Robot Security Framework - <AUTHOR> https://www.aliasrobotics.com/research/rsf.htm <comment><USER2> If the framework authors want to make a significant impact on the field, GPL v3 is not the way to license this.

You don't get broad industry adoption and broad information sharing by trying to force a viral license on interested parties, you get adoption and information sharing by doing the hard work of building a community around the issue you care about and encouraging others to share information and best practices back into the community. OpenGL isn't GPL v3, nor is ROS, nor OpenCV, nor the publication of CERT security alerts.

Releasing this under GPL v3 is simply the kiss of death for it, before it even got started.

[edit: looking deeper at the repo, GPL v3 is an even worse license to choose than it looks on the surface - there is no actual executable code in the repo, which means GPL of any version is incredibly poorly suited to the content at hand. If the authors have this weak an understanding of licensing issues, it's very hard to believe they actually understand the subtleties of modern security well enough to justify investing the time to actually try to assess whether they've done a good job with their proposal here]

<comment><USER3> downvoted for partisan bickering ("viral licence"), although I appreciate that you wear your bias on your sleeve.

<comment><USER4> downvoted for saying you downvoted

<comment><USER3> It's considered courteous to explain downvotes. (So, er, thanks.)

My actual initial reaction:

Come on HN calling the GPL "viral" you're pushing peoples' buttons and you know it.

Do you want flame-wars? 'Cause that is how you get flame-wars.

I'm out.

END TRANSMISSION

"THE SPHINX HAS SPOKEN!"

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Why is there no OS layer? Having just the concept of a firmware layer stand in for this is not sufficient, as the security implications are different. Also I looked for, and did not find, what their definition of "robot" is. What is in scope, and what is out of scope? Is a self driving car out of scope, and why?

</comment><comment><USER6> Bit poor naming choice [http://robotframework.org](http://robotframework.org)</comment>


Tips to become a successful entrepreneur - <AUTHOR> http://www.rediff.com/getahead/2007/nov/07ranjit.htm

<comment><USER3> Here are the tips for people like me who skim YC comments before reading the article.

Tip #1: Don't worry about not being courageous enough for the uncertainty of the business world, as being an entrepreneur has nothing to do with courage.

Tip #2: Look for a big idea, and be rational.

Tip #3: Start small.

Tip #4: When faced with the fear of giving up a secure job, concentrate on the equally frightening possibility of someday looking back with regret.

Tip #5: Have a backup plan.

</comment><comment><USER4> afaik 1,2 and 5 need to be looked on with pure caution and might be an artifact of the kind of startup (consultancy, which works on contacts and is in general much easier than a product startup)the guy has done rather than a generic rule.

#1. It is hard and takes a lot of persistence

#2. The idea with which a startups starts out with rarely works out - so if its not going to work anyways why does it have to be big and there is little 'rationality' about the idea per se. I would go with guy kawasaki here - <USER2> to make meaning - build something useful and everything else will take care of itself.

#5 Having a backup plan is highly questionable. The only way you will get to fighting the devil is by burning the bridge which helps you cross over the deep sea.

</comment><comment><USER5> Tip #1 is a very interesting one...</comment>


Peter Thiel Says Twitter 'Horribly Mismanaged' - <AUTHOR> http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-09-17/peter-thiel-says-twitter-horribly-mismanaged-.html

<comment><USER2> I love this:

"Working my way through a giant bag of Doritos," Costolo tweeted in an exchange with early Twitter employee Jason Goldman. "I'll catch up with you later."

PepsiCo Inc., whose Frito-Lay division sells Doritos, declined to comment.</comment>


Why is this apparently simple Go benchmark so slow? - <AUTHOR> https://gist.github.com/rcarmo/5394708 <comment><USER2> From the Go docs: "GOMAXPROCS sets the maximum number of CPUs that can be executing simultaneously and returns the previous setting"

You are setting this to 8 on a dual-core system. What happens when you set it to 2?</comment>


How software can be resilient to recession - <AUTHOR> http://www.cloudave.com/link/How-Software-Can-Be-Resilient-to-Recession-22-9-2008

<comment><USER2> I thought this was interesting: pricing yourself under the approval threshold gets you _in_ ; and from there you are known, and have a base to reach up above the approval level.

My experience is that Economic Buyers find a good deal irresistible (e.g. cheaper to buy in bulk). It's one of the strengths of a well-heeled company, so they like to use it (and should).

They could even walk up the price list for you... this would be easier once the value of the product/service has been verified by the initial usage "under the radar".

I've organized my terms so they rarely need to upgrade (so I haven't actually had this happen) - but I really, really should. Lower entry level + repeat sales has got to be a winner.

<comment><USER3> I liked this idea too.

Key Question: how to connect to users and make the initial sale? Many times users are prevented from making purchases like this -- at least on paper.

<comment><USER2> How to get sales in the first place? Assuming I'm understanding you correctly, that's the whole business problem, isn't it? It's (1). meeting a need (product for a market); (2). people knowing about it (publicity).

I won't theorize or exposit further, just give my own experience.

Mine was a product for programmers: I focused on creating a product that solved a problem that was frustrating and easy to solve. I began with the absolute minimum step towards that, set up a webpage, and released it on freshmeat. I used a dual license, meaning it was open source, but in some cases I could charge for it. I was prepared for there to be no interest, but there was _some_ interest (500 people looked at it, and _1_ emailed me).

Thus encouraged, I continued, adding features, and releasing each one as a new version.

A strange thing happened as I continued on this path - I saw a really cool way to do something that I had not even imagined before. I knew the components, but just didn't see the connection - maybe no else did... certainly, no one else acted on it. Seeing new things is not a matter of genius; it's a matter of _being there_ \- at the vantage point where it is visible. The other part is, having seen it, to _actually do it_. This is really what made it worth paying for, for my very first sale.

Simultaneous with all this, I was fascinated by the idea of a "pitch", trying to succinctly capture: the essence of the idea; the benefit to customers; and the advantages over alternatives. I constantly rewrote this - typically, weekly.

Summary: solved a frustrating problem with a neat solution that was constantly publicised via releases. Had a cool pitch, that was exciting and easy to grasp, and short enough to pass on to others by word of mouth. Kept working on the product regularly for a year before the first sale (it's reassuring for customers to see ongoing activity; and inspiring for technical users to see constant improvement).

So, _How to connect to users and make the initial sale?_ Users knew about it, wanted to buy it, so they found a way to buy it. My initial customer had management that understood and appreciated the technology (and taught me a lot about it, in fact).

They sometimes needed permission, but _only one level up_ (their immediate management). Sometimes permission would take 3 months. That was awful. Oh, and dealing with lawyers was awful (even though I respect lawyering, I didn't enjoy the experience). I also experimented with prices as I went along, and they ended up being 10 times what I started with (from $500 to $6,000 USD for top end)... thus moving higher up the management chain for "permission".

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Best idea in the article: _charge for it – companies actually prefer to pay for reliable, good service._

This is a no-brainer in the enterprise world, but continues to be avoided on the consumer side. Depending on ads to make you millions is a dangerous way to go. Building something that people are willing to pay for is a more tried-and- true method that has worked for thousands of years.</comment>


MP3 found to alter timbre of music causing loss of some emotional context - <AUTHOR> https://techxplore.com/news/2016-12-compression-format-timbre-music-loss.html <comment><USER2> no shit.... it's a compression technology...</comment>


Nearly half of Twitter messages are 'pointless babble' - <AUTHOR> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/twitter/6028566/Nearly-half-of-Twitter-messages-are-pointless-babble.html

<comment><USER2> I am getting tired of all these articles analyzing twitter's userbase and the nature of tweets. Yes, there are a lot of spammers and "marketing gurus" on twitter. Yes, people tweet about nauseatingly stupid shit.

Use twitter how you want to use it, and how you get the most value out of it. Follow people whose tweets you enjoy reading. Can't we just leave it at that? Leave the rest of the twitter over-analyzing to TC, they certainly do enough of it.

</comment><comment><USER3> Only half? I would've guessed far, _far_ higher than that. Maybe one in 20 conversations I have over facebook or AIM are not pointless babble, and I don't see why twitter would be wildly different.

</comment><comment><USER4> That's not pointless babble - that's social grease. I do wish writers wouldn't take everything that doesn't have a clearly defined goal and label it pointless...

</comment><comment><USER5> And depending on the estimate, somewhere between 90-97% of emails are spam.

That doesn't reduce the value of email for those that are received by people though.

</comment><comment><USER6> My family and university friends are spread all over the place. I have found the so-called pointless babble of twitter and facebook has played an important part in staying in touch. Most of the time you don't have anything exciting to communicate, but a message that is effectively 'X' is alive can help keep relationships going.

</comment><comment><USER7> Probably half the content in most newspapers is "pointless babble" particularly in the "Lifestyle" section. 90% or more of email traffic is spam. Doesn't make the media useless.

</comment><comment><USER8> "Pointless babble" like this poor excuse for an article, I suppose. What some friends might find interesting from me is useless to others. Does that make it pointless? No.

</comment><comment><USER9> Did anybody else think of Ford Prefect and his theory that unless human beings are constantly communicating, they shrivel up and die?

</comment><comment><USER10> could be said about facebook, myspace, or any other network. newsflash: most normal people in the world don't have ground breaking things to say every 5 minutes.</comment>


Ask HN: What are some ways to gamify writing? - <AUTHOR> I'm practicing writing fiction, and it's gradually coming along, but it's pretty hard for me. I really want to get good at it, but my reddit-addicted brain just seems to refuse to engage in this activity, doesn't enter the flow. Programming, on the other hand, works very well(it has an immediate feedback/gratification loop and clear goals). So I'm trying to figure out what kind of system would help me to experience the same thing in writing.
/r/WritingPrompts is pretty helpful, and blogging has sort of natural gamification(traffic/upvotes/comments) embedded in it, but these are misleading, my brain is getting dopamine spikes out of seing upvotes or refreshing the stats, not out of the writing process itself.
I've been thinking about making a website with daily flashfiction challenges(100-1000 words, winners determined by voting, leaderboard of the best writers), but it's not that different from writingprompts. Github-like streaks could help perhaps(a visual representation of how many words you have written every day, and how many days in a row you write). Or maybe a text editor with a progress bar that would show how much words you have written until reaching a daily goal....
There's gotta be a way to design a feedback loop that would make writing fiction addictive.
What are some ways to make writing process more fun and engaging? Are there some tools/techniques I can use? <comment><USER2> Something I love doing is collaborative writing -- my chat group [1] has a #storytelling channel and people toss around ideas in there. Or I'll chat back and forth with one individual and we'll shape the story together. Not exactly gamified, but when you're working with another person there's a pressure to respond quickly that helps me loosen up and just write.

Another idea: use [http://www.themostdangerouswritingapp.com/](http://www.themostdangerouswritingapp.com/) and literally reward yourself after each sprint -- try chocolate chips or something.

[1] [http://exolymph.com/cyberpunk-futurism-chat- group/](http://exolymph.com/cyberpunk-futurism-chat-group/)

<comment><USER3> A sort of tangent to this was when I would play writing/poetry golf with someone else. Literally, I write a line, then they write a line, and so on. Our products would often lead to ideas I'd take on solo later.</comment></comment>


Nebraska farmers vote overwhelmingly for Right to Repair - <AUTHOR> https://uspirg.org/blogs/blog/usp/nebraska-farmers-vote-overwhelmingly-right-repair <comment><USER2> What many people may not realize is just how long-lived a lot of farm equipment is. There will be tractors out there still working that are 75 years old and just keep getting repaired.

Obviously the manufacturers would like to sell those farmers tractors more often than that or, in the very least, generate a revenue stream from existing hardware and honestly that's what I see a lot of computing in vehicles as being: nothing more than guaranteeing a revenue stream. It'll get marketed and sold as "efficiency" but the manufacturers are capturing those (alleged) efficiency gains by charging farmers to repair them.

This is also the case with GM crops too. For years, farmers cultivated seeds and replanted them for the next year's harvest. GM crops are typically constructed so they're not fertile beyond the current generation. Why? So the farmer has to re-buy the seed stock from the manufacturer.

<comment><USER3> The search for an ongoing revenue stream is one of the most destructive forces in the tech industry. It leads to some very customer-hostile experiences.

<comment><USER4> My fave is "subscription headphones": [https://www.nuraphone.com/products/nuranow](https://www.nuraphone.com/products/nuranow)

<comment><USER5> > Please note: NuraNow is _not_ a rent-to-own program — as long as your > subscription stays active, the Nuraphone stays active too.

...isn't that straight worse than rent-to-own...?

<comment> blaser-waffle Rent-to-Never-Own

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Right to repair is increasingly hitting people outside of agrarian/industrial contexts.

This month, Google shipped the last update for my Pixel phone. The hardware is functional and in great shape, but I don't think there are any truly viable ways for me to keep it secure. I have a tablet that long-ago met the same fate. This is in the same world where I can 'apt-get update' my seven-year old desktop and work with aplomb. It is my understanding that the primary blocker to serious open-source kernel development on phones is closed-source drivers for the phone hardware.

<comment><USER7> You can get really good support from Lineage OS for years to come. Been running it on all my android devices for years. The flagship models like Pixel usually have the best ongoing support.

<comment><USER8> > The flagship models like Pixel usually have the best ongoing support.

When was the last time you checked on this? As far as I can see, LineageOS support is pretty much restricted to phones that have had it for years. There is no hope if you have a recent phone. There's also no hope if you have an old phone, unless it's _already_ supported.

For example, the most recent Pixel with support is... the Pixel. The original.

<comment><USER9> Lineage depends on the community to issue device specific builds. For instance, my dual sim traveling phone has no official Lineage support, but is well supported through the community (and indeed, everything works quite well).

I do wish Lineage had a way to promote and adopt community versions more officially.

<comment><USER8> > I do wish Lineage had a way to promote and adopt community versions more > officially.

They do. That's what official support is. [https://wiki.lineageos.org/devices/](https://wiki.lineageos.org/devices/)

But they're a dead project.

<comment><USER10> Last change 4 minutes ago: [https://review.lineageos.org/q/status:open](https://review.lineageos.org/q/status:open)

Looks quite alive to me.

<comment><USER8> An active project that supports no hardware is still a dead project. If you want to run LineageOS, that's not a realistic goal. It's a pipe dream.

<comment><USER10> I run LineageOS on my phone. I _specifically_ bought the phone to run LineageOS on it. It's only a pipe dream if you want to take any random phone and change the operating system.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> > The measure adopted by the Nebraska Farm Bureau laid out specific standards > for any agreement or legislation:

> Right to Repair: Nebraska Farm Bureau supports the implementation of > comprehensive right to repair legislation OR a negotiated written agreement > between ag producers and original equipment manufacturers (OEMs). This > legislation or agreement must:

....

> 4\. Differentiate between repair (the restoration of hardware to its > original intended function) and illegal "modding," (modification of original > hardware to bypass environmental controls).

To be pedantic, there are mods that are neither restoring originally intended functionality nor illegally bypassing environmental controls. I think that the ability to add functionality that the original manufacturer never intended is an important right that the owners of the equipment should have.

<comment><USER12> The EPA has always had laws about environmental controls (whether people care about them is a different issue, however...), so it's not something any new laws should really need to cover.

<comment><USER11> Also, a user may conceivably want to convert diesel equipment to be electric.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> This is a big deal, not only for the farmers using machinery from manufacturers like Deere, but for the rest of society who may now have some precedent for right to repair.

<comment><USER14> This doesn't establish any precedent - it's not a law or regulation, just an expression of the opinion of an association of farmers. In the equipment market, they're effectively a consumers' rights organization (except B2B? analogies to the consumer electronics market are inaccurate). Equivalent maybe to large corporate purchasers or a Chamber of Commerce endorsing R2R.

(And also, as the article notes, the national Farm Bureau that the Nebraska group belongs to has _already_ endorsed R2R!)

<comment><USER15> Perhaps not legal precedent, but many people may feel more comfortable pushing for right to repair if they see "down to earth" farmers calling for it. The ideal is much closer to entering the mainstream now that people other than technophiles are calling for change.

<comment><USER16> Mainstream isn't fighting against right to repair, mainstream doesn't know the conversation even exists.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> An economist would say that when considering buying this machinery the farmer would also consider the cost and availability of repairs and that the competition in the machinery market (the primary market) would police the secondary market for repairs. In reality, this kind of policing is hard to come by because of the time and expense of figuring out which company has the cheapest lifecycle1 costs for the equipment (do you figure out how much the blades will cost when you buy the razor). But the real reason is that lots of people just don't think about the long-term costs attached to a purchase.

<comment><USER18> When buying, if there are contractual strings attached to the use of the asset then it's more of a lease purchase than actual asset purchase. As it is now, farmers that are purchasing the asset are saying they want to use the asset as they deem fit, including repairs.

<comment><USER17> agreed. But when they purchased the machines, they should have looked at the services terms and taken that into account when making their purchases. If there's competition in the market (no idea) then presumably someone would try to beat its competitors by offering a better service option (such as unlocked diagnostics).

This issue went to the supreme court on the question of whether a manufacturer could "monopolize" its aftermarket. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastman_Kodak_Co._v._Image_Tec...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastman_Kodak_Co._v._Image_Technical_Services,_Inc).

<comment><USER19> Link is missing the trailing period:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastman_Kodak_Co._v._Image_Tec...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastman_Kodak_Co._v._Image_Technical_Services,_Inc.).

FWIW, I had to add an extra period at the end to get the original one to get included as part of the link.

<comment><USER20> another possible trick is urlencoding the dot as %2E: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastman_Kodak_Co._v._Image_Tec...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastman_Kodak_Co._v._Image_Technical_Services,_Inc%2E)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> I've been paying attention to this for several years. I have an affinity for John Deere, having grown up on a farm that had almost nothing but JD tractors, but their heavy-handed approach to repair work in recent years is unacceptable.

Farmers don't have the funds available to constantly be taking equipment (that sometimes costs upwards of $200,000) to a dealership when it breaks down (and it will break down).

<comment><USER22> Yep! In fact, the orchardist Michael Phillips in "The Apple Grower" specifically recommends older, purely-mechanical tractors for small / family operations, largely for repair reasons

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> Honest question: what would be the rationale to prevent farmers from repairing their machinery themselves instead of through the manufacturer (in this case, Deere)?

To my mind, from the point of view of the "user" (i.e. the farmer), that can be seen as somewhat monopolistic.

I tried to find similarities between this situation and that of Apple not letting users tamper with their hardware, but it could be argued that the latter makes a bit more sense given that most of their customers, statistically speaking, are not necessarily tech enthusiasts who know their way around hardware, but in the case of a farmer, I'd imagine most would be perfectly capable of messing around with the internals of a tractor, albeit some software-heavy parts would of course prove almost impossible to "repair".

EDIT: Grammar

<comment><USER24> I'm for right-to-repair, but I'll give it a shot in defense of manufacturers. A lot of people assume it's just "evil-corp" greed. All of these reasons are money based, but not necessarily malicious.

Liability: If a customer repairs a machine improperly and it causes more problems, or someone gets hurt, it can paint the manufacturer in a bad light. Many farmers know how to operate a tractor safely, but might not know how to disassemble and repair one safely.

Cost of creating parts distribution channels: Having the parts to repair a machine that you manufactured is cheap. Creating distribution channels to keep track of, maintain inventory, price out, and deliver those parts to customers, is a business in-and-of itself - and is not cheap to maintain. Many companies do this, but it isn't cheap.

Cost of creating and updating documentation for customers: Sure, this might seem tedious, but as a software engineer, I know this has an _actual_ cost. How many companies have you worked at that have had perfect, up-to-date information on the ins-and-outs of the software that's being written, while it's still being written? Every company I've had has glaring blind-spots in documentation. Also, as a hardware product, what happens when you make a minor revision? You send out a whole new book on Tractor v3.8973 (has slightly different brakes than 3.8972 because the brake manufacturer went out of business and Deere needed to find another).

I'm not saying these are good reasons, but would make sense, in a market where everyone wants everything as cheap as possible, or for free. Costs have to get cut somewhere. A manufacturer isn't going to (or able to) give something away for free, and stay in business. Ideally, competitive market forces would be enough to pressure a company into making their products repairable. What we are seeing is likely a byproduct of monopolistic laziness - there's no strong incentive and it's easier to say "just send it to us and we'll fix it".

Just my two cents in defense of companies not being "evil" in nature, but trying to give customers what they want and getting scolded for it.

<comment><USER25> > liability

When has any company been held liable for a customer modifying it.

> distribution channels

It might be annoying to create but they won't lose money on parts, it would likely be a profit center, just not as big a center as doing the repairs themselves.

They already distribute parts to dealers around the world who service the tractors.

> documentation

They already have repair documentation that they distribute to dealerships around the world.

Nobody is asking manufacturers to make huge sacrifices, just stop holding customers ransom.

<comment><USER24> > When has any company been held liable for a customer modifying it.

All the time. Regardless, the liability is to their brand. If someone hears that a John Deere tractor blew up and set a field on fire, they avoid the brand. Even if it was caused by an improper repair.

> They already distribute parts to dealers around the world who service the > tractors.

Just guessing here, but I imagine they do this in bulk to local service centers, via a regular distribution chain (on a semi-truck to many service centers) to manage cost. Distributing a part to an individual, or service centers they don't own, would require remodeling their distribution chain. My point is, it's doable, but not cheap, and customers will end up paying for this convenience in the price of the product.

> They already have repair documentation that they distribute to dealerships > around the world.

That are used internally... Are your internal docs customer friendly enough to help them repair the most minute problem?

Like I said, I am for right-to-repair and I'd like to see manufacturers move towards these types of models, but it's typically basic market forces that cause manufacturers to act the way they do. Unless I see evidence that someone consciously chose the "No, lets screw over our customers for more money" option, I'm not going to assume mal-intent and start screaming "they're holding customers ransom!" from the hilltops.

<comment><USER25> > All the time.

Then I am sure you can give us some recent examples in the media where the manufacturer is blamed for bad modifications by users.

If I pour a gallon of gasoline on a tractor and set it on fire, and the media reported "man sets farm on fire after torching a tractor", no tractor buyer is going to blame John Deere.

Your argument relies on the false premise that informed consumers (tractor operating farmers) would react negitivly to a brand if something happened involving a modified tractor. When in reality farmers are crying out to be able to repair and mod their tractors.

Compare to the tech industry. How often do PC gamers mod CPUs out of spec and end up shortening thr lifespan, or killing them? All the time. Nobody blames Intel.

> That are used internally... Are your internal docs customer friendly enough > to help them repair the most minute problem?

Have you seen car repair manuals? They are very detailed and complete and third party dealers have access to them.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> This is excellent news, and good awareness for the ag sector.

The most existential threat to human survival is the consolidation of the farm sector. If any industry needs to be decentralized (for the sake of resiliency) it's agriculture.

We don't want to create single points of failure in the food supply

Urban USA doesn't can't comprehend the fact that famine is a logistical possibility if finance/tech fucks up farming.

<comment><USER27> Many people will argue that finance / tech have already fucked up farming.

<comment><USER26> I would agree, but we're not yet to the point of massive famine and crop failures - although it seems closer year after year. Every farmer I talk to is worn out and tired of the bullshit.

<comment><USER27> I've often wondered if our government has some massive stores of grain somewhere to feed the nation for a few years in the event of a near total crop failure. Seems irresponsible not to have it.

Update: I sometimes wonder what it would take for me to have a year of food in reserve here at home, but I worry that its just the crazy Prepper in me trying to come out.

<comment><USER28> > but I worry that its just the Prepper in me trying to come out.

Fixed it for you :-)

There's nothing crazy with a little prepping, is it? Many of the practices are even recommended around here (stock up on food with long shelf life, keep clean water around, some iodine, a battery powered radio etc)

<comment><USER26> There's nothing wrong with a little prepping but you have to take that to the scenario's logical conclusion. What happens if you run out of supplies and there is no deus ex machina narrative and you are faced with starvation.

<comment><USER27> The hard part will be deciding when to pick up the family and move somewhere with a climate conducive to farming. I have a nice big block now, but live in a very arid area and rely on civilisation to deliver water to my house.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> Disclaimer: I'm a VP for an IoT software company. I also grew up in farming communities.

I'm all for the right to repair, but I'm concerned we're creating a bit of false hope for famers. As more and more software gets injected into the equipment, "fixing" things requires touching both the physical devices and the software.

Obviously, the right to repair for non-software related problems is easy to understand.

I'm wondering, however, how the current proposals handle software fixes or mixed use cases (software/hardware fixes)?

<comment><USER30> Look to the automotive industry then. I owned a shop as a mechanic for several years working on euro cars mainly as well as a lot of track cars. The software in cars has gotten insanely advanced, and yet independent shops are still able to service cars because there's support from 3rd parties on diagnostic equipment from companies like Snap-on who make diagnostic equipment.

Look at the auto enthusiast market for standalone ECUs that have been common for years. ECUs in modern cars are black boxes that are reverse engineered for aftermarket purposes. Software isn't a wall that can't be breached.

<comment><USER31> Is communication with the ECU encrypted in some cars? Will it be in the future? If that happens, it will become much harder to replace components with aftermarket devices.

<comment><USER32> It seems to me that it must be, since we're going to have self driving cars depending on all the components in the car working within a tight specification. How can manufacturers assure that the customer's car is still safe and won't randomly kill people or become weaponized? This is presumably a liability issue, and obviously a marketing issue as well. (And instead of "encrypted" I read "authenticated".) Does right to repair also come with feature reduction? By this I mean... go ahead and fix your car and put in whatever components you want, but know that as soon as you put in non-official parts, the car won't drive itself any more.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> I'm so thankful this has finally come to be. I'm not sure what power the American Farm Bureau has, though. Will this become law?

<comment><USER21> I would say that there's a high probability of it becoming law. Politicians in Ag heavy states, like Nebraska, Iowa, Wisconsin, etc. are much more likely to listen to AFB, and if there's enough of a push, it could absolutely lead to new laws.

</comment></comment><comment><USER34> My only concern is that this may be restricted to farmers while it's a much more general issue. We don't need more laws specific for an industry.

<comment><USER26> Farmers create the one product you can't live without

</comment></comment><comment><USER35> I'm shocked someone actually voted no. What would their justification for that vote be? Legit curious if they had a proper argument, didn't understand the issue, or if it was some type of corporate influence.

<comment><USER36> They might be running old equipment whose only electronic equipment is the spark plugs and headlights. The people who don't upgrade old equipment tend to fall very heavily in the "if it ain't broke don't fix it" camp, and this applies equally to legislation as well as farm equipment.

<comment><USER37> If it's diesel, they won't even have spark plugs... (They'll have a starter motor and likely a generator/alternator, though for both gas and diesel.)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> I wonder if it is like in Minnesota where there is rural support for right to repair...but they vote for representatives who oppose it?

</comment><comment><USER39> So, in looking at this from not just the "this year" problem point of view, but a "how do we set up society" point of view:

What is the failing here that our current system doesn't address and we need to correct it with these one-off bills?

Why is it that the farmers can't make the right choices or put pressure on the manufacturers (by not buying their stuff if they don't agree with it) to make the equipment easily maintainable?

If farmers are choosing with full information to value the cost more than maintainability, why is it a problem that rises to having to put in a right- to-repair bill? Haven't they made their choice clear? If the farmers wanted to start an equipment company that served their needs as this bill seeks to do, they are free to do that in this environment.

I'm not sure why people's clear choice needs to be counteracted with a patch on the consequences of their choice.

</comment><comment><USER40> Why does John Deere not simply offer the best service and repair facility in an open market in order to win the revenue stream? This was always a land grab for easy profits.

</comment><comment><USER41> In the limit this doesn't seem like a forward-looking/future-proof move. The gap between technology and consumers is naturally widening as tech becomes more powerful and useful. E.g. smaller scale hardware, more and smaller sensors, complex AI, autonomy. Machinery will self-disable if you tamper with it, for your safety. To continue to provide/enforce right to repair you'd have to insist that technology needs to remain dumb.

</comment><comment><USER42> > 3\. Include ALL OEM equipment, regardless of age, model, or years in use at > the time of the effective date.

To me, that clause seems to be overly broad since I'm interpreting it to mean that the manufacturers have to indefinitely support all of their products.

If it's limited to all equipment that the OEM is willing to sell to at least one entity, then I'd say it's perfectly reasonable.

<comment><USER43> I believe that it is meant to be interpreted in conjunction with the item above it on the list:

> 2\. Guarantee farmer/repair technician access to the identical information, > parts, and tools that are available to dealerships. These items must be > fairly and reasonably priced (taking into account both small and large > producers) and be delivered in a timely manner.

They could stop providing information, parts, and tool for old models, but only if they also no longer provide the information, parts, and tools to their dealers.

</comment></comment><comment><USER44> The right to repair in a computer age requires the right to root. This is the biggest sticking point for me, and why I still think open source is the future, and in particular copyleft open source that doesn't allow itself to be tivoized, which is why I have spent years making the vast majority of my stacks gpl or gpl compat.

</comment><comment><USER45> This is definitely the right step to take. We have global warming of course we should repair things in order to utilize them longer. This will benefit the environment and also hopefully farmers and consumers.

Our grandparents stuff was made to last a lifetime we have something to relearn from that.

</comment><comment><USER46> Off topic but if I wanted some info on farming for hackers where would I look? Lets say I wanted gis data on how well a given crop grows on a given spot on earth or how to back together a set of crops/livestock that promote topsoil growth.

</comment><comment><USER47> This reminds me of GNU GPL - Right to modify the software I bought.

</comment><comment><USER48> Thinking of who wouldn't vote for right to repair I can only come up with:

1\. leaders of companies that would be adversely affected by right to repair 2\. perhaps employees of same companies but that seems iffy as I doubt the adverse effects would be so great as to threaten employment. 3\. People who actually think that although it would be to their benefit to have a right to repair there is an encroachment on a company's rights to make their products as they seem fit by enforcing it.

Have I missed anyone? Because I think at that rate the population would vote overwhelmingly for it if offered the choice.

<comment><USER49> > Have I missed anyone?

"Security-minded" folk who insist corporates should have full control of their device via signed code from pre-boot, incidentally preventing "non-authorised" replacement parts from working since repair is an attack vector, allegedly.

<comment><USER50> What's the threat model for a tractor/harvester/etc...? Who wants to send a piece of farm equipment on a very slow rampage via a complex and difficult hack job? One that will be stopped if the manufacturer has any sense at all and has physical kill switch.

Maybe sabotage from competing farmers? But that seems far less likely than the owner wanting to maintain his equipment after the manufacturer has abandoned it.

<comment><USER51> Devils advocating here, but they could always use the boogeyman of China wanting to disrupt our exports via espionage.

Remember, doesn't have to be likely, just has to be a good headline.

<comment><USER50> I feel like if spies were sneaking around farms disabling tractors they probably wouldn't do it via a software thing. Lighting them on fire or shaped charges on the engine seem harder to reverse.

<comment><USER51> Ehhh, I'm thinking more along the lines of Stuxnet here. i.e. could something be done that doesn't necessarily destroy the attacked equipment itself, but instead impacts the output in a negative (and hard to trace) form.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER52> But what about a corporation's right to replace? People having their right to repair infringes on a corporation's right to make you replace your stuff. You're stepping all over their rights by not wanting to be forced to have them replace your broken stuff.

<comment><USER53> Why do cooperations have the right to replace people's stuff? People bought it and it's their own.

</comment></comment><comment><USER54> Farmers are hackers. There is a lot of technology on farms. You have tractor's, irrigation systems, sensors, camera's, sometimes even drones.

</comment><comment><USER55> Then what does this mean for Software? Right to repair your software. Isn't that the same as Open Source?

</comment><comment><USER56> Queuing the lease only business model in 3...2...1...</comment>


When the Food We Ate Was Literally Poison (Even More So Than Now) - <AUTHOR> https://lithub.com/when-the-food-we-ate-was-literally-poison-even-more-so-than-now/ <comment><USER2> NPR interview about the book. [https://the1a.org/shows/2018-09-26/sell-by- date](https://the1a.org/shows/2018-09-26/sell-by-date)

</comment><comment><USER3> Right now spices are still filled with non-spice matter, but it is mostly very cheap and harmless rice flour.

We still can't get good spices.

<comment><USER4> It's pretty easy to get good spices. Buy them whole and grind them yourself. There are a few things where this doesn't quite work, e.g. asafoetida.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Wow, this adds a lot of perspective. I thought that things were bad nowadays.

<comment><USER6> One of the reasons Rome fell was lead poisoning.

[https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your- health/wp/2016/0...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your- health/wp/2016/02/17/lead-poisoning-and-the-fall-of- rome/?utm_term=.e30de3990be0)

<comment><USER7> Wow, it's almost too perfect of a parallel.

</comment></comment></comment><comment> swingline-747 Artificial sweetener anyone? How about some hair dye? (still allowed today in the US but not in Canada)

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lead(II)_acetate](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lead\(II\)_acetate)

Sodium Pyrophosphate is also a "fun," somewhat toxic additive. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetrasodium_pyrophosphate](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetrasodium_pyrophosphate)

<comment><USER8> Lead acetate is banned in the US (except for use in hair dye, which the FDA proved is safe).</comment></comment>


Australian government accused of sneaking in web filter - <AUTHOR> http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/technology/technology-news/government-accused-of-sneaking-in-web-filter-20130517-2jq3p.html

<comment><USER2> Given the Australian government has now excised _the entire freaking country_ from the migration zone for asylum seekers, perhaps they should just excise _all_ of the internet. Would be a darn sight quicker, cheaper and easier than having to filter it one IP address at a time.

</comment><comment><USER3> The headline is a bit silly. People tried to help the cops stop a thief, but stuffed up and inconvenienced bystanders. Those people happened to work for ISPs. So what?

The real problem is the second order one: Australian cops are so bad at prosecuting fraud that they resort to blocking websites instead of arresting the people running them. A few websites going down is the least of the consequences.

<comment><USER4> No, it wasn't the cops. No, it wasn't a thief. Legally, it wasn't anything: there was no judge, no finding of fault, just a clumsy ban without due process for secret reasons.

Banning anything (in this case, websites) without due process, accountability and transparency is completely immoral. The fact that the Australian government keeps trying to do it is abhorrent.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> The little known law they quote is actually very well known if you are an ISP / carrier. But the law is not a legal mandatory filter requirement - just a requirement that you "reasonably provide assistance when asked" It just happened that most of the ISP's when asked in this case decided to comply, but importantly not all complied.

<comment><USER6> Well, what exactly legal obligations does that requirement impose on the ISP? If they're allowed to refuse any request, then the law wouldn't be needed in the first place - government agencies can certainly send whatever non- enforceable requests they like without needing a specific law to let them do so.</comment></comment>


Target will stop labeling toys for boys or for girls - <AUTHOR> https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/08/13/target-will-stop-selling-toys-for-boys-or-for-girls-good/

<comment> norea-armozel Wow, people are getting upset because Target won't label toys for boys/girls? Seriously, I think people need to get a grip and stop trying to force a social norm on a private company. If they don't like it then they can shop at Walmart (barf).

<comment><USER2> Tesco in the UK got loads of criticism for labelling them a while ago.

<comment> norea-armozel I think it's odd that anyone would bother to complain about such a thing. I think it would annoying if they redid the layout of the store. Just putting toys under one general category just seems like the least concerning matter in the world.

<comment><USER2> I agree, but there was outrage by the social justice warrior crowd.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Idea to paying customers in 7 weeks: how we did it - <AUTHOR> http://blog.bufferapp.com/post/3328167762/idea-to-paying-customers-in-7-weeks-how-we-did-it

<comment><USER2> Great post, thanks for sharing.

I Am here in Brazil, crazy trying yo start something just the way you did, Twitter here is very hot (2nd place in the world in tweets after USA)I think you should try to market it here a bit, people here doens't pay a lot for online services but with more than 81,3M internet users you should hit some.

If you need help, fell free to ask.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks :)

That's really great to hear. We want to expand as quickly as we can globally since we think many people will find Buffer very useful, so any help would be hugely appreciated.

<comment><USER2> <http://www.hackernewsers.com/users/cfontes.html> in case you need info about brazil.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> Great story. How did you handle your initial billing? Did you integrate paypal?

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks. Yep, just a simple Paypal setup. One of the interesting decisions was not to implement Paypal IPN (automatic upgrading when the payment comes through). My reasoning was that it could have been 4 months before I had the first customer, so I didn't want to implement it until I had validated that the time spent on it was worth it. I could rather spend the time gaining that first customer. So it was a very simple initial integration.

<comment><USER3> Cool. So you just added some html and javascript which took the user to paypal? No api integration at all ? Smart!

<comment><AUTHOR> Exactly. Minimum viable ;)

<comment><USER3> Thanks for letting us know this. I've read that this is the right way to go but I've never seen a writeup of someone who was successful doing this. This has seriously pushed me over the edge onto customer development.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Good writeup. I really enjoyed your story, particularly your discipline to focus on customer acquisition and resist the temptation to code in a bunch of new features once you got some paying customers.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks. It's definitely something I still have to keep reminding myself of.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Amazing to see how the idea itself revealed the way it could be validated - through Twitter of course.

Nicely done. Informative post.

</comment><comment><USER6> Building a service that is dependent on another service is always a risk, but this is a very nice and simple app that a lot of the "social media" sides of companies could utilize. It's a great idea to make some extra revenue and I think has a nice market. Well done.

</comment><comment><USER7> Nice work! I love this quote, "It was a tiny idea. I wanted to take the scheduling feature of many Twitter clients and apps and make that single feature awesome. I believed that single feature was worthy of it's own application."

</comment><comment><USER8> nice job. I'm surprised however that people are willing to pay for this type of service. Makes you wonder if people would be willing to pay in order to use twitter

<comment><USER9> _"... nice job. I'm surprised however that people are willing to pay for this type of service. ..."_

It appears to be a toy product but if you consider:

* As a twitter subscriber, reading multiple posts are a pain to read. This is a real problem for users and their subscribers.

* Twitter has a lot of potential users/businesses looking for ways to automate etiquette.

* Twitter has a lot of users

The real problem for any developer here if I get a product with a lot of users, will Twitter just roll out the same product or will they pay enough?

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Great story. How many users sign up when you had the website put up? Also, were the users still helpful when they realized you don't have the app yet?

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks. In around 4-5 weeks of having the landing page and pricing page up without the product existing, I got a total of 120 emails. I sent an email when they gave me theirs explaining a little more about the product and how I needed their help to shape it into something truly useful. They were delighted to be shaping a new product, and were certainly not negative about it not existing yet. One mistake I made was telling people in that email that it would be live in a week :) In the future I won't be telling people time scales!

<comment><USER10> Thanks for sharing your story. Congrats

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> This is great - my only worry is that this is something that Twitter could easily replicate and destroy the revenue

<comment><USER5> Twitter has no interest in complicating their interface and delaying the content.

<comment><USER11> In my opinion, the 'new' twitter is more complicated than old.

<comment><USER5> Read it as 'complicating it further' then. :) I agree, but its speed bothers me even more.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


80-90% of ecommerce stores fail. Low quality products may be the reason why - <AUTHOR> https://www.soundest.com/blog/low-sales-23-common-ecommerce-mistakes-pt-2-your-products/ <comment><USER2> I think you're also missing an important reason ecommerce stores fail: no one has ever heard of them.

Marketing the store is a lot of work, and I suspect that is a more common reason for failure.</comment>


Event 201 envisions a fast-spreading coronavirus with a devastating impact - <AUTHOR> https://hub.jhu.edu/2019/11/06/event-201-health-security/ <comment><AUTHOR> Note the dates: Event 201 was held on 10/18/2019; linked JHU report was published on 11/6/2019.</comment>


Surf's up Wednesday: Google Wave update - <AUTHOR> http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2009/09/surfs-up-wednesday-google-wave-update.html <comment><USER2> I just want to say that Google has some brilliant marketing people. I submitted for an invitation a while back, and now I feel like I have a lottery ticket - and tomorrow I'll just have to keep checking to see if they call my number.

Has anyone documented, in detail, the buzz-process Google used up to this looming release of Wave on the world?</comment>


San Francisco emerged from a lockdown too soon during the 1918 Spanish flu - <AUTHOR> https://www.businessinsider.com/what-san-francisco-can-learn-spanish-flu-pandemic-coronavirus-1918 <comment><USER2> The spanish flu killed working age people. The case fatality rate for Italian health care workers (frequently tested so should be a good proxy for IFR) is sitting around 0,35%. When you adjust for age (those under 60) you end up with <0.1%. When you look at data based on cfr, serology, etc it all paints a picture of stratified risks based on age. The best gift my age group can give is build herd immunity.

Given most deaths in Canada are in long term care homes (up to 80% in Quebec), this gives us a clear target to improve.

<comment><USER3> It's strange that engineers are giving in to this biased and non-rational mental model, treating this situation as linear and robust.

It is non-linear and non-robust system. The main problem is that mortality rate even among young people would become much higher as soon as hospitals become overwhelmed.

So you can not make any predictive conclusions based on current stats. Please look at any of the numerous models available online which account for all factors, and you will see how badly herd immunity idea would end for all age groups.

<comment><USER4> >is that mortality rate even among young people would become much higher as soon as hospitals become overwhelmed.

I don't see how this follows. The point the parent was making is that young people don't seem to need hospital care. Why would they suddenly start dying just because 'hospitals are overwhelmed'? They still won't need them...

<comment><USER5> > The point the parent was making is that young people don't seem to need > hospital care.

Low risk doesn't mean no risk, and we see plenty of younger people in hospital, and in intensive care, because of covid-19.

ICNARC has a report that they update over time using data from UK intensive care units. [https://www.icnarc.org/Our- Audit/Audits/Cmp/Reports](https://www.icnarc.org/Our-Audit/Audits/Cmp/Reports)

[https://www.icnarc.org/DataServices/Attachments/Download/c5a...](https://www.icnarc.org/DataServices/Attachments/Download/c5a62b13-6486-ea11-9125-00505601089b)

Age at admission (years), number of people discharged alive (%), number of people died (%)

      16-39     240 (78.4)     66 (21.6)
      40-49     350 (73.2)    128 (26.8)
      50-59     568 (57.0)    429 (43.0)
      60-69     503 (41.8)    701 (58.2)
      70-79     293 (32.2)    617 (67.8)
         80+     57 (31.3)    125 (68.7)

Once admitted to ICU people aged 16-39 have a 21.6% chance of dying vs a 78.4% chance of being discharged alive.

<comment><USER6> bad use of statistics. if gp is to be believed, once in ICU you are _already_ in the 0.x %. the question then is, are you in the 0.1 or 99.9.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> 50M people died worldwide from "Spanish" Flu, in a world much different than today, yet within a couple years the world had mostly recovered. So far we are still a long way from that number. The problem is you won't know if you are to be in the dead or gravely ill category, or the mild or perfectly fine category, irrespective of age, until it happens.

What we could have had today is the ability to identify, isolate, and thus properly quarantine those who are ill or spreading, but we did not as a society deem it valuable to invest in (outside of places like S Korea). It's a classic pay me now or pay me later situation; now we are reaping the lack of investment in the past (even before the current ineptitude).

I always thought the lack of a comprehensive nation healthcare system or at least a plan that covered everyone in some way in the US would bite us if there ever was a pandemic. We as a society decided that long term planning was not economically viable or even desirable. But we did not even do a minimum. Now we have to hope for the best.

As a nation having everyone (not just some people) healthy and when not have access to affordable healthcare is a benefit to the nation as a whole and the economy, something that the new German nation back in the late 1800's figured out. How we get there in the US in the future I don't know, I just hope we come to the same realization and do something.

<comment><USER8> Very few people want to spend $40 on a fire extinguisher every few years until the moment when their kitchen is actually on fire.*

*That is, unless, history repeats itself and we lose ~1-2% of the world population[0] this Fall. That might provide sufficient motivation. [0][https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_flu](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_flu)

<comment><USER9> >spend $40 on a fire extinguisher every few years

Gosh, I hope they last longer then that!

I have a (genuine) Halon fire extinguisher hanging on the wall. According to the internets, Halon was banned in 1994!

The pressure dial on it is still in the green.

<comment><USER8> "Stored pressure ABC extinguishers are very common, and they often require internal maintenance every 6 years and hydrostatic testing every 12 years. Other types of extinguishers may vary in their internal examination and testing intervals." -[https://www.cintas.com/fire-protection-services/fire- extingu...](https://www.cintas.com/fire-protection-services/fire- extinguishers.aspx)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I am starting to wonder if there is any good way for dealing with this. If you lock down preventatively, you are at risk of hurting the economy, losing a ton of jobs and looking silly if things turn out to be not as bad. If you wait, you are at risk of killing people. It seems only in hindsight there is a clear path that balances all factors. I definitely wouldn't want to have to make decisions right now. You can pretty much only fail in one way or the other.

I think what we should learn is that we need to put much more effort into vaccines even if they are not profitable immediately but the cost of a pandemic is just so high that it's worth being on top of things.

In a way we are lucky that this didn't happen some decades earlier when remote work was much less of an option. When I look at my company there are definitely problems from not being able to access equipment at the office that keep accumulating but overall things are moving along pretty well. Without a 100 megabit connection I would not be able to do much.

<comment><USER11> It's a lot more than just 'looking silly'. The lockdown kills many jobs leading to people losing hope and triggering a recession worse than 2007's. That will have its death toll too.

<comment> throwaway-2020 Does anyone have figures for the increase in deaths during the last great recession?

I'm tired of the cure cannot be worse than the disease rhetoric. Economies will recover. The dead won't.

<comment><USER11> But this situation will also lead to deaths. I already hear the mental hospitals are overflowing.

And really, if we would do everything possible to prevent deaths, we would have tackled traffic, alcohol, poverty, pollution etc. In some countries even poor healthcare overall (Trump is still fighting 'Obamacare').

It's not as black and white as this; the virus isn't the only problem in our society.

<comment><USER12> Approximately 36k deaths per year in the US are from traffic [1]. About 88k from alcohol [2]. Poverty and pollution is harder to pin down with a quick web search. According to [3], deaths-per-day from COVID-19 flattened at about 2000 deaths about three weeks ago. So in that time ~40k deaths from COVID. That's with the curve flattened...with the curve flattened it was approximately equal to traffic deaths. If exponential growth had continued what would it be? I think deaths-per-day would doubled about 4 times. So 32k per day. Each day we'd be in the ballpark of traffic deaths. Wait a few days and it would have eclipsed alcohol-related deaths.

[1] [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_...](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_in_U.S._by_year)

[2] [https://www.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/brochures-and-fact- sh...](https://www.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/brochures-and-fact- sheets/alcohol-facts-and-statistics)

[3] [https://coronavirus.1point3acres.com/en](https://coronavirus.1point3acres.com/en)</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


TinyWindow: cross platform window management library in a single header - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/ziacko/tinywindow <comment><USER2> If its something visual then it always helps a lot to add screenshots...</comment>


Ask HN: What is the best sci-fi you read this year? - <AUTHOR> Please share with us the best books or series you read this year. <comment><USER2> The Worm Web Serial[1]. I've heard it is longer than all of the Harry Potter books combined.

It starts as modern day slightly alternate universe super heroes, and ends up in some pretty heavy sci fi concepts towards the middle and end.

By far and away my favorite part is how it dives deep into not just the origins of many characters (and the universe has a LOT of characters), but also their powers. Specifically, it walks through how characters learn how to use their powers in new and creative ways, and explores what it feels like to use the powers from the users' pov. This gets interesting with things like perception, control, tinkering and entropy type powers, and the author does a great job at exploring these in a way where you can almost picture using them yourself.

Another cool part is that while I referenced it as a superhero story, it is probably more accurately described as a super villain story as the main character goes down that path. However you soon learn that it really isn't that black and white and that gray spectrum becomes a key element of the story.

[1][https://parahumans.wordpress.com/](https://parahumans.wordpress.com/)

</comment><comment> alex- The final red rising book was published this year: [https://www.amazon.com/Red-Rising-Trilogy- Book/dp/B0159URANK](https://www.amazon.com/Red-Rising-Trilogy- Book/dp/B0159URANK)

I really enjoyed the first 15 lives of Harry August ([https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00ECE9OD4/ref=dp-kindle- redirect?...](https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00ECE9OD4/ref=dp-kindle- redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1)) I only found it in 2016 although it was published in 2014.

<comment><AUTHOR> I second the First 15 lives of Harry August. Great book, well written

<comment><USER3> Touch by the same author, Claire North is a great book too.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Books 2 & 3 of Liu Cixin's Dark Forest series were translated this year. One of them will get the Hugo (book 1, the Three Body Problem won the 2015 Hugo).

</comment><comment><USER5> Ancillary Mercy by Ann Leckie (admittedly end 2015)

Very good closing of the Hugo&Nebula Award series (Justice, Sword, Mercy) exploring the questions of identity and consciousness of individuals, androids and hive minds on the background of a galaxy spanning social, political and military struggle.

Yeah and I second the 3 Body Series by Liu Cixin - that is one for the ages too.

</comment><comment><USER6> Three books I enjoyed this year:

 _this census taker_ , China Mieville

 _To Say Nothing Of The Dog_ , Connie Willis

 _The Possibility of an Island_ , Houellebecq

If you enjoy science-fiction, it is quite possible that you wouldn't enjoy any of the books above or even classify them as science-fiction (I would though) -- so definitely look them up or try the kindle sample to see if they appeal to you.

Also, I see Ann Leckie's Ancillary trilogy mentioned elsewhere, I second that recommendation.

[Also, honourable mention to the TV show Westworld -- if it were a book I would have included.]

<comment><USER7> _To Say Nothing of the Dog_ won the Hugo for best novel in 1999. That probably makes it science fiction.

<comment><USER6> It is a really great book, and I highly recommend it, but IIRC you could tear out about 20 pages and it would become historical fiction.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> The _Wayfarers_ books _The Long Way to a Small, Angry Planet_ and _A Closed and Common Orbit_ were quite good. Fantastic world building and characters, although the plots seem to meander about with not too much purpose.

[https://www.goodreads.com/series/170872-wayfarers](https://www.goodreads.com/series/170872-wayfarers)

Recently ploughed through _The Expanse_ series.

[https://www.goodreads.com/series/56399-the- expanse](https://www.goodreads.com/series/56399-the-expanse)

 _Dark Matter_ was a good read if you like parallel universes.

[https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/27833670-dark- matter](https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/27833670-dark-matter)

 _The Rho Agenda_ series was a surprisingly good read.

[https://www.goodreads.com/series/61746-the-rho- agenda](https://www.goodreads.com/series/61746-the-rho-agenda)

 _Quantum Night_ was something a bit different from Robert Sawyer.

[https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/25734179-quantum- night](https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/25734179-quantum-night)

And _Barsk: The Elephants' Graveyard_ would probably have to be rated my favourite for the year.

[https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/25667916-barsk](https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/25667916-barsk)

<comment><USER9> Seconding _Barsk_ , and just about anything by Robert Sawyer; I would recommend his Neanderthal Parallax series, which begins with Hominids: [https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/264946.Hominids](https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/264946.Hominids)

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> The Culture Series by Iain Banks. Love his style, love the setting, and love the stories. Really fascinating look at a post-scarcity galaxy spanning anarchist society facilitated by extra dimensional artificial intelligences.

</comment><comment><USER11> I've been reading the "Expanse" series. I liked the earlier books a bit more. The latest one drops today.

Anyone watched the show they made from it?

<comment><USER12> I'm working my way through the show after having just finished the first book. I found the crew of the Rocinante to be fairly generic characters in the book, but at least they were likeable. In the screen adaptation, I find the constant conflict among the crew a little grating at times – Amos and Holden aren't particularly likeable. Miller seems like a much more interesting character, and I think he is played well in the series (I will have to look up the actor who plays his part...).

The dialogue seems quite hard to understand – it falls victim to the typical mumbled, gravely voices that seem to be present in many American shows and films.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> More than a year ago, I picked up William Gibson's "Pattern Recognition." I wasn't sure what I thought of it, at first, but it became increasingly interesting and I finished it. This year, I picked up the third novel in the series that "Pattern Recognition" started.

It's a different world than that of "Neuromancer" et al., but I've come to find Gibson's portrayal of and thinking about it quite interesting.

This year, I also helped someone out for a while who is considerably into fashions of some sorts (make up, running shoes and attire, other stuff more by just doing it than by talking about it).

I'm finding Gibson's latest trilogy giving me new eyes on all this. And, in today's world of "image", it's not just and interesting but a valuable perspective. Treatise. Extrapolation...

Not the most in your face of sci fi titles, but subtly compelling, for me.

Perhaps partially sub-consciously. Just like the world he's describing.

</comment><comment><USER9> This is a little more Lovecraftian Horror than science fiction, but I loved Matt Ruff's "Lovecraft Country". Equal parts what you'd expect, with an exploration of how shitty America was for black people in the 1950s.

[https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/25109947-lovecraft- count...](https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/25109947-lovecraft-country)

Ted Chiang's "Stories of your Life" have been recommended here a bunch, since Arrival was based on one of the stories in the collection.

[https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/223380.Stories_of_Your_L...](https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/223380.Stories_of_Your_Life_and_Others)

Peter Watts' Blindsight and Echopraxia are both excellent explorations of the human mind and consciousness.

[https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/48484.Blindsight](https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/48484.Blindsight) and [https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/18490708-echopraxia](https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/18490708-echopraxia)

Bonus: Echopraxia comes with an optional audiovisual component that stands alone quite well: [https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL30ED0756E00786E2](https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL30ED0756E00786E2)

And don't let the mention of Vampires scare you off; this isn't a Twilight wannabe, and it's very likely not a take on Vampires you've seen before.

</comment><comment><USER14> John C Wright's "eschaton sequence":

 _Count to a Trillion_

 _The Hermetic Millennia_

 _Judge of Ages_

 _Architect of Aeons_

 _The Vindication of Man_

(and one more to come)

It's a combination of hard sci-fi and space opera, based around one essentially immortal character (and his rival, and his girl) carrying out a mission over tens of thousands of years. Mind-blowing scale and yet there's a romance to it.

<comment><USER15> Sweet so glad to hear this is continuing. When I finished Architect it seemed it could have been an end to the series.

<comment><USER14> It was a long wait, without the benefit of a cryo-chamber, but worth it. _Vindication_ is far and away the best of the series for me. I suppose it'll be another year or so before the next is out.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> If you are into AI, Crystal Society was a great 2016 release. You can read it for free online: [http://crystal.raelifin.com/society/Prologue](http://crystal.raelifin.com/society/Prologue)

</comment><comment><USER17> Kill Process by William Hertling: [http://www.williamhertling.com/books/#kill- process](http://www.williamhertling.com/books/#kill-process)

It's near future and the technology isn't that far-out. Most of it is either very real already or at least very believable from today's point of view. So, maybe technically it doesn't count as sci-fi but it's a really great tech thriller anyway.

<comment><USER9> I thought for a second this was Daniel Suarez's Kill Decision, which deals with autonomous drones. It was a fun technothriller, but focused too much on one particular weird model that I thought wasn't too realistic.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> n-thing ancillary mercy (and the whole series) - best sci-fi I've read in a long while. Just finished the fifth season, and liked it enough to get the rest of the trilogy. It straddles the line between sci-fi and fantasy, but does it well and packs an emotional punch at the end as you come to identify with the main characters without even realizing it.

</comment><comment><USER7> Connie Willis: _The Doomsday Book_ , a winner of the 1993 Hugo for best novel. It's deep and wide and brilliant and there's a technical excellence to the storytelling that made the book as a whole satisfying. She leaves a few loose ends and they're just the right ones and in just the right quantity.

</comment><comment><USER19> An old one, Rendezvous with Rama by Arthur C. Clarke. It can be fairly slow at times but it's such an inspiring read.

</comment><comment><USER20> Besides Kill Process and Seveneves (mentioned elsewhere on this thread), I'm going through the Hyperion Cantos right now, and I can't recommend it enough. Apparently Bradley Cooper is heading up production of a series as well, so good times ahead for that IP.

</comment><comment><USER21> How Great Science Fiction Works: The Great Courses. I'd say while not quite scifi itself, it's one of best audiobooks/lectures about scifi that teaches the history and techniques of science fiction.

</comment><comment><USER22> Seveneves by Neil Stephenson

<comment><USER23> I read _Seveneves_ this year as well but came away disappointed. Some of the science was good (orbital mechanics, genetic engineering) but the rest of the science and engineering was fairly poor[0]. Couple that with the questionable decisions routinely made by many characters and it's a very weak novel overall.

[0] In particular, they did not (and physically could not) have launched a broad enough manufacturing capability for the remnants of humanity to have had a realistic chance of long-term survival. The practicality of the Seveneves themselves did was also at best dubious from a biological and other standpoints.

<comment><USER20> That universe seemed to have a much more developed space industry than we have, indicated by the fact that they attached a whole _asteroid_ to the ISS.

Stephenson does seem to have a history of fudging a bit of the realism to drive the plot, like anybody, but he seems to do it in a way that says " _wink_ _wink_ , I know this couldn't happen but work with me people ;)"

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> A book series called "Omega Force", currently re-reading it

<comment><USER11> Is an Omega Force a group of Omega Men? :-)

<comment><USER24> Nah, it is just a name of a group of people ;)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> Definitely The Book of the New Sun by Gene Wolfe.

<comment><USER26> To those unacquainted, imagine if Godel Escher Bach mated with The Lord of the Rings. It is a true masterpiece.</comment></comment>