Craig Wright's signature is worthless - <AUTHOR> https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/4hflr3/craig_wrights_signature_is_worthless/ <comment><USER2> Discussed at [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11609611](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11609611) and [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11610342](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11610342).

</comment><comment><USER3> The big question mark for me isn't Wright, it's Gavin.

Wright has presented a bunch of bs, no definite proof, and has seemingly not wanted to sign recent or new messages with his PGP key. For all intents and purposes, he's got zero credibility.

Then Gavin comes along. A person who worked with Satoshi the longest, communicated with him the most, led the project in practice for years, is a computer scientist and well balanced guy overal. He's not perfect but he's got a lot of credibility in the community and for good reason. And he spoke personally with Wright, and is completely convinced, both by the things he heard on a personal level, as well as proofs, neither of which he disclosed.

To me that's just bizarre. It's like Trump saying he'd be a great president and Obama meeting with him and saying he's the real deal, it'd just wouldn't happen.

Gavin apparently knows stuff we don't, and apparently it's proof, and apparently at the same time Wright chose not to go with that but to show a lesser proof which turned out to be bs. What in the world is going on?

edit: possible explanation, although I find it unlikely: Gavin was hacked. It's not my concern, but the core devs removed his commit access as a precaution which I think is sensible, so they're concerned Gavin was hacked.

The reason I don't this it's likely Gavin was hacked is because there was no play here. i.e. we didn't see Wright e.g. say 'I'm Satoshi, and I'm going to sell all my coins', thereby causing panic that hundreds of millions of bitcoins flood the market and crash the price, allowing someone (him/hacker) to buy cheap coins, get uncovered, and sell when the price reaches normality again. They'd easily make millions. But that didn't happen. And it should have by now, because within 24 hours (or realistically, an hour) a hacked Gavin would phone up other core devs and spread the message he was hacked, wasting the window of opportunity of the scam. So the fact we're not seeing a play here means there was no reason to hack him (or squander a hack), unless it was all set up as a big joke which doesn't look sensible either.

<comment><USER4> Bitcoin Core developers appear to believe that Gavin's computer may have been compromised:

[https://twitter.com/petertoddbtc/status/727078284345917441](https://twitter.com/petertoddbtc/status/727078284345917441)

> FYI, @gavinandresen's commit access just got removed - Core team members are > concerned that he may have been hacked. > [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11609707](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11609707)

<comment><USER5> This hilarious! So someone has successfully hacked Bitcoin core's lead dev with the agenda of "appointing" Wright as Satoshi?

Most often than not, if the story is too convulated then the simple alternative offers the truth. Gavin is on it. I wasn't sure of it but since they played "His computer was hacked" card instead of "Sorry I messed up" then yeah there is something fishy here.

<comment><USER4> Gavin is not, and has not been for many years, Bitcoin Core's lead developer. In fact, he hasn't even been a Bitcoin Core contributor for quite a long time now.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> What is the value of uncovering who Satoshi is? Or rather what is the value of being considered Satoshi?

My pet theories: If Wright is Satoshi and wants to hide the fact, a good way to do that is to come off as a fraud

If Wright is not Satoshi but knows who Satoshi is, and wants to protect him, why not just keep quiet? Was someone actually getting close to uncovering the identity and Wright is just trying to muddle the waters?

If Wright is not Satoshi and is actually trying to get people to believe that he is, what would he gain by it?

<comment><USER7> > What is the value of uncovering who Satoshi is?

Learning the identity of someone with hundreds of millions of dollars worth of Bitcoin seems like the obvious one.

<comment><USER6> OK, but what about the opposite: what is the value of pretending to be rich when you are not? I mean, sure you can probably get a free pizza slice here and there, but what can you actually do?

<comment><USER8> Check out this classic movie: [http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0046072/](http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0046072/)

<comment><USER9> Love this movie :-)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't Craig Wright initiating a Bitcoin transaction from Satoshi's wallet to a retailer, of a reporter's choosing, be all the proof you would need to validate his claims? If he has access to Satoshi's wallet then that's all the proof he needs.

</comment><comment><USER11> Give him a piece of Bitcoin source code and ask him debug</comment>


Disney finally nails free-roaming wireless power delivery - <AUTHOR> https://arstechnica.co.uk/gadgets/2017/02/disney-room-scale-wireless-power-transfer/ <comment><USER2> Interesting Disney took on wireless charging on their own. Apple supposedly partnered with a 3rd party[1] to bring wireless charging to future iPhones. Of course the scale is different but concept is the same but Disney's approach requires the room to be 'purpose-built'.

[1] [https://www.zacks.com/stock/news/243363/is-apple-aapl- teamin...](https://www.zacks.com/stock/news/243363/is-apple-aapl-teaming-up- with-energous-corp-watt)

</comment><comment><USER3> Just wondering how would Disney benefit from this type of basic hardware research?

<comment><USER4> At the absolute minimum, I'm sure Walt Disney Imagineering would love to find creative uses for this in their theme parks.</comment></comment>


How your cat is making you crazy - <AUTHOR> http://m.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2012/03/how-your-cat-is-making-you-crazy/8873/

<comment><USER2> Does it bother anyone else that this article is dated to not come out for another 12 days? Which is especially odd since I'm positive I saw this article linked to last week on another site (which seems to be when the oldest comment was).

That said, I've seen articles on this kind of stuff before. We know that microbes and fungi can control the behavior or much simpler organisms (such as ants). And I guess we know some things effect human behavior (such as rabies causing hydrophobia).

It's just such an odd notion that someone I know may behave the way they due to some germ or parasite they picked up years ago.

<comment><USER3> _Which is especially odd since I'm positive I saw this article linked to last week on another site (which seems to be when the oldest comment was)._

It was actually posted here too. See my other comment.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Dupe. Previous discussion just 8 days ago: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3573694>

<comment><AUTHOR> Ah, sorry about that.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> The end of that article is very philosophical. It raises the Cartesian question of reality and free will:

 _Then it hits me. I may have dodged T. gondii, but given our knack for fooling ourselves—plus all those parasites out there that may also be playing tricks on our minds—can anyone really know who's running the show?_</comment>


After Universal Basic Income, the Flood - <AUTHOR> https://email@example.com/after-universal-basic-income-the-flood-217db9889c07 <comment><USER2> If you're automating and outsourcing all the work it would seem to be a choice between ubi or some form of genocide or mass incarceration, so far we are dealing with the shrinking need for human labor via mass incarceration of the former working class but Ubi is actually cheaper than locking up one in ten of the post working class in private prisons for poverty induced crimes

<comment><USER3> _a choice between ubi or some form of genocide or mass incarceration_

Or, like, banning the automation. It's politically crazy, but then so is UBI.</comment></comment>


GoDaddy Responds to HostBenchmarker - <AUTHOR> http://www.sideprojectprofit.com/godaddy-responds-hostbenchmarker/

<comment><USER2> Actually they are reasonable people.

When muggles ask for a domain name registrar I often do send them to Godaddy because they will get on your ass so often that you'll never forget to renew your domain.

</comment><comment><USER3> According to a reddit AMA about a year ago with a senior manager they'd just hired, they've been making a genuine bust-their-ass effort to fix some of the issues they've had.</comment>


Notes On Doing Massive Amounts of Good Enjoyable Work - <AUTHOR> http://sebastianmarshall.com/notes-on-doing-massive-amounts-of-good-enjoyable-work <comment><USER2> I really try to be nice and give an article by Sebastian Marshall a fair chance when it crops up on HN.

But every single time, I'm disappointed. There is little to no editing, no digestion process that I can detect that would turn what I find to be haphazard notes into an actual product of a writer. I see that he really, really cares about saying something - apparently, though, not so much about being understood. The content of these articles is at best something that somebody else somewhere has already said better and more succinct. At worst, it's meaningless drivel that could just as well be the work of the postmodernism generator[1].

After a while, the words blend together and I remain astonished how others find meaning in his writing. Maybe they need to supply it themselves?

Can anybody point me to something even moderately tangible that Sebastian Marshall has actually done?

And yes, I know he has published a book. A book that seems to be about how he's a guy who is crazy and does things. But I have yet to see what those things _actually are_ , besides talking about doing things. The level at which you apparently can never actually learn what he _does_ is maddening to me.

[1]<http://www.elsewhere.org/pomo/>

<comment><AUTHOR> Well, thanks for giving me a chance David. Sorry you've been repeatedly disappointed.

If you'd look on my site for about five minutes, you'd see 2 of the last 10 entries I made reference a nonprofit project I'm doing with along with some really great people. I've had some reasonable success contracting, and I'm doing mostly charitable work for the next 2-3 months.

Anyway, I always appreciate feedback. More editing and polish, that's useful. If you'd like feedback in return, I might recommend spending more time on your own writing and doing things that are meaningful to you, instead of worrying about others on the net. Looks like you only wrote one blog post in 2012 -- about a customer in Nigeria -- and that was back in July. Wouldn't you be better served by being an exemplar of good writing than putting together criticism in comments on the internet?

<comment><USER3> Not OK. Maybe, somehow, you intended this to be genuinely friendly advice, but it comes off as stinking.

You put your blogging out there for criticism when you submit it, criticism that is appropriate and useful to others in the comment thread of that blog post. This is not a comment thread about skore's blogging; which does not appear to be core to his activities. Even if the 'what the hell does this guy even do' part was not fair (i'm making no judgement on that) it does not reflect well for you to respond by going to much greater lengths to seek out and critique a blog from a commenter, whilst simultaneously suggesting _they_ don't critique your work.

<comment><AUTHOR> Actually I empathize with the guy. I used to make negative and critical comments online about lots of stuff I didn't like -- writing or writers, entertainment, culture, politicians, whatever.

But the thing is, that's a really bad waste of life. Constructive criticism, learning, analyzing can be useful. Negativity to no constructive end? It wastes days and weeks and months and years of our lives.

<comment><USER2> If that's the impression you get of me from one comment, then I'm afraid it seems a lot like projection.

I enjoy debating online (debating in general, actually) - in a limited fashion, mostly for procrastination, at times. As with all things - the dose makes the poison. That's really all there is to it.

In fact, your comment again reflects the problem that I have with your other writing - What you say isn't necessarily in itself wrong (apart from the fact that I don't think it applies to me), but I don't know what you say it _for_. And I'm not even sure you know.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment> barry-cotter Is this post inspired or insipid? Neither, really but the message is worth noting; one can get a lot done by working full on, on one task, for hours, success feeds on itself and feels good, and the easiest way to get into this zone is a big opportunity combined with a hard deadline.</comment>


Religions Claim to Be Nondisprovable - <AUTHOR> http://lesswrong.com/lw/i8/religions_claim_to_be_nondisprovable/

<comment><USER2> That's all obvious if you haven't been brainwashed in childhood. Most religions today require indoctrination in childhood to retain market share. Some do take it all the way to brainwashing.

There seems to be a maximum safe dose of religion. Once a week is probably safe. Once a day can cause problems. Several times a day tends to produce symptoms of overdose, including fanaticism and obsessive-compulsive behavior.[1]

[1] [http://healthland.time.com/2013/03/28/can-your-child-be- too-...](http://healthland.time.com/2013/03/28/can-your-child-be-too- religious/)

</comment><comment><USER3> Excellent piece, thank you. I love all things in common with Russell's teapot...</comment>


The Shaky Moral Compass of Silicon Valley - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/07/style/the-shaky-moral-compass-of-silicon-valley.html <comment><USER2> _Moreover, those who are not superrich often live as if they are. Employees at large tech companies commute in free first-class buses..._

Yup, that's exactly how the superrich live, commuting in first class buses.

Silicon valley is no less tolerant of homeless than most places, and is certainly more tolerant than New York which ran most of them out of town.

</comment><comment><USER3> Is this another anti-"secret" propaganda piece.. Jesus!</comment>


Re-base: A Relay inspired library for building React.js and Firebase applications - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/tylermcginnis/re-base <comment><USER2> What is the appeal of Firebase? Is it only useful for people who either don't know how to write RESTful backends or want to write one very quickly?

<comment><USER3> I wouldn't recommend it at all. I built an app on it and it was an endless source of downtime and bugs. For example, the ref.onDisconnect() api call will not always fire, leaving fragmented data in your db. Long story. Don't use firebase for anything that will be used in production

<comment><AUTHOR> I know I'm a little biased since I wrote the library, but we use Firebase in production and it works just fine for us. Auth, real time, scalability, and security out of the box is why I love Firebase. Not saying any other option is bad, I've just had plenty of success with Firebase.

<comment><USER4> Plus their team is awesome ^_^ It's always a pleasure working with them and their community!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I really wish this included examples of how to test your code, either in the form of "recipes" or in the examples.

If I'm building something that I plan on maintaining for a medium to long amount of time, I'll want tests to give me some peace of mind. Especially when I go work on other stuff, and I come back a few months later to find myself stressed out because I don't know if things will break.

</comment><comment><USER6> If you don't want to rely on a 3rd party service for your backend, there are tons of OS options.

This one reads json-schemas and spits out a backend API. The same schemas can be used on the client for extra convenience.

[http://ramses.tech](http://ramses.tech) (shameless plug from a co-author)

<comment><AUTHOR> Plug away. It looks rad. I'll check it out.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> sorry I don't really understand what your frustration was when trying to use Firebase from within React. Can you give a detailed example?

<comment><AUTHOR> There wasn't a frustration with Firebase and React. It was a frustration with Firebase and vanilla flux. Firebase is essentially a store. So using vanilla flux you end up just trying to keep your store in sync with Firebase.</comment></comment>


HP Allegedly Time Bombs Unofficial Ink Cartridges from Working in Its Printers - <AUTHOR> http://hothardware.com/news/hp-allegedly-time-bombs-unofficial-ink-cartridges-from-working-in-its-printers <comment><USER2> The best way to make a difference against this nastyness realistically available to us is probably the "one star review".

And when you do, resist writing 10 paragraphs about all the times HP has ever wronged you or a long story about how much you needed the printout when it refused to print.

One star, one sentence. "Expires full inks after only x months forcing you to buy new ones when you don't need them."

I know for certain these short, sweet reviews change the buying behavior of my non-techie family.

Make a difference. Write a product review today.

<comment><USER3> Normally, I loathe one-star amazon and yelp reviews. They are almost always knee-jerk reactions to some function not working perfectly, or, more often, the consumer felt disrespected and didn't receive the proper service, even though the product or food is flawless.

However, there's an exception to everything. Just this week, my printer crapped out a week after inserting 3rd party ink cartridges. I just thought that printers have a planned obsolesce period of around 2 years. It's one thing to make a device so cheap that it's only capable of lasting 2 years. Intentionally sabotaging your own products just to extract a little more coin is beyond a slap in the face, it's consumer rape. Sony did something similar with their about face on installing Linux. Although I don't agree with what they did, they could at least explain it away as trying to prevent piracy.

I am never, ever, ever buying another product by HP again, never signing up for any of their cloud services and I will tell clients, friends, colleagues, and anyone else in shouting distance to do the same. Luckily, the TinyScanner app (my fave document scanning app, sorry Office Lens) and my phone are more than enough to replace my scanner/fax/copier/printer and I hope I never have to buy one again. For some reason though, faxes are still being used in high numbers in Japan.

<comment><USER4> Most one-star reviews I see are for anything _but_ the product: "delivery was late", "box was damaged", "came with wrong power cord".

<comment><USER5> Amazon et al should really make it possible for people to disaggregate their opinions on this kind of think. Lots of delivery companies are terrible but there's no ability to leave feedback ("driver threw parcel over fence") etc.

<comment><USER6> Tech support is also uniformly awful, and someone always winds up getting shipped a lemon and complains about bad tech support. Unless there's some kind of fundamental design flaw that led to the product failing, or truly common issue that is likely to affect me, I don't actually care. Someone always tries to install a brand new router and finds it won't even power on, then they call tech support and have a horrible time talking to someone in India who can't go off-script.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Such behaviour is the reason I threw out a perfectly working HP OfficeJet one day and will never buy a single HP printer in my life.

In the OfficeJet in question I only used genuine cartridges, but every few year it would stop receiving black and white faxes because (the nearly full) color cartidge was passing its expiry date - forcing me to throw away the full color cartridge and buying a new one.

<comment><USER8> Join the club. At my office we had an OfficeJet, and it "expired" a printhead. It won't even allow you to SCAN unless the printhead is replaced.

No more HP for me. Never again.

<comment><USER9> They also print advertising without your knowledge.

[http://www.dailytech.com/HPs+Web+Connected+Printers+May+Prin...](http://www.dailytech.com/HPs+Web+Connected+Printers+May+Print+Out+Ads+on+the+Users+Dime/article18753.htm)

<comment><USER10> That article was 6 years ago and I haven't really heard of anything about printers containing adware since then, so I suppose the amount of negative reaction that generated was enough for them to abandon the idea.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Slightly offtopic, but, I've been using a HP printer for the past years (Photosmart D7360) and am also VERY annoyed, one example: whenever one of my _color_ cartridges is past it's expiry date i can't print in _black and white_. Even though the black cartridge is brand new. I first have to go buy a new color cartridge (which i don't use) and then i can print in black again. The warning message says something like "if you print with an outdated cartridge it may damage the printer".

seriously, will never buy a HP printer again.

<comment><USER12> Most colour printers never print in just black and white. They always need a bit of yellow: [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp- dyn/content/article/2005/10...](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp- dyn/content/article/2005/10/18/AR2005101801663.html)

<comment><USER13> That's laser printers

<comment><USER14> That anti-counterfeiting measure (secret yellow dots encoding a serial number) was originally on color _copiers_. Then it got extended to color laser printers.

Do we really know that it hasn't been extended to ink jets as well?

I think the grandparent has a legitimate observation. It would explain why you need to have working color cartridges to be able to print in black and white. (It's obvious that paper money is not going to be counterfeited in black and white, but maybe they decided to hide serial numbers on all printouts, not just color printouts.)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Can confirm, this happened to our HP 6830 printer on September 13. Extremely annoyed because we only bought this printer in June, and was working fine with a replacement ink. I was actually researching legal precedents to this, and learned that Lexmark has been fighting something like this in court for over a decade[1].

[1] [https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20160214/16294133605/after...](https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20160214/16294133605/after- failing-to-use-copyright-trademark-law-to-stop-printer-ink-resellers-lexmark- finally-scores-victory-with-patent-law.shtml)

<comment><USER16> Yeah, patent law, recourse of the scoundrels.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> There's the Epson Eco-Tank series. Ink is in four bottles at the side of the machine, good for about 4000-6000 pages. Refill with Epson ink bottles or (a bit more messily) from bulk ink. The printer costs about $279.

You do have to clean the print heads occasionally. That's the price of long life print heads.

<comment><USER18> How is the Linux support for Epson printers? The big thing for HP is their good support for Linux.

<comment><USER19> "Good" Linux support means being able to just download a PPD and shove it into CUPS. AFAIK HP is the only one that requires their own crappy GUI on top.

<comment><USER20> Personally, I never ever had to use hplip's GUI tool, except for configuring wireless printing. After doing so, I could uninstall it and use bog-standard CUPS.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> Not sure if it was a time bomb, but HP does have an "auto update" feature that could _seem_ like a time bomb.

We got nailed by this with our HP 8610. Were using 3rd party cartridges with much success for months. Last week my wife had a huge (for us) print job and encountered an annoying bug (prints blank sheets every other print). Updated the firmware hoping it would fix the problem. Next thing we know, cartridge error.

Spent 3-4 hours researching how to downgrade firmware with no luck.

No mentioned of new Sept 13 firmware on any HP driver website that I found.

3rd party is shipping us new cartridges for free, but it will be 2 weeks. Had to buy another printer.

Die in a fire HP.

<comment><USER22> Are you printing in color?

<comment><USER21> Yes.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> Somebody mentioned Brother printers elsewhere.

I replaced my HP laser with a Brother laser a while back (just printing "stuff", not photos)

I replaced my black cart on the HP (2600n) with a 3rd party product, and got away with it. However, when I replaced the color carts (one ran out), which I was forced to, since it wouldn't print B&W at all otherwise, the printer detected the alien carts, and immediately refused to clean itself or something - I started getting black streaks on my black text, even though the black cart worked just fine for months the day before.

Bye bye, HP, you ain't what you used to be.

<comment><USER24> Here's a tip for Brother printers. When the printer asks you to replace the toner and stops printing, you can override it with a setting. The default setting disables printing until you replace the toner. You can change the setting to keep printing until the toner really runs out.

Forcing you to stop printing is naughty of Brother, but at least there's a setting so you can keep printing—if you're clever enough to find it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> I think this calls for a cheap open source printer to be made. Nothing complex is needed initially, just black and white with low running costs. In reality, any liquid that stains the paper of a given consistency should be fine. It shouldn't be costing this much to replace ink.

<comment><USER16> All you need to do is buy from a business that doesn't depend on fraud. Samsung make very nice and cheap black & white laser printers. I've bought two over the last few years, around $70. I see one on Amazon for $75 that has wifi printing as well), comes with a cartridge that lasted me 2-3 years and some thousands of pages, and replacement cartridges are $60 for branded ones, less than half that for generics. The printer is tiny, quiet, fast, etc. I can't believe people still buy anything else, after all we don't print photos at home much anymore, do we?

There are other manufacturers that do the same kind of model.

Just avoid HP and (in my experience) Canon. Laser is the way to go.

<comment><USER26> Good news! HP just bought Samsung's printer business. [http://www.anandtech.com/show/10677/hp-acquire-samsung- print...](http://www.anandtech.com/show/10677/hp-acquire-samsung-printer- business)

<comment><USER27> There is still Brother. They make nice, inexpensive black and white laser printers.

<comment><USER28> Plus they have excellent support for Linux with every single printer model - once you install their drivers.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> I wouldn't doubt it for a second. Printer makers use the razor/razorblade model for consumables, where the printer's dirt cheap, but the ink costs an arm and a leg. This is just the latest tactic for getting people to go OEM only.

At this point, I long for the good old days, when Canon embraced 3rd party ink vendors. Canon's cartridges were cheap because the print heads were a separate, replaceable, item, and the third parties were more than free to put out really interesting inks, like sets of greyscale for making really nice black and white prints.

<comment><USER30> I never understood the razor/razorblade analogy. A razor handle without a blade is just a shaped bit of plastic or metal, without any working or moving parts. The precision engineering is all in the blade. It'd be weird if the handle wasn't cheap and the blades more expensive.

But a printer really is a non-trivial set of electronics and working parts, so it is more surprising that they're so cheap.

<comment><USER31> As another poster points out, modern blades are different than older style blades where the blade was just a thin piece of sharp metal. I have one from my great grandfather... the blades are the definitely the cheap, disposable part. That's the model which the idea refers to.

<comment><USER32> In modern money, my razor handle cost ~us$70, but the blades code around 20c each.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> Laser OKI color printer isn't different.

Each toner (CMYK) has a life based on printed pages and stop working even if there's toner inside. No third part supplier, because the printer won't recognize it. And it's useless torefill it if you don't change some chip in each toner.

And then the fusor will also stop after some number of pages, no matter if the quality was still good. To replace it you spend more than you paid for the printer.

So OKI was in my banned list, now HP joins it.

<comment><USER34> Life based on printed pages would be OK. If you actually print the number pages you promise, I can compare the total costs of cartridges and printers.

But I think some models also have timer. After 6 months or year, the printer starts to complain that the ink has "dried up". To prohibit you from saving up that unicorn blood by printing less.

By banned list is HP, Canon and I'm very cautious about Samsung.

<comment><USER35> Would you buy a water bottle that contains a certain amount of water but closes itself after X sips regardless of remaining content?

<comment><USER34> Thats bad analogy. I could easily just sip three times every time and have empty bottle. If that bottle was cheaper than regular bottle, then sure.

<comment><USER35> Why is that a bad analogy? You can also print out solid black / coloured pages and get rid of the ink before it hits the hardcoded page limit.

<comment><USER34> I get no benefit from black pages. I get lot's of benefit from long sips.

<comment><USER35> Sucks for poor and/or disabled and/or elderly people, sucks for people with infants, and of course, for everyone who doesn't like to have games played on them so they save one cent which others get to pay with five cents. Oh well, amirite?

<comment><USER34> If you're disabled or kid, just pour that stuff to glass.

Sip is not in any way definite measurement. Sheet of paper is somewhat decent.

Better one would be this: buy a car. It will automatically stop ignition after 100 000km. Do you really have problem with that, if you know it beforehand?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> I haven't owned and HP printer in a while, but this article will stop me from making an HP printer my next purchase if and when I need one. What a dirty, cheap tactic by HP! They'll fire some low-wage earner worker and a mid-level manager over this, while the real culprit stays at his job I'm sure. Definitely class-action, and even criminal, no? Consumer fraud, deception?

Third-party replacements are running fine in my Samsung and Canon, without a complaint.

<comment><USER15> HP just agreed to buy Samsung's printing business.

[https://techcrunch.com/2016/09/12/hp-is-buying-samsungs- prin...](https://techcrunch.com/2016/09/12/hp-is-buying-samsungs-printer- business-for-1-05-billion/)

<comment><USER37> Eh, those were terrible anyway. I have an ML2525w which should be wireless, but in reality almost never joins the wifi network on boot reliably like all of the ESP8266s I have. I have to re-run setup on it all the time, and half the time it doesn't get detected by the tool. I gave up long ago and just hard-wired it. If I follow the exact turn-on procedure it likes and wait for it to be fully settled before attempting to print, it generally will start printing within a minute or so.

Honestly, I'm so done with printers. If I really need something, I can run to the 24hr kinkos or the office center in my complex. Owning a printer in 2016 seems kind of silly.

<comment><USER36> I've had no connectivity issues with my Samsung color laser printer. I need it here in SE Asia, since bureaucracy still reigns and paper vs. electronics is not quite there yet. It reminds me of Brooklyn in the 70s for that matter - the DMV comes to mind!

Love my ESP8266; did you year about the ESP32 yet? I am trying to port Wasp Lisp/Wasp VM to it for networking (not pentesting) not for IOT, but creating a mesh network of sorts here in the village I have been staying in East Java - no Kinkos or Starbucks here!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> Are there any open hardware printers in the making?

I seem to recall some open hardware cell phone projects. No reason a similar effort couldn't be directed towards making an open printer, is there?

Also, it might not even require making a full open hardware printer, but just some key circuitry and maybe some drivers, right?

<comment><USER39> HP and others have a lot of patents in that space with an army of lawyers to defend them unfortunately. It would have to avoid using anything coming close to these patents...

<comment><USER40> Patents expire, and printers are fairly old technology, so perhaps there is to be a printer revolution in the not so distant future?

<comment><USER41> Unfortunately, the inapplicability of intellectual property doesn't seem to matter much. They probably wouldn't use an expired patent in a suit, but many of these places just make minor tweaks and file for a new patent on the "new invention". There's enough grey area that you have to go to court to hash out whether or not the technology is infringing.

Opposing IP lawyers working for one of the largest media companies in the world have openly told an associate that while the thing they C&D'd her on may have had a good chance to be ruled non-infringing, she should comply with the C&D anyway since she would be financially ruined by a lawsuit, win or lose (realistically, she wouldn't be able to win because she'd run out of money WAY before the case even approached a conclusion -- one of big companies' favorite strategies is to "starve out" their legal opponents by making the case as expensive and convoluted as possible).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER42> How I get screwed: My HP printer will occasionally print a black-and-white page using all three colors of ink. Discovered this one day when I rubbed a fresh page and it smeared three colors. They call it 'wear leveling' or something. But we all know it means 'using up your expensive color ink instead of your cheap black ink'. What a crock.

<comment><USER43> That's why my HP printer only has a black cartridge. The socket for the color cartridge is empty.

<comment><USER44> Yeah the problem is that some of them don't allow you to do this anymore.

Overall I've started to buy B&W only laser printers and I buy a new printer when the toner runs out.

You can find Samsung entry level laser printers with a toner good for 300-500 pages on Amazon for about 30£ on sale that's cheaper than buying a toner.

1st world problems for sure but this is beyond stupid.

<comment><USER16> The replacement toner is worth buying too, lasts some thousands of pages. I love my cheap Samsung lasers.

<comment><USER45> I have bad news for you.

[http://www.anandtech.com/show/10677/hp-acquire-samsung- print...](http://www.anandtech.com/show/10677/hp-acquire-samsung-printer- business)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER46> Stop buying dirt-cheap printers that are sold at a loss. These are _designed_ to be paid off by expensive toner / ink. These are designed to make you waste the supplies if you don't use them up fast enough. They are designed to reject third-party cheaper supplies.

Pay a couple hundred more upfront for a no-bullshit device. I hope those still exist.

<comment><USER47> Ya, it's our fault for looking for a deal?

How can you guarantee that paying a couple hundred more upfront would save us all from this pre meditated corporate gluttony?

Stop buying printers from companies that build in mechanisms to purposely brick them. Buying a high-end HP is just as risky in my opinion, based on this story.

Cannon is another company to avoid. They just settled a similar potential class action: [http://www.therecycler.com/posts/canon-faces-class- actions-o...](http://www.therecycler.com/posts/canon-faces-class-actions-over- pixma-printers/)

<comment><USER48> The problem with avoiding Canon is that essentially any desktop laser printer on the market is in fact largely Canon's product (and the best of them in terms of reliability and TCO are little more than Canon made print engine in a plastic box).

On the other hand I have reasonably good experiences with OKI and Brother LED printers. These printers tend to be reasonably cheap (I've got OKI multifunction on sale for ~150 EUR), are full Postcript/PCL printers and supplies are reasonably cheap too, both original and third-party.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER49> If this is affecting printers in Australia, then HP are going to learn a very costly lesson in ethics. The ACCC will have to do an investigation, but the instant they confirm this has occurred they will face stiff fines for third line forcing and anti-competitive behaviour distorting the market.

<comment><USER50> There are no fines large enough the ACCC can serve that will stop them from this practice. ACCC is pretty toothless again big companies like this.

<comment><USER49> I dunno, they stopped Apple and HP from selling "extended warranties".

<comment><USER50> What ? Apple definitely sell extended warranties.

<comment><USER49> No, they do not. Not in Australia.

<comment><USER50> [http://www.apple.com/au/shop/browse/home/applecare](http://www.apple.com/au/shop/browse/home/applecare)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER51> Does this also happens with laser toner cartridges ? I really have no idea why people even buy those inkjet printers anymore, price per page is lower with laser printers and prices even for a color laser are in sub 200€$ range.

<comment><USER52> Laser sucks for printing photos.

<comment><USER53> Is there a reason that Shutterfly or other similar services don't satisfy those needs? I try not to own things anymore unless I use them frequently (lessons learned after moving twice in Manhattan), and printing color photos definitely isn't a frequent need for me, or I suspect, for most people.

<comment><USER54> Especially in Manhattan! You're always a few blocks away from a place that will do it for you for a reasonable price.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER55> Liberate yourself from softwares/products like this!

We used to own the stuff we paid for! Now it's like you pay to be the product. I think this problem is worse in software.

Checkout fsf.org

<comment><USER56> Stallman was right...

<comment><USER57> First they ignore you. Then they laugh at you...

<comment><USER58> Haha, no, they're always laughing at us. First and foremost they take the money. Then they force/trick you into loading 200MB of crap to get a kB driver loaded. Then they ignore you, except for the multiple, obfuscated spywares the driver bundle installed.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER59> I've had nothing but great success using third party ink with Epson printers. Every two-three years I buy a new epson printer and either a continuous ink system or refillable cartridges. I never worry about the kids printing too much or the print cartridge getting dry and clogging.

Epson gets used a lot as a base in the third party space - for things like T-shirt printers and other textile based printing. The print heads are reliable and accurate.

<comment><USER60> Why do you buy so many printers?

<comment><USER59> I don't consider one every two-three years a lot. I buy one whenever I run out of ink.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER61> This kind of reminds me of how some of these companies disable the scanner portion of "All-in-One" type printers if the printer portion is out of ink.

</comment><comment><USER62> Old, but still so true:

"Why I Believe Printers Were Sent From Hell To Make Us Miserable"

[http://theoatmeal.com/comics/printers](http://theoatmeal.com/comics/printers)

Had this one printed out (oh that irony) and taped it to our office wall when we had to deal with crappy printers on a daily basis working for a big DAX company.

<comment><USER63> There is also this great short from CollegeHumor: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQGtucrJ8hM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQGtucrJ8hM)

</comment></comment><comment><USER64> I guess it's time due for a rerun of Ken Thomson's reverse engineering of Mergenthaler Linotron.

[http://www.cs.princeton.edu/~bwk/202/summer.reconstructed.pd...](http://www.cs.princeton.edu/~bwk/202/summer.reconstructed.pdf)

</comment><comment><USER65> In southeast Asia, you can get an Epson L300 tank printer for about $170 USD. Each tank refill costs $10 and lasts for 10,000 pages. This line of printers isn't offered in the US. It's market segmentation. I think it's indicative of the level of oligopoly in the printer industry that they can segment this well and get away with it.

</comment><comment><USER66> This isn't even remotely surprising. in early 2000's work had 5 heavy duty color laser printers from HP to print B&W letters on. All carts stopped working after a certain page count. Even if the color wasn't used it would decrement the counter. We threw out THOUSANDS of full color toner cartridges.

<comment><USER67> Same experience here. I smiled as I threw out my HP color laser which had probably cost me over ten thousand dollars over its life. I've saved time, money, and customers by throwing all my HP printers away. (I didn't even sell them - I didn't want to give it away to some unsuspecting victim.)

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> I'm fairly sure this is illegal in the EU under one of the e-waste directives.

<comment><USER68> Yes, cartridges fall under the WEEE Directive.

What do you think is the best way to enforce the rules on HP and make this action illegal? Contact the Member State authorities? Feel this should be enforced by the EU instead of national... gah, directives.

<comment><USER5> First check if the offending printers are actually being sold in Europe! They might only be for the US market.

<comment><USER68> Dutch retailer 123inkt was mostly responsible for finding this time bomb, so yes, definitely.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER69> Inkjet printers have been simply the most loathsome category of electronics I've encountered. Concluded some years ago to never own one again. Garbage! Zero tolerance!

</comment><comment><USER70> For anyone tired of paying so much for ink replacements, look into a CISS (Continuous Ink Supply System) [1]. I got one for our Epson and it far outperforms ink cartridges and even the replacement ink is cheap.

I've had some issues with the printer recognizing the cartridges, but after fiddling around enough it eventually does. It's definitely worth the effort.

[1] [https://www.amazon.com/XUANCAI-Continuous-cartridge- Printer-...](https://www.amazon.com/XUANCAI-Continuous-cartridge-Printer- Cartridge/dp/B01G701EBK)

</comment><comment><USER71> Is there any legitimate reason to be buying an inkjet versus a laser? I would personally never buy an inkjet again in my life regardless of the brand.

<comment><USER72> Yes there is a reason: To print high-quality photos.

I have an ink jet for photos (admittedly rarely needed these days) and a black&white laser for everything else.

Also, part of the problem is that lot of people don't realize how expensive it is to run an ink jet and how massively cheaper a laser is in the long run. The average person needing a printing goes to the store and sees a laser for around $200 and an ink jet for $49, and buys the ink jet, thinking it's a better deal.

</comment></comment><comment><USER73> just few days back (possible Sept 13th) I got the following error message

One or more cartridges appear to be damaged. Remove them and replace with new cartridges

I was using non-hp ink cartridges.

I've been HP customer for 20 years, and I'm done with HP for their dishonesty.

</comment><comment><USER74> I bought a Lexmark laser printer about 12 years ago. A few days ago I bought my very first replacement toner cartridge for it - until this point I have been using the included cartridge, which is probably a half-capacity one. As you can guess, I do a lot of printing.

The box for the cartridge actually says that it will:

1) Only dispense a certain amount of toner before the printer will stop printing and that there will still be some toner left in the cartridge when this happens.

2) Update the firmware on the printer so that it won't accept 3rd-party cartridges.

3) Stuff about me agreeing to return the used cartridge to Lexmark for recycling since I bought a "return program" cartridge. Lexmark sold the cartridge for a reduced price, returning it for recycling is my end of the bargain.

They didn't use these exact words, but it was very clearly written and seemed like it would be pretty understandable to a regular person.

On one hand, I have to give Lexmark props for full disclosure that doesn't hide behind a click-through license or any weasel-words/legalese. On the other hand, changing the printer after purchase to lock the owner into Lexmark cartridges seems kind of low.

I'm really not sure how I feel about this though. I don't mind buying the manufacturer's cartridges or packing up the old one to be returned. But at the same time I'm worried that, in another 12 years, Lexmark might no longer be making cartridges for this printer and I'll have to throw the printer away.

</comment><comment><USER75> As an aside, does anyone remember the last time they were happy with _ANY_ HP product? Everytime I see that logo I get chills knowing what a pain in the ass it's going to be.

Edit: I am specifically thinking about HPSM, and HPNA here.

<comment><USER76> dec0dedab0de: "As an aside, does anyone remember the last time they were happy with ANY HP product? "

For the record, a company with which I consulted was very happy with the HP 1000/2100 series computers, and especially the exquisite keyboards that now- terminated HP employees once made, with tender loving care, for those computers. I suspect that one of these computers is stored safely in an underground cave somewhere awaiting it's rediscovery, alongside a somewhat- notorious VW beetle:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ctin21yrfcA](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ctin21yrfcA)

<comment><USER77> [https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/89/HP...](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/89/HP_1000_E- Series_minicomputer.jpg/736px-HP_1000_E-Series_minicomputer.jpg)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER78> I don't know how the DRM works on ink cartridges, but if all the off-brand cartridges just use the same mass-produced cloned DRM "chip" (or whatever it is), it not possible this is actually caused by a certificate expiring rather than an intentionally malicious act by HP?

I really don't have any clue what I'm talking about, just wondering if there's any alternative cause whatsoever.

<comment><USER79> If the intent isn't to stop generics, why have DRM on an ink cartridge at all?

Even if this instance is due to HP making a mistake, such as forgetting a certificate renewal, the intent is there right from the beginning, by using the DRM in the first place.

</comment></comment><comment><USER80> Reverse engineering is a must in this case. I cannot be accepted that you got an HP printer and now you cannot use generic ink.

I never liked HP but now, no way I will consider to buy HP products at all.

</comment><comment><USER81> So what is a good brand of laser printers that work well under Linux and accepts unofficial toners?

<comment><USER82> Brother. Look for:

\- BRScript3 (their clone of PostScript)

\- ethernet port

\- a "D" on the end means it can print on both sides, duplexing. It's slower but oh so much more convenient.

Printers with all these features start around $100.

<comment><USER83> Yup. I have had two brother printers so far. The first was about 8 years old when the paper feed became unreliable, so I replaced it with a newer (color) model. Prints great, takes whatever cartridges fit, works fine with Linux, windows and osx. Haven't tried network printing from Android or iOS yet.

Disclaimer: I probably print about five pages a month, so it hardly sees extensive use. I also don't print photo quality stuff, mostly role playing maps and characters for gaming sessions. But under those constraints, it's been great.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER84> Also, don't forget to mark "helpful" the most popular reviews that align with your opinion of HP's current practices.

</comment><comment><USER85> Real simple: if you don't like it, go buy another brand printer. That's the beauty of democracy: you're free to buy another printer/ink just like they're allowed to protect their proprietary assets! Bunch of whiners....

</comment><comment><USER86> Very dishonest practice from HP i'm never going to use any of their products again.

<comment><USER87> It's very sad - I am old enough to remember when HP was synonymous with quality and doing the right thing for both customers and employees. Hewlett and Packard (the founders) would never have pulled a stunt like this. Fiorina destroyed that legacy almost overnight.

<comment><USER67> I'm in Silicon Valley and I know someone working in their outsourcing group. HP has a "secret" office where they try to get all their development offshore. They will arrange travel visas to rotate people from other countries into hotels to work on projects. It is coordinated across the entire company in order to cut costs. I wish that we wouldn't allow such companies to sell in the United States (ie. companies that hide their income and employ offshore in order to avoid employing US employees. Such companies shouldn't be able to sell in the US.)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> I gave up on inkjet printers a long time ago. Is there any justification for using inkjet over laser for black and white?

</comment><comment><USER88> Canon printers with a "Continuous Supply Ink Tank" FTW. Now they even have official versions of these tanks.

</comment><comment><USER89> [http://www.myce.com/news/hp-pre-programmed-failure-date- unof...](http://www.myce.com/news/hp-pre-programmed-failure-date-unofficial- non-hp-ink-cartridges-printers-80457/)

@mods That is the original source

HP also made a statement about this: [http://www.myce.com/news/hp-officially- responds-pre-programm...](http://www.myce.com/news/hp-officially-responds-pre- programmed-failure-date-non-hp-cartridges-80467/)

</comment><comment><USER90> How is this legal?

As a side note, HP sells a (vintage) 256 MB DDR2 RAM module for $600 (USD) for it's new printers.

<comment><USER91> Hint: it isn't.

<comment><USER92> Surely depends on jurisdiction.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER93> The Amazon Basic is my go to brand, their are cheap and functional. I wish they get into printers.

<comment><USER53> That would be amazing if Amazon released store brand printers with no nonsensical ink policies. They would wreak havoc on the entrenched players. Amazon could pull it off.

</comment></comment><comment><USER94> how is this legal? It's akin to a car shutting down if a non genuine part is used.

<comment><USER95> Tesla is already doing this, iirc. As self-driving cars become a thing, you'll see way more of this, "for safety".

<comment><USER96> In the case of automated multi-ton death machines moving at high-speed near other people, that seems totally reasonable. You shouldn't be allowed to tinker with your automated car and risk everyone else's lives.

<comment><USER60> No, it's not reasonable. Government should set standard, free market competes to follow start dates with best quality and lowest cost.

Wht should Tesla be able to prevent me from replacing a bad Tesla part with a better/safer third-party part?

<comment><USER96> As long as it's advertised that way upfront, then I don't see why not. Tesla is not going to be the only automated car manufacturer. Today, you can buy cars that only take specialty parts. You can also buy cars that take standard parts. I'm sure it will be that way with automated cars too. Same way that you should be able to buy an iPhone with all of its non-standard quirks.

As for safety, it depends on the specific parts. An automated car is a complete integrated system. Once people start swapping parts, the test-matrix to ensure safety explodes. People modifying the driving software in their own cars, for example, is definitely a no-go. (And modifying any software at all should be prohibited unless the driving and entertainment computers are completely air-gapped.)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER97> Update here, HP admits to doing this intentionally and makes excuses as to why... [http://hothardware.com/news/hp-admits-to-sabotaging-ink- cart...](http://hothardware.com/news/hp-admits-to-sabotaging-ink-cartridges)

</comment><comment><USER98> Not trolling, but why do you use printers? I haven't used paper for 5 odd years now. The gov here (Spain) gives me tons of paper; I photograph it and then leave it and have them print it out when needed. Outside that I have not needed paper since the ipad. Why do other people?

<comment><USER99> Doing business: get paperwork, print paperwork, sign it, scan it, email it back.

<comment><USER98> Yes, but that is one printer for my company of 400+ people. It seems people are buying a lot more printers than just that.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER100> There has to be enough former HP engineers to find one willing to answer this one definitively.

</comment><comment><USER10> _Because of this sudden influx of complaints, it didn't take long to trace the "failures" to a HP firmware update that was released during the spring._

I wonder how long it'll be until someone hacks it and releases a firmware that has the checks patched out. I vaguely remember this being done for a few other chipped-cartridge printers many years ago, although that was more intended for CIS ( [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuous_ink_system](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuous_ink_system) ) where it makes no sense for the printer to keep thinking it's using small cartridges.

<comment><USER92> Patching the firmware might be possible, but 99.42 % of consumers and corporate users won't be doing such things even if the instruction is provided to them on some Web page.

</comment></comment><comment><USER101> Here is a (probably worthless) idea:

Create 1 or 2 good, serviceable network printer and experiment with different business models like subscriptions or pay-as-you-print, where the printer manufacturer _owns_ the printer an office or home just rents it.

In such a model, the companies incentives would align with the users values:

\- Cheaper printing per page

\- Less overhead on distribution

\- No artificial costs and limitations

\- Generally better printer:

      - More serviceable

      - Better software

      - Long term support

\- More environmentally friendly

Most people I know doesn't own a printer and just use the office printer anyway, so why not make the office printer just-work?

Edit: formatting

<comment><USER102> That sort of business model- leasing- is pretty common with copiers/printers already.

<comment><USER101> Yes, but that's the opposite end of the market (e.g. industrial pronting, very large size or volume). I am wondering if there is something in the middle.

<comment><USER103> Photocopier/Printer leasing is common for small and medium sized businesses too. If you google for photocopier leasing you'll find a huge number of options.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER104> There is a little chip inside the cartridge, EPSON's chip was cloned in China so you can use the third-party inks "safely", however it's not the case for HP.

I had not bought any HP products for 10+ years.

</comment><comment><USER105> For $69 it's easy enough to buy a different printer brand.

I buy a new ink cartridge and put it in my old printer and it doesn't work. Why should I assume the problem is the new ink cartridge and not the old printer?

</comment><comment><USER106> If this can be proven, and a class action lawsuit is filed, this would spell the end of HP. I don't think they would have any choice but to declare bankruptcy.

</comment><comment><USER107> Reminds me of the last HP printer I owned and the priceless reviews people wrote about it:

[https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/review/B0076O2A4C/RUHTFX2XOZQFY](https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/review/B0076O2A4C/RUHTFX2XOZQFY)

True, it was cheap, but the way in which it malfunctioned was so much over the top that I'll never buy HP printers again.

</comment><comment><USER108> I wonder how this will play out. This should get the attention of consumer rights watchdog at least, but possibly also class action suite.

</comment><comment><USER109> Just get a CISS printer. I got an Epson L300 when I started college (4 years ago) and the printer is still going strong and I still have one full bottle of black ink (it came with 3x black ink bottles in the box). It was about $150 when I bought it and I spent $0 on ink.

</comment><comment><USER110> Well, on my mom Windows 10 pc hp software asked her if the cartridge was pirate (unofficial?). Well, actually it was original, the only thing is that I'm keeping an empty color cartridge instead of replacing it since I only use black... I'm wondering wtf happened there

</comment><comment><USER111> If you're gonna do something sketchy like this, at least be smart about it.

HP could learn from Apple...

</comment><comment><USER3> I'm not a legal expert, but I want to believe that there is some law preventing manufacturers from sabotaging their own products in order to extract more coin from your consumers.

I want to believe...

<comment><USER112> The conduct described in the article is definitely unlawful in Australia.

</comment></comment><comment><USER113> I hope HP can prevent _all_ their future customers from talking to informed parties, or reading informed reviews. Seems rather self destructive of them.

</comment><comment><USER114> Can anyone recommend a good Soho printer at this point?

</comment><comment><USER115> Well, I'm glad I basically don't need to print anymore. Not sure what luck got me here, but I sure as hell aren't going back.

</comment><comment><USER116> any hard evidence about pre-programmed date on firmware?

I think this is evil and smart, \- people would by printers \- some unofficial ink cartridge market will add good reviews etc (low printing cost) \- increased cartridge sales for HP after set date

Sounds more like, unofficial iPhone cables not charging, but smarter (possibly illegal though)

edit: some google search reveals[1] more like firmware update at September 13 (auto update), then pre-set date. Pretty much like Apple and third party cable update.

edit2: More I read, I start to see 3rd party cartidge vendors didn't implement the chipset on cartridge fully compatible, instead they went easy way around.

Third party ink vendor says: "We do not yet have an updated chipset that will work with this new firmware version. . Customers can expect cartridge replacements with updated chipsets to be available in two to three weeks, possibly longer."

[1] [http://www.therecycler.com/posts/hp-inc-firmware-update- lock...](http://www.therecycler.com/posts/hp-inc-firmware-update-locks-out- remanufactured-cartridges-2/)

</comment><comment><USER117> Is there any brand of printer that that doesn't do that kind of thing?

</comment><comment><USER118> second sneaky thing I have heard about them recently, there was also a big thing about them disabling the printers when you unsubscribe from the instant ink package.

</comment><comment><USER119> I feel like we have this discussion every week.

</comment><comment><USER120> Sadly, HP doesn't have a reality distortion field. Apple would have gotten away with this and some clever marketing.

</comment><comment><USER121> I'm not sure HP is smart enough to do this nefariously.</comment>


Peter Naur – Programming as Theory Building (1985) [pdf] - <AUTHOR> http://pages.cs.wisc.edu/~remzi/Naur.pdf <comment><USER2> This is an amazing insight into the nature of programming. It feels right to me, and will help me explain what I do to others.

I feel privileged to live in an era where many pioneers of our field are still with us. I feel the passing of that era, and their loss, keenly.

</comment><comment><USER3> The idea that a Theory of the Program cannot be conveyed from one programmer to another but other means that apprenticeship seems to fit quite well with the experience of most programmers. While "program text and documentation" might not be enough, it would be interesting to understand what kind of documentation best supports Theory Building for new programmers coming into an existing project. It is my understanding the Literate Programming is thought by its proponents to be superior to traditional code/documentation in this regard.

</comment><comment><USER4> Other thing I don't know if can agree is that program's author has complete theory about his program.

I think that is oversimplification. I think that often program authors don't know what they are doing. Quite often somebody new who comes to the project has more insights about the project than original authors. Because:

1\. the author can be biased (that's why we need code reviews)

2\. the author can be less experienced has less programming skills, than a new person on the board.

3\. the author simply lost his fresh eye for the program etc.

</comment><comment><USER5> Naur argues that this view is contrary to the mainstream approach to software development, is that true? Does Google, Facebook, etc... view software development as: "similar to industrial production, the programmer being regarded as a component of that production, a component that has to be controlled by rules of procedure and which can be replaced easily"?

<comment><USER6> This is from 1985. Things have certainly changed.

<comment><USER4> nothing changes. I read some time ago Dijkstra article from 1972(!) called "The Humble Programmer" and what he wrote describes perfectly programming in 2015 as well (maybe he had Time Machine? Who knows...).

<comment><USER7> And here it is (for the lazy ;)

[https://www.cs.utexas.edu/~EWD/transcriptions/EWD03xx/EWD340...](https://www.cs.utexas.edu/~EWD/transcriptions/EWD03xx/EWD340.html)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> It's good essay, but there are some theses which I don't know if I can agree with them.

He claims that theory cannot be expressed. "(...)the knowledge held by someone who has the theory could not, in principle, be expressed in terms of rules"

Imagine that he is right and programming theory can't be expressed in words. Imagine if this was true.

Imagine there is no GoF book, no established design patterns (design patterns imo are just programming theories expressed in terms of rules...),

Imagine there is no Knuth books (if trees couldn't be expressed in terms of rules, then it would be pointless to write books about it).

Imagine there is no conferences about e.g. AngularJS or React architecture etc.

Because theory is in programmer head and "can't be expressed"

Maybe my thinking is flawed. Maybe Naur meant by "theory" something like "inner insight". If so I would agree with him. I see this quite often. People read books about design patterns and still don't understand underlying principles behind them. They just use them without deeper thinking (and they overengineer code often).

Although Naur wrote this article in context of one program but I think that programmer is building theory not only for current project but also for whole programming field. Programming skills are often independent of technology/project/language).

<comment><AUTHOR> _> Maybe Naur meant by "theory" something like "inner insight"._

I'm pretty sure he means exactly that. A programmery "theory" about the subject is something that goes beyond blindly following documentation or rules. It is something that is taught (or self-taught) over time, rather than executed by following instructions.

The author even spent a whole section "Ryle's Notion of Theory" in the article to described precisely what he means by "theory". (More exactly, he describes Ryle's definition, which he is borrowing.)

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> HTML version: [http://www.dc.uba.ar/materias/plp/cursos/material/programmin...](http://www.dc.uba.ar/materias/plp/cursos/material/programmingAsTheoryBuilding)

<comment><USER9> Here's a .txt version[1] which is mobile-friendly, unlike that website.

[1]: [http://pastebin.com/raw/WwXKAGnW](http://pastebin.com/raw/WwXKAGnW)</comment></comment>


The fishy ingredient in beer that bothers vegetarians - <AUTHOR> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-37350233 <comment><USER2> The skewed view given in the article is hilarious.

"Nobody really wants to advertise that they filter their beer through dead fish"

Well that would be because they don't. Isinglass has a long history of use in beer and wine, and is a refined collagen. If you don't want animal products in beer, awesome, go for it. The slightly hysterical language is unnecessary though.

\-- edit -- Another technique sometimes used is to fine with beef gelatin... Not sure how widespread this is commercially, but it seems relatively popular with homebrewers. Vegetarians do need to be careful with beer.

<comment><USER3> > Vegetarians do need to be careful with beer.

Vegetarians _may wish to be careful_ with beer. Some vegetarians aren't ideological/religious about it, and some that are draw lines in different places.

<comment><USER2> Quite right, people are vegetarian for a variety of reasons, and draw the line in different place!

It's worth noting that good results can be achieved with proper temperature control and irish moss, isinglass is not always needed. Also many/most keg beers are filtered rather than fined.

<comment><USER4> Vegans, on the other hand, draw a very simple line, with very simple (and powerful) rationale.

<comment><USER5> Yes, Vegans have the moral highground and none of their dietary choices are detrimental to cute little animals.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> "Ask somebody to list the classic ingredients of beer and the chances are they will come back with: hops, malt, barley and water, with a bit of yeast thrown in for good measure."

It seems strange listing both "malt" and "barley". Malt is just partially sprouted barley (or occasionally other grains). In most beers all the barley is malted. Some beers do contain both malted and unmalted barley, for example Guinness, but unmalted barley can make beer cloudy so it's usually only used in dark beers.

</comment><comment><USER7> Is this something unique to British-brewed beers? According to [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isinglass](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isinglass) "Isinglass finings are widely used as a processing aid in the British brewing industry to accelerate the fining, or clarification, of beer". I cannot recall ever seeing anything like this on the ingredients lists of cans from other countries (e.g. French or Spanish beers), but maybe it doesn't count as an ingredients for some reason or maybe other countries use something worse to clear the beer.

<comment><USER8> Apparently in Germany it fell out of use – mechanical filtration systems are better and cheaper nowadays –, and is only used for some traditional wines (and possibly beers).

However, it is not considered an ingredient, and so does not need to be listed on the bottles.

<comment><USER9> In germany there is something called "Reinheitsgebot" \- the oldest (1516) food law in existence (if you don't count religious "laws"). It states that you can only use water, barley and hops for beer production. So no fish in german beer.

<comment><USER2> Is that still the law?

Also, it may not be considered an ingredient so much as a tool or technique...

<comment><USER10> It isn't a law anymore. But I do not know one beer brewery which doesn't still brew according to it. However, the food industry is usually quite creative in bending the rules...

<comment><USER2> From a quick googling - it looks like finings were allowed, as they aren't strictly an ingredient.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> In the UK there's a definite sentiment that a cloudy pint is a bad or off pint. I've seen a few breweries that specifically label their beer as "unfined" to make sure people know what to expect.

I do find the slight distaste of fish bladders in this article a bit baffling though.

<comment><USER12> Not sure I agree with that. There's the same attitude pretty much everywhere, its not any more prevalent in the UK. Lager the whole world over has the same sort of clarity.

In fact, the UK has a stronger craft beer and real ale scene than many other countries, so I'd say there are a lot of people here willing to drink a cloudy glass.

It's much more likely that the continued use of Isinglass is due to tradition, and no great desire to change an existing product/process.

<comment><USER13> For a long time, in the UK at least, clarity just is more visually appealing. In the past the role of the cellarman was much more hands-on; there was a time where beer was unfined leaving the brewery and fined on delivery once casks were put in place. Much of this art is disappearing, but it has been a while that the beer has been designed to be clear. With that, the bottom of casks are murky with yeast (since filtering is uncommon) and isinglass - which may make you ill (it tastes bad too) so cloudy beer has been associated with off beer or the end-of-cask.

I've tried serving a cask wheat beer which was rejected purely by appearance in the past.

Mind you, things have been changing rapidly in 5/6 years and many breweries make their tasty products without isinglass (or vegan-friendly alternatives+). Some choose to be fairly close to pin bright and others less so - depends on many things like more flocculant house yeast, etc.

I can say that around 5 years ago, a brewery made the decision to switch to being unfined for flavour - and their products were cloudy then onwards. It was difficult to 'sell' then, but now it's a commonplace. And yes, a pub did an informal experiement: flavours were altered with the addition of isinglass but from a general public opinion was divided in which they preferred (almost 50/50)

\+ not necessarily equivalent. Some products are introduced during the brewing process, not after

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> There was lots of new recently about Guinness moving away from isinglass so that should be vegan friendly soon too!

In wine they also use egg whites to filter it, my dad get some kind of allergic reaction from these too so we stick to vegan wines in our house.

</comment><comment><USER15> A close relative is vegan for ethical reasons. I looooooove sending articles like this to her :-)

</comment><comment><USER16> I hope they are OK with dead animals being used to fuel their cars, made into plastics to pack their stuff, producing the electricity to power their house and all the stuff in it.

Never heard people being offended by killing plants for food, cutting trees grinding them into paper or just to have it as a decoration for holidays.

I do agree, if it's only for aesthetics we could actually leave it out and not kill something for just having clear beer.

In the end everything is made up from the same starstuff as humans, a squirrel, even the rock in the dirt and the dirt itself. Some of it is considered living the others not.

Why do I always feel a bit of hypocrisy when it comes to these topics?

<comment><USER17> What hypocrisy? Many vegans object to killing animals but not the use of remains of already dead ones.

Use of isinglass requires killing new fish to extract their swim bladders. Meanwhile, nobody is killing animals to turn them into oil.

Besides, it'd only be hypocrisy if they're judging others. Simply saying "I'd like my beer free from fish bladders" isn't, even if you think the reason is ridiculous.

<comment><USER16> First of all it's free from fish bladders, because you're not consuming that. That fish might have been killed to end up on the plate of non-vegans. So the fish was already killed for other reasons in the first place. And following this thought, then vegans can go and wear clothes made out of skin. Cows, pigs, sheep aren't killed for their skin in the first place. It's just a byproduct that is used.

The hypocrisy lies in the valuing lives of certain beings over others.

Or when vegans have carnivorous animals as pets. Feeding them with canned guts and other leftover parts of animals. And whining about fish bladders in beer.

I will state that from an energetic standpoint it would be great, if the whole world would go vegan. I have no objections.

But I don't like people going mental on fish bladder whilst they are still polluting the environment as the others and have to have a rage fit about literally everything.

Oh and lastly, we don't have to drink beer. Alcohol was needed when humanity didn't have clean water and we needed alcohol to disinfect it. Now we have all the water we want. From the tap, or bottled.

You are not required to drink alcohol, at all.

Oh and why aren't they considering the huge impact we have on the environment just by growing crops for beer. A social, useless beverage. Like the fish are the only ones who suffer cause of this.

All and all, I'm fine removing fish bladders from the filtering process, but wont get a hissy fit if they continue to use it.

<comment><USER17> It seems you're reading a different article, since I see nobody "going mental" on the one posted, hence there's no point in discussing further.

<comment><USER16> It's not just this article. This was triggered way back where vegetarians started to boycott Guinness.

We used this technique for quite a while now and people are shocked.

What about this part: Brewery owner Tim Bosworth, a long-term vegetarian who went vegan two years ago, said he was shocked when he first learned about the ingredient.

Really? A brewery owner finds out how he makes clear beer?

And he is shocked? Just imagine how shocked he will be when he finds out how much damage he makes to the environment by brewing beer.

And this: "It's kind of disgusting to think about, even to people who eat meat, and it's something that's not talked about," he said.

It is not. I for one, think if you kill an animal you might as well utilize all of it. Skin for clothing, meat for eating, bones for tools and jewelry, swim bladder for beer cleaning. That animal shouldn't die for nothing.

But for the third time. I agree to get rid of the fish bladder, because we have substitutes for it, which might be even better. But let's not grab one particular problem with the whole brewing industry and the rising alcohol consumption issue.

I might be wrong, maybe starting the change through our beer will lead us to a balanced natural lifestyle.

<comment><USER17> _Really? A brewery owner finds out how he makes clear beer?_

Nobody said he firstly learned about it after becoming a brewery owner.

The rest of your points are just disagreements, which are certainly valid, but don't point to hypocrisy or "people going mental".

<comment><USER16> Yeah, maybe hypocrisy is not the right word here.

I still feel they are making a big problem out of it just because some people have different eating habits.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Cassandra 0.5 released - <AUTHOR> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/cassandra/tags/cassandra-0.5.0/CHANGES.txt

<comment><USER2> I'd like to promote my python library for Cassandra:

<http://github.com/vomjom/pycassa>

</comment><comment><USER3> maybe link to the download page: <http://incubator.apache.org/cassandra/download/>

<comment><USER4> Thank you, I got a lot more out of:

 _Cassandra – A highly scalable, eventually consistent, distributed, structured key-value store._

Than I did out of:

      0.5.0 final
       * avoid attempting to delete temporary bootstrap files twice (CASSANDRA-681)
       * fix bogus NaN in nodeprobe cfstats output (CASSANDRA-646)
       * provide a policy for dealing with single thread executors w/ a full queue
       (CASSANDRA-694)
       * optimize inner read in MessagingService, vastly improving multiple-node performance (CASSANDRA-675)
       * wait for table flush before streaming data back to a bootstrapping node.
       (CASSANDRA-696)
       * keep track of bootstrapping sources by table so that bootstrapping doesn't give the indication of finishing early (CASSANDRA-673)

<comment><AUTHOR> indeed, but <http://incubator.apache.org/cassandra/download/> isn't unique to the 0.5 release.

wish there was a blog post I could have linked to

cheers

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> At the place where I work it's become clear that we need something like cassandra or redis. The lack of robustness in the php redis client is a cause for concern for me (as compared to libmemcached), and I don't know much about cassandra, but our CTO opposes it because he thinks the documentation is spotty and not enough big projects are using it.

Thoughts?

<comment><USER6> Your CTO is right. I was recently in the position of using Tokyo Cabinet on a site with a lot of traffic. Initially, it was great. It continued to be great for a long while until we hit a point where it started taking up too much memory and 100% cpu causing load to sky rocket. While the technology is great, there was very little that Google found about our particular problem. We eventually wound up resetting our tyrant database and plan on moving completely off of it.

<comment><USER7> You didn't strace it to see what was going on?</comment></comment></comment>


Show HN: Who wants to be hired (anonymously) - <AUTHOR> https://whowantstobehired.com <comment><AUTHOR> Hi HN,

This is an attempt to solve a problem where I felt that people on LinkedIn feel to openly announce being open to new offers. WWBH solves that problem for one to anonymously announce that they are open to new offers.

At the same time it gives recruiters some basic information to quickly search through candidates and their expectation of salary packages as well. I hope this would help recruiters quickly find candidates to fill open positions at their company.

Please have a look and let me know what do you think?

<comment><USER2> Neat idea. I didn't know it was taboo to be open to new offers, I assumed everyone was open to new offers. Feedback: what's the $ figure? If I were listed here I doubt I'd want to have a dollar amount by my name. As an employer, I might want to click one of the tags to see all people with that tag.

<comment><AUTHOR> I am working on the skills tag such that anyone can filter based on that single tag. I was 50/50 on the $ amount but given that it works as a filter for recruiters I left it there. This also serves another purpose of sort of anonymously letting other people know what a rate for certain role is in the market which will help them better negotiate with potential employers.</comment></comment></comment>


New tech/developer focused Podcast: Building for the Next Billion - <AUTHOR> https://soundcloud.com/building-for-the-next-billion <comment><USER2> Interesting concept. Will this be a podcast featuring a lot of interviewees from developing countries where the next billion users come from?</comment>