven years and love my wife. But these satisfactions were not enough. My meditation practice did not materially change my life but it has given me a sense of centeredness. I am in a quiet way more fulfilled.

My experience was that TM was a very practical choice. I paid $75 to be initiated and found the TM community meet my needs for companionship on my path. Community is important to support a meditative practice. The actual practice is practical to do in our busy lives. If you are too busy to take two twenty minute periods each day for your personal readjustment then you are too busy and you need to readjust your life pattern. If you do not realize the imbalance in your life, probably meditation is not for you. Don't waste your time. Perhaps later.

YMMV, nowadays it cost $2k+ to learn TM. It is a good deal at this cost at least the benefits in my life exceed almost any amount of money. But without my experience I would never understand that. It is a chicken and egg problem.

OTOH, the TM community has changed and I am not sure I would be served by the Post Mahrishi community. In my case, as a long term meditator the difficulties with the community don't really affect me. Although I did consider the quality of the Goenka to support me in future.

So the choice of TM is a possibility for a newby. One caution, I knew many poeple who started TM and did not continue. So you are risking $2k+.

Vipassana is different. The technique requires more training and a greater daily investment. I sit for an hour a day. But Goenka suggests a minimum of two hours a day. And most practioners do at least one ten day retreat a year. I find this a bit much. But given that I am retired it is easily feasable. It merely a matter of commitment for me. A midlife married programmer will find this a greater challenge.

The introduction to Goenka's technique is charming. You do a ten day retreat at no cost to you. Their story is that adopting this practice is a serious matter. You learn the technique and then practice ten hours a day for ten days. For this learning period you live on the charity of others like a Budhist monk. Since this technique is a way of living that extends beyond just sitting, you need time to get into it.

I don't know how to tell which is most appropriate for you. I can just say it works for me. But I can say one thing for certain. Meditation is a practice that must be done everyday. Don't bother if you are not ready to commit to a regular practice. The benefits of meditation can not be explained. It is an experience and all that a teacher can do is give the experience and show you how to protect it. The rest is up to you.

I will say that meditation and psychotherapy are not mutually exclusive. For more than twelve years during the last forty I have been in therapy.

My final thought is that if you have a sense that your experience of life seems not quite complete, meditation can work to give you greater experience of connection.

</comment><comment><USER50> Oh, come on. Meditation is not the way to "exercise willpower muscle" (running is the way to do so).

Meditation is the way to learn that your flow of thoughts is not you, it is mere side-effect, a smoke from an engine, a screen-saver, or just idle- running.

Yes, the practice of meditation is beneficial for will-power and self-control, but it is not the goal.) Goal is realization that what you think you are, is just a running total of all previous conditioning, and the ''real you'' could be "seen" is in an instant between two thoughts.

Any good ''eastern'' teacher will tell you that.

<comment><USER51> I'd think any good "eastern" teacher would be sure to emphasize both the cultivation of wholesome mental qualities _and_ the realization of not-self in meditation, depending on the audience and the context.</comment></comment>


The story of round rectangles - <AUTHOR> http://folklore.org/StoryView.py?story=Round_Rects_Are_Everywhere.txt <comment><USER2> Actually, this is a fine lesson in persuasion, something that Chip and Dan Heath point out in Switch and Made to Stick; that is, reasoning that is highly concrete and visual is far more convincing and impactful than appeal to models, forecasts, spreadsheets, and schematics. I think Jobs here could have simply demanded rounded rectangles or appealed to some vague need for geometric completeness in the product, but imagine how powerful it must have been to take a walk outside and actually see how reality presented rounded rectangles at every turn, and how truly crippling the program would feel with this observation in mind if it didn't ship with the feature. The lesson is to reach beyond the world of formal logic and into the visceral world of sight and touch, where the real "aha" and gut judgments reside.

Here's another example, cited in the design and creation of the Palm Pilot:

"Jeff Hawkins, the team leader, wanted the Palm Pilot to be simple. It would handle only four things: calendars, contacts, memos, and task lists, but it would do them well. Hawkins fought feature creep by carrying around a wooden block the size of the Palm. Hawkins would pull out the wooden block to "take notes" during a meeting or "check his calendar" in the hallway. When someone would suggest another feature, Hawkins would pull out the wooden block and ask them where it would fit. Hawkins knew that the core idea of his project needed to be elegance and simplicity. In sharing this core idea, Hawkins and his team used what was, in essence, a visual proverb. The block of wood became a visual reminder to do a few things and do them well."

taken from [http://www.gsb.stanford.edu/news/bmag/sbsm0702/feature_ideas...](http://www.gsb.stanford.edu/news/bmag/sbsm0702/feature_ideas.html)

<comment><USER3> You're right; but I think uprooting the persuasion from its source kills it. Steve didn't use that technique because it was persuasive; he used it because that's what he saw. After that calligraph class that connected so deeply, I bet he became aware of curved corners everywhere; and hated that computers rendered everything squarely... so when he saw fast curves, he grabbed it by the neck. When questioned, he probably spluttered "b-b-but look! all around you! can't you _see_?!" It's not a persuasion technique; but simply sharing the reality he saw.

Uproot it from reality and use it in isolation, and it has no life in it to persuade. Therefore: improve at seeing, not persuading.

(He'd have been more savvy at persuasion techniques if he'd complimented the poor guy first.)

<comment><USER4> "Steve didn't use that technique because it was persuasive; he used it because that's what he saw."

You can see a lot by just looking.

<comment><USER5> Nice. Talk about a Yogi Bera-ism!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> If you would like to do some archaeology, the QuickDraw source code can be downloaded here: <http://www.computerhistory.org/highlights/macpaint/>

It's really nicely structured and has lots of comments!

EDIT: The code is in the BumpOval procedure in DrawArc.a

<comment><USER7> I don't know what I was expecting (C I guess), but upon opening the project it blew me away that it was written entirely in assembly by hand.

<comment><USER8> The original Mac had a 64K ROM. It's unbelievable what they packed in there. They used a lot of tricks to do it that are only possible in assembly.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> The "clever way to do the circle calculation that only used addition and subtraction", which the article attributes to Apple employee Bill Atkinson in 1981, is in fact a variant of the Bresenham algorithm, devised in 1962 by Jack Bresenham at IBM, when Bill was still a kid.

see <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bresenham_algorithm>

<comment><USER10> Hmm... The Wikipedia article for the circle-drawing algorithm indicates that while it uses the same error-accumulation strategy as Bresenham's line-drawing algorithm, it was not actually invented by Bresenham.

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

I'm not sure how correct this is, as I don't have access to the full text of the papers involved. But it looks like if Bresenham _did_ write the algorithm (and wasn't beaten to it by, say, Pitteway as Wikipedia implies), it wasn't until his 1977 paper, "A linear algorithm for incremental digital display of digital arcs".

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> Bill Atkinson is a programming god. He was such a pioneer in so many areas. He created QuickDraw, MacPaint and Hypercard! Is there nothing he can't do??? I wonder what his background was when he developed Quickdraw. Did he have any previous graphics experience? How much previous experience could you have when you're the one who created the graphic routines powering the Lisa/Mac?

<comment><USER12> "How many man-years did it take to write QuickDraw?", the Byte magazine reporter asked Steve.

Steve turned to look at Bill. "Bill, how long did you spend writing Quickdraw?"

"Well, I worked on it on and off for four years", Bill replied.

Steve paused for a beat and then turned back to the Byte reporter. "Twenty- four man-years. We invested twenty-four man-years in QuickDraw."

Obviously, Steve figured that one Atkinson year equaled six man years, which may have been a modest estimate.

<http://folklore.org/StoryView.py?story=Mythical_Man_Year.txt>

<comment><USER5> But did Bill get 6 men's worth of pay? If the answer is no let that be a lesson to all super-talented/productive hackers out there whether you should strike it out on your man or work for The Man.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Amusingly, I'm looking around the room, and the most obvious examples of rounded rectangles are my MacBook, my iPad, and my iPhone.

<comment><USER14> If you look a bit further, I'm sure you'll see more. I see chairs, tables, a television, a remote control -- all with rounded corners. So many rounded rectangles, yet I never noticed before I read this article. It's funny how a story like this can change how you look at the world.

<comment><USER15> Like my Zippo!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> For anyone else whose jaw dropped at "the sum of a sequence of odd numbers is always the next perfect square", Wikipedia has a helpful visualization:

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Square_number#Properties>

<comment><USER17> > _anyone else whose jaw dropped_

Wait, really? You never worked out in school (or on your own before it ever came up in school) that

      1 + 2 + 3 + ... + n = n * (n + 1) / 2

and likewise that

      2 + 4 + 6 + ... + 2n = n * (n + 1)

and

      1 + 3 + 5 + ... + (2n - 1) = n * n

? (of course, it also comes up geometrically if you start looking at the number of little squares in a big square, and count the next row)

<comment><USER18> It always struck me as obvious; with a square of n*n, just add n + n (for the two sides) + 1 (for the corner) and you get the next square. 2n+1 progresses 1, 3, 5 etc., plain as day.

What got me thinking about it (at perhaps 11 or 13 or so) was trying to turn it into a way of calculating the square root.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Sounds like a typical coder's week:

1\. accomplish something pretty darn tricky to try to impress the boss/client

2\. boss is only impressed for a split second before giving you a harder to accomplish task

<comment><USER20> Obligatory: <http://www.xkcd.com/664/>

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> An unsatisfying story. The first half of the story is about an algorithm to produce ovals. Then most of the rest is Steve Jobs convincing the guy that rounded rectangles are desirable. Then, without any narrative about this actual central problem (which the guy had no idea how to do when the conversation with Jobs ends), we're told that he just happened to solve it.

EDIT: I find the bouncing up and down of votes for this interesting, particularly the reasons people give for disagreeing.

<comment><USER22> I especially don't buy the idea that Bill Atkinson, after demonstrating fast ellipses, would then claim that rounded rects would be "really hard." Indeed, the enhancement would be trivial.

<comment><USER23> I think that Atkinson probably thought that roundrects would be a useless addition that would bloat the library. (Remember, the entire Mac OS and applications needed to fit in 128K!)

It's easier to dismiss something as "entirely too hard" than to get into an argument about whether it's worth implementing.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> Everytime I get linked to a Folklore article I end up hitting next until I look up at the clock and get amazed at how much time has gone by. True hacker stories.

<comment><USER25> It's also available in book form as _Revolution in the Valley: The Insanely Great Story of How the Mac Was Made_. It's always better to step away from the computer for a quick, inspirational read!

<comment><USER24> I own it. I still lag on Folklore.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> Are rounded rectangles actually hard? Isn't it just a matter of placing 4 quarter circles in the right places? If you can draw straight lines and you can draw ovals (and hence, the special case of circles), then you can draw rounded rects, right?

<comment><USER24> Almost everything is hard when you have 128KB of memory and a CPU that does only 8 MHz. Not to mention having to write in assembly.

<comment><USER27> Yeah, it's far easier on a CAD machine these days. I added that shape to our AutoLisp function library years ago and it only took me a few minutes, including testing.

<comment><USER27> It's weird. We haven't sold any of those in months. Today, I had two orders for rounded rectangles at work.

I'm 99.99% sure it's coincidence and confirmation bias, but some part of me wonders if this story played any part. But, if anyone in the southwest bought a window or glass table in that shape today, I might have played a part in doing the CAD.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> HN Feature Request: A cron job that automatically submits and votes to the top of the front page 1 folklore.org story per week (or two weeks?).

Reason: Most of us that have been around a while have read this entire site, more than once usually, but most of the stories there are good enough to keep getting upvoted for any youngsters that haven't discovered it yet. Eg, it's one of the few links that can keep getting reposted over and over, and revoted to the front page over and over, probably till the end of the Internets. So lets just make it a cron job already.

</comment><comment><USER5> Once again we see Steve's intensity and vision and single-mindedness.

Bill: Who cares?

Steve: Round rectangles.

Bill: Not important.

Steve: Round rectangles.

Bill: They're impossible.

Steve: Round rectangles.

Bill: Okay I'll try to figure out how to do them.

Steve: Okay now send in that Andy guy about that Switcher thing. And bring my checkbook.

</comment><comment><USER29> We call 'em roundtangles.</comment>


Why I'm Canceling my Cable - <AUTHOR> http://theblogjoint.com/2010/08/04/free-alternatives-to-cable-service-such-as-hulu/

<comment><USER2> We cancelled our cable in 2007 and have never been happier.

For example, Wikipedia states current shows are between 18-22 minutes long with 12-8 minutes of advertising. So for the worst offenders (looking at you TruTv), you're getting awfully close to a 1:1 ratio of content to ads.

Combine generally stupid shows/networks, extreme ad times, in a $60/month "basic" package and no thanks, life is too short.</comment>


Accern:Real-Time Financial News Platform for Trading - <AUTHOR> https://www.accern.com <comment><AUTHOR> We are leveling the playing field on Wall Street by empowering individual investors with the same news technologies that institutions have been using for years. Discover Real-Time Trading Opportunities from 20 Million News, Blogs, Social Media,and Financial Documents. This will be the first time in history that state-of-the-art AI news technologies, which are usually reserved for institutions, will be made freely available to individual investors.</comment>


Ask HN: What live chat solution do you use? - <AUTHOR>

We've been using livezilla for about a year now and have found it has a few limitations such as having no mobile client and the inability to email forward offline messages with the clients email address as the from address. I'm looking for a solution with good mobile support. <comment><USER2> I've a similar question and was interested in answers, but absent any I'll share what little I know.

We are looking for a chat solution as well. The current lead candidate appears to be 'Campfire' from 37signals.

<http://campfirenow.com>

\- Campfire is a web-based group chat tool that lets you set up password- protected chat rooms. Invite a client, colleague, or vendor to chat. Link to a room on your intranet for internal communications. \- web based, nothing to download or install \- free for up to four chatters on-line simultaneously, various paid plans \- iPhone, iPad, Android apps exist

Testing with the free trial will have to wait until after the holiday weekend.

</comment><comment><USER3> <http://www.olark.com>

It works with existing clients like gchat, etc. I've used this on 3 or 4 of my websites and it works really well. They also have a free version for one operator.</comment>