Indecipherable Medical Bills Are One Reason Health Care Costs So Much - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/29/magazine/those-indecipherable-medical-bills-theyre-one-reason-health-care-costs-so-much.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=photo-spot-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0 <comment><USER2> A few years ago, my wife hurt her back when we were moving. She went to the local urgent care center, and saw a doctor. We have insurance, and that was mostly the end of it for us.

We later found out that the urgent care center had coded her visit as something like "surgical consultation" when it was nothing of the sort. I think the insurance company actually contacted my wife and inquired about the visit. We then got curious, and interested in the bill, and discovered that the codes are copyrighted. My wife actually was able to translate the codes using something she found in the local university library (which is how we realized that the visit was upcoded, and suddenly things made sense).

We had thought that urgent care chain was just shady, but after reading this, I guess that this upcoding is a common practice.

<comment><USER3> Optimizing coding to maximize income is a major consultancy in the industry. The key is knowing what an Insurance company will accept without questions otherwise there will be a delay in getting your money or maybe you get nothing. Recently the coding system changed to a much more detailed version (which I think was in use internationally long before the US adopted it). I don't know if it's better but there are way more ways to code things today.

<comment><USER4> I never realized all this existed!

I'm still not clear from the article why the codes used inside the hospital are proprietary. copyrighted information- what kind of legal hoop jumping allows them to claim this?

What kind of domain knowledge do you need to be able to code a procedure? Is it knowledge just of the insurance system, or is it also deeper medical knowledge / cultural knowledge of how doctors perceive / deal with one procedure over another?

<comment><USER3> The codes are standardized but the interpretation by insurance companies isn't so clear. For the coding look at [http://www.medicalbillingandcoding.org/qnas/what-are-the- dif...](http://www.medicalbillingandcoding.org/qnas/what-are-the-different- types-of-medical-coding-classification-systems/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> How to fix USA healthcare IMHO:

1\. Pharma: drugs must be sold to American people at the same price as the other developed countries such as Canada, Germany, etc.

2\. Prices must be published, and, the lowest paid by any insurer must be available as a cash option if you pay at the time of service.

That is, an MRI scan with a retail price of $3k but which the insurer pays only $1100 for, must be available for $1100 if you pay at time of service, that same $1100.

3\. Repeal EMTALA.

<comment><USER6> #2 is illegal under Medicare/Medicaid rules.

We are required by law to charge the same price to all payers, including patients. We can't offer a cash discount at the time of service, as it is Medicare fraud. We can charge you, accept a lower payment, and then write off the rest as a loss.

In your example, who is this magic insurer? Which reimbursement rate are we setting as the bar? I hope its not medicare or medicaid, as they often reimburse below cost.

Is it the highest negotiated reimbursement a given imaging center has negotiated?

Each of these contracts are negotiated individually between the payers and the imaging center. Because of the variable reimbursement and the federal requirement that one price be charged to EVERYONE, you see huge markups lest you undercharge a payer that would have paid the full amount.

<comment><USER7> I think you misunderstood. The poster is saying that if the prices are as follows:

Sticker price (uninsured people pay this): $5000 Insurance A in-network price: $2100 Insurance B in-network price: $2300 Insurance C in-network price: $1800 Medicare price: $800

That anyone paying without insurance (cash) should be able to pay the $800 Medicare rate since it is the lowest rate. That's not asking for a cash discount but rather forbidding price discrimination.

<comment><USER6> Medicare and Medicaid often reimburse below cost. Healthcare businesses make up the difference from private insurance. By forcing people to accept the lowest rate (which is not negotiated, but effect by decree), you absolutely destroy the funding for services.

Good luck keeping any healthcare facilities open at those reimbursement rates.

Medicare is allowed to set prices by fiat for physician and hospital services. It is barred by law from negotiating on medications. Perhaps the ire should be directed there.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Doctors want to bill insurance for as much as they can. Insurers don't really care about medical costs either, because the percent they keep as profit grows as they spend more.

Patients are the victims in the trench warfare between doctors and payers.

<comment><USER9> Isn't there any competition between health insurers in the US? If it's a free market and consumers care about costs, then you'd expect that at least some health insurer would start looking for ways to put their insurance premium down.

<comment><USER10> Most health insurance is provided via subsidized employer plans so consumers can either take the plan they're offered or pay 2-3x as much on the open market.

The healthcare system in the US is fundamentally broken, overpriced and cruel. It is one of the worst things about living in this country.

<comment><USER11> Employers are the "consumers" in that case, and they do switch plans if they get a better offer.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Wow. Every time I read a story about how the business of health care in america really works, it makes me really angry.

It seems to me that one of the central issues is, how all these hospitals and providers can continue to get away with keeping these billing codes proprietary information- how can the prices for your services be a trade secret??

If I receive a hospital bill how is it that I, the customer paying that bill, _not_ receive an itemized list of the procedures done, with prices? I wonder what the legal reasoning behind keeping them from your customer could possibly be?

It also strikes me that the companies that aid in coding/billing for providers are an example of software with unintended evil consequences. If you are a developer at one of these companies, how can you justify your role in making healthcare more unaffordable for everyone?

I'm now incredibly curious about how this ecosystem really works and how all these perverse incentives are setup and perpetuated. Who are all these software vendors / training course providers / coding specialists / lawyers who maintain this system?

A while ago I remember reading stories like these: [http://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-care/u-s-health-care- pr...](http://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-care/u-s-health-care-prices-are- all-over-map-new-n563661) which compared costs on a geographical level vs. this story where the costs are compared system-by-system, and similar procedure vs. other procedure. Neither makes any sense at all.

<comment><USER12> It's derived from a perverse combination of cowboy era "git the F away from me, I will do it myself!" individualism; and classist aristocracy "I am better than you because of bloodline, family name, and money, I can pay to get better health care and I'm not waiting in a line with the likes of the rest of you."

A third group genuinely believes an inherently anti-competitive business, with deeply irrational and price inelastic buyers, can magically squirt out unicorn poop in a free market. And they've succeeded at getting the above two groups to use this "choice" and "free markets" nonsense as their messaging, whether they believe it or not, it gets them what they ultimately want.

And what we have now, is a highly protected industry that whether before or after ACA, is in no possible way approximating either a free market, or socialized care. It is a legalized cartel, with a massive economic momentum such that even if the politics were to turn on a dime, the health care economic system would resist the changes.

There's also conflation between insurance and payment plans. Insurance is risk management for random, unpredictable events like cancer. It wouldn't cover having a baby, that's predictable. Free market health care would mean you pay out of pocket, or out of savings, or you get a loan and have a payment plan. What we have from our health care "insurance" industry, is all the peasants and serfs are on a payment plan.

Adding to the amusement is Medicare, after age 65, covers only 64% of the bill. You're on the hook for the rest. And it covers 0% dental, and old people have lots of on-going dental maintenance. If you're dying of a dental related brain disease, you can just go die if you can't pay. And people do.

It cannot be understated how classist this system is. And it's a box canyon, near as I can tell.

<comment><USER4> Yeah, and from what I understand the crazy thing is that no one even really makes that much money, or as much money as a 2-300 percent increase in costs over other countries would suggest... It's mostly just an unbelievably inefficient system.

<comment><USER12> It is the exact opposite of an ant colony. It's almost directionless at a societal scale, cooperative only at a narrow tribal scale. America has many tribes. This is a natural consequence of its diversity. The diversity moderates many things, good and bad mood swings, including efficiency because we're simply not all on the same page, often not even on the same book.

The county has gotten a lot of rope to hang itself because baby boomers have charged a massive pile of debt to the country's credit card. That card was built by the silent generation, who also gave the U.S. the gift of the dollar being the world's reserve currency.

And in some sense that reserve currency's status is better secured by Brexit, because it demotes the EU and Euro as being a direct equivalent competitor to the dollar.

All of the things going on are interrelated, and make complete sense. The way they're happening is about the only way they could happen because as crazy as they seem, they're still the path of least resistance forward from where we are now.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> We should remember the only reason in many states buying a car is a transparent process is because the government realized this kind of billig/invoicing is exploitative and unfair. Almost every argument applied to the "one page" car buying rules apply to cell phones, medical treatment, you name it.

</comment><comment><USER14> I have this paranoid theory that insurance company coders work a lot harder on bills that are after the deductible. A sort of gentleman's agreement to inject as many of those sweet deductible dollars into the system as possible.

<comment><USER15> Well that or they just deny the claim for some random reason.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> Is the situation described for the woman in the article common? It sounds completely insane, I don't see how anyone could defend it.

Minimum wage is $7.25, so at a guess say $20k/yr net? $800/month insurance is $9,600, nearly 50% of her income for insurance that would still have left her with a $70k bill after the haemorrhage?

Edit: I realise that's kind of the point of the article, but seeing those figures I don't see how _anyone_ below the middle class could get decent insurance.

<comment><USER17> In theory she's mandated to have insurance to prevent this type of thing from happening. If she couldn't afford it the government would subsidize her on the exchanges.

In practice, she paid the ACA penalty to have the privilege of not buying insurance and then she got screwed for not having it.

<comment><USER18> After the subsidies, chances are good that the amount she would still have to pay is prohibitively expensive. There is a baseline amount you have to make to get by, and at minimum wage in the US, chances are good you're hitting that baseline amount.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> It sounds like there's a niche for a non-insurance insurer. It wouldn't actually pay for procedures, but in return for a low monthly membership fee, it would negotiate on behalf of the members for their bills, just like an insurance company does.

<comment><USER17> Patient billing advocates are a real service now. For let's say $500 they go to war with the billing dept of a hospital; the hospital will almost always knock 50% of the price off because they don't want to fight the battle.

So many patients default on their bills it's a financial crisis for most hospitals outside of the large major chains. That billing department is going to take what they can get, even if it's only 20% of the amount the patient owes. Pretty nuts.

<comment><USER2> But apparently that strategy doesn't always work. The lady in the article offered the hospital what her experts said was a reasonable price, including a profit margin & they turned down the offer.

<comment><USER17> I think the hospitals jack up their list prices with these adjustments presumed.

Of course, they don't tell the patient to negotiate a discount that's the last thing they want to deal with.

And you're right, it doesn't always work it depends on the context and financial health of the provider.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> A woman's hospital bill for delivering her baby showed "SKIN TO SKIN AFTER C-SEC $39.35". She could of saved some money if she refused to hold her baby right after he was born.

<comment><USER21> What? Is that like normal practice, that women can be charged $40 for holding their babies immediately after a c-section?

<comment><USER19> An ob-gyn had some stuff to say about it here: [http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2016/10/05/hospitals_ch...](http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2016/10/05/hospitals_charge_new_parents_for_skin_to_skin_contact.html)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> Transparency in healthcare billing was actually a point Trump ran on but it disappeared from his website and his agenda as soon as he was elected.

</comment><comment><USER23> I wonder what groceries would cost if we didn't buy them with cash or credit but instead a "Foodcare plan". I also wonder what the bills would look like in that case. If I went to the deli, I imagine there'd be all kinds of interesting blade sharpening fees and glove disposal fees and whatnot.

<comment><USER24> I mean, Comcast does the same sort of thing without any insurance model involvement.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> The Republicans are (and have been for almost a decade) trading human suffering for political gain. Keeping up with medical bills for a serious illness can be a full-time job. It's tragic, and until everybody after the baby boomers wakes up and bothers to vote we're stuck with it.

<comment><USER17> Is this a comment about the article? The patient experienced her accident in 2013 after the ACA was in effect, which famously not a single republican voted for.

Patients are being screwed under the current system right now, regardless of politics.

Providers are having trouble remaining financially solvent bc most patients end up not paying their bills; providers rely on private insured or self pay patients to stay afloat because Medicare/Medicaid don't reimburse enough to cover costs. If we put everyone on Medicare the system would shut down, everything else remaining equal- unless we subsidized providers with even more money from taxpayers to replace the insurance companies.

<comment><USER14> If Virginia had taken Medicaid expansion, she likely would have been covered, or had access to less expensive insurance.

<comment><USER15> And this is why people should move if at all possible to states that took the medicare/medicad expansion. You can either vote out the government or move to a state that offers a better deal. It's almost an impossible choice but it is your life and your families lives. With respect to health care there are a lot of Americans leaving the US (who can) for other countries with health care.

<comment><USER14> It's really not clear how much it matters. There is a lot of leeway in the ACA and not much information about how the current administration plans to use it.

[http://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-care/democrats-ask- hhs-...](http://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-care/democrats-ask-hhs-chief-do- you-plan-sabotage-obamacare-n740081)</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Video for Merlin's "Inbox Zero" talk at Google - <AUTHOR> http://www.43folders.com/2007/07/25/merlins-inbox-zero-talk/

<comment><AUTHOR> This is an exceptionally good talk.

What is especially interesting is in the QA session, we hear about how dysfunctional team communication is at Google. The current practice is an email question is sent to the entire team on a project of 20+ people. Then people play the waiting game to see who will reply first to the question, etc. The result is that googlers get hundreds to 500+ emails internally that they have to cope with - a productivity nightmare. Also one questioner pointed out, in spite of the email information firehose, critical information is not distributed. She mentions the example of a random encounter with someone at lunch, and finding out that a person in NY is working on a very similar project to hers and she having no clue about it.

Also interesting is that Google hosts a seminar series by David Allen on "Getting Things Done" for their staff on a regular basis. I guess they are trying to start solving the problem.</comment>


Ask HN: Inventions from history that might've never happened? - <AUTHOR> Are there inventions from history that might've been delayed 10+ years without the work of 1-2 people?
I'm hoping to identify examples of people doing things that aren't merely redistributive
e.g. if if one ride sharing company never started, it is and was a crowded enough space that there'd still be someone who runs/owns a $10bn+ value ride sharing company.
I'm looking for examples from history where "if person X didn't do Y, then thing Z wouldn't have happened for at least ~20+ years" <comment><USER2> Henry Ford making a V8. Everyone told him it was impossible to cast an eight cylinder engine block in one piece. He did it anyway. [http://dreamdolivelove.com/do-it/choosing-setting- goals/the-...](http://dreamdolivelove.com/do-it/choosing-setting-goals/the- secret-of-henry-fords-success)</comment>


Apple Agrees to Pay $53M to Settle iPhone Warranty Lawsuit - <AUTHOR> http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2013/04/iphone-warranty-flap/ <comment><USER2> Probably cheaper than providing warranty... Or does the court also force them to change their policy? That's the only thing that matters here. Fining them is only of use as warning for future cases, it's not like citizens ever see any money from fines.

<comment><USER3> > Or does the court also force them to change their policy?

They already changed it as of the iPhone 4, which is why only previous devices are covered.

> Fining them is only of use as warning for future cases, it's not like > citizens ever see any money from fines.

The article says "provides cash payouts to potentially hundreds of thousands of iPhone and iPod Touch consumers".</comment></comment>


One in five of us may 'hear' flashes of light - <AUTHOR> https://www.theguardian.com/science/2017/jan/17/listen-with-your-eyes-one-in-five-of-us-may-hear-flashes-of-light-synaesthesia <comment><USER4> I think synaesthesia is the wrong interpretation of this phenomenon.

I hear flashes like that as a soft rush of blood around my eardrum. I'm pretty sure it's just the "acoustic reflex" (the muscles in my middle ear tightening in case there's a loud sound incoming). Obviously there isn't a loud noise here but like an involuntary blink, my body doesn't know that.

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

<comment><USER5> It's not blood but the vibrations of the tensor tympani muscle. I learned to control it voluntarily and can make my ears rumble whenever I want. It's a pretty useless talent. Many people hear it when yawning.

There was an HN post a few weeks ago about Mercedes putting something in their car that activate the reflex just before an accident. To protect against hearing loss from the loud crash of an accident.

<comment><USER6> If it's the same thing I can do, it's very useful. I can "pop" my ears voluntarily, which is nice when freediving.

<comment> steve-howard I can pop my ears by plugging my nose and making a "k" or "g" sound. Comes in handy since my Eustachian tubes are essentially useless.

<comment><USER6> What I described above is called a BTV. This sounds like a Frenzel, which is the one most experienced freedivers use. [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ear_clearing](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ear_clearing)

<comment><USER7> Huh, I thought this was the val salva maneuver.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I'm actually the opposite. In that I see flashes of light when I hear sounds (when my eyes are closed in a dark place). Happens all the time when I'm laying in bed before I fall asleep at night.

<comment><USER9> Do you mean sounds that are real or imagined? Reading this article made me look up this phenomenon I sometimes experience, and it turns out it's a documented thing: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exploding_head_syndrome](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exploding_head_syndrome)

<comment><USER10> Thank you so much for the link! I've experienced it too and always wondered what it's called. It happened multiple times, over a period of a couple weeks. It always occured at the worst time - the moment where you actually fall asleep. It's definitely related to the twitching many people experience during this stage [0], as I thought.

It can be really intense: an extremely loud sound, a bright flash of light and jerking of the neck muscles. It became stronger every time it happened - <USER2> it suddenly went away completely.

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

<comment><USER9> In the past, I've also suffered from sleep paralysis, so it's interesting that the two are possibly linked.

<comment><USER11> I used to experience sleep paralysis as a teenager and it was terrifying until I worked out how to end it (stay calm and focus on wiggling a toe).

It always left me wondering how many stories about alien abduction etc were related to sleep paralysis. I read once that a feeling of being watched was common with sleep paralysis.

<comment><USER12> > I read once that a feeling of being watched was common with sleep paralysis.

I've only experienced a couple of times, but that was the most noticeable thing about it. I knew about sleep paralysis before I first experienced, so it didn't really concern me (as soon as I realised I was awake but unable to move, I knew what it was and roughly what to expect), but glancing over to my doorway and seeing a vague silhouette just standing there watching me is somewhat disconcerting nonetheless.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Another similar phenomenon is that bright light can cause a person to sneeze. There have been a few times where it has happened to me too, but usually bright light doesn't trigger sneezing for me. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photic_sneeze_reflex](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photic_sneeze_reflex)

<comment><USER14> Looking at light helps me sneeze when I feel I'm just about to sneeze but for some reason won't. In most cases the light triggers the sneeze, and I'm not left with the sensation of an un-sneezed sneeze.

I started doing this when I read about it somewhere, and I got the impression it's universal. I haven't experienced lights causing unwarranted sneezing though, but perhaps it's the same thing, only some are more sensitive than others.

<comment><USER15> nope not universal.

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

my entire family does it on my mom's side. when you tell it to someone who doesn't do it they think you are crazy.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> I have always had this experience. I never stopped to consider that others don't have it as well. Now I wonder how much this correlates to how people process information. I tend to visualize abstract concepts in some fashion, ever if I cannot describe what I am seeing.

<comment><USER16> Perhaps also relevant: I'm not much of a lip reader, but when I clearly can tell what someone is saying, I have an auditory response. I hear the words. Sometimes this is so strong that when viewing video, I have been fooled into thinking that there was actual audio, when there was none.

I wonder if this is the auditory version of vision whereby the brain fills in details that are not necessarily there.

<comment><USER10> Check out this [0] video! The visual system plays a huge role in how you process sounds - the brain uses all information it can get.

[0] [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kzo45hWXRWU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kzo45hWXRWU)

edit: After watching the video three times I can influence which word I hear just by thinking 'the right way'!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Is anyone trying to correlate this effect with DNA (similar to how cilantro tastes like soap to some). If a seeming large difference in basic sensory processing can go relatively unnoticed for so long, I wonder what else could be flying under the radar, so to speak.

</comment><comment><USER18> I have been experiencing this . I tried searching for terms related to synthesia but couldn't find anything . I tried the test but I am in a car but I believe I was able to perform the task. I agree that it is a faint sound but also I know that it is a result of what I am seeing .

I hate seeing jarring animations on websites especially above the fold.

</comment><comment><USER19> Yeah, happens to me if I look at flashing lights with a regular pattern - <USER3> get a barely perceptible accompanying soundtrack in my head.

</comment><comment><USER20> I discovered I had this many years ago. A gif someone had posted was making a periodic noise as it looped that stopped if it was scrolled off the screen. It inspired a fun video art project for me: [https://joshrickert.com/blog/threshold/](https://joshrickert.com/blog/threshold/)

It's interesting that they point out that trained musicians exhibit the effect more often. I wonder if psychedelic drug use would correlate to it as well, since those drugs are known to cause an acute version of this effect. And would the correlation to musicians hold up if we control for drug use?

<comment><USER21> That might actually be the computer making the sound:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8862689](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8862689)

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> I know it's not quite synesthesia, but I could always hear the boards coming up when skating backwards even though I'm not sure of the mechanism. I wonder how much preprocessing goes on before we interpret our senses (is hearing just that good?/can I judge the distance to the opposite boards accurately enough to sub in "hearing" them?/see the reaction from other players?/etc?).

edit: I was still kind of a shitty hockey player but I was never surprised by the boards.

</comment><comment><USER23> >a synaesthesia-like phenomenon

How is this different than synesthesia?

<comment><USER24> It _is_ synesthesia. The news is that it seems to be more common than previously thought.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> As somebody with synaesthesia this doesn't really sound related, my synaesthesia is basically that there is something intrinsically mustard yellow about the number 4 and something red about the letter k (and words that start with k). That doesn't mean I see 4s as yellow or words that begin with k are red in a book it just means when I think about them they have that color. This on the other hand seems much more direct, almost more like the holywood version of synaesthesia.

</comment><comment><USER26> Anyone took this test mentioned at the end of the article?

[https://cityss.az1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_bKSkV69EJ6TKmKV](https://cityss.az1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_bKSkV69EJ6TKmKV)

I did not experience "hearing motion" in any of the test videos. Try this out and if you experience "hearing motion", please post here and let us know what a certain video sounds like.

<comment><USER27> I experienced "hearing motion" in most of them, although the more abstract videos tended to bring it out most strongly. I seem to respond best to periodic patterns involving changes in brightness -- the police lights consistently gave an set of four... ehh, "thumps"... increasing in subjective pitch.

It's really hard to describe what exactly it sounds like, because it's not really sound that I'm perceiving. It's like the shadow of a sound that could have been.

<comment><USER28> exactly the same as me! and "shadow sounds" is the perfect term for it!

almost any motion involving acceleration generates shadow sounds, for example watching people walking creates a wooop-wooo-wooop-wooo (rising-falling) sound

flashing lights (emergency services) is the most powerful, like you it's "thumps" at different pitches timed exactly to the lights

I also get the same in reverse: when I listen to music I "see" moving shapes in a dark space

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> This may explain why some people "hear" the aurora borealis (northern lights) even though audible sound is clearly not being generated.

<comment><USER30> Same for fireballs, I have heard _very_ experienced, thoroughly rational amateur astronomers claim they "heard" a fireball when it is clearly at least 60 miles away and the sound waves can't arrive for another 7 minutes. We tried looking for answers such as turbulent plasma propagating magnetic waves to be picked up and retransmitted by nearby hunks of metal, now I can suggest to them it is all in their head.

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> I can "hear" visual motion without any accompanying sound, e.g. animated GIFs. I don't think it's that rare, though?

<comment><USER32> Super amazing, what does it sounds like? I 100% cannot do this or even imagine what it's like. People think it's unusual that I can deeply "feel" other people and truly "see" objects in front of me in 3D space. If I listen to music I get intense graphics/movies/colours. I'm also dyslexic so I can/do strongly believe in neurodiversity.

<comment><USER33> Try out [https://www.reddit.com/r/noisygifs/](https://www.reddit.com/r/noisygifs/)

<comment><USER34> It's not always interpolating the sounds that would actually occur. Yes, a hammer hitting something will produce the relevant sound in my head, but it can be quite a bit more abstract than that.

Imagine someone dancing in an animated gif. Each motion has a particular "swoosh" or "pop" or "bang" to it. It's kind of weird to describe. As the gif replaces, the same sounds play over and over. I couldn't turn it off if I wanted to.

Take this for example: [https://i.imgur.com/eVeYyCq.gifv](https://i.imgur.com/eVeYyCq.gifv). In real life I imagine I would hear the woman grunting or growling as she tried to lift the tire. But in my head I can only hear the motion of her legs as they shift to accomodate the weight, making sort of a "kathoomp thoomp thoomp" each time her feet touch the ground.

Makes me think of how a musical score can capture the energy of a scene so well; I'll bet those musicians can probably "hear" the scene without even trying.

<comment><USER32> Absolutely amazing, thanks for sharing this.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> Man, how come I am so normal, not a single weird thing to happen to me :) !.

Last night, while I was laying in bed, with eyes closed, I see flash, I think to myself: "Man, I am finally getting visual halucinations, how awesome!"... then I hear thunder rumbling...

</comment><comment><USER36> related: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideasthesia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideasthesia)

I wonder how saccades are involved in the phenomenon in OP

</comment><comment><USER37> Get ready for every unique snowflake you know to claim that they have this new, special power :)

</comment><comment><USER38> Mitch Hedberg eat your heart out!

</comment><comment><USER39> Bright lights make my ears ring.

</comment><comment><USER40> If one in five people hears flashes of lights, I'd expect one in five writers to use such words, to describe evocatively some scene with that in it; I'd expect others to think it's some metaphor, and I'd expect a few sound-words to make it into the language of describing flashes of lights. so, are there any? stars twinkle - but they don't "sizzle" or "crackle". a shooting star or a far-off flare does not "sigh" or "whistle" or click or any other sound word. Can anyone think of a single common, and clear example in the language?

If not - why not?

I've used lots of words to describe lights (shimmer, twinkle, etc) not one of which happened to be introduced by one or more writers using sound-words evocatively. We could say "I saw a flare pop in the distance" \- but we don't. Why didn't these 20% of writers make some sort of mark on the language like that? (with everyone else not realizing it wasn't supposed to be a metaphor?)

<comment><USER41> Pure speculation on my part, but I think to some extent writers are conditioned to think of writing things a certain way by the sheer amount of literature they read, creating a reinforcement loop where there are various idiomatic ways to explain things and moving too far away from that is jarring to the reader.

<comment><USER40> But lots and lots of writers (and poets!) are happy to go for jarring effects :) I wonder if a single one of them has ever used a sound-word to describe a flash of light. Even ambiguously. (for example, I said we could say "I saw a flare pop in the distance" \- and it could be about the sound/act of firing the flare, rather than what thd sight "sounds like". (so 80% of readers could misunderstand.) so can anyone quote an example from poetry or literature?</comment></comment></comment>


AI100: One Hundred Year Study on Artificial Intelligence - <AUTHOR> https://ai100.stanford.edu/ <comment> dj-wonk Is there a history of similar efforts (albeit in different topic areas)?

</comment><comment><USER2> In order to have intelligence, not just pattern recognition, systems must have analog of emotions.

<comment> dj-wonk Do you think emotion is necessary for all (not just human) intelligence? Or do you think emotional intelligence merely is one form of intelligence? Or perhaps it helps other forms? How do you define (what do you mean by) intelligence?

I would be more inclined to agree with your statement if it was restated as "In order to act in a human-like way, systems probably need an analog of human emotions."

<comment><USER3> Just incase anyone fails to spot the implications of AI without emotions, we already have examples of non artificial intelligent sentient beings without the "emotion" of empathy, we call them psychopaths and sociopaths

I'd like non sociopath/psychopath AI please. Doesn't seem too much to ask for considering the possible fallout.

<comment><USER2> This is nonsense. They do have emotions. Hunger is one of them. Self- preservation is another. Pain is also very important.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Someone knows something about how to get sustainable research funding.

<comment><USER5> No, Horowitz, who set this up and heads Microsoft Research, is paying for this. Or at least a lot of this.

Horowitz has a decent track record. If this were a Paul Allen initiative, it wouldn't end well.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Committees .... Bleh</comment>


Blippy Has 'Capacity To Be A Giant Company' - <AUTHOR> http://blogs.wsj.com/venturecapital/2010/05/13/augusts-hornik-blippy-has-capacity-to-be-a-giant-company/

<comment><USER2> The bubble is back. Who would use Blippy, let alone ever pay for it?

</comment><comment><USER3> question to HN ? does anyone use blippy ?</comment>


Puget Custom Computers: Custom Built Computer Systems - <AUTHOR> http://www.pugetsystems.com/nav/aquarium/EATX/customize.php <comment><USER2> Flagged, scusa.

(I'm a satisfied PCC customer. Excellent machines, careful assembly, responsive personal support. But your post is simply not HN-worthy.)</comment>


Memory-efficient quantum circuit simulator in JavaScript - <AUTHOR> https://www.npmjs.com/package/quantum-circuit <comment><USER2> Nice! As a beginner, where would be a good place to start learning quantum and to maybe use this as a playground?

<comment><AUTHOR> See here: [https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL1826E60FD05B44E4](https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL1826E60FD05B44E4)

Very nice and gentle introduction to quantum computing.</comment></comment>


Tim Berners-Lee on the future of the web: 'The system is failing' - <AUTHOR> https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/nov/15/tim-berners-lee-world-wide-web-net-neutrality <comment><USER2> Or phrased another way: Tim Berners-Lee calls for censorship of "political" ads as a follow up to his support for DRM[1].

1\. [https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20170712/10262037770/eff-o...](https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20170712/10262037770/eff- officially-appeals-tim-berners-lee-decision-drm-html.shtml#comments)

<comment><USER3> Tim needs to resign.

<comment><USER4> From being Tim?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> "The system" is the group of popular centralized communication networks.

What we need is not censorship, but privacy. Malicious advertisers are given credibility by centralized public social networks like Facebook and Twitter.

We shouldn't be begging Facebook and Twitter to police communication; we should be _replacing_ them.</comment>


Apple, Google, Fornite/Epic Games, antitrust lawsuits, and app stores' policies - <AUTHOR> http://www.fosspatents.com/2020/08/how-apples-and-googles-defenses-to.html <comment><AUTHOR> This article gives context I didn't already know, about why Fortnite was pulled in the first place, and digs in deep into the Google Play Store and Apple App Store policies. Recommended.

'The situation Epic Games is facing in practical terms is the same: Fortnite has been thrown out of Apple's App Store as well as the Google Play Store, meaning that new users can't download it and existing users can't receive updates. _In either case, this was the platform owner 's response to Epic's offering of rebates contingent upon purchases that would have circumvented Apple's and Google's in-app payment systems._ So there's a behavioral overlap. Antitrust law, however, is concerned with unilateral conduct only against the background of monopoly power. In that regard, Epic faces unique challenges with respect to each adversary (technically, there are multiple Google defendants, but they belong together):'

[Emphasis mine]</comment>


Do Software Engineers inflate the reported hours they claim to work? - <AUTHOR> Every now and then I hear a Software Engineer (often from the Bay Area) report how they work or are expected to work "60 to 90 hours a week", for example this guy: https://youtu.be/dvdL-21o3GM?t=224
60h/w is 12 hours a day 5 days a week and 90h/w is almost 13h a day 7 days a week...
I cannot imagine how you can stay productive during such extended period of time, not to mention any time to sleep, commute, self-care, basic house chores, family, games etc. Yet still, my impression is that plenty of Bay Area engineers are staying up-to-date with various Netflix shows, computer games and contribute to open source projects... this just doesn't compute.
Probably one of the largest surveys of IT professionals on how long they work (still self reported) is the Stack Overflow survey, which shows that the average is actually more like 42h a week in the US: https://insights.stackoverflow.com/survey/2019#work-_-hours-worked-per-week
0. Are Software Engineers inflating the reported hours per week they claim to work?
1. Why would they do so? Doesn't this contribute to a worse, unhealthy working conditions overall for everyone?
Thoughts? <comment><USER2> IT professionals in the "Bay Area" do not reflect the broader nationwide IT community. They tend to be younger, often fresh out of college with no family connections in the area.

My first job out of college (actually while I was in college doing a co-op program as well) was with a large IT company in Redwood Shores. I lived in SF proper. I had left my family and friends "back home" and joined my new "family" at work. Looking back, they were not co-workers, but more like fellow cult members.

It was routine day in day out that we would get to work around 10am and work until 10pm then go clubbing for a couple of hours. This was work in the office and before the rise of startup houses. With a startup house and a fresh batch of fellow cultists right out of college working from their bedrooms, 60 hours a week seems easy to me.

This is clearly not the way the broader IT community functions. Today, I work from home and put in 10 hour days Monday to Friday plus whatever I put in on the weekend. My wife who does defense/intelligence tech routinely works longer than me.

</comment><comment><USER3> TLDR: No-one pays for hours, they pay for value. Nothing else matters (to quote metallica).

I think some companies (and people) need to change their thinking:

One might be thinking intensely about the problem for 2 hours, and spend 1 hour writing the code, they might report 7 hours. Not because they're lazy slackers, but because they're backburning, seeking flow and inspiration, getting interrupted and all the other stuff that gets in the way of coding..

I code mostly the first hour when I arrive, when I've got the clear idea from all the backburning that I couldn't help but do the night before when doing house chores, playing Apex Legends and on the drive to work. When that's been flushed, I read some articles and "wait for it to come back", then there's lunch, and after that I will read another article or two, listen to music, do reviews, and then think hard about the problem.. Then for the last 2 hours, "it" will be back, and I will write the code down.

Am I lying when I've logged the days time?

No.

That code costs a days worth of salary, it does not matter how many lines it is, or even how hard it was to write.

What matters is that my employer is satisfied with the value they got for that amount of money in that amount of time.

If they can't accept that, they'd have to find someone else..

But would they want that?

Would that guy who sits and types the entire day produce more code than me?

Maybe not, maybe he's doing more interation. Maybe, maybe he's just better (tm) than I am. Maybe not, maybe he's writing more, but worse. But it does not even matter.

Would the money for a days work be better spent on him than me?

I wouldn't know. But I can't feel bad, because I'm doing the best I can, and my intention is good, and nobody can ask for more. I've been here for 6 years and never heard a word for it.

</comment><comment><USER4> A few years ago (2014ish) I would start the work week pulling 7am to 10:30pm - approx 15 hour days -- but couldn't sustain that for more than a couple of days, so by Friday my hours would drop to 10-11 hours per day, and I would spend pretty much the entire weekend asleep - so significantly less than the 90h claimed and much closer to 60h. After a couple of years of this, I was in the middle of an emotional breakdown with rapidly encroaching early-onset rheumatoid arthritis - my body couldn't handle it any more. So ... while I don't think it's totally impossible - it's also a long way from being a healthy lifestyle. (Needless to say I try to avoid this sort of thing these days).

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for sharing your experience, glad to hear that you got a better handle on this now!</comment></comment>


Show HN: Gransk mini – A processing tool for when you're fed up arguing with IT - <AUTHOR> https://gransk.com/mini.html <comment><USER2> Seems interesting, but no link to download the html file? Or am I missing something?

<comment><USER3> [https://github.com/pcbje/gransk](https://github.com/pcbje/gransk)

<comment><USER4> That looks to be the full package, rather than the single page HTML tool "Gransk Mini". I hope the author releases the code soon, rather than just an expression of interest subscribe button.

<comment><AUTHOR> It'll be released within a couple of weeks.

I really think this tool can be useful for analysts and others working in "thin client environments" with limited possibility to install tools, but I need to get the message out there. This post was a first attempt at describing it and check interest.

Edit: Download button added to page. Source comes later.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


In May 2009 O'Reilly agreed to publish a book about Common Lisp (2011) - <AUTHOR> https://www.nicklevine.org/lisp-book/talks/eclm-2011-10-23/plan.txt <comment><USER2> I know Mike. He was editor of my first book and I still deal with him. He's about the most standup guy I've ever worked with. If you're thinking about writing a book, pitch Mike. I can't recommend him more. I needed help with having the confidence to get my thoughts down on the first book and he coached me through it.

Disclaimer: 4x O'Reilly author and contributor to their blog. Don't think there's a financial incentive, I make less than minimum wage on books.

<comment><USER3> Why doesn't someone's experience attempting to write a technical book (even if they failed for personal reasons) belong on Hacker News?

EDIT: above post originally said "This doesn't belong on Hacker News", but is has been edited out.

<comment><USER2> It's the emails I object to.

<comment><USER3> Why? They don't paint anyone in a bad light IMHO?

<comment><USER2> It's rude.

<comment><USER4> > It's rude.

I don't think this two word explanation is going to help people understand your opinion.

<comment><USER5> I know exactly what they mean.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I wrote a book for O'Reilly ([https://buildingtoolswithgithub.teddyhyde.io/](https://buildingtoolswithgithub.teddyhyde.io/)) and I only say that because what I'll say next is controversial.

First, there must be a huge market for technical books that don't appeal to Lisp fanatics. There are people coming from nontraditional backgrounds into technical roles, and they, I assert, probably want a different book than the types of books O'Reilly generally publishes, which are very technical, like those dealing with Lisp.

Two, and this is what is controversial: O'Reilly as a publisher is unable to offer those types of books and misses out on those types of customers.

I don't know how they marketed my book, honestly. I intended that it would speak to the beginner programmer by offering up chapters that introduced a new programming language in each chapter. I hoped people who weren't technology experts would find a gentle path into technology with my book. But I don't think it resonated, maybe that speaks to the quality of the book, but maybe not.

Less than 1% of the people in the world are software developers. Are the people fascinated by Lisp less than 1% of that? But, excluding say the Luddite population, let's say 90% of the rest of the people in the modern world do want to learn about technology and how to play with it, and I'm not sure O'Reilly knows how to reach them. O'Reilly is full of some of the smartest people in the tech community, but I'm not sure the empathy for beginners is there and that's hindering them as a publisher.

<comment><USER7> > There are people coming from nontraditional backgrounds into technical > roles, and they, I assert, probably want a different book than the types of > books O'Reilly generally publishes.

... and "the for Dummies" does not cater to them ? Or are you saying that O'Reilly should become somewhat more like the "Dummies" Series. Regardless of the name some of those books dont speak to the reader as if the reader is a dummy. Then there are those "21 days", "Unleashed".

I like it that O'Reilly speaks to me more than the "21 days" variety. Each to his own. I have been happy with Apress (other than Practical Ocaml) and Manning too. Packt is mostly an abomination.

<comment><USER6> I hate the dummies books too. People that consider themselves intelligent don't want to buy a book that forces you to call yourself a dummy. I'm saying there is another space for people that feel they are intelligent and don't yet have the knowledge about programming and could do it given the right introductions.

O'Reilly speaks to me too, but I think there is entire population of people that aren't familiar with Tim O'Reilly and buy books from his publisher to join that community of thinkers. And that's a shame.

<comment><USER8> I think you're right about this. I'd much rather read LISP for Poets or LISP for Future Presidents than something with a title that is insulting or degrading. There's probably a considerable market for books that educate and respect the reader.

<comment><USER6> That's a great theme. Programmers have a different set of aspirations than most people, so making books that speak to both a different aspiration and teach tech seems like a winner of an idea for the rest of the people out there who don't identify as a nerd.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Why is HN this interested in Lisp anyway? Not saying it's a good or bad language, just don't quite get why it receives as much attention as it does.

<comment><USER10> Because it can easily solve or altogether eschew a lot of the issues that object-oriented JavaScript developers are struggling with and that's barely scraping the tip of the iceberg of problems which Lisp doesn't suffer from.

Alas one of the problems Lisp does quite acutely suffer from is that SBCL has become a defacto standard and its support for anything that isn't GNU/Linux (like Solaris / illumos) is dismal.

<comment><USER11> SBCL is open source, so you are free to improve the support for Solaris.

<comment><USER12> Also, the SBCL maintainers can be hired for custom help or support - one of my customers did this, with good results.

<comment><USER10> I'm a private person in this capacity, so paying someone to reverse the breakage is out of the question. It's an outrage that something like that was allowed to happen in the first place. If this were my software, not only would I fix it immediately, but I would be deeply ashamed of myself for allowing it to happen. We as programmers should start taking responsibility for our actions.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Website of the book: [https://www.nicklevine.org/lisp- book/](https://www.nicklevine.org/lisp-book/)

</comment><comment><USER13> To second rjurney's comment, I've also recently had the pleasure of working with Mike Loukides, and his feedback has always been hugely insightful and valuable.

</comment><comment><USER14> [2011].

<comment><USER15> Why do people tag the year on articles? I feel like hackers cling to the "if it's not new, it's not worthy" paradigm.

Update: Thanks for all the replies, makes sense. Why downvote an honest question?

<comment><USER16> I didn't downvote but I don't think you're being downvoted for asking an honest question, but mostly because

> I feel like hackers cling to the "if it's not new, it's not worthy" > paradigm.

is incorrect and reeks of an accusation of elitism which is not fair in this case.

<comment><USER15> I can see how it may have come off that way. It was my first thought as I've seen people get pretty exited about the new—rather than the old. Some thoughts are better kept to the self.

<comment><USER7> > as I've seen people get pretty exited about the new—rather than the old

Hardly a trait exclusive to hackers.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


The Guns of Bitcoin (2017) - <AUTHOR> https://firstname.lastname@example.com/the-guns-of-bitcoin-1f779309a718 <comment><USER2> The common mistake is to try to compare Bitcoin to a predefined experience of money.

Bitcoin's value is multifaceted. From a very simplistic perspective, it can be compared to gold. Things get more interesting when you value aspects such as it being:

\- Fully digital

\- Verifiable by the common individual

\- Sent and received with no interference from third parties

\- Free from supply emission increases or control

Each of these is especially hard to come across in any other form of money. Combining them is unprecedented.

<comment><USER3> > From a very simplistic perspective, it can be compared to gold.

It is indeed very simplistic to compare it to gold and this is sadly part of the Bitcoin narrative. Gold has a recognition as an store of value based on its network effects while Bitcoin network effect is pretty low in comparison. We can imagine than if a Bitcoin2 is created with similar economic properties and gain more traction it will automatically replace the Bitcoin1 as a store of value. Obviously, this can happen to gold either but with much less probability thinking on all the financial network gold is part of.

<comment><USER4> _Gold has a recognition as an store of value based on its network effects while Bitcoin network effect is pretty low in comparison._

Not sure I understand why you believe Bitcoin's network effects are lower than golds. The more people willing to accept a unit of Bitcoin, the more useful Bitcoin becomes.

Also, gold's store of value power is also attributed from its stock to flow ratio (the difficulty of inflating gold supply). Bitcoin has an even better stock to flow ratio, which is why its often compared to gold.

<comment><USER3> > Not sure I understand why you believe Bitcoin's network effects are lower > than golds. The more people willing to accept a unit of Bitcoin, the more > useful Bitcoin becomes.

Gold is more connected to the regulated financial world than Bitcoin. The network effect is not only about user base but interrelation with other systems. Not saying that Bitcoin could not have a bigger place but it is not there yet.

<comment><USER4> I see, you're saying gold is basically more established in the current financial system.

It might just be semantics, but when you say gold has stronger network effects than bitcoin, I'm imagining that an additional user provides X value to the gold system, but an additional bitcoin user only adds X-1 value to bitcoin. Which I believe isn't true, both networks probably follow the same marginal utility curves.

<comment><USER3> Tether (USDT) has more volume than Bitcoin which could mean that the network effect ironically turns to stable coins connected to fiat money taking advantage of permissionless protocols and not caring about the native assets like Bitcoin or Ethereum.

<comment><USER4> Stable coins like Tether are mostly used by large exchanges for liquidity purposes.

Retail users rarely use USDT to buy/sell goods or exchange with one another. It is also not really permissionless because you need to register with the administrators of USDT and wire a bank transfer if you ever want to convert your USDT to USD. All fiat backed stablecoins have this inherent flaw of having an intermediary party to "parent" transactions. An example of this is Tether banlisting addresses of suspected stolen coins.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> People using pine wood for flooring to spite the king for claiming it is probably the most American thing I have ever heard of.

<comment><USER6> Pine floors are terrible to maintain though.

'cut off your nose to spite the king'

<comment><USER7> >Pine floors are terrible to maintain though.

Why? Is it the sap?

<comment><USER8> Pine is a very soft wood. Some you can dent with a pencil.

Our dining table was like that when I was a kid. You could see all sorts of writing in it from too much pencil pressure when doing homework.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> > _What makes dollars valuable is that the government wants them back._

Very common misconception. Dollars have value because there is demand for them (governments, other governments, other people and institutions). Bitcoin also has value because there is demand for it. As does your house, expensive art, etc.

Why does anything have value? Because someone else will pay your for it. I can say my pencil is worth $1 billion, but it doesn't really unless someone else will execute the trade.

<comment><USER10> Actually you wrong. Dolar has value, because even if no one will want dollar, government will buy it for dollar. It backed on government promise.

<comment><USER11> Your argument sounds recursive. What does it mean to say the government will buy a dollar for a dollar? A dollar is only useful if it can be exchanged for things other than itself.

<comment> streb-lo I mean avoiding prison for tax evasion sounds pretty useful to me.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Wow, app wall, that's a new one. "Download the app or create an account to read."

<comment><USER13> Seen it. Most recently was trying to view a reddit on mobile. Said download the app or take a hike. Circumvented by doing 'request web view' option (in mobile safari)

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> The article makes a lot of good points. I think people put _way_ too much stock into the government not being able to regulate digital currencies. Besides the obvious technical advantages of a state power, they can simply create policy that turns people into criminals if they intentionally answer questions wrong on their tax returns.

</comment><comment><USER15> Well it is possible to pay some (municipal-level) taxes in Switzerland in Bitcoin. That's a start. As for the guns — how about, say, using Bitcoin in lieu of dollars for petroleum and other import-export settlements? You can't sanction Bitcoin, you know.

</comment><comment><USER16> What are the guns of bitcoin? In answer I point to is its network. People who are willing to take payment in bitcoin are different from the general population. It's a club many desire to join.

</comment><comment><USER17> > American dollars have value because the US Government taxes things, like > land, and if you do not pay those taxes they will send you mean letters > (trust me) before resorting to other means (trust Al Capone)

This is just plain wrong. Currencies have value themselves for their utility as a means of exchange, not because of taxes. This idea that raising taxes increases the value of a currency is bonkers.

<comment><USER18> It's not "plain wrong." When minting a new currency you need a way to bootstrap it into being an accepted medium of exchange, and taxes help serve that purpose. They aren't the only method (and I'm not sure historically whether that was the case for the USD), but it isn't baseless.

<comment><USER17> Currencies existed well before governments minted them. Plus the dollar was once backed by gold: you can transition from a convertible system to a fiat system, which has nothing to do with fiscal policy.

<comment><USER18> This reads like an argument, but it doesn't seem to contradict anything I said. Am I misinterpreting you?

> Currencies existed well before governments minted them.

Sure. Nevertheless, to accept a currency as a medium of exchange when it has no value to you personally (bank notes, gold, etc) you need to have confidence that you can exchange it to somebody else for something you do care about, regardless of who mints it.

> Plus the dollar was once backed by gold: you can transition from a > convertible system to a fiat system, which has nothing to do with fiscal > policy.

Yep. As stated, "[taxes] aren't the only method" to bootstrap a currency, and in practice transitioning from a gold backing to fiat seems to work smoothly (somehow...it's not hard to imagine an alternate reality where the public heard their dollars wouldn't be exchangeable for gold, the public lost faith in the dollar, and the dollar tanked as a result).

<comment><USER17> As far as I know, there is no currency that existed because there were taxes involved, and that's certainly not the experience of the major fiat currencies.

In fact it might be otherwise: taxes are a deterrent to use currency, which is why barter is so often used by people and small businesses to avoid the tax- man today.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> What's going to stop me from using bitcoin for everything, and then exchanging some into dollars at the last second to pay my taxes?

<comment><USER20> There are already initiatives to pay taxes directly in Bitcoin. [https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/why-ohios-state- treasur...](https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/why-ohios-state-treasurer- backs-decision-accept-btc-tax-payments)

This isn't some fringe idea it is being developed by governments around the US. I remember reading about some city in America that will take Bitcoin directly for tax but I can't find the article.

<comment><USER21> See my comment below--the tax-related demand for USD comes from the holding period between incurring the tax liability and paying it, not from the payment itself. Even if you get paid in BTC and pay your taxes in BTC, 1 mBTC earned on Jan 1 with a 30% tax rate doesn't imply you owe 0.3 mBTC on April 15--USA tax law expects you to convert from BTC to USD using the Jan 1 exchange rate to calculate your tax liability, and then convert back using the April 15 exchange rate when you make the payment.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> Since when does Medium _require_ an account to read articles? Guess I'm not gonna read this one.

<comment><USER23> It's an interesting article and worth a read. Here's an outline link from elsewhere in the thread.

[https://outline.com/VBSEgq](https://outline.com/VBSEgq)

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> full decentralization and seizure-resistance work as good guns against state tyranny

<comment><USER25> That is orthogonal to the point of the article.

The state can demand, using their guns, that you pay them in the coin of their realm.

At that point, you need to come up with those coins, or face their guns.

You can have your BTC be decentralized and seizure-resistant at that point, but that will not stop the Leviathan from jailing or killing you. The "guns" of the article are the actual guns of the IRS.

<comment><USER24> Do the IRS really carry guns? The man-power needed and costs to enforce collection of coins means this doesn't scale well for the state

<comment><USER26> They have guns and a yearly budget of US$1.2 billion

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

<comment><USER27> They are notorious for "always" catching their criminals, too. Local law enforcement of many stripes in multiple states tried to catch Capone, but in the end it was the Revenuers that caught Capone on tax evasion.

<comment><USER28> For every Capone there are thousands of people you never heard of successfully evading taxes

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> [https://outline.com/VBSEgq](https://outline.com/VBSEgq)

Read without annoying app/account wall

</comment><comment><USER30> I think the guns of bitcoin are it's decentralized design backed by the lobbying of domestic forces (The EFF, ACLU, exchanges, etc)

</comment><comment><USER31> yaaawn. this article is full of tired arguments. Bitcoin is a lot more like gold than a competitor to the US dollar or substitute for cash.

</comment><comment><USER32> tired old arguments

</comment><comment><USER33> I would like to see a total ban/block of any kind of cryptocurrency articles on HN. I'm happy to include my own, if that's what it takes.

[https://louwrentius.com/cryptocurrencies-are-detrimental- to-...](https://louwrentius.com/cryptocurrencies-are-detrimental-to- society.html)

<comment><USER24> you want to censor discussion around a promising technology. why?

<comment><USER34> Bitcoin is not really liked on HN. I'm guessing most of the older HN guys don't seem really interested in the tech or is terrified by the price action, perhaps

<comment><USER28> I'm on HN. I like Bitcoin. Surely, I am not alone

<comment><USER35> You are not. I will say, the general consensus seems to be negative, but I wouldn't say it's disliked by all.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Demographic Deathwatch: Credit Crunch & Debt Burden are Just the Beginning - <AUTHOR> http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZmU0MWFkODk5MTUxZWI4YWQzNGI0NGMzYmRjZWQyMTQ=

<comment><USER2> "… but Good King Barack seems determined to saddle us with the same unaffordable entitlements that have scuttled the rest of the west."

Why not just come out and say it? Letting people spend all of their savings on healthcare and die of disease before they get old is a feature, not a bug.

Interesting idea, but I doubt it will be popular. Not sure what is being suggested here other than that.

<comment><USER3> Let me help you out then.

Aside from the administration's health care nationalization goal, that you have already illogically and fanboyishly endorsed without even knowing exactly what it is, there are a myriad of other debt producing (tax requiring) instruments that the administration has or is in the process of implementing, thus making the U.S. more "inline" with the norms of western Europe. Now, if you hate America and idolize western Europe, as is the trend among many people today, then you think this is a good thing. The author, however, is of a different opinion.

But hey, one issue voters like you (healthcare seems to be your issue, doesn't it?) are the norm, not the exception, so we're all in good hands.

<comment><USER2> What's with the personal attack? When did I illogically and fanboyishly endorse Barack Obama's plan? I'm telling you my interpretation of this article. I even went as far as to call it interesting. I think that even if it's logical, I doubt the american people will get behind it.

Furthermore, I wouldn't call one comment on a posting about healthcare enough to make it "my issue".

I think you have me mistaken for your stereotyped enemies. Grow up Tom.</comment></comment></comment>


The Blackmail Business Isn't Easy - <AUTHOR> https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-12-02/the-blackmail-business-isn-t-easy <comment><USER2> Isn't this like the case with the sex-friends of Trump, who settled and got the money and never revealed any damaging stuff about Trump, BECAUSE they got the money?</comment>


I Went Camping in the Trunk of a $145k Tesla - <AUTHOR> http://www.bloomberg.com/features/2016-tesla-camper-mode/ <comment><USER3> Fine, I'll be the first to piss on the parade: the Tesla Model S is not the first car to have enough room in the back to sleep. Let me check the list of vehicles I've slept in with plenty of room: 1\. 1978 Chevy full-sized van (sleeping ain't the only thing to do in that baby, amirite?) 2\. 1982 Honda Accord - plenty of room once the back seats are down. No hump, either. Love- making-capable, if you're young and flexible. 3\. 2003 Jaguar S-Type - <USER2> feet will be in the trunk, but it's long enough with the seats down. No love- making attempted on the leather seats. 4\. 2005 Scion xB - a little short for this six-footer, but plenty of width.

So this person isn't even close to being the first to sleep in their care like a homeless person, it's only novel because "Tesla". No one would click on a story about how I slept in even my old Jaguar on a road trip, because so what?

Besides, it's not like people will view a Tesla as the new VW Westfalia. Because lemmee tell ya, even an actual Westfalia gets a little cozy for two people after a while.

<comment><USER4> I think the main sell was that you could run your AC/heating all night without leaving your engine on and disturbing other people at the campsite.

> But Tesla camping promised something different. The sapphire blue Model S I > was driving for the week has a 90 kilowatt hour battery—the largest you can > find in a car on the road today. In theory, it should be able to handle a > night of climate control and HEPA-level air filtration without much limiting > of the vehicle's range. Also, electric cars are virtually silent and release > no tailpipe emissions (they don't have tailpipes) so they won't suffocate > the camper or disturb the local fauna. As for the Model S's panoramic glass > roof, well, no tent can compete with that.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> If you listed vehicle platforms not originally outfitted for camping (so no motorhomes or semi trucks with sleepers) that are most commonly slept in you could probably buy the entire top 20, take them on a trip and blog about it for under $145k.

I'm thinking E-series, GMT400 Suburbans, Ranger based Explorers and 1st gen Subaru Legacys would be the first few blog entries. The panther platform would probably make this list too just because the number in service means a lot of people lived out of them. As far as pickups go, once you've camped in one the camping part is about the same for all of them.

</comment><comment><USER6> Nice report. I hope, Tesla spends a little time for some software add-on for the camper mode. Shouldn't require many changes to make it a selectable option. The front seats could also move to their maximum front stops to create more space, especially in the Model3. In the long term, they should revisit the options for the second row in the Model X, so that some flat space could be reached. This would then be the king sized camper mode :).</comment>


How to Catch a Fly in Your Hand - <AUTHOR> https://lifehacker.com/how-to-catch-a-fly-in-your-hand-1844847458 <comment><USER2> I used to be a "paper boy", meaning I sold newspapers. I sat outside a restaurant. There were always a lot of flys. We used to bind the newspapers we sold with rubber bands so we had bags of them.

So I got really good at shooting flys with rubber bands.

To this day, when there is a fly in the house, I put a rubber band around my wrist and wait for the chance to shoot it.</comment>


Show HN: Never miss a software update again - <AUTHOR> http://updateditis.com/

<comment><USER2> I like that the name can be a pun, "Updated-itis: a disease where the afflicted person cannot help but check hourly whether all of their software is up-to-date"

<comment><AUTHOR> I like that... it was originally a play on yodas strange little syntax.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Ruby programmers who use Bundler can get this for their gems with `bundle outdated`. It's not push notification, but it's much more comprehensive.

</comment><comment><USER4> I thought of making a similar service, but with the option to upload a package manager config file. scenario: I have project A and B, with some dependencies. I upload the files, and I get a weekly digest "project A: updates for django, userena, taggit, jquery, zurb foundation. project B: django, zurb foundation" or similar. Have you thought of implementing it?

<comment><AUTHOR> I have almost finished the ability to add custom projects (within reason). Perhaps I could then implement a service which auto-detects packages. So, user Bob creates a repo in github. He adds a file in the root called packages.json which contains a list of the packages he is using. He then adds his repo to updateditis.com. Updateditis periodically checks his packages.json file and if it detects a change in one of the packages versions, it emails Bob saying "For project XYZ, the package ABC has been updated to version 1.2.3, you should consider updating it."

<comment><USER4> why would I need to add a repo in a scm provider of your choice? let me just upload a requirements file.

<comment><AUTHOR> Well that should be possible too. However if you add a package later, it would be easier to edit your own package file then to log back in to updateditis and re-upload a package file. Automatic for the people

<comment><USER4> yes, but IMO it should be provided as a feature, not as a requirement. I'm probably in the minority here, but I prefer general solutions to 'github extensions', as when you host projects elswhere all those useful tools become simply worthless. especially that using a package manager and using github isn't necessarily tied together.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Reminds me of Bundlescout: <http://bundlescout.com>

</comment><comment><USER6> Cool idea, similar to what I had in mind using Git's tagging system when I built <http://hubnotify.com>. Are you using any repo or is the version just in a local database?

<comment><AUTHOR> Nice site! Currently tracking the version in a local database and checking for changes hourly via cron. I've half implemented checking github repo's but its not 100% accurate yet. Not sure how you are doing it but I am going to focus on an update being any change to a branch. So its basically tracking branches only.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Looks pretty fancy, any plans for an API / auto upgrade system that you could have sitting server side?

<comment><AUTHOR> No plans for an api as such yet. Although I might add in the ability to change the notification type. Options would be a push url, sms, jabber notification and anything else that might be useful.

<comment><USER7> I think non email based notification, or customizable notification, would be a killer.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Congratulations. Awesome idea and a great implementation.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks :)</comment></comment>


Dear Apiary, let us pay you - <AUTHOR> https://securitytrails.com/blog/dear-apiary-let-us-pay-you <comment><USER2> Oh those foolish startups, trying to buy Enterprise Software online on their own, and not by the clueless CTO going golfing with an Oracle sales rep.

</comment><comment><USER3> And this is why you don't do business with Oracle. They don't want your business, you're too small to make a profit that matters to them.

<comment><USER4> And if you do make a profit that matters to them, you _really_ don't want to do business with Oracle...

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> How did the word Oracle not immediately scare the author away? They make a large portion of their revenue through license compliance auditing.

Doing business with Oracle is dangerous.

</comment><comment><USER6> Once you have a customer-impacting issue with Apiary, and Oracle is completely unresponsive, you will realize that this was a beautiful gift of a warning sign that you just threw in the trash.

<comment><USER7> My worry is that Oracle decides to kill Apiary. I wouldn't use it because of that.

I used to work for a company that used a product purchased by Sun and killed off by Oracle.. a few years back they deleted all the docs (fortunately we had local copies).

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> As soon as I saw it was an Oracle product, I knew only pain could be the result.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Some kind folks at Apiary have reached out and gotten this attention. It looks like they got our account fixed.

<comment><USER9> why it didn't work earlier? were you talking with wrong apiary/oracle support channels/using twitter handles?

<comment><USER10> We reached out several times to the livechat at oracle cloud and the apiary support e-mail about 6 days ago.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Why would you want to start a business relationship with a company that required you to go through so much effort to buy their product?

</comment><comment><USER12> This is a recurring nightmare if you have bought Oracle Products. We are an enterprise paying customer. If we open a ticket, the first thing they do is ask for some logs which is fair. Then after sometime they will ask for more unrelated logs. Then your metadata structure. Then your data..the list goes on and on. Then you realize - 2 months have passed and they still don't have a resolution.

</comment><comment><USER13> We have that situation quite a bit. We like the product, have the money, just need a quote and way to pay and the answer is often "Not so fast. First you have to watch a 60 minute demo by our sales rep, then we need to discuss your needs". Just take the f...ing money!!!

<comment><USER14> If you don't have pricing on your website, I'm going to assume I can't afford it.

.... Which, now I think about it is probably the point

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> I used to use Mashape for an API service I provide, but they recently transitioned (sold?) their marketplace to RapidAPI.

I've been happy with the move, as RapidAPI seems to be working hard to improve the API-provider portal.

</comment><comment><USER16> These sorts of things happen far too often in my experience. Not just by big enterprises, but by hot new startups and everyone in between.

And frankly, when I see something like this fail, it makes me seriously question the quality of the product I'm buying.

</comment><comment><USER17> Swagger is better anyway.

</comment><comment><USER18> Also, please give a way to version the API specs and specify different environments to hit with the said spec (mock, test, stage, etc.) when trying the service.</comment>


Ask HN: How many companies fail to engineer for scale? - <AUTHOR>

And how many over-engineer for scale that never actually happens? <comment><USER2> I've seen both, but it's hard to say how much of each happens exactly -- I think jumping straight into microservices before you know what the product really is is a symptom of the latter at least.

You can get a long way with a monolithic architecture and a reasonably good database that you don't abuse nowadays (40-vcore servers, hundreds of gigs of RAM, terabytes of fast SSD). And in the face of getting a product out as quick as possible, not making hugely awful decisions in how to store and access your data is key. 10% more time thinking about these problems saves you several orders of magnitude down the line fixing and solving scaling problems.

If you really scale, you're going to rewrite most of it eventually anyway, but having the data stored in a sane manner makes all that easier anyhow.

<comment><USER3> I'll second this. I have built a lot of ideas and prototypes over the last year or two. I used to spend a lot of time focusing on the architecture design of these things, building in microservices using the latest technology wherever possible. I figured this was the best way to go about it, until the day I realized I was spending 50% of my time trying to set up a distributed microservices environment, 40% of my time fighting with the tools I was trying to use to build my prototype, and 10% of my time actually building my prototype.

This is the biggest problem with trying to scale too early - you take the focus away from your product. The reality is that most businesses will not work out. Instead of focusing on scaling something that may never sell, you should use the tools that allow you to iterate on your product as quickly as possible - where reasonable.

As stated above, if you end up needing to grow the business, all the code will eventually be rewritten. The data, however, will likely be much more expensive to change. Put some time into thinking about your data model, but otherwise focus on building your product.</comment></comment>


Global cybercrime has infected the very soul of capitalism with evil - <AUTHOR> http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jun/14/global-cybercrime-infected-soul-capitalism-evil-financial-system

<comment><USER2> ...Capitalism has a soul?</comment>