Why is European broadband faster and cheaper? Blame the government - <AUTHOR> http://www.engadget.com/2011/06/28/why-is-european-broadband-faster-and-cheaper-blame-the-governme/ <comment><USER2> In the "Need to Know" version of this story they talked with a BT representative about how things had worked out for BT after they were forced into local loop unbundling.

It worked out _great_ for BT. They make more money leasing out the lines and leasing out space in their switching centers for the third party ISP's equipment than they were making providing monopoly ISP services directly.

It truly is a case of everyone wins. BT makes more money. Third party companies can start ISPs and make money. Consumers get plans that fit their needs better and cost less.

<comment><USER3> After looking at the options available that were linked in the article, I'm unsure that I agree that _everyone_ wins. Specifically, consumers looking for the higher end of the spectrum.

At least, the only higher-end provider linked in the article, Demon [1], seems to offer abysmally low bandwidth caps on almost every plan, and generally low max download speeds (20Mb or less). How well are their bandwidth caps enforced? I ask because Comcast does not seem to enforce their bandwidth caps in San Francisco, at least for customers on their >$99/mo Home plans.

I realize that this is an extremely small sample size, how well does this trend describe other UK providers? Personally, given the option between any of the plans Demon has to offer, I'd still prefer my 50Mbps down/10 up Comcast line that has effectively no cap, for which I pay 100/mo. Is Demon the exception and not the rule when it comes to pricier third party providers in the UK?

[1]: <http://www.demon.net/broadband>

<comment><USER4> BT Infinity (40Mbps down, 10 up) is £18 a month with a 40GB cap and £25.60 for unlimited.

<comment><USER3> Thank you, as much I tried to resist believing it...the grass certainly is greener on the other side.

<comment><USER5> I have symmetric 100 Mbps uncapped service in San Francisco for $33/month if I pay by the year or $45/month if I don't through Webpass. It works beautifully.

<comment><USER6> Ouch. My parents pay $45/month for 2Mbps. But they live in a rural mountain town where there's only one provider (plus satellite, which is even more expensive with interminable latency).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER2> The most interesting part in that is that in the UK, both Verizon and AT&T were strong and public proponents of local loop unbundling. When asked about it for the US, they say it is terrible and will hurt consumers.

<comment><USER7> That's because everyone justifiably hates BT, rather than it made sense.

<comment> bjelkeman-again Well it produced the same result in Sweden. And I am sure that "everyone" hates the incumbents in the US too, so the result would possibly be similar.

<comment><USER8> Likewise in France (see FreeTelecom, pretty much the poster child for line sharing and local loop unbundling)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment> bjelkeman-again The report which is referenced by Endgaget says about fiber penetration in Sweden:

      "Fiber and fiber-LAN networks have a slightly bigger share of the market
      than cable, holding 14% and 13%, respectively. Sweden trails only
      South Korea and Japan in household fiber penetration rates."

      "Municipal networks alone control 20 to 25% of the coverage.
      Among the more than 150 local fiber/LAN networks in 2008, a majority
      are owned by municipal authorities or municipally run companies."

And I think this is probably one of the key factors to high fiber penetration.

My local government owns the fiber, and I paid to connect to it from my house, so I own the last 40 meters. :) And now I can chose from seven companies offering IP services (four which offer services for homes, the others are company offerings only) and four which offer digital-TV services.

92% of apartments in our local community are connected to the fiber network and 37% of the individual houses are. The other houses are likely to use DSL.

<comment><USER9> It's not a silver bullet, though. In Denmark, electrical utilities (semi- private) spend obscene amounts of money digging down fiber, but when fiber arrived at my in laws, it took all of a minute comparing their offer with what they could get over DSL before ticking the "no thanks" box. (The price was at best comparable, and then there was the several hundred dollar connection fee).

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> So this is basically more evidence that government regulation does work (when it's not captured - oil and nuke reg agencies are horribly corrupt).

If there's anything that all folks of political bent should agree on, it should be greater transparency where government and business (ie, moneyed interests) interact - otherwise you get the mess that is the US government "regulation" efforts.

</comment><comment><USER11> For those who think this is going to be an anti-government regulation, libertarian orthodoxy type article, here's the tl;dr:

"government regulators who have forced more competition"

<comment><USER12> Well this is how it happend in Romania:

\</comment></comment><comment></comment><comment>----- __2000 - 2002 __

There was NO regulation. We just threw UTP cables from building to building, and bought external connectivity from bulk sellers. We didn't pay any taxes. We didn't have any signed agreements with "customers". We didn't have any permits from the city council either. There were no employees... heck, we weren't even registered as a business.

We just threw UTP cables through the city like it was in our own backyard. The only problem was after thunderstorms, when there was a shortage of switches to replace the burned ones :) Oh, and from time to time I had to call some customer's mom to ask her to reset the stuck switch hosted by her kid, because half the network couldn't connect to the internet.

Users paid about $10 for 100 mbps connectivity with other users (multiplayer games and movie/mp3 sharing) and 64 kbps internet access.

Basically we were just some highscool/college kids building a LAN, and every user paid a share of the costs. My network had about 200 subscribers and covered a 2x2 km area. Several networks like this one were scattered throughout the city. Every month a couple of new networks appeared, while others bit the dust (including my own).

\</comment><comment></comment><comment>----- __2003 - 2004 __

(By this time me and my friends lost interest in being a "pseudo-ISP", so I can only speak from the POV of a customer)

Networks with 100-300 users began joining together forming networks of 1000+ subscribers. Companies were formed, real sys-admins were hired. Some backbones were now built with fiber optics.

Big companies noticed this and started to complain in the mass-media, calling such networks "illegal". Well, they were partly right (nobody gave a f#ck about building permits and taxes).

Now users paid $10 for 100 mbps connectivity with hundreds and even thousands of other people, and 256 kbps internet access. Big telcos were barely able to offer 128 kbps with a monthly traffic limit.

\</comment><comment></comment><comment>----- __2005 - 2008 __

Big telcos stopped complaining and began building their networks. Then increased their networks speeds, removed the FUP, offered subscriber packages (phoneline + cable + internet access). For $10 you could get a landline and 5 mbps internet.

A lot of city "LANs" couldn't keep up with the big guys and crumbled. Others joined forces and became real ISPs (with tech support, tax payments, ...) and some even managed to obtain money from investment funds. They could still compete with the main ISPs because they offered much better tech support, and the 100 mbps LAN speed was still of huge interest, even if the internet access was limited to 1-10 mbps.

\</comment><comment></comment><comment>----- __2009 - 2010 __

Small ISPs begin implementing Fiber to the Building. Hello Gigabit (well, 1000 mbps with others subscribers only... the internet connection is limited to 20-30 mbps).

Big telcos buy more and more small ISPs, but also continue to improve their infrastructure. Some drop the old cable (with its DOCSIS modems) and begin implementing Fiber to the Building too.

\</comment><comment></comment><comment>----- __Today __

For $10 per month you can get 100 mbps internet access + 5GB of mobile 3G connection. My ISP started installing Fiber Optics to the home (GPON technology) for houses and continues installing Fiber to the Builing (and UTP from there to your apartment) for high buildings. They also began installing WiFi access points through the cities (free access for all subscribers).

\</comment><comment></comment><comment>-----

IN THE END, I WOULD LIKE TO THANK THE ROMANIAN GOVERMENT FOR NOT INTERFERING. And if the large companies will try to form monopolies, I'm sure new ISPs will appear. I don't care about regulations. Thank you.

<comment><USER13> Awesome story. I like the idea of a city or neighborhood LAN with an internet gateway.

This makes a lot of sense, especially when local online businesses want to serve their local community (like a local Groupon or live streaming of the neighborhood's Little League game from multiple cameras).

<comment><USER12> Well, back then we didn't see it as a business. Of course there were also people who knew what they were doing, but if I remember well, my network started with three teenagers wanting to play Quake and Need for Speed. Then more and more people joined... hundreds of them.

Internet access wasn't a priority (most users wanted it for IRC, and there were very few local websites/services anyway). As long as we could share movies and play games, everything was fine.

Today things changed. I think that most users want 100 mbps internet access instead of 10 mbps internet + 1000 mbps LAN. But I'm confident that, if the ISPs fail, people could build their own networks as long as the State doesn't interfere.

The problem with US seems to be that the Government is bullying (through all kinds of regulation) small ISPs in order to protect the big guys.

\</comment></comment></comment><comment>---- EDIT: I have to admit that (in 2003 or so) it felt good when a big telco, with a budget of millions, could barely provide 128 kbps, while the small ISP which I joined was providing 512 kbps internet access + 100 mbps LAN. Today I'm a subscriber of that big telco, because they managed to pull their stuff together and now provide a really good service (at least in my area). But Gov regulation had noting to do with it. It was the competition: improve your service or die. Plain and simple.

</comment><comment><USER14> This is a very interesting article, especially 'dummifying' the complexities of US telecom markets. I used to always wonder why US was so behind in terms of broadband deployment and the answers that we given to me were always around 'density'. However, there are densely populated areas in US that can create better broadband experience.

The challenge here is that the larger telecom companies (AT&T, Verizon) are required by law to sell their loops to other carriers, but there is a lot of CAPEX needed even with the fiber/copper look. It costs around $1000 per subscriber to bring a broadband TV service home even from the neighborhood (connecting from neighborhood to home and all the equipment in the home). This high CAPEX is a barrier for new entrants in this market.

Another reason why US is behind is that the US Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is not allowing the telecom companies in US to charge users based on their tiered internet usage. Therefore, price per mbps is flat no matter how much bandwidth you use. On the other hand, European telecom companies are allowed to charge extra for higher bandwidth usage.

Once these two barriers fall (cloud based home TV management and tiered pricing) there will be more competition in US.

<comment><USER8> > On the other hand, European telecom companies are allowed to charge extra > for higher bandwidth usage.

These are getting rarer and rarer these days. And the countries which raced ahead dropped quotas early, or never had quotas in the first place (France for instance, second ADSL market in Europe, standard ADSL contracts are all unmetered and metered never represented any significant portion of the market).

Even Belgium, historically one of the worst countries in europe quotas-wise (supposedly due to the very low level of computer-based production, meaning ISPs can get no peering), is moving away from quotas.

> Once these two barriers fall (cloud based home TV management and tiered > pricing) there will be more competition in US.

No.

<comment><USER14> Masklinn, If my first point was not correct, then why is there so much lobbying effort and dollars being spent on the 'net neutrality' issue?

Also, just out of curiosity, want to know why the 'No' for the two barriers and if you identified something different that would change the landscape.

<comment><USER8> > Masklinn, If my first point was not correct, then why is there so much > lobbying effort and dollars being spent on the 'net neutrality' issue?

Net neutrality has _nothing whatsoever_ to do with quotas.

> Also, just out of curiosity, want to know why the 'No' for the two barriers

The first one simply does not make sense, the second one is at best irrelevant and at worst counter-productive (countries using quotas are historically the worst ones in terms of penetration and improvements over time, they're solely a way for carriers to fuck with above-average customers)

> and if you identified something different that would change the landscape.

Bundled line sharing (mandated at acceptable prices by regulations), they let new isps start out as purely virtual and ramp up their operation by building their physical network over time (DSLAMs and local loop unbundling) instead of having to front these, and affordable local loop unbundling.

Those are what triggered internet access improvements in european countries with a former telco monopoly (just about all of them). As well as policy and explicit political drive for increased competition in the sector.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Free markets need government regulation in order to create competitive environments where the customer is served best. (The "blame the government" in the title refers to blaming the US government for not creating those conditions, and crediting the European governments for doing so.)

<comment><USER16> I think it's a clever, ironic use of blaming the government- in the U.S., big government is always seen as an impediment and to be dreaded, but the problem is not for meddling bureaucrats, but hands-off ones who allow corporations free rein.

<comment><USER17> You mean the governments that constrain through force the market so that only a few monopolistic entities are present?

<comment><USER16> The problem is caused by bad government, but the solution is good government, as exemplified by the BT story. A completely free market would lead to a monopoly in broadband anyways. The irony here is that the government is not doing anything to solve the problem.

<comment><USER17> Government getting the hell out of the way of people voluntarily interacting the marketplace is the best situation.

For example: cable easements. Get rid of them. Get rid of all easements. Without them, you would have a variety of options and methods of gaining access to a number of utilities (internet, power, etc) as well as new services that have not yet been created.

<comment><USER18> Easements and the monopoly they sanction are the reasons that everyone in an area can get service at all. If they had to write a private contract that would cover the absurdly high cost of laying cable, it would make a cell phone contract look like a love note. It would have to be a covenant imposed on every tenant of the building for many years. It would be just like regulation, only written by people with an immediate incentive to do it as abusively as possible.

Real-world markets lack infinite competition and perfect transparency, so they pretty routinely fail to deliver optimal solutions. Many famously wealthy people got there by exploiting strategies to make markets fail.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Where can I find out more about the "last mile" wireless links near the end of the video?

I will be moving to an retirement area that has a summer population of a few hundred and a winter population of many thousands. There is no internet currently aside from cellular. I wanted to look into long link wifi, but only have found expensive point to point solutions that are multiple thousands of dollars.

I don't even know if it is possible. The closest town is only a few miles, but I doubt Comcast is going to let me share a few business class accounts to all those users.

I was going to try to keep it free to near free, a few bucks a month and cover the equipment costs on my end up to a few thousand dollars. If I can't hook into cable without violation of TOS, then I have to go right to the telco and lease a line, which I have no idea the costs of these days. I would need at least several hundred Mb/s I believe. Hopefully there is a datacenter or ISP nearby that would allow me to work with them to put something on the roof or on a neighbors property.

Suggestions on resources?

<comment><USER20> Start here: <http://www.dslreports.com/faq/wisp/2_How_to_start>

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> There is a direct correlation between competition and lower prices in this market. The US has little to no decent competition in many markets. Therefore ISPs rip people off.

If you think Western Europe has cheap broadband try going to small countries in Eastern Europe like Croatia, Slovenia, Latvia or Estonia. I've never seen cheaper BW in Europe than in Latvia.

<comment><USER4> Wow - 200Mbps fiber for about £25 a month - that's pretty good!

[http://www.lattelecom.lv/majai/internets/optiskais_internets...](http://www.lattelecom.lv/majai/internets/optiskais_internets/)

<comment><USER22> Lithuania here - 25 pounds/month gives me unrestricted 100 Mbps, next month they're tripling all speeds for no additional costs. The one-step-cheaper option is 90% of the cost for only 10% of the speed, so I opted for this one instead.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> On one hand, more government regulation brings things like Sarbanes-Oxley. On the other hand, you get faster, cheaper Internet access, and arguably more jobs from that.

This is why I cannot bring myself to identify with a political party.

<comment><USER24> This is why I really don't like it when people treat "government regulation" like it's something that you have "more of" or "less of". Government regulation created the slow, expensive Internet access in the US, government regulation helped create faster, cheaper internet access in the UK and Europe. Government regulation isn't an atomic entity that either exists or doesn't, or there's "more" or "less". There's good regulation and bad regulation, and sometimes the best regulation is none at all but that's not always the case.

As a little-l libertarian, I observe that when markets have real competition, consumers and society benefit and even the providers globally benefit. When the free market is allowed to be monopolized, consumers and society loses. I believe that it is a valid use of regulation to force markets to remain non- monopolized, even if it is a "natural monopoly". Regulations to encourage this are good; regulations that enhance the monopoly rather than busting it are bad, and there's no way in which I am being a hypocrite about the goodness of regulation.

(The general metric of good regulation is "benefits exceed costs", and the general metric of bad regulation is of course the opposite. However, there is legitimate room to argue about some of the details, in particular costs and benefits to exactly whom. But even within those constraints, it's hard to crash your economy with regulations whose benefits routinely exist costs, and easy to crash with the other way around, so you really have to have a pretty freakin' sweet system before these arguments are really the biggest problems you are facing. We do not have a such a system.)

<comment><USER25> _There's good regulation and bad regulation, and sometimes the best regulation is none at all but that's not always the case._

That's the key point there. Unless of course you're against regulation or government on principle.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> I'm mentioning this from a point of complete ignorance but why can't this sort of proposal be used for cable operators as well (both for broadband and television)? Getting to choose from several competitors on who gets my tv and broadband service would I expect create better plans than the current "pay for 100 channels but only use 3" that most if not all US consumers currently get.

<comment><USER9> DSL uses the phone lines to the central, of which there is (at least) one per household, so you just need to hook into a different router at the central. This is easy. For cable you have one cable running down the street, and access is binary, either you have everything or you don't. It's not practical to force the cable owner to "open up", like you can force the phone line owner.

Digital is changing this, very quickly.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> _When Black was named Telecommunications Adjudicator in 2004, he fought on two fronts to break the BT logjam. First, he used his own experience as a former employee of the telecom giant to push for change from the inside. When that wasn't enough, he used the bully pulpit provided by his government post to embarrass BT in public. He publicized the company's failure to meet goals. Reporters loved the story of the government regulator holding the giant firm's feet to the fire._

I wonder if there are similar tales in the U.S. of the brave little bureaucrat against the hulking titan of industry. Seems rather countercultural.

</comment><comment><USER27> Government regulation is the cause of slow US broadband. The laws are set up to _prevent_ competition. If these laws were removed speeds would increase dramatically for those that desired them.

</comment><comment><USER28> It is somewhat weird reading about DSL in 21 sentury. Atleast i hope ISDN is dead. Down here, in Lithuania, 50% of population (or maybe even more) has the ability to use 300 mbps fiber for only 30 eur/month. No data caps, no shaping.

</comment><comment><USER29> This does not seem like much of an explanation. CLECs have existed in the US for over a decade now. In Chicago many of us have about a dozen options. None of them are very competitive with EU providers when it comes to price. A few are probably comparable when it comes to speed.

I have noticed that even when there is competition most people will stick with Comcast or AT&T and bitch about it.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Competitive_local_exchange_carr...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Competitive_local_exchange_carrier)

</comment><comment><USER30> This article surprises me. I'm Dutch and I always thought that in the US, everybody had super awesome broadband for nearly no money.

Not sure why, though.

</comment><comment><USER31> It's worth highlighting that although broadband over-the-phone is competitive in the UK, the cable internet service (which was built with US money) is a virtual monopoly and there's no sign of its network being unbundled.

<comment><USER13> It is also the least expensive way to build out infrastructure (US cable).

</comment></comment><comment><USER32> France is one of the most regulated countries and the price for internet access is still the cheapest in Western Europe. So, no, I wouldn't blame the government for your prices.

</comment><comment><USER33> 1\. Foreign call centers. My parents are now too scared to move because they (foolishly) assume everyone uses them. Talktalk and BT do, low quality lines to South Africa and India. 2\. I practically live on the dividing line between two exchanges. The one I'm not on is really advanced, lots of choice, but not the one I am on.

There are various ideas floating around, which I've never heard of since, such as iPlayer and Steam caches at every exchange. I wish they'd stop caring so much about speed (I get 5.5mb/s in speedtests, over 1.2 (directly, the line isn't) miles of copper) and move onto ping and caches.

</comment><comment><USER34> Or more specifically, blame the government we get because of the way we finance and run political campaigns.

</comment><comment><USER35> Global report (excludes Africa). US is dirt cheap compared to internet pricing here...

</comment><comment><USER17> The only reason we don't have most metropolitan areas with gigabit fiber to the door is almost entirely teleco/cable easements.

The day you stop government from mandating one company per area or delimiting it to a small few monopolistic entities and allow a free market is the day we stop dealing with the hell that is becoming us.

The answer is quite simply LESS government, dammit.

<comment><USER36> That clearly isn't the answer, as the article spends many paragraphs explaining.

The answer is "do things that encourage competition and investment". The US government fails at this, but it is neither a limitation of government _per se_ or easily achieved by private enterprise alone.

<comment><USER17> The article argues that good situations resulted from government action. The reality is that while these situations are viewed as good, they are not neccessarily the best. Only when individuals are able to voluntarily interact in the market do the best services and products meet the best prices and innovation is at its highest. One of the main factors that does not permit government from being able to exist in a market in a positive way in comparison is due to a complete lack of price model interaction. Government (by its very nature) does not depend on consumer response (price model). It thus has no way of allocating resources as efficiently as it would were it to exist without tax dollars (confiscated property, not gained through competition or voluntary interaction). As such, it cannot gauge weather or not the things it is doing are the best or the most effective to meet the demand.

There are mountains of writing on the basics of free markets and Austrian Economics, if you would like me to link you to some resources.

<comment><USER17> Ah yes! -2! Let's outpace reddit down the website memory hole!

I mean really people, this is basic economics.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> An issue that appears to be overlooked is that the US is much less densely populated and has a much higher overall population and land area to cover. I favor the way many European countries are able to handle things like this (and healthcare, and transportation, etc) but the US is hardly similar to any of those countries. We're operating at a completely different scale here. Not to mention political and cultural differences and issues of states' rights versus the federal government's rights.

<comment><USER8> > An issue that appears to be overlooked

It wasn't overlooked in the article, you overlooked it in your reading:

> Meanwhile, the size of the U.S. may be a red herring. Most of the region > between Boston and Washington is as densely populated as most of Europe and > the UK. So is the California coast between San Francisco and San Diego. And > so is the region of the Midwest centered on Chicago. Those areas are home to > about a quarter of all Americans. In other words, we live in a big country, > but a lot of it is relatively empty space.

> The argument that the U.S. is too spread out is nonsense, according to > Herman Wagter, one of the Netherlands' most prominent evangelists for next- > generation broadband. He thinks there's something else going on in Verizon's > and AT&T's opposition to competition at home: They're afraid of it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER38> Here's why: population density is much higher in Europe. The price per mile to put cables into the ground has a lower bound that cannot be breached. The same length of cable will connect far more customers in high-population areas than it will in rural Wyoming. It is not valid to compare Europe with the USA in this regard because they truly are apples and oranges geographically.

I assert that broadband would be faster and cheaper anywhere given true capitalism (that is, a system where people trade honestly, at a profit, with the only government involvement being the courts [no regulation to give corrupt businesses and activists the upper hand].)

<comment><USER16> The article actually mentions that point:

 _Meanwhile, the size of the U.S. may be a red herring. Most of the region between Boston and Washington is as densely populated as most of Europe and the UK. So is the California coast between San Francisco and San Diego. And so is the region of the Midwest centered on Chicago. Those areas are home to about a quarter of all Americans. In other words, we live in a big country, but a lot of it is relatively empty space._

<comment><USER38> I don't buy that. One reason is that the article fails to account for the taxes that are put on phone bills that subsidize rural telecommunications. Another is that the regulations that force American telcos to support low- density projects have direct effects (someone subsidizes folks in Wyoming, and that invariably ends up being people living elsewhere) as well as indirect ones (regulating a business changes its culture for the worse. Risk takers get pushed out.)

<comment><USER39> The Federal USF Surcharge is what, US$1 per residential line per month? That's the only nationwide subsidy program I know of. Even if it's more - $5/month? $20/month? - that's nowhere near enough to account for the disparity in network performance in the Northeast seaboard states compared to, say Sweden.

I'm an American living in Sweden. I'm in a city and can get 200Mbit/s for US$80/month. Checking Comcast for Boston and I don't see any option above 105Mbit and that costs US$105/month. That's not a simple difference in subsidies.

In any case, Sweden is _not_ a densely packed country. It's about 54 people/sq. mile and the US is 83 people/sq. mile. Massachusetts is 830 people/sq. mile.

Why doesn't Boston have better internet service than here? It can't be subsidies for universal access for a far-flung population since the surcharge isn't that high. It can't be population density since otherwise Boston or any other large US city would have better connectivity than here.

The point of the survey is to analyze those reason, and you drew your conclusion after only reading a summary of it.

The objections you raise come up every time there's a cross-national comparison of internet access. They are accounted for, and the US is still behind, and falling further behind.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER40> It blows my mind that anyone in a startup community, which is all about creating value and making good investments, would suggest that the government tax him (!) and invest in broadband infrastructure instead of that person investing in it himself.

<comment><USER41> I've read your sentence perhaps 10 times and I can't figure out what it means in relation to the article. Are you saying telecom incumbents are startups? Does the "him" refer to telecom incumbents? Are you suggesting that the government is taxing startups that are trying to invest in telecoms? Or that the government is investing in telecoms (which is very much not what the article is about)?

<comment><USER40> I actually did read the article. I wrote that comment before there were any comments, in anticipation of comments in support of subsidized broadband. It was a risky venture, for sure. Heh</comment></comment></comment>


GCP arrives in India with launch of Mumbai region - <AUTHOR> https://cloudplatform.googleblog.com/2017/10/GCP-arrives-in-India-with-launch-of-Mumbai-region.html <comment><USER4> > With the opening of this Mumbai region, Indian customers are now able to buy > these services directly in Indian rupees.

Somewhat related: I was forced to switch to GCP for hosting my static website because of lack of payment options. AWS doesn't allow you to prepay. The only way to settle your dues is using a credit card. My international debit card usually works everywhere but it didn't in case of AWS. I never felt the need to get a credit card. I had to waste many hours in moving to GCP because there wasn't a way I could use to pay.

It's funny how I have failed often to buy something online because payment options are not international friendly. Latest in this case was New Yorker subscription. Every address combination I tried said the same thing: "Address is invalid", even though I had ticked the option for International subscription. Support was hopeless and in the end, I had to go without it. It's like I am saying, "Shut up and take my money" and people at the other end are tone-deaf to it.

<comment><USER5> I am always curious about why people don't use credit cards more. Would you please explain your reason?

<comment><USER6> 1\. It doesn't make any sense to allow yourself to risk spending more than you have

2\. They're more prone to abuse: if somebody gets hold of the numbers on your card (whether by a leak or hack or by old-fashioned pickpocketing), no further PIN, password or 2FA token is required

3\. The only use for them is online spending outside Europe, and even then the number of websites that require them is rapidly shrinking (PayPal can work with bank accounts, and Stripe now supports SEPA direct debit and local payment methods such as SOFORT (Germany), iDEAL (Netherlands) and Bancontact (Belgium))

4\. They cost money (see point 3, people don't like paying for things they don't use)

<comment><USER7> 1\. This just requires control.

2\. In the US at least, fraud isn't the responsibility of the card owner

3\. That's true

4\. There are plenty of cards with no annual fee and net negative cost through rewards

<comment><USER5> +1.

The cost of the risk of fraud is bundled into the ~2-3% transaction fee.

1\. As for 1, it's self control. 3\. The only use is not for online shopping, it's for every day use. Cash can get stolen, credit card can, but you can then cancel it. 4\. Plenty of cards are free.

<comment><USER6> 1\. Yes, but it's easier to just not have one.

3\. For every day use, there is your bank card which comes for free with your bank account. (A growing number of people don't use cash daily, and there are even people who have ditched cash altogether and gone card-only.)

4\. I have not run into any free CCs offered in my country (Netherlands). If you have, please point me to them.

As for fraud, it's not only about the risk, but also about the hassle. I have heard of people who had their credit card suddenly cancelled because of fraudulent transactions, and the banks will only send a replacement to your home address, even when you are travelling! The risk that this happens with a bank card is much lower, as entering your PIN proves that you authorize the transaction.

<comment><USER5> Definitely not the experience in united states. I was offered to cancel my card for a similar situation, and they offered to send it to my country.

I guess a bunch of countries are behind USA in credit card offerings. I am from Turkey, and situation in Turkey is very similar to united states - <USER2> cards are very very common.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> The biggest tech hub in India is in Bangalore, but both AWS and GCP chose Mumbai. Because of proximity to international data cables?

<comment><USER9> The datacenters should be where the users are, not where the developers are.

<comment><USER10> By locating them at major internet exchange points they are doing exactly that, being closer to more users.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> This is amazing! I am really excited to see this happen from the big three. Amazon, Google and Azure.

<comment><USER12> I wish they did billing from an Indian entity with GST as well instead of hitting us with massive exchange rate issues

<comment><USER13> That's part of the announcement, under "Pay in local currency": GCP now supports billing in INR.

(Disclaimer: I work in GCP.)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> gcping.com still shows less latency to Singapore than Mumbai - From Hyderabad, India.

<comment><USER15> You are probably on Airtel or one of the providers that exclusively peers with Airtel at the Chennai location for International traffic.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> $GOOG employees: any eta on the California region?

<comment><USER17> Why do you need a California region? There's already a west coast datacenter in Oregon. I'm guessing the latency differences would be likely negligible. That said there's plans for a Los Angeles region here: [https://cloud.google.com/about/locations/](https://cloud.google.com/about/locations/)

(Disclaimer: I am a Google employee, but totally not working on datacenter stuff.)

<comment><USER18> The Pacific northwest has all of that delicious, cheap, reliable, non- polluting hydroelectric power. It's really a logical location for regional data centers, and Google is far from the only company making that same decision.

I agree with you, I'm not seeing the big draw of California, especially given the much more expensive electricity plus greater earthquake risk.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> No GPU Instances sadly. I use AWS P2 from US west region and sometimes the transfer speed to and fro my system is really low.

</comment><comment><USER20> I am really excited to see this happen from the big three. Amazon, Google and Azure.

</comment><comment><USER21> I read the title as GOP and was incredibly confused :D

That said, I'm curious about why they choose Mumbai (similar to @amiturk) - <USER3> it cable access, politics, land cost, ...?

</comment><comment><USER22> This is awesome! Are there any plans to launch in Delhi region as well?

</comment><comment><USER23> Is there any way to see which facilities Google Cloud is using?

</comment><comment><USER24> Google is following AWS ,. Microsoft is also following AWS . Which is not necessarily bad but doesn't speak much of their innovation . The only play they have against AWS is fear mongering about vendor lock-in which is highly debatable anyways .

<comment><USER25> Oh, give me a break... where did Kubernetes come from? Whose LB solution relies on DNS and whose uses BGP/ECMP for regional routing and failover? Who offered HIPPA compliance without dedicated hosts and stupid markups first? Who created BigQuery?

Look, both Google and AWS have areas where each excels over the other, but to say that Google isn't innovating is to say you are basically ignorant of their offering.

<comment><USER26> NLB DynamoDB EMR even HIPAA without dedicated was on AWS first ... whatever AWS does Google is trying to do better. Granted Kubernetes was google product but what was so innovative about it when Docker and Linux container was already there for a long time ... and now AWS has ECS

<comment><USER25> You are factually incorrect about HIPPA and dedicated hosts. Amazon only switched to the non-dedicated approach this year some time. Google has been that way for at least two (if not longer).

EMR is basically hosted Hadoop, which is an open source implementation of a system Google created and made famous.

Docker is based on cgroups, which was largely contributed by Google engineers. And anyone deploying docker for distributed systems will tell you that you need some kind of scheduler/orchestrator.

Amazon excels at packaging and bundling the work of others, and provides a fairly robust enterprise management layer on top of it. CloudFormation, for example, is much better than GCP's Deployment Manager. Google is quickly catching up in the enterprise management space as well, as they take on larger customers who demand these abilities, but I still feel like AWS has a bit more capability there.

You probably should have listed Lambda, which was a nice idea out of AMZN.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


OpenBSD 6.3 released - <AUTHOR> https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-announce&m=152267725618055 <comment><USER2> Congratulations and thanks to the OpenBSD developers for yet another great release!

</comment><comment><USER3> From the release notes:

> o Support the sun4v hypervisor interrupt cookie API, adding support for > SPARC T7-1/2/4 machines.

Who is running OpenBSD on a big expensive SPARC T7 and why? I'm genuinely curious as to what possible use cases there are which make this a desirable combination.

<comment><USER4> It was probably for testing, but that platform supports partitioning up the hardware through LDOMs, which OpenBSD supports as both a host and guest.

[https://www.tedunangst.com/flak/post/OpenBSD-on-a- Sun-T5120](https://www.tedunangst.com/flak/post/OpenBSD-on-a-Sun-T5120) (Not expired, Ted runs his own CA)

[http://man.openbsd.org/man8/sparc64/ldomctl.8](http://man.openbsd.org/man8/sparc64/ldomctl.8)

<comment><USER5> unrelated, but I found his post about running his own CA quite interesting: [https://www.tedunangst.com/flak/post/moving-to- https](https://www.tedunangst.com/flak/post/moving-to-https)

<comment><USER6> Actually, being special is sometimes just boring and annoying.

>Do we really want an internet where the use of encryption requires authorization?

No, it doesn't require, it provides identification and that's a huge benefit. We are all far better by having it as a standard. Just configure Let's Encrypt and stop annoying your readers.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I apologize for being an ignorant for so many years but... who is the OpenBSD target audience? In which areas it is the most popular OS? I worked with Windows, GNU/Linux and macOS (OSX) but never tried OpenBSD.

<comment><USER8> BSD people, usually networking. And people who like security (though OpenBSD has detractors). It was used a lot as firewall for critical infrastructure a few years ago, perhaps still is.

Also, installation was quite fast if you knew what you were doing.

<comment><USER9> It has been my daily driver on laptops and desktops for eight years. I have run home servers with it as well.

<comment><USER10> It's my primary desktop as well. I like it because it's low churn, everything I need just works, and most of the configurations have sane defaults so config files tend to be short and simple or not needed at all.

I don't hack on the internals or build my own ports, I just use it. It stays out of my way and I like that.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I notice the new Broadcom Wifi bwfm(4) drivers. Anyone with better knowledge of the project know what hardware is supported by that? The manpage doesn't mention specific chips: [https://man.openbsd.org/bwfm.4](https://man.openbsd.org/bwfm.4)

<comment><USER12> [http://cvsweb.openbsd.org/cgi- bin/cvsweb/src/sys/dev/pci/if_...](http://cvsweb.openbsd.org/cgi- bin/cvsweb/src/sys/dev/pci/if_bwfm_pci.c)

indicates:

      static const struct pci_matchid bwfm_pci_devices[] = {
    	  { PCI_VENDOR_BROADCOM, PCI_PRODUCT_BROADCOM_BCM43602 },
    	  { PCI_VENDOR_BROADCOM, PCI_PRODUCT_BROADCOM_BCM4350 },
      };

those are hex codes defined in:

[http://cvsweb.openbsd.org/cgi- bin/cvsweb/src/sys/dev/pci/pci...](http://cvsweb.openbsd.org/cgi- bin/cvsweb/src/sys/dev/pci/pcidevs)

as:

      vendor	BROADCOM	0x14e4	Broadcom
      product BROADCOM BCM4350	0x43a3	BCM4350
      product BROADCOM BCM43602	0x43ba	BCM43602

so if you're not sure, checking boot up dmesg on OpenBSD or lspci on linux should give the hexcode of your device which should match 0x14e4 + one of the other two..

<comment><USER11> Ooh! Interesting. I've a ~2 year old Macbook Pro with the 43602 chipset. Would be lovely to be able to run OpenBSD on it without wifi dongles.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Busy upgrading machines now, lots of nice new things.

Looking forward to checking out the new execpromises in pledge. I use pledge in all my C stuff and have added it to a few other apps. Thanks OpenBSD devs!

<comment><USER14> > Looking forward to checking out the new execpromises in pledge

Interesting that they just changed the interface from `int pledge(const char * promises, const char * paths[]);` to `int pledge(const char * promises, const char * execpromises);`. I guess that is the power they have by being a BSD and integrated system, they do not worry about userland compatibility.

<comment><USER15> The pledge(2) manpage for 6.2 and earlier states:

"BUGS. The path whitelist feature is not available at this time."

So the second argument was previously unused, and thus could be repurposed without hurting backwards compatability.

<comment><USER10> zokier's point is still correct though. OpenBSD is a complete system, kernel + userland. You upgrade in lockstep.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment> rob-olmos sshd(8): Add "expiry-time" option for authorized_keys files to allow for expiring keys. -- hooray!

Can someone help explain what the "routing domain" is?

<comment><USER16> man rdomain to start, though unfortunately you kind of need to already understand rdomains to fully understand the docs. Basically it's a network partitioning/virtualization tool. Two computers can have two routing tables. rdomains lets one computer have two routing tables. Each process is in one rdomain or another which determines where its traffic goes and how it sees the network.

<comment><USER17> Interfaces can be places into rdomains aswell

<comment><USER18> So.. they are like linux network namespaces?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> I actually searched the release notes for ipv4 due to that awful april fools gag. That wasn't funny. ;)

<comment><USER2> I don't get it, Sorry. Can you elaborate? Thanks!

EDIT: Nevermind: [https://marc.info/?l=openbsd- cvs&m=152256582629837&w=2](https://marc.info/?l=openbsd- cvs&m=152256582629837&w=2)

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> 6.3 Song: Maybe...

<comment><USER21> no more songs. :(

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> Currently running my VPN in Linux on a pi. Gonna see if I get openbsd to run on the pi.

<comment><USER10> [https://www.openbsd.org/arm64.html](https://www.openbsd.org/arm64.html)

</comment></comment><comment> cmb-prgmr As of this morning, customers can install OpenBSD 6.3 on a Prgmr.com VPS using our updated netboot installer. [https://prgmr.com/blog/2018/04/03/distributions- updated.html](https://prgmr.com/blog/2018/04/03/distributions-updated.html)</comment>


Show HN: We are building an Uber for laundry - <AUTHOR> http://washioapp.com Hi Guys, We are building an Uber for laundry. Please help us out and join our beta.  Thanks for your support. J <comment><USER2> How much do you charge? Can you put a numeric dollar figure right on your front page instead of (or perhaps next to) where you say "Save up to 30% versus traditional wash and fold. With door-to-door service!" ? Thanks.

<comment><AUTHOR> HI Non-EU Citzen, pricing changes per market so there is no unviversal rate. It is however up to 30% cheaper than standrad fluff and fold locations near you. (depending on where you are ;)

<comment><USER2> How much for Sunnyvale, Mountain View, or Palo Alto?</comment></comment></comment>


Meet Karma Go – The Internet in Your Pocket, with Nationwide LTE - <AUTHOR> https://blog.yourkarma.com/announcing-karma-go-lte-hotspot

<comment><USER2> Sounds neat, and the device itself is reasonably priced ($99 for the next 30 days). $14/GiB isn't a steal, though. There are better-priced data plans out there (T-Mobile has a 11GiB plan for $70, for instance).

<comment><USER3> Depends if you use exactly 11GiB a month, no more no less. Many people use a hotspot more one month, less another month. 11GiB for $70 is absolutely a great deal for some people, but not most people.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> > WiFi shouldn't be something you have to hunt for, worry about, or plan > around.

I can definitely relate to that.

I will order a Karma Go as soon as they are ready. $150 seems like a steal.</comment>


Ask HN: Alternatives to SOPA? - <AUTHOR>

If you haven't already, I'd recommend taking a look at some of the 12/5 SOPA hearing replays. See: http://www.reddit.com/r/SOPA/comments/nf5vo/complete_videos_from_1215_sopa_hearing/
I've found the beginning Part 4 especially interesting. For example, at around 11:30 in the video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sc_cGRZNjLA&feature=relmfu), the chair says that he is open to alternatives.

  "If there is an alternative out there that the tech community,
   or individuals within it, or companies within it, wants to
   offer that would be a better way for them to make a
   contribution and help us fight this crime on the Internet...
   I've been looking for that"
 So instead of boycotting SOPA, failing to implement it, or petitioning against it, why don't we try to propose alternatives?
If you had the opportunity to pitch an alternative to the House Judiciary Committee, what would it be? <comment><USER2> [https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2011/12/alternative-sopa- open-...](https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2011/12/alternative-sopa-open-process- befitting-open-internet)

[http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/12/the-open- act...](http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/12/the-open-act- significantly-flawed-but-more-salvageable-than-sopaprotect-ip.ars)</comment>


Ask HN: Are non-free Slack Communities worth the cost? - <AUTHOR>

Hi HN ! I see a lot of Slack based communities annonced here. A lot of them aren't free. Are they worth the cost ? Could you share with us your exepriences ?<p>Thanks and have a good day ! <comment><USER2> I've never seen this, but I think IRC would be the de-facto alternate to these "hip" communities.

In the end, you will go where you can benefit most, so if paying $5 bucks a month gets you speaking to smarter people, folks will do it.

I still think IRC is the place you go to for tech-talk (sadly everyone has ended up on Freenode though).

<comment><USER3> Why's Freenode sad? (genuinely curious)

<comment><USER2> Although it is my opinion on the situation, having all IRC centralized onto 1 "network" kind of reduces the redundancy that many different networks would bring by just existing.</comment></comment></comment>


Michael Arrington beaten to top spot on Forbes top 25 web celebs... by Perez Hilton - <AUTHOR> http://www.forbes.com/2009/01/29/perez-hilton-celebrity-technology-webceleb09_0129_lavandeira.html

<comment><USER2> I met Perez at the airport mid-month on a layover in Minneapolis. For a z-list actual celebrity, I found him incredibly full of himself. A woman, obviously a fan and just tickled to death, asked if she could have her picture taken with him. He said 'fine', but she would have to come down to his level because he wasn't going to stand up for him.

Thanks, but I can do without celebrities like this.

</comment><comment><USER3> Except 3, rest all are bloggers... I wonder how come youtube celebs (like Chad Vader, Obama Girl) are not included in web-celebs ...

</comment><comment><USER4> I'm amazed Perez isn't discussed more around here - it may not be a "technical" success, but his site is ridiculously popular.

He's achieved something most startups would die for, but rarely design for - mainstream "your mother" traffic.

<comment><USER5> The mechanisms of popularity are interesting for hackers (at least for me), but hardly anyone understands them. Adding more anecdotes and celebrity gossip isn't helpful.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Has anybody observed cheating? - <AUTHOR> So I'm writing an article for the Chronicle of Higher Education (a journal for educators) about my experiences with people cheating in class.
While I don't want to generalize, I have seen far more incidents of cheating in my engineering classes than I have seen in my physics classes.
For the article, I want to focus about what can be done in the classroom.
I'm curious as to what you all think about this issue and what you have experienced. <comment><USER2> I went to a very large public university. The engineering program was so-so, and they valued ABET over actual learning.

Senior Design was known as the "gauntlet," not necessarily due to the actual building of something, but for the 100-page research paper that they required. They assumed that if each member of the team writes about 25 pages, then they _must_ understand the underlying concepts.

This didn't affect me as much as it did my team. As you can tell, my long- windedness knows no bounds when behind a keyboard. My team however had the collective grammatical know-how of [insert punchline here].

It was my job to proofread the paper. It was straight copy and paste. Utter bullshit.

And I understand that it was my ethical obligation to correct this, if not report it. But it was clearly stated at the beginning of the class: "if one fails, you all fail." I was not prepared to deal with that. So I compromised my standards and just finished the assignment.

I knew that there wouldn't be repercussions; all they do is count the number of pages, make sure there isn't too much whitespace, and that there's no more than 50% of space devoted to pictures.

What can be done? With this particular example there was a large discrepancy with the overall goals that _should have_ been, the goals that were, and the metrics that they measured it.

</comment><comment><USER3> The most serious form of cheating I ever experienced was Junior year in high school. It was a Spanish 3 class taught by an eldarly women, who reportedly had a stroke over the summer (which I attribute the entire incident to as I can only hope no sane person would do what she did.)

Anyway, she was not teaching the class. I would go in there and sit and she would mumble on in English about nothing in particular. After about three weeks of this, I got a bunch of students together and we all complained to the head of the Spanish Language department (large school, many spanish classes). He said okay, and he told the teacher he was going to observe the class.

Well, the day he observed was the first day she taught the class anything. Of course, it was the material we should of known after a month of Spanish 3 so everybody had trouble following.

This went on three or four times until midterm exams. For the midterm, we had a standardized spanish test. Since he hadn't taught us anything, except when being observed, students knew nothing. I studied my butt off but that didn't matter. She stood in front of the class and read all the answers from the test.

I complained to the school and they had a huge investigation, and basically thought I lied about the whole thing. Why would a teacher give the entire class the answers? The real part that gets me is that nobody had the integrity to come forward and complain. They had to discretely question students.

Long story short, truth came to light and she found out I was the one who reported her. She was not fired, but kept "teaching". For some insane reason, she started changing the answers on my tests and quizes so I started out scoring everybody by huge margins.

In the end, everybody who had her as a teacher failed the final for the class, but the school system changed all our grades to As in some weird sort of cover up.

She still teaches to this day, at a different school, however.

</comment><comment><USER4> The best case I've seen was at a certain SAT center. A group of 5 people went together with the idea to copy off each other. However, the proctor had each one draw a number from a hat to determine where he was going to sit. Since they ended up sitting in different parts of the room, the plan was thwarted.

A few minutes later, the proctor realized she had messed up the seating. People were supposed to seat on every other row, but there were two rows one right after the other. She said "Why don't you move around a bit?" at which point everyone got up and the 5 people in the group sat together.

All of them had a 790.

</comment><comment><USER5> I think cheating is the tip of the iceberg, the root problem being that the system over-emphasizes marks. Students who genuinely care about learning the material have no incentive to cheat. Cheating is just the symptom; the cause is the prevailing attitude that high marks are the ultimate goal of school.

If marks and learning were perfectly correlated it wouldn't be a problem, but trying to quantify something as abstract as knowledge is bound to have a large margin of error which students will exploit (by cheating or otherwise) if the incentives encourage it.

<comment><USER6> Amen. The worst aspect is that the system rewards mediocrity. Real brilliance is often punished as (or along with) out of bounds behaviour. To add insult to injury, the education systems of the world have also proven to be very resilient against change so far. School and college have seen almost zero change over the last century in large parts of the world - no wonder they're not a good fit for the internet world anymore.

Real progress has only been made in a few countries, Scandinavia comes to mind. The success in these countries shows that the rest of the world could greatly benefit from opening up...

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> In my engineering classes, almost all the tests were open book and open notes. The hardest classes only had two problems per exam and the teacher wrote those questions the day of the exam - so cheating wasn't really an option, which would explain the 30% pass rate in some of the classes... We also had to walk through six feet of snow, uphill, both ways.

<comment><USER8> uphill, both ways?

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> The funniest cheating I have seen in a "class room" was during a philosophy class. Tests for the class were multiple choice and given out on a computer. Every student for some reason good two guesses for each question and there were five answers. This meant that you needed to work with two other people and you could get all the answers right. So during the tests you would hear. Fred - "A" nope. Stan - "B" nope, Jeff - "C" yes. Then everyone would enter C for question one and then repeat.

It was quite hilarious actually.

</comment><comment><USER10> Well for tests, let students have a formula sheet. I don't understand why in this day and age we need to learn everything by heart, when in the real world everything is 1 search query away.

Or you can just forbid all TI calculators with memory, and just have them work with a $10 special(but thats just a way to screw over the kids).

Then you can have smaller classes. Its a little harder to cheat in a 20 person class, compared to a 300 person auditorium.

For big projects etc, split those in a lot of parts. This way the students won't be tempted to cheat, when they remember that they have a 40 page paper due tomorrow.

<comment><USER11> "Well for tests, let students have a formula sheet. I don't understand why in this day and age we need to learn everything by heart, when in the real world everything is 1 search query away."

I think this is exactly the problem. When formula sheets are allowed it is reinforced that you need not learn the material, but instead just know that you'll be able to plug and chug. Sure, you may be able to look it up later, but in class students should truly understand the material not simply know where to plug in which numbers. However, if you truly know the material intuition and the ability to derive the formulas will give evidence that you truly understand the material.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> My brother had an issue where he had finished a programming assignment early. Some other people found out and asked for help. Being the good-natured (totally naive) freshman he was, he sat down and started to explain his own code to them. Sure enough, they ended up asking the age old question, "I just need to look at it for a while. Could you just send me the code?" Nothing happened until grades came out and he failed. Weeks of interrogations and protests later, he finally cleared his name.

Moral of the story? Never send a copy of your code.

<comment><USER13> I'm not sure how my professors feel about it, but I always try to stick a GPL on my assignments...

<comment><USER14> Ha, I'm going to borrow this idea of yours.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> I'm currently in a Masters program for Information Systems and one of my peers had the joy of having the professor of the class ask him why his answers and another student's were so astoundingly similar. Having worked with this gentleman a lot on the homework, this particular assignment even, I knew that he wasn't the one cheating. Apparently one of our classmates had asked to see his work to "verify" and instead had copied it. Granted, allowing someone to see your answers could be considered cheating, but one assumes that the other person isn't a complete imbecile and has actually done the work. I think that level of trust is even more likely at the graduate level when your peers are all well into adulthood and should know better.

We were both pretty ticked to find this out. I was mostly ticked because I had worked with the one for several hours trying to help him understand the questions and how to get to the answers (without ever giving him the answers) and so knew how hard he had worked to get that lab done. Having someone weasel his work off of him was just rather foul.

We both didn't understand his motivation either. Why pay close to $800/credit just to risk losing it as well as not getting anything except a piece of paper at the end. I know that paper can get you in the door, but it is also really obvious when you don't actually know your stuff.

This was on of the more technical of the classes. It dealt with web services.

</comment><comment><USER16> The instructor for our discrete math class has a most hilarious way of catching cheaters: he sets up trap sites regarding the problems that he googlebombs to be on the front page of the results. Every student signed a document at the beginning stating that they acknowledged googling for solutions was cheating, but 20/195 people still managed to be caught cheating on the first assignment.

</comment><comment><USER17> I can't be too specific about the circumstances ...

A colleague of mine was teaching a class, and after a few weeks set a test. He also took a note of who sat where, and noted that three friends, A, B and C, were sitting together in the back. When he graded the test he found that on question 3, A and B had identical incorrect answers, whereas on question 7, B and C had identical incorrect answers. He joked that this showed that A and C were conspiring to make it appear that B was cheating, but the evidence was clear - cheating had occured. He decided it was an interesting lesson for him, and it was OK since that test only counted for 5% of the final grade.

For the next test he created two, nearly identical tests, differing only in the actual numbers. All the calculations were identical, just the numbers were different. He gave these out alternately.

As office hours approached on the day after the graded tests were returned, there was a _very_ long queue. He invited the first student in, who immediately started complaining that on question 6, he and his friend had identical answers, but his friend got full marks and he got zero. "But the questions are different," said my colleague. "But the answers are the same - why don't we get the same grade?" complained the student. After running around that little loop for a while the light dawned, the student became very thoughtful, and left. "Next!" said my colleague. No one came in, and when he checked, the queue was gone.

The students complained to the Dean, and my colleague was told in no uncertain terms that it was unacceptable to give different tests. In particular, it was unfair not to have warned them, or made it obvious. The students had no way of knowing that they were equivalent, it was impossible to prove that they were equivalent, so he was instructed to give identical tests to everyone.

On the next test he handed out alternate blue and yellow test sheets. There was muttering, but no outright complaints. Within an hour, however, he was summoned to the Dean's office. "You were told to give identical tests!" shouted the Dean. "I did", said my colleague. "They were on different colored paper, but they were identical tests."

The reaction from the Dean was, says my colleague, remarkably similar to that of the student discovering that the tests were different.

Fortunately that was the last "in class" test. The final loomed, and one by one the students dropped the course. The final test was only taken by 12 of the initial 40 students, and all passed. Interestingly, of those that dropped out, several were later disciplined for cheating in other classes.

So the evidence suggests that cheating occurs.

But we knew that.

</comment><comment><USER18> I dual-majored in Mechanical and Electrical Engineering at a 95% engineering school. Cheating occured very often, and I would venture to guess that a majority of the students cheated at some point during their college career, usually in the form of finding a "crib", or previous test from that professor and memorizing the answers.

In my opinion, the greatest cause for cheating was severely unrealistic expectations from the professors. They often expected a far greater amount of memorization and understanding than could possibly be accomplished in the amount of time given to learn the material.

When confronted, their answer was almost universally that "you will have to know it in the real world, and people's lives could depend on your work." However, this logic is severely flawed in that, in the real world, we are given more than 2 hours to complete a set of tasks. And we have the internet and textbooks at our grasp if we need a refresher on a specific equation or concept. And others will be checking our work, especially if people's lives depend on it.

This discrepency between professor expectations and real-world expectations I think gave many students the view, "if the professors aren't playing fair, then why should I?"

As a result, I saw much much less cheating when the professors "played fair", meaning they made the tests open-book and/or open-note. However, there was probably also much less legitimate understanding of the material come test time. So, I'm not really offering up a solution. Just my observations.

</comment><comment><USER19> A roommate of mine from college graded papers for an introductory astronomy class (a class commonly taken to fulfill a distribution requirement for those majoring in the humanities); one of the students in the class (after, apparently, not going to class between the third week and the midterm), copied his entire midterm exam from the person sitting in front of him, almost word for word.

It's not that the content of Physics classes makes it harder to cheat (although this might be true); students cheat when they don't love the subject (and believe that they will get away with it). This is why you see much higher rates of cheating in disciplines people often learn for money rather than curiosity (business, engineering, law, computer science, and medicine).

Unfortunately, people aren't likely to love these fields any more any time soon. Nor are they likely to stop pursuing them despite their dislike for the content (as long as the resulting job is respected/pays well). Which only leaves making it clearer that they won't get away with it, or making the penalty for getting caught outweigh the advantage of doing it. The former is a topic worthy of active research. The latter is probably not helpful, since (at least at the university I went to) the penalty is already so severe that I can only assume that people cheat purely from a lack of expectation of getting caught.

</comment><comment><USER20> Specifically in the classroom? Or just cheating in higher education in general?

I get emails from students asking me to complete their CS assignments with reasonable frequency. Because I'm a prick (and actually worked for my degrees), I'll more often than not determine the school and class and fire off an email to their lecturer or professor.

<comment><AUTHOR> I welcome all suggestions. I get the feeling that cheating does not get reported very often, and I have become increasingly intolerant as every new scandal gets reported on TV.

I'm always shocked at the lack of repercussions for people who cheat, even when it is obvious.

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> In college when I graded introductory programming assignments, there was the time a student turned in a printout of their program and execution trace for an assignment.

Unfortunately they forgot to remove the _email headers_ from the other student who sent it to them.

</comment><comment><USER22> Do you know what - I've often wondered about cheating in the Higher Education context.

Is it really cheating? When you're spending $,000's a year to learn, does it really ever benefit anyone?

Maybe that's the thing - Higher Education is increasingly under pressure as a business. It's getting hard to fail/expel someone. On the other hand, universities trade on their reputation, so they need to walk a fine line.

Higher Ed is free in Germany - and someone can probably correct me - but they also have no entry criteria (I might be off-base, but it's less retrictive either way). So you can sign up for Engineering there if you want to, but you soon fail if you can't meet the requirements.

</comment><comment><USER23> Hey, your email isn't listed in your profile -- if you want people to be able to see it, you need to relist it in the about me section.

<comment><AUTHOR> done! thanks for the tip. i welcome any input.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> Last semester someone in my signals class started an exam before we were told to begin. The prof took the test and that student got an F.

I loved it.</comment>


137 Rails ideas hacked together in 48 hrs - <AUTHOR> http://r09.railsrumble.com/entries

<comment><USER2> A few notes from someone (me) who competed:

* Extremely well run. zapnap, if you're ever in Perth, I'll buy you a steak. awesome job guys.

* There's a comment about the longevity of the entries here. Can't speak for others, but I entered just for fun and for the experience. I built something quick and simple that I planned to throw away, however...

* The quality of the feedback was fantastic. The criticism my app received was very constructive (and justified :), but there was also some very positive feedback, enough that I'm going to take what I've created, keep working on it and keep it going.

I entered as a solo entrant, and my app was pretty simple but there's so much I learnt; for example, setting up a server. I've never done this before (always had someone else to do it for me), but I've had to learn how to get everything up and running from nothing. Too me a stupidly long time to do, but I had a great time doing it.

</comment><comment><USER3> This was my first time competing and our entire team had an awesome time. We had the idea for quippopotamus for months, but Rails Rumble finally put the fire under our collective asses to actually build it.

The organizers truly did an amazing job, and we can't wait for voting to end so that we can act on the feedback we've gotten and start making improvements.

</comment><comment><USER4> Really impressed by some of the ideas and execution. Great stuff.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Inspiring, to say the least.

<comment><USER5> It sure is! But here's a question: How do these "I hacked together 50 websites overnight" sites stack up in the long run ?

I've gone through a couple of those lists now, including a large number of 'rate my startup' type posts on HN and usually when I visit them a couple of weeks later there is either nothing left of it or the site has been taken over by spammers.

It's like with children, making them is easy, supporting them over their lifetime is hard, very hard.

So, what's the story, how many of those 'one night hacks' make it in the long run ?

<comment><USER6> Here are a couple previous winners:

<http://tastyplanner.com> <http://meetinbetween.us>

Both are still running and doing quite well. Although no one has made a million dollars on a Rumble exit quite yet, we're looking forward to the first one :). Maybe someone will buy us a steak for organizing the event heh.

<comment><USER6> Here are a few more:

* <http://prioritizd.com> * <http://bidbuildbill.com> * <http://jot.ly> * <http://imatightwad.com> * <http://qflip.net> * <http://trackclass.com> * <http://whatdoesthiserrormean.com> * <http://remindr.info> * <http://www.riverdex.com> * <http://www.learnbylikis.com> * <http://so2speak.net> * <http://pictmeme.com> * <http://ndebted.com> * <http://pricepounce.info>

<comment><AUTHOR> Just curious, zapnap, but I didn't see any useful information on the site about finding partners. I saw a list of project suggestions and interested people, but none of finding partners local to your area, or how the existing teams found or knew each other..

<comment><USER6> That's a great question. Up to this point we've really assumed that most people come to the table with a team or potential teammates already in mind. One thing we could certainly do better in the future is providing mechanisms through which teams can find collaborators (they don't need to be in their area though, of course, since the competition is completely virtual).

If you check the discussion list and do some Twitter searches you'll find that many teams advertised that they were looking for collaborators that way. Still, probably not the best mechanism for that.

<comment><USER7> I commend you on this and wish I had known about it sooner. What a great way to allow people to practice so many skills and have so much fun as well.

To expand on the previous post and your post as well, some sort of "team finder" would be really cool.

Great, great job.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Judging by how nice most of these sites look, I think this was more of a web design contest than a programming contest. Let's see the code.

<comment><USER6> You really want to make judging code a part of an innovation competition? I know some have gone that route. But personally, I can't think of a more subjective thing.

Most commercially viable web applications find their success through execution of their idea and connecting with an end user audience. So it seems, to me, like the best way to judge their likelihood of success in the "real world" is by reviewing the end product rather than the integrity of the code.

If they didn't write tests, if their authorization code is full of holes, if there are XSS vulnerabilities everywhere -- end users are going to find these. They're also going to comment on them, and these comments will affect other ratings and overall public opinion.

I'm a developer myself and of course I have my opinions about the 'right way' to write code. But judging from that perspective isn't part of the contest for a reason. Not that it's wrong, it's just not the perspective that we're approaching it from.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> Some cool projects. However, a small tagline would help a lot with browsing the list.

Edit: just saw that the long list has descriptions.

</comment><comment><USER10> i bet a lot of people cheated, no way some of those ideas only took 48 hours to develop

<comment><USER2> It's not obvious if your comment is serious or tongue in cheek.

Prior to the competition, teams can prepare as much as they like, with pretty much the only proviso being no creation of any digital artifacts. This means no code and no digital artwork can be created before the 48hrs starts, but teams _are_ allowed to do as much non-digital (ie. pencil and paper) prep as they deem necessary.

Sure, there's room for people to cheat if they wish, but I think it's disingenuous to throw out a "i bet a lot of people cheated" comment instead of perhaps crediting them with good planning, hard work and skill.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> pet peeve: having to scroll a page to find the 'close' link on a lightbox.

<comment><USER12> Just click outside the lightbox, this works 90% of the time.</comment></comment>


Design Patterns for Container-Based Distributed Systems - <AUTHOR> https://www.usenix.org/conference/hotcloud16/workshop-program/presentation/burns <comment><AUTHOR> Associated presentation is here: [https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1Qbr3MWyTwhqXCPPrBoat...](https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1Qbr3MWyTwhqXCPPrBoat3J_evWa1ZtKvVBosZyDYFf8/edit#slide=id.g1504263821_0_398)

</comment><comment><USER2> Is it open access?

<comment><AUTHOR> According to the linked page, that would be yes :-)</comment></comment>


Procedural Art with WebVR and Oculus Go - <AUTHOR> https://codercat.tk/monster-or-friend/ <comment><AUTHOR> We are excited about user accessibility of WebVR and ease of development. So we played around with A-Frame for one week and made this demo.

In general it was a pretty smooth and interesting experience. We are looking forward to create more content :)

We tested it on Oculus Go, Chrome, iPhone and Google Pixel.</comment>


Software-Defined Radio for Engineers [pdf] - <AUTHOR> http://www.analog.com/media/en/training-seminars/design-handbooks/Software-Defined-Radio-for-Engineers-2018/SDR4Engineers.pdf <comment><AUTHOR> This book published in free access in _Education Library_ on _Analog Devices, Inc._ web site.[0]

      Software-Defined Radio for Engineers, by Travis F. Collins,
      Robin Getz, Di Pu, and Alexander M. Wyglinski, 2018,
      ISBN-13: 978-1-63081-457-1.

The web site _sdrforengineers_ [1] provides supplementary materials for the text, hands on content, labs, assignments, end of chapter questions, that anyone can use or contribute to.

Slides and other materials for lectures related to _SDR for Engineer_ textbook released on GitHub.[2]

[0] [http://www.analog.com/en/education/education- library/softwar...](http://www.analog.com/en/education/education- library/software-defined-radio-for-engineers.html)

[1] [http://sdrforengineers.github.io](http://sdrforengineers.github.io)

[2] [https://github.com/sdrforengineers/LectureMaterials/releases...](https://github.com/sdrforengineers/LectureMaterials/releases/tag/v1.0)

<comment><USER2> Very nice, and I think the ADALM-PLUTO is a very accessible SDR that is a step up from the RTL sticks that most folks start with.

<comment><USER3> Primarily because it can also send.

<comment><USER2> That and a price of $99 vs $300 for the low end of the "high end" SDRs.

<comment><USER4> But if you want to actually use the chip in a design, it's still $300.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I really wish that I could do some basic sdr with android.

People talk about decentralization and privacy and net neutrality, but sdr on handheld would sound very exciting. I'm sure ISPs would argue against it, but communicating small segments of data wirelessly between terminals would open a lot of gates for new kinds of software.

Dht is already at the core of Bitcoin, yet it's not talked a lot about. Dht, to me, is the most important networked algorithm. Implementing the concepts of dht over sdr sounds new and unexplored, but it should be the internet of the future...

<comment><USER6> have you seen this: [https://www.rtl-sdr.com/questasdr-new-rtl-sdr-software- for-a...](https://www.rtl-sdr.com/questasdr-new-rtl-sdr-software-for-android/)

You could take something like a NooElec ([http://www.nooelec.com/](http://www.nooelec.com/)) and connect it to your phone. Though you'll need a rooted device.

I tried it and it wasn't the fastest thing out there but let me do some basic scanning.

<comment><USER7> I've tried a few of the apps on the Play store (non-rooted) and they did work, but they were crashy and when they did work, clunky to the point of being unusable

<comment><USER6> GNU Radio has a guide of how to compile it for Android. Having said that, if you're just trying to run it on your phone, it doesn't (usually) have enough power to do anything "fun". You need more capability than your average Android device. The other option is to have something a little more powerful running GNU Radio stack and then control that via your phone :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> The hard part, and cool thing, about SDR is that it covers so many disciplines. It's the proverbial rabbit hole, with multiple layers of abstraction.

I'm very good at RF hardware and antenna design; grok that as I do it for a living.

I have dabbled in DSP and FPGAs, hacking some Verilog together with Xilinx blocks to do RF in to USB out. Not a DSP comms guru, but know my way around the theory.

Then got into GNU Radio, so had to learn Python. Got the basics down on that and wrote a GNU radio based app, putting it on Github.

Though then came C++, and the whole Linux development environment. Totally new stuff to delve into. Still trying to wrap my head around that.

</comment><comment><USER9> Not really related to the book, but it's only yesterday that I've found out about AirplaneJS [0]. It picks up ADS-B radio signals from airplanes and display them over maps on browser like a local Flightradar. It's nice that you can interact with SDR in Node.js

About this book, it's interesting to see that there are more advanced applications of SDR on Chapter 13.

Do you, HN-friends, know any other toy/simple or advanced applications of SDR?

[0] [https://github.com/watson/airplanejs](https://github.com/watson/airplanejs)

<comment><USER10> I'm by no means an expert - just a hobbyist tinkering with some RF magic, but I made a simple POC of using SDR to reverse engineer and perform jam and replay attacks on cars - essentially giving you permanent access (for cars with button keyfobs). I have a short write up here: [https://github.com/trishmapow/rf-jam- replay](https://github.com/trishmapow/rf-jam-replay)

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> If you don't want to set up everything yourself and just want to tune in to some numbers stations, there is an online SDR interface hosted from the Netherlands.

[http://websdr.ewi.utwente.nl:8901/](http://websdr.ewi.utwente.nl:8901/)

<comment><USER12> Arguably also the more boring use of SDR; at least for me the interesting bits come from the ability to (de)modulate, filter, process and otherwise mangle signals in a way that would not be feasible with traditional radios. Using SDR to "just" listen in on old modes and bands seems like a waste in comparison.

<comment><USER8> There are several technical advantages to using SDR (and some downsides), but the benefits are greater. By SDR I mean direct sampling of the HF, such as a Flexradio or HPSDR.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> A similar book, used in a few grad-level courses on software defined radio. It includes a good amount of MATLAB snippets and exercises to highlight the math.

Software Receiver Design: Build your Own Digital Communication System in Five Easy Steps

[0] [https://books.google.com/books/about/Software_Receiver_Desig...](https://books.google.com/books/about/Software_Receiver_Design.html?id=sw86nwEACAAJ&source=kp_cover)

</comment><comment><USER14> incidentally, fwiw, i just _love_ the figure-2.1 which shows both time, and frequency domain signals in a single diagram.

turn the whole thing clock-wise, and you have the fourier signals, and counter-clock-wise to get to the time-domain signal.

just beautiful :)

</comment><comment><USER15> Thanks for this. This is such an exciting field. W5TSU

</comment><comment><USER16> I'm a ham and I'm slowly churning through designing my own SDR HF radio. I think this might be the end-all be-all guide for my pursuit!

</comment><comment><USER17> Picked up one of these $20 gadgets to play around with a year ago: [http://a.co/71lRE13](http://a.co/71lRE13)

You can get your feet wet at a small expense. Open source software is available that talks to it on various platforms.

</comment><comment><USER18> Some of the fun: [http://websdr.ewi.utwente.nl:8901/](http://websdr.ewi.utwente.nl:8901/)

</comment><comment><USER19> The last few pages have a nice general history of communications. Gives some great perspective.

</comment><comment><USER20> A few interesting things about SDR and the kind of tinkering and experimentation one can do:

\- in amateur radio, SDR is starting to dominate new commercial designs, but has not yet overtaken the superhet.

\- you can buy a low end SDR (rtlsdr) for $20 or a better one for $120 (sdrplay) or a high end one that transmits for $2K (flexradio)

\- Ettus hardware is great if you have the dollars and only care about VHF/UHF

\- if you want to play with the concepts without buying hardware, just learn DSP.

\- there are many interesting applications that are now fairly affordable to build that used to require massive budgets (due to cheaper FPGAs)</comment>


Ask HN: light mathematical/scientific reading with computer exercises? - <AUTHOR>

I'm looking for books that discuss neat topics in math or the sciences which are oriented around computer experimentation.
One examples of such books are The Computational Beauty of Nature. Another is From Calculus to Chaos. A third I've recently enjoyed is Daniel Ashlock's book on evolutionary computation.
I also tremendously enjoyed Steve Skiena's "Calculated Bets", which discussed his use of mathematical modelling to gamble on jai alai with real money.
Any other suggestions?
No dry theorem-proof-theorem-proof-lemma-proof stuff like the kind I suffered through in college, I tried reading that in my spare time outside of classes and I failed miserably. <comment><USER2> Stan Wagon writes interesting books on experimentation with Mathematica.

I'll look forward to hearing more comments about this.

</comment><comment><USER3> I plan to get this one soon: The Annotated Turing: A Guided Tour Through Alan Turing's Historic Paper on Computability and the Turing Machine

</comment><comment><USER4> One Two Three... Infinity by George Gamow

</comment><comment><USER3> The Code Book by Simon Singh</comment>


How to use Query Objects to refactor Rails SQL-queries - <AUTHOR> https://mkdev.me/en/posts/how-to-use-query-objects-to-refactor-rails-sql-queries <comment><USER2> My rant is not entirely appropriate in the context of Rails, but generally speaking, I cannot for the life of me understand why so many programmers take something very simple - a SQL query - and decide the best way to deal with it is to hide the SQL in some kind of wrapper, thus "simplifying" it. Not once have I used one of these libraries where within hours you run across a non- arcane scenario that the wrapper can't handle (just yesterday: Postgres type cast to insert an enum value).

<comment><USER3> For 80% of use cases all you're doing is Person.find(id), Items.top(10), user.email, etc. ORMs are great for productivity, then eventually you run into a complex query where you want to join a bunch of tables, sort, filter, etc. In these cases, the best practice is to do this in SQL in my opinion. All ORMs give you the ability to get an object by executing raw sql. It's not an either or, it's a both and for general productivity.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> A "when to" should be added to this "how to". This might be cohesive in a smaller code-base, but it is not pleasant as "query objects" multiply. There are other ways of handling complex queries closer to the model without this type of abstraction. If you reach for this pattern, be sure it's worth the added cost in complexity.

</comment><comment><USER5> I created a gem which wraps all this up in a nice API: [https://github.com/jonathanhefner/talent_scout](https://github.com/jonathanhefner/talent_scout)

So the final code from the article would look like:

      class ProductSearch < TalentScout::ModelSearch
        criteria(:search) { |search| where("title ILIKE '%?%'", search) }

        criteria(:from_price) { |from_price| where("price > ?", from_price) }

        criteria(:to_price) { |to_price| where("price < ?", to_price) }

        criteria(:properties) { |properties| joins(:product_properties).where(property_id: properties) }

        criteria(:category_id) { |category_id| where(category_id: category_id) }

        order :price, default: :desc
      end

Brevity is an obvious benefit, but reliability even more so. For example, the code in the article has at least two major mistakes:

1) `from_price` will silently never be applied

2) `sort_type` and `sort_direction` defaults are mixed up and always nil, either of which will raise an exception, but only when the corresponding request params are omitted

Another benefit of using the gem: instances of the `ProductSearch` class from above can be used with the stock Rails form builder (i.e. `form_for` and `form_with model:`).

</comment><comment><USER6> I'm trying to figure out what is of such interest. The fact that you can do all the querying very neat or hiding all the logic behind a class ? Am i missing something ?

<comment><USER7> I'm with you. Indirection for indirection-sake is not a great idea. If this code should be moved anywhere, it's to a scope on the model.

<comment><USER8> It's a way to avoid the "fat models" problem (models files with too many lines on them).

<comment><USER7> I feel like this is akin to putting your sick mother outside in the snow to avoid the problem of her having a fever.

If you have a model with hundreds of lines, there may be a larger design problem that could be addressed. By extracting lines into other files to arbitrarily keep line counts low, you just increase the effort it takes future developers to understand the code.

<comment><USER8> You need the code somewhere. "Extracting lines into other files" is organizing it. And you do it to keep concerns separated and thus _decreasing_ the effort for future developers to understand it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> In real world, most of our "pattern" become technical debt as codebase grows very fast. My solution is just simply using raw sql query. Hide complexity of query behind another complex "ActiveRecord" is not the solution.

The benefit is separation of concern when your team has a SQL specialist. And no more code technical debt as your project scales.

<comment><USER10> Most of the relationships are belongs_to and has_many.

How is a raw SQL more readable and expressive than that?

Sure, there may be an occasional AR expression that could be optimized with a raw SQL query?

But for most associations for information based systems, AR is incredibly descriptive and performant.

<comment><USER11> ActiveRecord is far from straightforward when it comes to joins, unfortunately.

Even if you use belongs_to/has_many you still have to manually perform the join, otherwise you'll get an N+1 issue which will affect your performance. On top of that there are four ways to perform that join: joins(:table), include(:table), eager_load(:table) or preload(:table).

In SQL you can basically achieve the same level of expressiveness by using NATURAL JOIN.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> 2018 ?

I share similar doubts to other commenters.

One semi-positive side effect of moving this into a class however, was testing (kinda?).

I'm never sure how to test certain bits of my code that might do something as simple as `Model.where(:x => "y").where(:y => "z").limit(3)` ... usually ending up with a bunch of `expect(...).to receive_message_chain` which feels extremely clunky (and doesn't even test all where params).

The other day, I even struggled to test an even simpler `User.update(:x => "y")`, because there was another `update` in a before filter on ApplicationController... and it easily becomes a mock-the-world situation.

Am I doing it all wrong?

<comment><USER13> I like to think about what a test of `Model.where(:x => "y").where(:y => "z").limit(3)` is supposed to be testing. If the test is that the correct query gets generated, then a simple check to ensure that the `where` calls have been made is fine. If the test is that the query returns the correct data, then either a real database or something lighter weight but which handles queries in the same way needs to be used, since it is really a test of how the query is interpreted rather than what the query is.

<comment><USER12> I'm testing the message. So that the (in this case) `.where` was called and with the right parameters... I trust ActiveRecord with the rest, and I don't want to hit the DB.

I can't simply use `expect(...).to receive(:where)`... even if I only cared that some `.where` was called...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> It's just the concept of interactors used for the specific case of search.

</comment><comment><USER15> This is the type of code/suggestion that I would have eaten up 10 years ago as a junior. Now this type of code just makes me angry and I spend most of my time turning stuff like this back into what it was before applying this query object abstraction.

There's nothing wrong with the code before he applies this abstraction. It's twenty lines, it's exactly in the first place I would go looking if I need to debug, it directly uses active record so I know there's no hidden BS.</comment>


Why JSON doesn't support comments - <AUTHOR> https://plus.google.com/+DouglasCrockfordEsq/posts/RK8qyGVaGSr <comment><USER2> > Suppose you are using JSON to keep configuration files, which you would like > to annotate. Go ahead and insert all the comments you like. Then pipe it > through JSMin before handing it to your JSON parser.

Excellent advice... except that it isn't built that way. The tool _that someone else built_ reads a JSON configuration file instead of a "JSON-after- running-through-JSMin" file. I can't change that. So I either have to build some complex deployment tool that reads config files from somewhere else then copies them over (piping through JSMin) to the server to be executed, OR ban comments. And the second one is much simpler.</comment>


Is 'Pink = Girly' a Myth? - <AUTHOR> http://priceonomics.com/is-pink--girly-a-myth/ <comment><USER2> I'm not sure you can really tell much about women's color preferences from bridesmaids dresses. A lot of women seem to think that brides tend to pick ugly dresses for their bridesmaids.

Some claim this is because they do not want the bridesmaids to outshine the bride. Others say it is because they need a design that works well for a group that may consist of people with different skin tones, sizes, and shapes, and that is not too expensive for the bridesmaids to buy, and this limits choices. Whatever the reason, it seems that a lot of these dresses are ones that the bridesmaids would not be choosing if they got to pick their own dresses.

That said, yes, pink = girls, blue = boys is a fairly modern convention. This was covered on the "Adam Ruins Summer Fun" episode of the excellent new show "Adam Ruins Everything" on TruTV [1].

Here is the reference cited on that episode for their discussion of boy/girl blue/pink [2].

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

[2] [http://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/when-did-girls- st...](http://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/when-did-girls-start- wearing-pink-1370097/?no-ist)

</comment><comment><USER3> I saw an episode of QI, in which Fry said up until 20th century pink was for boys and blue was for girls</comment>