Nintendo Switch is not USB-C compliant - <AUTHOR> https://plus.google.com/102612254593917101378/posts/2CUPZ5yVTRT <comment><USER2> In watching the evolution of USB-C over the last few years, it seems like it's extremely hard to implement correctly with the huge number of modes, alternate modes, and power delivery in the spec.

When you connect two USB-C devices today, you have almost no idea what is actually going to happen, which device is the master, and which way power will flow.

While having one connector and cable type for everything seems like it would be a good idea, in practice it's turning out to be a giant mess. Maybe it'll clear up in a few years, but given the race to the bottom in price and quality in the accessory market, this seems doubtful.

<comment><USER3> I partly agree that it's a bit harder than before. But a lot of the faulty devices we're seeing are just straight up using an incorrect resistor value or similar, and apparently released to the public without proper testing.

Maybe that's on USB spec people for not having good material, but on the other hand maybe that's on the manufacturers for not hiring EEs who can actually read a damn spec sheet properly...

<comment><USER4> Is it really that simple? Just changing a resistor value? I got an XPS 13 for work, it's all USB-C, and the versatility of the port is fantastic (doesn't matter which port I plug into, it still charges, so I don't have to wrap the power cable around the back of the machine or sit in a weird position to keep some slack in the wire). However, I took it to the office and naturally I plugged my power adapter into one port. I then plugged in the monitor (also USB-C, delivering power), and the two ports cancelled themselves out and confused the OS. Windows thought I was charging the laptop yet it also said the battery was depleting. They were negating each other and the battery loss continued as it would with no power connected.

It makes sense for a monitor to power the laptop because it's mains connected. But then you have one of those classic programming problems: if there are multiple inputs providing the same thing which do you consider the source of truth?

<comment><USER5> They could always ask the user if they are that confused then remember the answer so they don't have to ask again.

<comment><USER4> Can you imagine a typical laptop user who assumes everything 'just works' (like me, by virtue of thinking I need to power my laptop while attaching a powered monitor) seeing a prompt in the OS about which thing should provide power and which should either reject it or use it to charge a battery?

<comment><USER6> Can you imagine someone not understanding a clearly worded UI that they use to do the things they have to do to function in society?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Why does USB-C have such terrible failure modes? I'm sure that the people behind it are bright engineers, so why do I have a fear unlike anything I've ever felt when buying a USB-C cable or charger or device?

Is this just a "tragedy of the commons" where every manufacturer expects the others to follow the spec so that they can skimp, or is there some kind of fundamental flaw in the USB-C spec that is making it so seemingly dangerous and difficult to use correctly?

<comment><USER8> Prior to USB-PD, USB maxed out at 4.5W, and that was a later addition, originally it maxed out at 2.5W. The USB-PW spec allows for 100W power transfer. There are far more modes in USB-C/PW, and they're _much_ higher energy. If all you ever need to deal with is 5V and 0.1-0.9A then there's a much narrower range of failure states.

<comment><USER9> What voltage is the 100W coming through at? If it is low voltage, that is gonna be a really beefy cable... At 12V that is more than 8 amps. 5v is 20 amps. That is a lot of current to send over a typical USB cable...

<comment><USER10> Profile 5 is 20V@5A

<comment><USER11> Suffice to say, this makes me very hesitant to connect a USB-C phone (which I don't have, thankfully) to a laptop USB-C charger, because even though they /should/ negotiate the correct voltage, the idea of a bug in the implementation causing the charger to fry my phone, perhaps even setting it on fire in the process, isn't worth the risk.

As others note, the poor implementations wind up causing us to use only the adapters shipped with the device in the first place, which is actually a worse situation than with standard USB - right now, I know that I can plug a device into any USB charger and get 5 volts. Amperage may vary considerably, but unless the adapter is a real lemon (and yes, I know those exist), it's not going to kill my phone or burn my house down if I don't get the planetary alignment of adapter, cable and device right.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> While this is more of an interesting fact than anything: The Nintendo Switch website [1] does not advertise that the Switch has a USB-C port. It has HDMI and USB 2.0 on the dock... but no USB-C anywhere.

[1] [https://www.nintendo.com/switch/features/tech- specs/](https://www.nintendo.com/switch/features/tech-specs/)

<comment><USER7> Then why did they use the port? I'm guessing it's the obvious answer of "it was cheaper".

As much as it pains me to say it, a "pay us to use the port shape" group like HDMI that will threaten litigation unless you pay them to use the port would probably have prevented this kind of thing from being as widespread with USB-C as it is. While just about everyone doesn't want that to be the case (myself included), I don't see any other way of aligning incentives to make it _harder_ to use the port/spec incorrectly than it is to make it correctly.

<comment><USER13> They should stop using HDMI and switch to DisplayPort.

<comment><USER14> Fun fact: the Switch does output a flavor of DisplayPort to the dock, which converts it to HDMI using a Megachips STDP2550 MyDP-HDMI converter for output to TVs[0]

[0] [https://www.tweaktown.com/news/56650/switch-dock-uses- mobili...](https://www.tweaktown.com/news/56650/switch-dock-uses-mobility- displayport-hdmi-converter/index.html)

<comment><USER13> Hm, so actual Switch alone does output in proper DisplayPort (as MyDP)?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> I love the idea of USB-C - Being able to have one cable which can do everything is great.

But I've become very leery about actually trusting it in practice - There are so many examples of bad cables, or devices which don't _quite_ follow the specification, causing things to break badly.

If you end up having to follow a defacto "Only use 1st party tools" rule for safety reasons, I'd almost rather manufacturers went back to proprietary connectors. Those aren't inter-operable, but at least they don't pretend to be and risk me breaking everything.

<comment><USER16> My favorite is I have an HP Envy USB-C monitor to use with my Macbook, and using the HP factory supplied cable, every time I power it on I get a warning that I should use an "official HP USB-C cable". It's literally the one straight from the box!

<comment><USER17> My macbook won't wake up my usb-c monitors consistently. I have tried 8 cables at this point. I have to unplug the cable and plug it back in.

I also refuses to mount my phone straight usb-c, and the _known_ workaround is to go usbc -> a -> c.

At this point in my relationship with Apple, I can only assume this is deliberate.

<comment><USER18> So _that's_ why my monitor doesn't wake up.

I got the new xps13, it only has thunderbolt/USBc-C ports and it's pretty much 50/50 whether my external monitor will wake up.

I figured it was the cable and was about to buy another one but you saved me the trouble.

I also got a hootoo adapter that's supposed to support power delivery but that hasn't worked either :/

<comment><USER19> This isn't just a problem with USB-C. There are also tons of video adapters on the market that say they support 4k, but really don't. We have grips of 2560x1440 monitors at work, and they had tons of issues like this where the monitors may or may not wake up, may handle the native res for a while, then power down or switch back to 1080p. The only consistent fix for them has been to buy one particular brand of adapter that we found works and making sure it's active. So I guess what I'm saying is, display tech has already been having issues for a long time with crappy components, and USB-C is just adding one problem into the mix now.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Can the title be changed to note that this is from 2017? It's new to me, so I assumed it was recent (but it was also posted on Google+....).

<comment><USER21> Some consoles are getting bricked since the latest Switch update because of this problem, that's why it gained visibility.

<comment><USER22> More info on that here:

[https://www.reddit.com/r/NintendoSwitch/comments/86wu9t/psa_...](https://www.reddit.com/r/NintendoSwitch/comments/86wu9t/psa_if_youre_using_a_third_party_dock_stop/)

Both the update and third party accessories seem implicated to a degree.

<comment><USER23> It's absolutely insane that Nintendo still has no way to backup saves in the event of console failure. This compounds the already ridiculous situation where you risk bricking the console when you plug it in to a charger.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> _However, because it was USB-C compliant (followed the darn spec) and robustly engineered, it will work with the Switch even though it came out nearly two years before the Switch was released. (Hooray!) Innergie had the foresight to add 15v as an "optional and extra" voltage level and now it reaps the rewards. (It also has $1mil in connected device insurance, so I can recommend it.)_

I think maybe I just found a new preferred provider of cables and chargers.

</comment><comment><USER25> Unrelated, but I really wish G+ posts were a bit wider. They look great on mobile but reading a "card" on a laptop screen is insane.

<comment><USER26> Reader Mode seems to work fine to reformat the page

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> In case others are looking for something similar, I've had great success using Anker's 20100mAh USB-C portable battery to charge my Switch on the go. It's the only USB-C battery I've tried that actually works with the Nintendo Switch.

Link: [https://www.amazon.com/Anker-PowerCore-Ultra-High- Capacity-P...](https://www.amazon.com/Anker-PowerCore-Ultra-High-Capacity- Portable/dp/B014ZO46LK/)

It also gets me a full recharge of my 15" USB-C MBP (though you can't use the MBP and charge at the same time, it takes a while).

<comment><USER28> I've got the same battery, bought ~2 years ago. Seems to work fine with my Switch and an Anker-brand USB A-to-C cable.

My 40W Anker PowerPort wall-charger also works.

Now I'm a bit worried about trying anything else, though. o_O

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> Well this is exactly what I was wondering last week after noticing the USB-C port on the switch dock is labelled "Power Adapter". I thought it was a little off that there is no mention of USB-C, either not to confuse the users or perhaps because they didn't have much confidence in their hardware compliance.

</comment><comment><USER30> In my humble opinion, the greatest sin of the USB C standard is the lack of introspection. Given the huge amount of possibilities, it should be possible to question a USB C socket with a cheap device what Alt modes it is capable of, what device roles it is capable of, what USB PD it supports etc.

<comment><USER31> One out of three: This device will show you what power deliver modes are available, request the most it can get, and make that available on terminals.

[https://www.tindie.com/products/ReclaimerLabs/usb-c- explorer...](https://www.tindie.com/products/ReclaimerLabs/usb-c-explorer/)

(Also, if you didn't know about _tindie.com_ , and you are a certain sort of person, then I apologize for consuming the next couple hours of your day.)

<comment><USER30> That's 79 dollars. I said cheap :) 20 bucks is realistic, even if it's just the hardware and needs a phone or even a laptop to be plugged into. Even a laptop is reasonable.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> I can't make heads or tails of the technical details of this, but I think it's fair to start with the prior that Nintendo doesn't care too much about non- proprietary formats/interoperability/etc. I developed this impression when the Gamecube came out -- weird minidisks when Sony had already switched over to CDs and then DVDs, no ability to play external media, an online community that seemed pretty half-baked.

I haven't played videogames regularly for a decade though so perhaps things have changed. I now use a PS4 controller to play some games on my computer, and it's really nice, integrates naturally.

<comment><USER33> I hadn't played video games for close to a decade before I kind of randomly bought a switch, and it's actually got me back into gaming. Nintendo has kind of always done their own thing though, sometimes for better, sometimes for worse.

</comment></comment><comment><USER34> I have a feeling I'll be buying one of those fancy USB-C amperage/voltage meters. I hit issues with the charging spec on a GPD Pocket (tiny laptop). Its maximum supported charging voltage is 12V, which is now optional in the USB-PD 2.0 standard. So most chargers I see now are 5V/9V/15V

Macbook charger for instance is missing the 12V, so it charges slow off that charger since it ignores the 15V rail. Has to fall back to 5V or 9V in theory...

</comment><comment><USER35> My Apple USB-C charger and cable (which came with my 2017 MacBook Pro) work fine to charge my Switch. No crashes here.

<comment><USER36> Apple's USB-C chargers skirt around some standards, as well.

<comment><USER37> Can you say more? Thanks.

<comment><USER36> Apple uses a non-standard 14.5V @ 2A PDO unit in the smaller MacBook charger, they also have some protocol-level 'quirks'.

[https://plus.google.com/102612254593917101378/posts/ftb7qCZf...](https://plus.google.com/102612254593917101378/posts/ftb7qCZfPQf)

<comment><USER37> That's quite interesting, as in the last 20 years that I've been dealing with Apple hardware they have typically been excessively _strict_ with hardware spec conformance (not especially "liberal in what they will accept"). They of course had plenty of in-house stuff (adb, AUI etc) back in the pre-jobs- departure and pre-jobs-return eras, but that was often because no standard existed at all.

I wonder if something has changed or if this is an outlier, or perhaps it's just my sampling (which of course is hardly enormous) has simply entirely fallen in a pool of strictly conforming equipment. I can certainly believe the last possibility.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> Presumably this investigation was prompted by the Nyko dock catastrophe.

I'm a software guy; what do these revelations imply about which other accessories may or may not be unsafe to use, whether they work or not? In particular, third-party charging cables. My girlfriend uses her MacBook charger to charge her Switch sometimes, and now I'm worried it could brick it one day.

<comment><USER39> I find it absolutely mindboggling that Switch's are bricking when 3rd party accessories are plugged in isn't being treated as a bigger issue. Everything I've heard is that the Nyko dock is at fault, but why the hell aren't people mad at Nintendo? Then again, I haven't followed it very closely, maybe people are? All I've read is how the dock is bad, and nothing about the Switch's apparent fragility.

<comment><USER40> People are somewhat mad, but Nintendo's only recently bothered adopting anything akin to industry standards around power adaptors. Even the 3DS is proprietary, and the Switch dock itself is some voodoo magic with a chip inside.

USB C itself has been sort of a minefield of adaptors getting the spec wrong, so I doubt anyone is surprised that docks are buggy and even capable of damaging parts.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER41> the switch is advertised to only work with official nintendo cables and accessories. Anything else and you're just risking damage to your console/tablet/thingy.

I don't think they have ever claimed that their USB-C connectors were compliant with the spec.

<comment><USER42> What they claimed is almost irellevant - the device bears USB-C logo and has a USB-C port - so plugging a USB-C device into that port should in the worst possible case result in a system message "sorry, this device is not supported", not brick the device! There's a reason why you can't use a USB-A cable in your device to carry 220V - because someone _will_ plug it into a normal USB-A socket and burn their computer down. If both sides of the connection have the official USB logo, then connecting them together should _never_ result in either device becoming damaged.

<comment><USER43> The Switch has many logos on it, but a USB-C logo is not one of them. Nintendo does not use the term "USB-C" in its literature for the Switch.

<comment><USER44> Nintendo of America may not, but Nintendo UK and Japan both refer to it as a "USB Type-C terminal"

UK: [https://www.nintendo.co.uk/Nintendo- Switch/Specifications/Sp...](https://www.nintendo.co.uk/Nintendo- Switch/Specifications/Specifications-1176277.html#1)

JP: [https://www.nintendo.co.jp/hardware/switch/specs/](https://www.nintendo.co.jp/hardware/switch/specs/)

<comment><USER43> I stand corrected. Good catch.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER45> I'm not sure I buy the vendor lock-in thing, if that was the core motivation why not at least bother to use a custom USB-C connector? This way you wouldn't have to deal with the reports of users plugging other USB-C peripherals and getting crashes.

Seems more likely what whoever implemented that part of the Switch did a poor job. Was it even done in-house or did they contract a 3rd party to hack it?

</comment><comment><USER46> My son just bought himself a Switch, and TBH this isn't surprising at all. What _is_ surprising is that Nintendo didn't modify the port so that a USB-C cable wouldn't fit. I don't think it's advertised as being a USB-C port, though.

The specs page[0] says there are three USB 2.0 ports and a power port (which, by looking at it, uses the same connector as USB-C).

[0][https://www.nintendo.com/switch/features/tech- specs/](https://www.nintendo.com/switch/features/tech-specs/)

</comment><comment><USER47> Why not require some kind of USB-C compatibility details on all USB-C related products? So you know if you use the device/cable what will actually work/not work?

</comment><comment><USER48> On a related note, what are some reputable brands for USB-C adapters that actually do have proper implementation and quality assurance? Anker? UPTab? Belkin?

<comment><USER49> Check out [https://usbccompliant.com/](https://usbccompliant.com/)

<comment><USER50> Cheers, presumably the AC wall plugs have international equivalents for the non-US market?

(i.e. their 'compliance' has been tested on 240V scenarios)

<comment><USER49> Actually, I don't think so. These have been tested by one Google engineer, and he lives in the US.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER51> I thought type-c was just the shape, while usb 3.1 and 3.1 gen 2, or thunderbolt 3 being the common specs that usually carry this shape.

Or is it more complicated than this?

<comment><USER52> Type-C can carry things that are not USB, that's the problem. USB-PD can't be carried over non-C connectors.

<comment><USER26> USB-PD is still allowed on classic USB-A/B ports

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER53> USB-C peripheral makers desperately need to agree on a color/marking scheme for the devices and specifically the cables. Right now it's chaos. Red, blue, green, black, ABCD, 1234, square, circle, triangle, cross... Whatever. Just make it so users can tell what's going on.

</comment><comment><USER54> I was under the impression that some of the issues with third-party adapters were caused by insufficient tolerances, causing damage to the type-C connector. In addition to the non-compliance.

</comment><comment><USER55> Maybe it's USB-C because of future usage requirements, that they envisioned they might need USB-C to interface with attachments (VR headset? New GB/DS generation?).

</comment><comment><USER56> I'm curious, how many of the issues enumerated could be fixed by a firmware upgrade? Personally, I wouldn't be too surprised if the dock isn't upgradeable at all.

</comment><comment><USER57> huh, I thought Plus was dead

</comment><comment><USER58> How is this at all surprising? Controlling what third parties are allowed to make accessories and games has been part of Nintendo's business model since the 80s. They truly believe (and you can argue this if you want) that the Nintendo Seal of Quality is part of their success.

<comment><USER44> Given the video game crash of the early 80s, it's entirely likely that the Seal (or at least the principles behind it) was part of Nintendo's earlier successes. Whether it's still relevant today is questionable, but I wouldn't write it off.

<comment><USER59> Also, every other console may not have an official "Seal", but they all have the same process. Nintendo created that idea when anyone could release games for consoles without the console manufacturer approving or even knowing about it. I can't just make an Xbox 1 game and release it legally either. Blaming this on the Seal is completely misunderstanding the context.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER60> I was just amazed that a google plus post got so high on hn.

</comment><comment><USER61> Perhaps if Nintendo had boarded the standardized-connectors train at the terminal, rather than just hopping on at the last station, they would have been more familiar by now with the need to read and follow all the rules of the standard.</comment>


Annotations in very early printed books - <AUTHOR> http://15cbooktrade.ox.ac.uk/reading-practices/ <comment><USER2> These are fun. Wish the ones they had there were explained - sometimes they're quite funny, as with the monks complaining in the margins of the texts they were illuminating or copying:

[http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2012/03/che...](http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2012/03/cheeky- complaints-monks-scribbled-in-the-margins-of-manuscripts/254868/)

Sometimes this stuff is lost because of fading ink or palimpsest-style erasure - there are multiple efforts on to retrieve such hidden and deteriorating items, which can sometimes yield very important things like lost manuscripts or fragments. I wrote about it a while back, though there's much, much more to know than what I could fit here:

[http://www.nbcnews.com/tech/innovation/multispectral- imaging...](http://www.nbcnews.com/tech/innovation/multispectral-imaging-new- technology-resurrects-centuries-old-texts-n395406)</comment>


Obituary for Michael Stern Hart, Project Gutenberg Founder - <AUTHOR> http://www.gutenberg.org/w/index.php?title=Michael_S._Hart

<comment><USER2> Really, sad. But his legacy lives on in one of the finest projects on the internet. It's provided me and my family with countless hours of enjoyment and immensely lowered the cost of ownership of my Kindle.

Imagine my wonderful surprise when I found not just one, but an entire library of Oz and Edgar Rice Burroughs novels that I quickly disseminated to all of the youngsters in my extended family ... then watched them spend hours entertained by these century old tails of fantasy and adventure.

No project has proven more firmly that our modern endless extensions to copyright is hopelessly wrong headed.

<comment><USER3> > No project has proven more firmly that our modern endless extensions to > copyright is hopelessly wrong headed.

This. Wikipedia is a fantastic free cultural work, but it can never replace the historical and cultural significance of free primary sources themselves.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Michael Hart was a fantastic guy to know back in the early 90s as the Internet was transforming from a research network into a popular phenomenon. He'd foreseen this eventuality in the late 70s and made Project Gutenberg in part so it would be there when the world needed it. I'll always remember Michael rollerblading through Champaign-Urbana in his trademark ruby spandex singlet. And his incredible ability to scrounge computer parts. He once invited me to drive through the night to score an obsolete supercomputer that was allegedly sitting beside a dumpster at the University of Minnesota. He wanted to get to those hard drives before the rain did. Sadly, I turned him down - I had a first date that night. I don't remember her name. But I'll always remember Michael. And miss him.

</comment><comment><USER5> _"Reasonable people adapt themselves to the world. Unreasonable people attempt to adapt the world to themselves. All progress, therefore, depends on unreasonable people."_

I really like this quote. I discovered Gutenberg looking for something to read on the train pre-ebooks days. I really got sick of having to take books so I wanted a way to get books onto my PalmIII. [0] Searching around for anything in text format I stumbled onto Gutenberg. How do you get the text into the palm in a readable format? Using open source software like Plkr. [1] If you ran Linux the morning routine would go something like this:

* sync PC with Palm ~ <http://flic.kr/p/mhmuK>

* manually select Gutenburg novels to read & add to plkr.

* plkr client would crawl various web sites I read, compress the pages & sync with the pilot.

* read on the train.

I'd make this morning/evening habit. I benefited from Harts vision for many years.

        "My father read an assortment of these made
         available to him by Cambridge University in
         England for several months in a glass room
         constructed for the purpose.  To the best
         of my knowledge he read ALL those available.
         . .in great detail. . .and determined from
         the various changes, that Shakespeare most
         likely did not write in nearly as many of
         a variety of errors we credit him for, even
         though he was in/famous for signing his name
         with several different spellings." [2]

Hart was certainly well read. You can open random classics like _Macbeth_ & find his comments like this one in the forward of Macbeth.

[0] 2005OCT151730, Palm III, diary in use ~ [http://www.flickr.com/photos/bootload/52909493/in/set-720575...](http://www.flickr.com/photos/bootload/52909493/in/set-72057594088577955)

[1] _"An Open Source Success Story: A History of Plucker"_ ~ <http://www.plkr.org/about>

[2] Project Gutenberg, _"The Tragedie of Macbeth"_ by William Shakespeare, July, 2000. <http://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/2264/pg2264.txt>

<comment><USER6> _"All progress, therefore, depends on unreasonable people." I really like this quote._

That's not the quote. Ironically, it has been bowdlerized: [http://books.google.com/books?id=fYDSuENw1BoC&pg=PA189&#...
Besides using correct syntax for 1903, the language of the original is incomparably more alive.
This can't be Hart's doing. A man who devoted his life to preserving original texts (including this quote itself in http://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/26107/pg26107.txt) would never have had the bad taste to botch it like this. I suppose if whoever did had bothered to quote the title, he would have renamed it People and Superpeople.

<comment><USER5> thx @gruseom 2 things I didn't know, source of the quote & _bowdlerized_ : <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Bowdler>

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Five years ago I was at HOPE Number Six and Michael Hart was the Saturday keynote speaker, giving a talk on his work at Project Gutenberg. I didn't know very much about it, but I recognized the name. There were Project Gutenberg discs floating around the conference so I snagged one and had a look.

I don't really remember anything specific from the talk, but I remember it was inspiring. It was called "Using eBooks to Break Down the Bars of Ignorance and Illiteracy". There's audio of the talk online, and I think I need to hear it again.

The next day was the last day of the conference, and as was usual Jello Biafra was the getting far less attention than the other keynote speakers. They'd closed off the back part of the main hall, a hall which had been filled to capacity and then some for Michael, and some of us were tossing around beach balls. I pounded one particularly hard and hit some guy in the back of the head with it. When he turned around I recognized Michael. I don't think he was too happy with me in that moment.

With the eloquence that only a twenty year old can muster, I stuck my hand out and said "I love your work. It's fucking absurd." That's about the highest compliment I can give a person, and I'm glad to see that Shaw quote in the obituary. It says what I was awkwardly trying to express.

The tension drained out of the situation, and he shook my hand before turning back to his companion and returning to his conversation. I went back to playing with beach balls.

I admire what Michael built, and I admire how he did it. Project Gutenberg was slow but steady, and will continue past his death. I can only aspire to leaving that kind of a legacy.

Goodbye Michael. I loved your work. It's fucking absurd.

</comment><comment><USER8> Good interview: [http://poynder.blogspot.com/2006/03/interview-with- michael-h...](http://poynder.blogspot.com/2006/03/interview-with-michael- hart.html)

(Link at the end to a pdf with interview).

I was curious about how he funded this project.

Excerpt from interview: RP: Do you get a salary from the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, which was founded, I believe, in 2000? MH: No. We don't attract enough funding for that. RP: So what do you live on today? MH: It's been two years since my last pay check, but if you save all your salary when you do get one, $100,000 will go 10 years with no salary, at $10,000 a year.

Interesting that he lived so cheaply in order to work on something he loved.

<comment><USER9> Working on something you truly love has a very high value. And that value isn't taxable ;-)

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> I suppose many would consider this both indecorous and perverse, but I really am curious about the cause of death in cases such as these. It is usually omitted in cases of suicide or some particularly nuanced, possibly embarrassing disease.

I don't care about specifics, I am just disturbed when all reports tiptoe around the cause of death as if it just "spontaneously" happened to a man who was merely 64.

It sounds from some of his recent public writings like he may have been struggling with a terminal disease, but not being an associate of his, I have no way of knowing that.

<comment><USER11> People die at all ages and for all kinds of reasons. If your curiosity is morbid, you can probably hunt around for it. If you have respect for others privacy, you'll accept the information given.

Obituaries should celebrate a life, not explain a death.

<comment><USER12> It is not unhealthy or insensitive (which is what "morbid" means) to know cause of death.

Knowing cause of death has value for public discussion about policy, health, and medicine. Even if it's something like suicide or AIDS, we'll know that we should be paying more attention to preventing those.

IMDB and Wikipedia always list cause of death when it's known. Are they morbid too?

The obituary writer is free to write it any way he wants, but you seem to be arguing that it's wrong to _include_ the cause of death. The reason we're reading this particular obituary at all is because we want to know more about the person. How is a list of surviving relatives, his home town, or age any more relevant or important to mention than cause of death?

<comment><USER13> The cause of death is important to know in the aggregate: 1 person died last year in the United States from alien laser beams.

In the specific, it's morbid, yes.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Fancy adding something like "Founder of Project Gutenberg" to the title here? Just think it'd catch on better, and he's definitely a guy worth remembering :-)

Update: Eh, that'll do ;-)

</comment><comment><USER15> This is 403ing now, which is a shame because I've been using Project Gutenberg since like _forever_ and really wanted to read this. Can anybody copypasta?

<comment><USER16> Here you go:

Michael Stern Hart was born in Tacoma, Washington on March 8, 1947. He died on September 6, 2011 in his home in Urbana, Illinois, at the age of 64. His is survived by his mother, Alice, and brother, Bennett. Michael was an Eagle Scout (Urbana Troop 6 and Explorer Post 12), and served in the Army in Korea during the Vietnam era.

Hart was best known for his 1971 invention of electronic books, or eBooks. He founded Project Gutenberg, which is recognized as one of the earliest and longest-lasting online literary projects. He often told this story of how he had the idea for eBooks. He had been granted access to significant computing power at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. On July 4 1971, after being inspired by a free printed copy of the U.S. Declaration of Independence, he decided to type the text into a computer, and to transmit it to other users on the computer network. From this beginning, the digitization and distribution of literature was to be Hart's life's work, spanning over 40 years.

Hart was an ardent technologist and futurist. A lifetime tinkerer, he acquired hands-on expertise with the technologies of the day: radio, hi-fi stereo, video equipment, and of course computers. He constantly looked into the future, to anticipate technological advances. One of his favorite speculations was that someday, everyone would be able to have their own copy of the Project Gutenberg collection or whatever subset desired. This vision came true, thanks to the advent of large inexpensive computer disk drives, and to the ubiquity of portable mobile devices, such as cell phones.

Hart also predicted the enhancement of automatic translation, which would provide all of the world's literature in over a hundred languages. While this goal has not yet been reached, by the time of his death Project Gutenberg hosted eBooks in 60 different languages, and was frequently highlighted as one of the best Internet-based resources.

A lifetime intellectual, Hart was inspired by his parents, both professors at the University of Illinois, to seek truth and to question authority. One of his favorite recent quotes, credited to George Bernard Shaw, is characteristic of his approach to life:

"Reasonable people adapt themselves to the world. Unreasonable people attempt to adapt the world to themselves. All progress, therefore, depends on unreasonable people." Michael prided himself on being unreasonable, and only in the later years of life did he mellow sufficiently to occasionally refrain from debate. Yet, his passion for life, and all the things in it, never abated.

Frugal to a fault, Michael glided through life with many possessions and friends, but very few expenses. He used home remedies rather than seeing doctors. He fixed his own house and car. He built many computers, stereos, and other gear, often from discarded components.

Michael S. Hart left a major mark on the world. The invention of eBooks was not simply a technological innovation or precursor to the modern information environment. A more correct understanding is that eBooks are an efficient and effective way of unlimited free distribution of literature. Access to eBooks can thus provide opportunity for increased literacy. Literacy, the ideas contained in literature, creates opportunity.

In July 2011, Michael wrote these words, which summarize his goals and his lasting legacy: "One thing about eBooks that most people haven't thought much is that eBooks are the very first thing that we're all able to have as much as we want other than air. Think about that for a moment and you realize we are in the right job." He had this advice for those seeking to make literature available to all people, especially children:

"Learning is its own reward. Nothing I can say is better than that." Michael is remembered as a dear friend, who sacrificed personal luxury to fight for literacy, and for preservation of public domain rights and resources, towards the greater good.

This obituary is granted to the public domain by its author, Dr. Gregory B. Newby.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> I saw a wonderful talk at HOPE 6 concerning Project Gutenberg, and can only assume it was Michael Hart speaking. It made me donate on the spot.

As a staunch supporter of paper books I don't often read eBooks, but I can completely understand and appreciate what an immense resource they are to those less fortunate (and picky about their medium!) than I am. Rest in Peace, Mr. Hart. Your legacy will live for years and years to come.

</comment><comment><USER18> Project Gutenberg is a vision of what the future could be if we choose. RIP Michael, you done good.

</comment><comment><USER19> _One thing about eBooks that most people haven't thought much is that eBooks are the very first thing that we're all able to have as much as we want other than air._

He sure was right about that. It's one of the really big ideas, the kind that is going to take several more decades to really sink in.

</comment><comment><USER20> I remember going to a dual-talk in Amsterdam of Michael Hart and Richard Stallman. I went to see Stallman, I returned energized by Hart's vision. He was a convincing visionary person that dedicated is life to the good of all people.

The world needs more Michael Stern Harts.

</comment><comment><USER21> I really admire people who strongly believe in something and dedicate their lives to it. I wish I were made of the same stuff.

<comment><USER22> We're all made of the same stuff. You are too. You can do almost anything other people can, all you have to do is get up and do it. Some do, some don't. There is still plenty of time for you.

Rest in peace Michael Hart and thank you for endless evenings of reading both in the past and in the future.

Project Gutenberg will live on forever or at least as long as a single copy remains. Building a library is one very worthwhile thing to do with your life.

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> The George Bernard Shaw quote is wrong. The actual quote is:

 _"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man."_

Source: <http://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/26107/pg26107.html>

</comment><comment><USER24> Am I the only one who is getting 403 forbidden error on the link?

<comment><USER25> Go to the main site, then follow the obit link.

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> Bless you good Sir.</comment>


Get Ruby and Rails running on Ubuntu with one command - <AUTHOR> http://thechangelog.com/post/2857400260/railsready-setup-script-to-get-ruby-and-rails-running

<comment><USER2> Oblig. bash.org, <http://www.bash.org/?464385>

      <@insomnia> it only takes three commands to install Gentoo
      <@insomnia> cfdisk /dev/hda && mkfs.xfs /dev/hda1 && mount /dev/hda1 /mnt/gentoo/ && chroot /mnt/gentoo/ && env-update && . /etc/profile && emerge sync && cd /usr/portage && scripts/bootsrap.sh && emerge system && emerge vim && vi /etc/fstab && emerge gentoo-dev-sources && cd /usr/src/linux && make menuconfig && make install modules_install && emerge gnome mozilla-firefox openoffice && emerge grub && cp /boot/grub/grub.conf.sample /boot/grub/grub.conf && vi /boot/grub/grub.conf && grub && init 6
      <@insomnia> that's the first one

<comment><USER3> haha updated to read "A setup script to get Ruby and Rails running on Ubuntu server in one line". The first draft of the script was one command originally.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> This strikes me as no easier than rvm, but less clean (installations go to /usr/local, no easy way to switch between various ruby interpreters or gemsets, harder to uninstall, etc.).

Why not just do this?

        1) Update whatever requirements you need via APT tool of choice.
        2) Install rvm
        3) Install ruby-1.9 using rvm
        4) gem install rails
        5) Write great rails app.

<comment><USER5> I posted the following guide the other day:

<http://ryanbigg.com/2010/12/ubuntu-ruby-rvm-rails-and-you>

Sadly it languished with no upvotes. :( I found it extremely useful, however!

<comment><USER6> <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2039029>

<comment><USER5> Ahh.. Dupe, then. Thanks!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> That is many commands, but it's only one line.

And there's something in the inner-sysadmin in me that sees "curl <http://example.com/foo.sh> && ./foo.sh" and shudders. That sounds like a receipe for disaster.

<comment><USER8> It's a bitch rubygems are so fucked up on Debian/Ubuntu and that Ruby 1.9.2 is still not in Ubuntu's repo.

Otherwise that line would be:

         sudo aptitude install ruby1.9.2-full && sudo gem install rails

<comment><USER9> That's what rvm is for. Leave the system Ruby alone and install your own, even multiple versions. I have ruby 1.8.7 with rails 2.3.5 and 1.9.2 with 3.0.3, easily switch between them for testing.

<http://rvm.beginrescueend.com/>

<comment><USER3> I have updated the script to ask you if you want to build Ruby from source or install RVM (Wayne from RVM pointed me in the right direction)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Here is a script that I wrote and have been using, should work on most Linux's and OSX to bootstrap a Rails Development environment. Also ensures that git is installed. You can run it with one command (after reading it's contents of course) as follows:

curl -O [https://github.com/wayneeseguin/rvm/blob/master/contrib/boot...](https://github.com/wayneeseguin/rvm/blob/master/contrib/bootstrap_rails_environment) && source bootstrap_rails_environment

This automates installing the prerequisites across many Linux package management types and then bootstraps a Rails development environment using RVM.

<comment><USER6> A few questions:

-Why Ruby 1.8.7 and not 1.9.2?

-I've installed 1.8.7, 1.9.2 & 1.9.2-head via RVM without having libyaml-dev or libffi-dev installed (I see they're listed in `rvm notes`). Any idea what's up here?

Thanks!

<comment><USER10> Read the script, it's adjustable. Download, change your version and run. They are listed as they help 'cover all bases' as they are used by some gems that people might need.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Couldn't you just do:

wget [https://github.com/joshfng/railsready/raw/master/railsready....](https://github.com/joshfng/railsready/raw/master/railsready.sh) && bash ./railsready.sh

Besides the "1" command is really 4.

If you are setting up enough VM's that you need this you should have something like puppet installed and don't need this. If you are setting up one machine then do it by hand. Know the tools you have installed and keep track of them it will make deployment easier.

<comment><USER3> This isn't meant for huge deployments or rollouts. I use it to setup testing servers that mimic production boxes. And yea it should ready "setup rails with one line"

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Some comments & questions from someone who's worked on something similar:

-What's extglob used here for? I don't see any regexes.

-What are libffi-dev and libyaml-dev for? I assume some common gems depend on them. If so, which? (I'm just getting into Rails.)

-Git in the Maverick repos is old (1.7.1, which was released in April). Installing it from source is probably a better idea.

-You should probably use RVM to install Ruby, since its 1.9.2-head target won't require you to keep updating your script with 1.9.2's patchlevel.

-In my rails3.sh (which I should really publish), I didn't need to `gem install bundler` in order for `bundle install` to work. Probably because `rails` depends on `bundler`.

-That sudo check is neat, and I'd like to lift it; what's this script's license?

<comment><USER3> extglob is in there for future improvements. I plan to make it robust enough to accept parameters in the future.

When building Ruby the output complained about some missing deps. libffi-dev and libyaml-dev made Ruby stop complaining about them :)

Bundler is installed on the system because you don't have to install Rails on the system. You could simply put Ruby on there, install bundler then when you upload your app and run "bundle" it will pull down Rails and any gems your app depends on. Having Bundler available on the system is needed if you don't install the Rails gem system wide.

Use the script however you see fit and feel free to take from it what you like :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> Note to the wise: do not run this on a production machine unless you understand the full consequences of what the script is doing.

This is great for starting out a new machine and getting things setup, but running the update and upgrade commands without consideration of what's being updated could cause a lot of headaches if any existing sites running on the server have dependencies that are botched by the upgrade.

<comment><USER3> The README advises to run on a fresh install. Install Ubuntu, run railsready, have fun :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Just so you guys know this script has changed a lot since I opened it up. It now has way better output formatting, the option to install Ruby from source or RVM, better stdout and stderr redirection to the install.log and even captures signals for things like ctrl-c to kill the script nicely. Thanks for all the input and I hope it's found to be useful :)

</comment><comment><USER3> This also installs git, I updated the readme. It's a very simple script so if you guys see any ways to improve it let me know.

</comment><comment> DanI-S Nice! It'd be nicer if it used RVM, though. Might try rolling my own.

If anyone else wants to try, or is otherwise interested, I wrote a step-by- step guide to getting Rails on Ubuntu with RVM: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2113525>

<comment><USER3> It offers the choice now of build from source or RVM

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> If anyone is looking for a Debian Lenny config script (RVM, Apache, Passenger, SQLite), here it is: <https://github.com/vysogot/railsready-debian-lenny>

Debian has some differences.

</comment><comment><USER14> I just ran the script on Ubuntu 10.10 (64bit) but when i run "rvm list" or any other rvm command i get the following error:

/usr/local/bin/rvm: line 73: /home/myuser/.rvm/scripts/rvm: No such file or directory

Whats wrong here?

<comment><USER14> ok... i had run the script as root and was trying to run as a normal user, thats why the error....fixed now

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> Related and very recent: [http://hivelogic.com/articles/setup-guide-rails- stack-with-p...](http://hivelogic.com/articles/setup-guide-rails-stack-with- passenger-rvm-bundler-apache-and-mysql-on-ubun)

</comment><comment><USER3> Just a FYI I changed the script to install Ruby to /usr/local thanks to some input from a Github user. Also people are forking it and setting it up to install RVM so feel free to check those out as well!

<comment><USER4> I believe your earlier version _already was_ installing to /usr/local. You've just made it explicit. Most configuration scripts accept a _\--prefix_ option, but default to /usr/local if you omit the option. I'm pretty sure that Ruby works that way, and it's exceedingly common. (Not that the explicitness isn't a good idea. You don't want to rely on a default without being sure.)

Follow-up: partial output of ./configure --help in a Ruby source directory:

> By default, `make install' will install all the files in `/usr/local/bin', > `/usr/local/lib' etc. You can specify an installation prefix other than > `/usr/local' using `--prefix', for instance `--prefix=$HOME'.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> I have updated the script to ask you if you want to build Ruby from source or install RVM (Wayne from RVM pointed me in the right direction)

</comment><comment><USER16> I now prefer using chef-solo, which allows to tweak and add the remaining bits very quickly once you know how to use it!

</comment><comment><USER17> Wish this was around a week ago when I did this all manually.

<comment><USER18> Agreed, now if only someone could write the one line command to robustly install couchdb on ubuntu.</comment></comment>


Amazon.com Announces First Quarter Results - <AUTHOR> https://ir.aboutamazon.com/news-release/news-release-details/2020/Amazoncom-Announces-First-Quarter/ <comment><USER2> > If you're a shareowner in Amazon, you may want to take a seat, because we're > not thinking small. Under normal circumstances, in this coming Q2, we'd > expect to make some $4 billion or more in operating profit. But these aren't > normal circumstances. Instead, we expect to spend the entirety of that $4 > billion, and perhaps a bit more, on COVID-related expenses getting products > to customers and keeping employees safe. This includes investments in > personal protective equipment, enhanced cleaning of our facilities, less > efficient process paths that better allow for effective social distancing, > higher wages for hourly teams, and hundreds of millions to develop our own > COVID-19 testing capabilities

This seems huge. Spending _all_ $4 billion of their expected Q2 profit on covid-19-related things, including developing their own tests.

Committing to spending all of your future profit (which seems like a huge statement on its own) aside, anyone know how this compares to what other companies (or even governments) are spending on safety/testing? Trying to get a sense for the scale here.

<comment><USER3> They included "getting products to customers" in what they'll spend the 4 billion on, seems like they can include basically any cost in that.

<comment><USER4> Considering I have been getting non-Amazon purchases much faster than Amazon purchases I suspect that's really code for paying for the delivery costs that exceeded the actuarial models that were baked into Amazon Prime and thus turned 1 day free delivery into 8 day free delivery.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> This may be cynical, but I think this was a PR focused earning to offer better optics.

I think they absolutely had to say something to placate the rising tide of voices against their monopoly and for their contribution to so many retailers' downfall- even without COVID. This will earn them some brownie points as in "Oh- AMZN's sales went up but at least they were not gouging- they invested all their profit in improving their service and employee benefits"

<comment><USER6> This type of cynicism is exhausting. It seems that if they're damned if they do and damned if they don't, Amazon might as well pocket the cash and not worry about doing good things because people will trash them regardless.

<comment><USER7> I'm not the original commenter so I'm only speaking for myself here but if a company has shown itself to be ruthless and harmful (to its employees, the environment, small businesses) I don't think you need to give them the benefit of the doubt when they do a solitary good thing.

I'll give Amazon props when they start supporting warehouse unionization, lobby the govt for a carbon tax, sell off Whole Foods, AWS, amazon basics + all in-house home goods into separate entities. Of course that will never happen because anything that actually stops the harm that Amazon does would be detrimental to the business.

<comment><USER8> So you don't support any big company? Which company is supporting unionisation? Hell, most big tech companies don't even employ non professional workers directly, instead as a contractor.

So which is the noble big company you support? Which has sold of all diversified businesses? A company doing what you are suggesting will not even survive for long.

<comment><USER7> No, I can't think of any big company I support.

Amazon, Google, Apple, Exxon, etc. are all built on exploitation.

My point wasn't that Amazon is more evil than other corporations, I think that's only marginally true. Probably only because of how much more efficient they are than a lot of companies.

<comment><USER9> While I agree with you, I think your criticism is better directed toward capitalism, not the winners within it. This is a structural problem.

<comment><USER8> The problem remains in any other system though. In Communism, the winners would be the politburo members instead of bigco executives.

<comment><USER10> In fact, that's the argument for capitalism:

All of these systems suck, so let's favor people who can lead voluntary large tribes over the politically connected, such as the politburo.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Isn't the elephant in the Amazon boardroom that AWS essentially pays for any mischief they can do with their retail arm?

i.e. Sell an equivalent item at a loss for an extended period of time to force a competitor / retailer out of business? Opening up a physical bookstore after essentially crushing that market felt like a "finger" to ex-businesses to me.

<comment><USER12> I don't see the problem. It's Amazon's money; they are entitled to spend it however they want.

I think a lot of people are mad at Amazon for various things; undercutting mom-and-pop businesses in niche markets, paying people to deliver packages almost for free, busting warehouse unions, counterfeit items, etc. The solution is to not fund Amazon. Move your servers elsewhere. Shop at Target. Ask your representatives to make stronger labor laws.

But all in all, I don't think it's intrinsically wrong to start selling an internal tool and then end up making a lot of money from it. If Amazon weren't dominating online retail, someone else would be. Nobody wants to go to a store. It's boring and there isn't a very good selection. That is not the fault of cloud computing.

<comment><USER13> > I don't see the problem. It's Amazon's money; they are entitled to spend it > however they want.

If they actually were selling products at a loss to put competitors out of business, that would be considered predatory pricing. Imagine Apple using their iPhone profits to sell MacBooks for $200 - it would distort the market and eliminate competition. It might be good for consumers in the short run, but much worse when they were the only game left in town.

<comment><USER14> They basically did this with diapers.com a decade ago.

[https://slate.com/technology/2013/10/amazon-book-how-jeff- be...](https://slate.com/technology/2013/10/amazon-book-how-jeff-bezos-went- thermonuclear-on-diapers-com.html)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> As I predicted (as did many others), their revenue was way up, but their earnings per share missed significantly due to increased costs from COVID-19.

<comment><USER15> Just curious why does wall st and others use "Earnings per share". The number of shares is arbitrary and can be adjusted up or down by a split/reverse split or dilution.

It seems to me that EPS is just earnings divided by an arbitrary number. Why not look at operating profit as a percentage instead?

<comment><USER16> dividends are what people historically bought stocks for, not speculation. If you want your stocks to pay dividends, earnings per share is a much more useful metric.

<comment><USER17> I bought $10K of STOCK. I hope for 5% dividend. I have no idea how many shares that is, and I don't care.

<comment><USER18> Then you want Earnings per Price. i.e. How much Earnings for STOCK*STOCK_PRICE.

(Earning / Price) is not a typical metric, (Price / Earnings) (i.e. PE Ratio) is the more typical metric. These metrics are meant for casual/institutional investors not lay people[1].

Meanwhile, if you still want (Earning / Price), you can do (1 / PE Ratio).

[1] If you aren't able to find the number of STOCK units you own or will purchase, then you are not a casual/institutional investor.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Looking at Amazon's stock, one of the more surreal financial things going on during this pandemic depression, is seeing the Bezos fortune cross $200 billion today while we have 30 million newly unemployed persons in the past six weeks. Had Jeff and MacKenzie not gotten divorced in the recent past, Jeff would presently be listed right at about $200 billion today. As it is, Jeff is up to $150 billion and MacKenzie is at $50 billion. Jeff is nearly worth as much as Warren Buffett & Mark Zuckerberg combined (#4 and #5). If the tech juggernaut outperformance (they're levitating apart from much of the economy) continues for a bit longer, it'll take Bill Gates + Warren Buffett ($180b) to equal Jeff alone.

It's safe to say Jeff is the wealthiest person that has ever lived, short of fantastical examples like Genghis Khan. Gates hit near $100b ($152b inflation adjusted) during the peak of the dotcom bubble. However, logically only some split of that $100b should be exclusively credited to him, as he was of course married to Melinda, whereas Jeff is worth $150b alone. By contrast, Rockefeller was likely never worth more than $25 to $50 billion (inflation adjusted; at his peak it's thought he might have approached $2b in his day; the historical record is certain he crossed $1b; the reasonable inflation adjustment back to the 1920s and 1930s is anywhere from 20x to 30x depending on how aggressive you want to be).

(ignore the stupid, yet persistent claims that Rockefeller would be worth $300-$400 billion today as an adjustment; those claims are not using any manner of proper inflation adjustment; instead, that's based on taking Rockefeller's wealth as a percentage of the US economy at the time, and then doing the same thing for the US economy today (eg if his wealth equaled 1.5% of GDP in 1928 or 1937, then 1.5% today would be $330b), a complete non-sense approach for numerous obvious reasons)

</comment><comment><USER20> All the speculators saying Amazon should be making big from covid might be feeling a little low today.

</comment><comment><USER21> aws is straight printing money. & will likely continue to do so for many quarters to come. $10bn revenue for the qtr.

<comment><USER22> Why is that guaranteed? If a lot of companies that are using AWS experience declining business activity or even complete shutdown due to the recession, why couldn't AWS's revenues decline?</comment></comment>


The Netflix of machine learning APIs: Test, compare, integrate all ML/AI APIs - <AUTHOR> https://dataturks.com <comment><USER2> This seems pretty good. As an ml engineer where I have to try various apis provided by companies, it's a big pain to manage subscription and to maintain various accounts.

<comment><AUTHOR> I am not sure if that is the big use case for me. I liked using it to try out various APIs and then to compare what might suit my use case. This helped us to somewhat narrow down on the image moderation API integration we were looking for in our startup.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> I needed this since long time, i was getting exhausted of comparing different apis and writting code for each of them.

<comment><AUTHOR> While there was programmable web for getting the documentation and alternatives for the APIs. These guys have a small set of API for now, hope they can add enough to really be of good value.</comment></comment>


There's Already a Leather Coaster to Protect Your Furniture from the HomePod - <AUTHOR> https://gizmodo.com/theres-already-a-leather-coaster-to-protect-your-furnit-1823043111 <comment><AUTHOR> I almost got it right: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16378547](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16378547)</comment>


Algorithms for generating new ideas for startups: servicing trends - <AUTHOR> http://www.toao.com/posts/algorithms-for-generating-new-ideas-for-startups-servicing-trends.html

<comment><USER2> In my opinion, the notion of an "algorithm for generating new ideas for startups" is absolutely appalling. I am far from an expert in the field of startups but I have enough knowledge (at the very least from a consumer's point of view) on the matter to know that great products are crafted by imagination and passion. Having a process decide what a "good startup idea" would be completely takes away from the base imaginative thought. Furthermore, how are you to become passionate on an issue that was brought to light by a process rather than intuition?

<comment><USER3> Is it really that bad though? I see it as a form of brainstorming and/or a way to overcoming blind spots/biases in your thinking. It's not an 'automated process' to generate ideas - just one method in a whole 'toolkit' of methods to stimulate one's creativity.

<comment><USER2> I can definitely see the benefits of using this tool as a brainstorming function, however why try and force ideas to create a startup. The function of a startup is to make a company in order to respond to a need. I believe that need is only going to be fully satisfied when the company/person/startup addressing it has some underlying attachment to the core issue. Grabbing a hold of an idea that is a result of some exterior process, to me just seems wrong and lacks a genuine intention.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I think this is a proactive approach rather a reactive approach, when products/service come into existence after mass uses new technology and find issues with it and market respond to that need.

</comment><comment><USER5> Another way to work with ideas is to work on the technology stacks behind them. Want to implement a new kind of service but the underlying technology stack doesn't work well for the idea? Work on that first, possibly in such a way that it can be sold or leveraged.

For example, Ruby on Rails came from Basecamp, SproutCore came from Mailroom, and Redis came from LLOOGG.</comment>


Dow Hits 20000 for First Time - <AUTHOR> http://blogs.wsj.com/moneybeat/2017/01/25/dow-hits-20000-for-first-time/ <comment><USER3> Listen to this episode of Planet money in 2013: Despite all the celebration, the Dow Jones industrial average has not hit record highs recently. If you adjust for inflation, the highs just aren't as high as they seem.

And even if it does hit a real, inflation-adjusted high in the next few weeks, it won't mean much. The Dow is a seriously flawed stock index, and it's certainly not a good way to measure what's going on in the overall economy.

On today's show, we rain on the Dow's parade and explain why a lot of very smart people say we should ignore the Dow.

[http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2013/03/12/174139347/episo...](http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2013/03/12/174139347/episode-443-dont- believe-the-hype)

The Dow Isn't Really At A Record High (And It Wouldn't Matter If It Were) [http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2013/03/05/173515767/the-d...](http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2013/03/05/173515767/the- dow-isnt-really-at-a-record-high-and-it-wouldnt-matter-if-it-were)

<comment><USER4> Yes, the dow is a flawed index.

That said, the S&P 500 & Russell 1000 are also at all time highs.

[https://www.google.com/finance?q=INDEXSP%3A.INX&ei=6-KIWNi7K...](https://www.google.com/finance?q=INDEXSP%3A.INX&ei=6-KIWNi7KIeejAHlwZq4Cw)

[https://www.google.com/finance?q=INDEXRUSSELL%3ARUI&ei=8eKIW...](https://www.google.com/finance?q=INDEXRUSSELL%3ARUI&ei=8eKIWJnQNof7jAG74ar4Cw)

None of these data points mean anything on their own. People that look at a chart a conclude anything at all are not doing enough analysis.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> So what? The Dow is a terrible indicator of even how well the stock market or the economy as a whole is doing. It is price weighted instead of market cap weighted so smaller companies that released fewer shares at a higher price have more impact on the Dow than larger companies. [http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2017/01/04/508261371/episo...](http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2017/01/04/508261371/episode-443-dont- believe-the-hype)

<comment><USER6> Alright how about NASDAQ and S&P 500 hit record highs at the same time.

<comment><USER7> That would be a much better headline.

<comment><USER8> Even better: RUA 3000 hits all time high. A broad spectrum index covering ALL publicly traded companies in the US.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I understand that people believe Trump is good for business. And I also understand that people believe Trump is good for the rich. And I also understand that people believe Trump is good for the blue-collar worker.

But I don't understand how Trump could be a good influence, in the long term, on business and the stock market, when looking at his positions and policy changes.

Why Trump isn't good for poor working class America - Assuming there's a large tax on every good coming into the country, then the cost of groceries will increase dramatically. The cost of cars will increase. The cost of consumer electronics will increase. The cost of many goods that Americans buy will increase and that will most directly affect the poor.

Why Trump isn't good for business - Many American companies source their parts from other countries. Increased tariffs and taxes impact their bottom line. Trump wants American companies to hire American and is willing to enforce it. American workers have a higher minimum wage. This also affects the bottom line.

Why Trump isn't good for the rich - If businesses are impacted then investments should decline, but if you've seen The Big Short, then it's possible that we could just have a fraudulent, unpredictable market instead. The huge tax cut should also benefit the rich, so actually, Trump does seem great for the rich.

All in all, I'd like to hear what others think and why this sort of thought isn't widely circulated.

<comment><USER10> I have this - admittedly very condescending - theory that a large part of the middle class is still "financially illiterate". Wages are hardly ever discounted for inflation and thus growing wages (in absolute terms) make most people happy. Even if their purchasing power is declining. As long as there is no sharp increase in prices most people won't complain.

<comment><USER11> I wonder what things would be like if employers were somehow required to adjust pay for inflation _by default_. I guess they'd just label it a "raise" and take credit.

Heck, I'd be happy if Congress would pass legislation to make the minimum-wage automatically adjusted too.

<comment><USER12> How about the government stops printing money instead? It would have a similar effect on buying power as your suggestion.

<comment><USER11> That's a little reductive -- there's always going to be _some_ inflation (or deflation) over time, because there's no instant accurate measure of "how much value exists."

So making mistakes in inevitable, and it's safer to err towards inflation than deflation.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Remember when nearly the entire business media predicted that if Trump was elected the stock market would crash immediately?

Some of my smartest friends (at hedge funds) placed large bets mid to late 2016 that the market would decline. Now here we are.

The lesson isn't that Trump is awesome for the economy (maybe he is, maybe he isn't) or that the market won't crash tomorrow (maybe it will, maybe it won't) but rather that even the so-called experts are relatively clueless when it comes to financial timing. Remember Brexit? Same story. Good lessons for the rest of us trying to invest. If you want to learn more, read 'The Bogleheads Guide to Investing' [[http://fave.co/2jpTKmf](http://fave.co/2jpTKmf)] which is an excellent place to start.

<comment><USER14> I'm just a little confused about this though. If everyone thinks the market will decline due to Trump, then doesn't the market actually decline? What I'm saying is that apparently there were even more people making the opposite guess.

<comment><USER15> It is so so so much more nuanced than that.

In one way, the more people that bought put protection on their stock portfolio created the bullish pressure that took weeks to unwind.

(When you buy puts, the market maker is going long the stock as their own hedge. most akin to a bookie)

<comment><USER16> If you buy puts, MM sold puts and will sell shares against since he is holding a deltaLong position from selling his puts (he makes money if the underlying goes up and lose money if the underlying goes down (which is why you bought the put). To hedge that risk he would sell shares against the sold put so that the risk of the underlying move would be covered.

<comment><USER15> you're right, but yes the concept I'm referring to was staying delta neutral. When people close their put options before expiration, the MM's create buying pressure.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> "The Dow is dumb! Calculating a price-weighted average of a small arbitrary group of stocks is no way to go through life, son, and no one should care if that average reaches 20,000." \- Matt Levine from [https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-01-11/insider-t...](https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-01-11/insider- trading-and-theoretical-indexes)

<comment><USER18> Exactly. This is the most pointless economic indicator ever.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> Trump for all his craziness is vehemently pro business. I know the whole tech crowd wants him to crash and burn but the stock market rising is no surprise to me.

Whether it's worth the damage done to the poor and the environment is yet to be seen.

<comment><USER20> > Trump for all his craziness is vehemently pro business.

No he is definitely not. Trump is anti-business and he makes that very clear. His campaign promises and actions since election are super clear that he is pro-his-wealth and _not pro-business._

A pro-business politician would raise taxes on the wealthy, provide tax cuts for the middle class, increase the corporate tax rate, improve immigration so that more people could come in to the country, address massive business risks like climate change with a serious face, improve healthcare for everyone in nation, etc. A pro-business politician would want a healthy and wealthy middle class, a stable climate, and good tax structure to incentivize smart people to come here and build useful things. More businesses are more likely to succeed in a society that is healthy, resourceful with its environment, and with enough wealth shared that income inequality does not destabilize the structure.

Trump is the opposite of being pro-business. Trump is not fiscally conservative or pro-business at all - the very idea that he is would be considered an "alternative fact" \- a lie.

<comment><USER21> Could you explain why any of what you say a 'pro-business' politician should do is pro-business? I think a lot of people would disagree with you on those points.

<comment><USER20> Okay, sure. The first place is to immediately dispel the idea that Republicans have ever been about being "pro-business" \- and the second place will be that Trump specifically is not.

It's simple Tragedy of the Commons at first. Republicans / Republican Presidents are generally pro-greed and pro-riches, not pro-business, and those are different things. What you want in a good business environment is not achieved with Republican policies. This can be seen with the past few presidents - good economic times and growth with Democrat policies, and poor economic times and decline with Republicans.

Specifics.

> A pro-business politician would raise taxes on the wealthy, provide tax cuts > for the middle class, increase the corporate tax rate

Henry Ford is the good example here of showing why this is pro-business. Give your country a stable, wealthy middle class (pay your auto-workers more, a lot more), and then they will be able to buy your products and your company will thrive. Roads will be built for your cars to drive on, with those taxes!

Wealthy people are important in a capitalistic society, but income inequality and extreme wealth present dangers, not useful things. Income inequality will catch up with the business as the middle class fades and doesn't buy their products.

Want a pro-business environment? Increase corporate taxes to fund schools and education and infrastructure so that more people will grow up healthy and wealthy and wanting to buy things.

> Improve immigration so that more people could come in to the country

Is this really a debate, especially here? Most of the smart people in the world who can create wealth and businesses do NOT live in the USA. If they wanted to live here, or did live here, that would be great.

> Address massive business risks like climate change with a serious face

The climate is changing, and it's going to kill a lot of people that could have been buying your products. It's going to displace hundreds of millions of families and settlements. Food production and distribution is going to be wildly affected. Basic things that should be stable in a business environment will not be stable. Climate change is the biggest RISK for corporate profits in the world (though right now you could also see it as an opportunity - <USER2> you recognize that it needs to be addressed).

> improve healthcare for everyone in nation

Again is this really a debate? Isn't it obvious that healthy people will be better for business? Do you want your customer base to be dying? Or your employees worried about disease? That's not useful for business.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> Other people have covered how the Dow is a mediocre stock index. The other half is that 20k doesn't mean anything either. It's just a number calculated by the math-function of the index.

The psychology is mildly fun, just like a 50th birthday may be more celebrated than a 49th. Round numbers appeal to us. But 20k dow says nothing more about the state of the economy than the 19.9 dow did a few days ago.

<comment><USER23> > _But 20k dow says nothing more about the state of the economy than the 19.9 > dow did a few days ago._

It's not the 20k vs 19.9 it's a) the record high, b) the upward trend.

<comment><USER24> But we won't be celebrating 20.1k in the same way.

<comment><USER23> Which makes sense, because even if a value is continuous and its rise monotonic, you obviously can't celebrate all the time.

Having some milestones to pause and ponder along the way makes sense.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> Would be great for Republicans if this boom persists through the 2018 midterm elections.

When Trump's trade policies take hold there should be a rush to form manufacturing startups to make stuff in the USA for the industrial supply chain, e.g. power cords, circuit boards, paints, etc. I expect these to form in the traditional centers of manufacturing excellence - urban areas where minorities will enjoy relative job prospect improvements.

<comment><USER26> Can the US really make power cords cheaper than China or Vietnam? If they add tariffs to imports I'm sure they can but is manufacturing for the domestic market alone enough to create sustainable jobs?

<comment><USER27> Nope, unless it's all automated and paired with high tariffs. But then you might only create tens of jobs per factory instead of thousands.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> Here's an interesting podcast claiming the Dow is meaningless: [http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2017/01/04/508261371/episo...](http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2017/01/04/508261371/episode-443-dont- believe-the-hype)

The article might have already discussed this, but I can't tell because of the paywall.

</comment><comment><USER29> Just a reminder that Dow Jones went up by over 140% over the last 8 years.

<comment><USER30> Right. It was basically already at 20k (19,963.8) on Jan 6, with two weeks left for Obama's Presidency.

<comment><USER31> That's correct, but the bull run started after the election results in November.

I'm not exactly shocked that an ego-driven, heavily pro-business Republican President with full congressional control and majority of states under Republican governorship could drive the market up.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> So nominal stocks valuations are up. The real question is are valuations high or low.

good indicators

\- Stock Market Capitalization to GDP (This is Warren Buffets's favorite). [https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/DDDM01USA156NWDB](https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/DDDM01USA156NWDB)?

\- Q Ratio aka Tobin's Q Ratio (total price of the market divided by its replacement cost)

\- S&P 500 CAPE (PE10) and Shiller PE (PE)

\- S&P 500 Price to Book Value

None of them alone, but all of them together.

</comment><comment><USER33> Daily reminder that stock indexes in free markets have very little to do with the government.

<comment><USER34> Do you have any evidence of that? From my understanding the two are hand in hand. (note: I am not an investor)

</comment></comment><comment><USER35> If you had a bunch of money to put in the stock market, would you:

\- Put 1/3 of it in now and the other 2/3 in when the next crash hits \- Wait until it all goes to shit and put it all in then, keeping it in a high-yield savings account until then (they make about as much as CDs these days)

Would love to hear opinions!

<comment><USER36> Time in the market is better than trying to time the market.

How long until next crash? When is the crash over and things start to climb again? You cannot know before after the fact, so it ends up being a big gamble. I'd say invest now, possibly over a few months if you want to spread the risk.

</comment></comment><comment><USER37> The Dow is a bad index, but if it's the warmest year ever, we shouldn't focus on all that's wrong with the Fahrenheit scale.

<comment><USER38> The Dow is more similar to using a barometer and proclaiming it the warmest year ever. However, in this case, the thermometer just happens to agree.

</comment></comment><comment><USER39> There's no real evidence that the President has much of an influence on the economy.

<comment><USER40> I agree 100%, but for as long as I can remember, presidents have received credit for the state of affairs on their watch, and used that as talking points while campaigning.

<comment><USER39> Yeah :( It started with Kennedy, if I recall correctly, but it apparently took off and became a standard part of the presidential playbook.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER41> The Venezuela stock market has had quite a run over the past few years too, but..... [https://www.bloomberg.com/quote/IBVC:IND](https://www.bloomberg.com/quote/IBVC:IND)

</comment><comment><USER42> This is nothing more than a sugar high before the inevitable Trump crash. He likes to take credit or stuff other people did. Then when Trump actually does something and it doesn't go well he pushes the blame onto someone else.

The stock market indexes were already up significantly as a result of Obama's policies. I'm just not here for Trump or others assigning credit to Trump for something Trump had very little to do with.

This is what you call speculation. Under Obama people had to prove out their finances. Under Trump gut feeling is enough.

<comment><USER42> I got down voted for this. However, I was right that it was a sugar high and not based on the numbers. It was some blanket assumption that Trump would automatically be "good for the market" because "deregulation". Deregulation isn't always good.

"Customers" will be a lot less likely to spend money if they aren't adequately protected when they do. Regulations also exist to protect the health and safety of the US citizens. It protects business from getting sued when they didn't follow the regulations.

So businesses and consumers benefit from regulation and that there is no gain to be had here. We are just trading the small gains in stock price for lots of additional risk legally and otherwise.

I didn't even bring up the fact that Trump may unwittingly get us into a trade wars with some of our biggest trading partners by threatening to go to war with them or threatening them with tariffs when they don't do what we say.

</comment></comment><comment><USER43> Can we not post articles behind a paywall?

</comment><comment><USER44> What will happen to the Dow (and other indices) when the first serious geopolitical or financial crisis hits?

<comment><USER45> It will go down. After that, it will go up again. Then down again. Then up again. Ad nauseum. The market fluctuates. If you want to put money away for the long-term, it makes sense to have some in it. For the short-term, not so much. This is all pretty standard stuff.

</comment></comment><comment><USER46> This is driven by expectations of Trump's deregulatory agenda. He says he's going to cut 75% of regulations.

I can't believe this is happening. America is back people.

<comment><USER26> Depends which 75% of regulations he cuts. If he cuts EPA regulations and there is more pollution as a result of the increase in manufacturing this could result in more deaths in the long run. How about safety regulations get cut so manufacturing gets cheaper but more workers die in manufacturing plants, is that ok?

<comment><USER47> Fine, but what if there is a chance that the huge heap of regulations supporting entrenched interests is broken up? I'm looking at you Comcast

<comment><USER48> Let's see which regulations get cut first. So far, it's not the government contracting regulations.

Bonus: when Trump "freezes the size of Federal employment" do you think that will be match by a freeze in contracting, or a boost in crony contracts?

<comment><USER47> What I learned reading The Art of The Deal is his MO:

Trump: "I have a problem (e.g. Wollman Ice Rink) but know nothing about this topic. Who is the best company that makes ice rinks?"

Makes a few calls to hockey teams to find this information.

Learns the name of the company.

Calls CEO of the ice rink company.

After 15 mins of conversation, learns that freon-based ice rinks suck the monkey and that brine-based ones last forever.

Total elapsed time: Probably an hour.

Hires ice-rink company to help with Wollman Rink.

Project completed in four months and under budget.

No studies, no meetings, just results.

Government bureaucrats: REEEEEEEEEE!

<comment><USER46> These critics don't understand what it means to get things done. It's becoming a meme at this point.

Media for the last year and a half: "Donald Trump will NOT be able to build the wall."

Just now, Donald Trump: "We will start IMMEDIATE CONSTRUCTION of a border wall."

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER49> This is why Hacker News needs a downvote button. This is a non-story. The DJIA is an average of 30 stocks. Even if it was possible to figure out causation of stock market movement, the DJIA would be a terrible indicator of stock market movement.

For more, see here: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dow_Jones_Industrial_Average](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dow_Jones_Industrial_Average)</comment>


Show HN: A Flowtype generator for Postgres - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/gajus/database-types <comment><USER2> If this supports TypeScript, as some of the text seems to suggest, my company will donate to the project's maintainers immediately. We'd find that very, very useful. It's actually been in our backlog for several months, but we don't have the bandwidth to work on it ourselves.

<comment><AUTHOR> Hi, I am the author of the project. TypeScript is on a to-do list and it is fairly straightforward thing to add. Contact me at firstname.lastname@example.com if you'd like to discuss any specific requirements you have.</comment></comment>


Wozniak: Web crackdown coming, freedom failing - <AUTHOR> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJnghGBBP2Q

<comment><USER2> This guy is _so_ hungry for press attention. I soon expect to see headlines shouting, "Wozniak: Storm coming, rain falling". When someone hasn't accomplished anything notable since the Carter Administration, one should fade away.</comment>


Electron Isn't Just Heavy, It's Dangerous - <AUTHOR> https://firstname.lastname@example.com/electron-isnt-just-heavy-it-s-dangerous-580a53b0716e <comment><USER2> OMG the executable I installed can run commands on my machine? No way -- down with electron! /sarcasm

... isn't this exactly the case with ANY executable?</comment>


Amazon goes down; takes S3, Salesforce, Target, and others with them. - <AUTHOR> http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/12/23/amazon-down/

<comment><USER2> And people told me I was crazy for hard-coding IP addresses for s3.amazonaws.com and sdb.amazonaws.com into the Tarsnap code... :-)

<comment><USER3> You _are_ crazy for doing that - one instance of downtime doesn't justify ignoring all the advantages DNS brings.

<comment><USER4> Are there DNS servers that support versioning? The best solution I could imagine would simply be to set Tarsnap to normally use the current DNS records for S3, but be able to rollback to a valid zone record if they encounter an update that makes the servers stop resolving.

<comment><USER2> The Tarsnap client only talks to the Tarsnap server, but I do cache that lookup in order to avoid problems with glitchy DNS resolution.

I could have the Tarsnap server cache DNS lookups if I was only worried about working around DNS outages -- but as I said, that wasn't something I was considering at all when I made the decision to eschew DNS.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> It is DNS. If you put the EC2/S3 address into /etc/hosts, the services work fine. Affecting lots of other big websites as well apparently (target, salesforce) because they all outsource to UltraDNS

<comment><USER6> I'm very surprised that they rely on a single vendor. But I guess DNS is one of those things you don't think about until it fails.

<comment><USER7> The point of using UltraDNS is that it they provide fast "real-time" failover of DNS routing. This is used, for example, for fault tolerance where the IP address responding to a domain name might change due to failure scenarios or load balancing (where a different server is now primary responder to the domain name, maybe located in a different data center or country). Infrastructure-wise, UltraDNS is kind of like the Akami of DNS, instead of content distribution.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I thought DNS was supposed to try backups servers automatically... any DNS experts able to explain what's going on? Some of the ultradns servers are returning (correct) values, others simply not responding.

<comment><USER8> yeah, uh, if you are smart, you have a secondary DNS provider. But that really requires you managing it yourself. the problem was that many people outsource, which usually means going with only one provider. (now, ultradns does have a good setup, they probably aren't a bad choice for a provider, but having only one is just plain stupid.)

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> Never let truth get in the way of a good headline.

<comment><USER10> Haha.. true. What else can we expect from Techcrunch?

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> It doesn't say in the TC article and I can't really tell from this thread. How long was Amazon actually down?

</comment><comment><USER12> I wonder how much money amazon loses per minute 2 days before christmas. Ouch.

<comment><USER13> At $20B annual, assuming Christmas is a big chunk, I'm guessing $2B (10%) in the last two weeks, 2 minutes would then be worth $200,000?

I think my 10% number is too low, so maybe $500K for two minutes? But this is not profit, just revenue.

<comment><USER14> Do you think it might catch up once it is available again? It is a pretty serious shopping destination, and possibly people retry.

<comment><USER15> It really depends on downtime, if it was more than say an hour a lot of people would probably buy elsewhere, small amount of downtime you wouldn't think would effect sales though.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> surely they mean "Amazon goes down and takes the Internet with it"

<comment><USER17> Only if TC was hosted there.

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> It looks like a DNS issue, since while <http://amazon.com> isn't working for me <http://18.104.22.168> is (kind of).

EDIT: "No A records were found for amazon.com" [http://www.zoneedit.com/lookup.html?host=amazon.com&type...](http://www.zoneedit.com/lookup.html?host=amazon.com&type=A&server=&forward=Look+it+up)

</comment><comment><USER18> When Rackspace goes down and takes TechCrunch with them, the whole INTERNET goes down. When Amazon goes down, Salesforce, Target, and others...

</comment><comment><USER19> It looks to be back up now.

</comment><comment><USER20> Why wouldn't such a company run their own name servers? I understand it's "yet another thing to maintain," but I've set up bind before... didn't seem that bad.

<comment><USER21> It's relatively trivial to outsource. It's one of those services that's easy to measure, quantify, and manage (from an outsourced perspective). There's also a bit more to it then that. The Anycast routing can be quite difficult to setup and maintain. It's virtually useless outside of a very small set of protocols (DNS being one of them), so it wouldn't make sense for Amazon to bring that kind of talent in-house for something like DNS.

<comment><USER8> the mistake was outsourcing to only one provider. it's easy enough to setup a BIND slave elsewhere that automatically transfers the zone from your primary provider.

<comment><USER21> I'm not sure that "setup a BIND slave" is quite that easy for someone with as much traffic as Amazon.com.

<comment><USER8> I'm sure they could hire the muscle to do it.

I'm just saying, relying on just one company is usually a bad idea.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> Internet can be so fragile.</comment>


Introducing the Crypto University - <AUTHOR> https://hackernoon.com/introducing-the-crypto-university-5f6b07c4805c?source=rss----3a8144eabfe3---4 <comment><USER2> This misuse of the word "crypto" is starting to get irritating, especially from people who pretend to teach others something.

It's like all the self-proclaimed "SEO experts" from a few years ago suddenly decided that they are "crypto experts" despite knowing nothing about cryptology, not even the meaning of the word.

</comment><comment><USER3> The blatant repurposing of the University of Oxford's logo isn't going to fly for long, and for a site for "all things crypto", it seems awfully focused on just crypto currencies.

</comment><comment><USER4> The name is "Crypto" University, doesn't have anything about cryptography

</comment><comment><USER5> This should've been named "The Royal Bitcoin University" judging from the logo.

Why not just create a course on Coursera or something?

</comment><comment><USER6> Is this a good value? Has anyone gone through it all yet? (I would like to know).

I am currently going through the Hyperledger tutorial series on edX. It is completely free to access. See [https://courses.edx.org/courses/course-v1:LinuxFoundationX+L...](https://courses.edx.org/courses/course-v1:LinuxFoundationX+LFS171x+3T2017/course/)

I find that the course material has a large intersection with the edX course. I'm not sure why they need an Indie Gogo Acccount. You can also buy a certificate on edX for $99 but this is optional.

</comment><comment><USER7> Sounds really soft: [https://thecryptouniversity.io/p/the-crypto- masterclass](https://thecryptouniversity.io/p/the-crypto-masterclass)</comment>