San Francisco tech worker: 'I don't want to see homeless riff-raff' - <AUTHOR> http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/feb/17/san-francisco-tech-open-letter-i-dont-want-to-see-homeless-riff-raff <comment><USER2> I've been on so many sides of this issue it really almost sounds like bullshit.

You see, I was addicted to heroin, and basically homeless, for three years living in Vegas after my mom passed and I divorced.

My beautiful co-junkie girlfriend ODed and died, literally in my arms, in a room at the MGM Grand the first time she ever shot up. I thought she was doing meth like she always did. She was such an amazing soul and I still cry when I think of her and that horrible night.

I allowed a bunch of homeless "friends" to stay with me as I was blowing through my money. I fed them all the time; gave them money for dope sometimes.

Several of them ended up robbing me for money, clothes, computers etc etc. I ended up in the Tunnels for about 6 months before I could finally get out of town.

I finally kicked cold-turkey on the floor of a county jail medical cell back here in Florida as I had missed court dates and had warrants. This was 5 years ago and I have worked hard to pull my life back together.

Before this, my 5yo daughter was physically grabbed by a homeless person in the streets of downtown Chicago, off Michigan Ave., and to this day she still talks of the fear she felt that day.

Who knows what could have happened if I wasn't 6'3" and prison-hardened from the 22 months I did for selling MDMA in 2001?

So I feel I see all sides of this situation from real experience. It's hard writing this because I try not to remember all that garbage and pain.

I think this guy has the right to express himself and his fears without being knee-jerk dogpiled by the offense mobs, but that's just me.

[edits]

<comment><USER3> Keep it up, man. Does it get easier? I look at what I need to do to fix my broken mind and sometimes I think I'd rather lie down in the snow than keep climbing. Do you ever get to stop climbing?

<comment><USER4> As someone who has dealt with addiction, I would say it's similar to exercise. It doesn't exactly get easier, but you do get stronger—that is, better practiced at dealing with cravings, coping with stress, managing your mental health, and so on.

You're never really out of the woods, but you get better at finding your way out and choosing not to venture too deep.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> It always amazes me when people are stupid enough to post stuff like this in a public forum. I support Justin Keller's right to believe and say these things, but he has to know he's going to get crucified in the court of "teh internets."

Here's the deal, Mr. Keller: I don't want to see homeless people in SF any more than you do. But, I'd rather we help them _not be homeless_ rather than sweep them away like so much sidewalk trash. People become homeless for a variety of reasons: job loss, addiction, mental illness, criminal record, etc. Homelessness becomes a trap, because it's really hard to get a job, get sober, get competent medical care, etc. when you're homeless. These things can be done, but it takes a certain amount of skill to navigate the web of bureaucracy necessary to get any help.

Some people don't want help, and that's sad, but we live in a society where we can't force these things on people. One of the tragedies of homelessness is that it's really, really damn difficult to help them-- even the ones who want help. I know this from experience.

But, still, rants like this are nothing but counterproductive. If you want to see fewer homeless on the street, try helping instead of ranting.

<comment><USER6> [http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/matier-ross/article/S-F- spendi...](http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/matier-ross/article/S-F-spending-on- homeless-exceeds-many-5416839.php)

SF is 'trying' and isn't succeeding. Stop spending my unaccounted for tax dollars on this if it isn't going to solve the issue and is just going to make SF a mafia wife enabling the homeless.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> It's unfortunate that such a callous performance has to become the icon for his case.

Living in SF, I agree there is a problem. In fact there are two.

1) There are the schizophrenics who need some help (but nobody knows exactly what or how).

2) And there is the unfortunate reality of downtown: \- smells of piss \- no public bathrooms (because they become campsites) \- escalators break on public transportation often because people excrement on them \- trashcans get dumped out so people can find cans for recycling \- people walking across certain busy streets ignoring traffic \- various campsites especially in soma

I don't think this has to be an either-or issue. Helping the homeless is not an opposite of keeping downtown clean. I seem to notice people giving up on the latter though because they assume that the only way to do so is to blame the former, which is a no-no.

<comment><USER6> 3) SF has spent more than 30k per homeless person per year in the city to do 'something' about it. It's typically unaccounted for money and an area ripe/putrid for corruption.

<comment><USER8> Maybe put that $30K into a cheap dwelling for said homeless person and problem solved, no longer homeless.

<comment><USER6> don't disagree at all. I admire what salt lake city is doing and think it should be a model for SF

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I'm not sure it's possible to have a civil discussion about the homeless issue in SF. Many of the 'homeless' really enjoy their lifestyle- it never gets that cold, they can hang out all day and do drugs, and have lots of social services available to them if anything ever gets too bad. Mix those people in with people who are genuinely struggling to survive, and a bunch of wealthier residents, you get a perfect storm on the internet. Criticize one group, and you're instantly an asshole. Or maybe you were an asshole to begin with. The internet loves the drama though.

<comment><USER5> > Many of the 'homeless' really enjoy their lifestyle- it never gets that > cold, they can hang out all day and do drugs, and have lots of social > services available to them if anything ever gets too bad.

I don't see too much wrong with that. If someone's living on the streets because they like it, more power to 'em. As far as services go, it's almost a logical consequence of having them that a certain few are going to abuse them. I'd rather accept that than have people who truly need and want help not get it.

<comment><USER10> I've gone back and forth on this, and I'm still not sure how I feel. On one hand, I do believe we should let people live how they want, as long as that doesn't negatively impact other people (simple Golden Rule type thing).

But then that's it -- out of the homeless people who genuinely prefer that lifestyle, does that negatively impact other people? And it's hard to answer that, because I think a lot of the discomfort about homeless people surrounds people defecating on the sidewalk, people asking for money, and the mentally ill yelling obscenities and freaking people out... etc.

So the the question becomes: if we could help the people who do not want to be homeless, including those who have mental health issues, and get them off the streets and into places where they can heal, what would be left? If the remainder is just people who like the homeless lifestyle, would that be ok? Would non-homeless people feel comfortable with that? I don't know the answer to that, even on a personal level.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> How important to us is it to watch some random doofus set fire to his own reputation?

<comment><USER12> To be honest, I'm at a loss for why articles from this publication, and other similar ones whose primary output is.. spin and politics... are on the front page here.

Not news, not for hackers, not tech, not startups.

This article is purely about trying to perpetuate class warfare.

<comment><USER11> I'm mostly on The Guardian's side regarding class warfare (though not on some other issues), but I agree: important stories for which The Guardian is the best possible source for HN are rare.

I think if you had played your political cards closer and left out that last sentence, you wouldn't have gotten downvoted so quickly; as it stands, you allowed your comment to be a proxy vote for whether inequality is an important issue.

<comment><USER13> <I'm mostly on The Guardian's side regarding class warfare>

If only they were more concerned with class warfare _within the British Isles_ than mocking the rest of the world's politics.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Yeah, the way he phrased his blog post is terrible. The guy is clearly not a writer.

But my parents are visiting me from abroad in a few months (I've lived in the Bay Area for about 5 years now), and I'm legitimately afraid something dumb will happen. I usually just walk fast around town, pre emptively avoiding people who seem to be in a universe of their own (and I'm a pretty tall/wide guy, so i've never had a problem fending off loud/obnoxious people when they confront me individually), but my parents will be in leisure visitor mode, and I don't want my mom to have to deal with a coked up naked guy yelling at her.

Is that entitled? Yeah, maybe. But I'm not mad at the homeless people - I feel for them. I'm mad at the politicians of SF, who can't properly give a support network to the mentally ill in our streets. Other major world cities aren't in the state of disarray that SF is, so it seems like something that can largely be improved on.

<comment><USER11> The problem isn't that he's wrong about the San Francisco homeless problem. The problem is that the first half of his letter is lists legitimate concerns about the problem, and the second half is a temper tantrum about how he feels he's earned a station in life where he shouldn't have to be bothered with those problems.

It's a terribly stupid letter.

But it's also pretty silly that we're paying attention to it. It's self- evidently stupid.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> _The wealthy working people have earned their right to live in the city. They went out, got an education, work hard, and earned it. I shouldn't have to worry about being accosted. I shouldn't have to see the pain, struggle, and despair of homeless people to and from my way to work every day._

Wow, what a real piece of work this guy. He honestly believes the most offensive thing in his post is him calling them "riff-raff".

<comment><USER16> Which part of this quote is untrue? That it's not worded tastefully is a different matter.

<comment><USER17> The part where he says the wealthy earned it. Did they earn it? this is the part where I often disagree with people. We all love to think we've earned what we've got. Just crying out loud 'we worked hard! we earned it!' doesn't make it true.

I'm at the top 10% income earners in a wealthy country and I don't feel think I've necessarily earned it more than the other 90% of the population. I lucked out. I had loving parents that guided me and pushed me to have an education. I don't suffer from any mental or physical disease. Seriously, going to school to get a degree and learning on my own how to build software systems, that's the easy part and wouldn't have been possible if I didn't have the luck of being born in the right social circumstances and with the right biology traits (health and smarts).

<comment><USER18> I feel like there is a lot of disrespect for our ancestors when we try to apologize for our "luck" or "privilege".

If one's own parents labored and suffered to create value and provide for their child, does that child not deserve to enjoy the fruits of that labor? If that child honors their parents by continuing a tradition of hard work, albeit more comfortably, why does he need to feel ashamed of his success? At which generation do we disinherit the sacrifices of those who came before us?

<comment><USER17> I am not sure how you jumped to the conclusion that I implied we should feel ashamed. It's about being grateful for how lucky we are we inherited something, not ashamed. You also completely disregarded the biological factors I mentioned that have nothing to do with the "hard work" of my ancestors, it's just "random" luck with good genes/biology that allows us to learn things faster and to be healthy (yes, eating habits help, but your biology helps just as much).

There's a difference between not feeling ashamed and feeling entitled to it and superior to the others that didn't inherit those fruits.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> I don't have a opinion on this situation, but there is going to be a point in time when tech workers need to stop thinking that there government is going to do what they want it to do and instead need to actively get into the political process, for example, by running for office. Politics has an effect on everything from poverty to transportation.

<comment><USER20> Ah, but it's so much easier for us to stand by the side of the road and complain that the emperor's clothes have the wrong fringe on the hem. Politics is boring, it's messy, it's tedious, and it demands compromise -- in other words, it takes a genuine and deep investment in time, effort and knowledge to shift any degree of change. (Me, I just comment on HN.)

But, hey, Internet. Used to be you'd just write cranky letters that the _Chronicle_ interns would auto-bin; today, you can catch the international media's attention, become the poster boy for clueless gentrification, and feed your startup's reputation into the dumpster fire, all in a few hours. Truly an age of miracles and wonders.

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> I was wondering why the headline refers specifically to "tech worker".

It seems like the motivation for the article is to call attention to a stereotypical "tech bro". Is "tech bro" in common usage?

I guess I didn't realize that appending "bro" to create a pejorative term has become so common.

<comment><USER7> I agree. I'd even go so far as saying it's appealing to the audience's basest desire: to perpetuate an iconic enemy.

You could do the same thing by changing "Tech Worker" to "White Man," that is: pick some group he belongs to and try to blame the whole for his callous delivery.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> As someone who was raised in the bay area, the idea that these experiences meant that homelessness was at an all-time high in the city struck me as the thoughts of someone whose rose tint was fading from their glasses. One of my earliest memories is of a grizzled homeless man on Market asking me if I'd seen his spaceship anywhere, and I can't remember ever spending more than a few hours in the downtown area without seeing some sort of display of intoxication, mental disability, or both. So I looked it up, and indeed, crime and homeless rates within the city have stayed relatively consistent over the past decade, both in terms of sheltered and unsheltered homeless (crime is up slightly, but still well below what it was in the 90s). Just in case anyone was wondering.

</comment><comment><USER23> A far more erudite take on the situation

[http://programmingisterrible.com/post/50421878989/come- here-...](http://programmingisterrible.com/post/50421878989/come-here-and- work-on-hard-problems-except-the)

</comment><comment><USER24> "Rich white entitled computer developer can't understand the less fortunate." Is this some news bulletin from Sim City?

<comment><USER13> I missed in the article where the author's race is mentioned. Do you know him personally?

<comment><USER24> It's pretty easy to google his name and come up with a picture.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> This cannot be real. It must be some kind of avant-garde performance, I am not able to understand.

</comment><comment><USER26> While he sounds reasonable, his assertions of superiority are tone-deaf and quite irritating.

Sure he's been exposed to some obscene behavior and perhaps mentally unstable homeless people, but I don't think he has considered that there is undoubtedly thousands of otherwise normal people in very unfortunate circumstances that don't deserve to be lumped with "those people".

</comment><comment><USER27> [http://www.glide.org/feedthehungry](http://www.glide.org/feedthehungry)

<comment><USER28> Not to knock you or that wonderful project, I actually upvoted your post, but I still have to add this:

> "Charity is the drowning of rights in the shithole of mercy." \-- Johann > Heinrich Pestalozzi

People have the _right_ to a fair shot at life. When that is achieved, we will not have "done good", we will merely have ceased to do atrocious evil. By which I don't mean to knock generosity and volunteering at all, I really hope my reply doesn't come across that way. Of course it does a lot of good, for all involved parties, and every life saved and every meal or even smile given counts. I still would call it a workaround rather than a solution, in the context of "mercy vs. rights", but it's a workaround that doesn't keep us from looking into long-term fixing of things, so I don't mean it as a "yes, but", but really as an addition.

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> One person heard a racial slur yelled from a pickup truck on the UMissouri campus? The president of the school has to go.

Psychotic and not uncommonly violent people are attacking citizens apparently everyday for the past decade? Suck it up!

</comment><comment><USER30> Pity - this is the first I've heard of commando.io, and it looks like I could have used this tool as my current setup is a touch unwieldy. I would have at least tried it out, and likely would have bought it. Oh well, they can do without my $100/mo.

<comment><USER5> Yep. Scratch one startup off the list of "companies I'll ever work for," too.

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> [http://justink.svbtle.com/open-letter-to-mayor-ed-lee-and- gr...](http://justink.svbtle.com/open-letter-to-mayor-ed-lee-and-greg-suhr- police-chief)

I think this would be a better link than the OP as the OP is an interpretation of the original work.

While its clearly a shitty blog post, it seems like his concern is largely stemming from the number of altercations he personally experienced and the Guardian is interpreting it much harsher than is truly necessary.

Shitty blog posts happen but private blogs shouldn't be attacked by a news publication so blatantly.

<comment><USER5> > I think this would be a better link than the OP as the OP is an > interpretation of the original work.

Maybe so, but how much do you want to bet that blog post comes down within the next few days?

<comment><USER31> [http://archive.is/3uny8](http://archive.is/3uny8)

Better?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> _> Madeleine McCann, 27, had some more pointed words for tech bros who disapprove of her. McCann has been living in a tent under the highway for about a month, ever since her van was towed, leaving her without a roof._

This name surprised me.

I assume it's a fake name for the reporter, or at least, unrelated to [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disappearance_of_Madeleine_McC...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disappearance_of_Madeleine_McCann) .

<comment><USER33> Some people have the same name as other people.

</comment></comment><comment><USER34> What a clickbait-y headline, makes the original author sound insensitive when he's trying to shame public officials into action to help the homeless. (Not that the messaging or content is perfect, but the title is definitely trying to fit a narrative)

<comment><USER15> Did you read his post. The headline was correct and "riff-raff" was one of the least offensive things he wrote.

</comment></comment><comment><USER35> Move to Redmond.</comment>


Show HN: Hookbin – Capture and Inspect HTTP Requests - <AUTHOR> https://hookbin.com <comment><AUTHOR> Hi all. If you have the need to inspect webhooks from external services, or simply debug your own applications and capture and inspect HTTP requests you might want to give Hookbin a shot. Unlike the other service(s) Hookbin:

\- Allows you to delete individual requests when you don't need them

\- Stores both request AND response headers

\- Has a quick-note functionality built in so you can comment or tag your requests (super-useful when debugging)

\- Offers a wide-open CORS implementation so you can test HTTP requests from within your JS applications

\- Fully handles Multipart requests giving you total control over uploaded files

\- Supports method overriding

\- Gives you an option to 'replay' any request as a cURL command

\- Keeps each endpoint alive for 7 days and stores up to 100 requests per endpoint

\- Offers only SSL-secured enpoints and scores A+ grade on SSL Labs test

\- Actually works and is deployed to a Highly Available setup</comment>


Bye Bye, WhatsApp: Germans Switch To Threema For Privacy Reasons - <AUTHOR> http://techcrunch.com/2014/02/21/bye-bye-whatsapp-germans-switch-to-threema-for-privacy-reasons/?utm_campaign=fb&ncid=fb

<comment><USER2> Since yesterday, I have 200% more contacts in Threema. Now there are 6.</comment>


The International – Dota 2 Championships - <AUTHOR> http://www.dota2.com/international/compendium/?

<comment><AUTHOR> The prize pool for the upcoming Dota 2 tournament is now the largest prize pool ever in esports history, which is why I'm submitting it to HN. It's an interesting new phenomenon, because it seems to indicate that esports may finally be taking off.

Valve basically crowdfunded their tournament prize pool. They started out by offering an initial $1.6M prize pool, but gave every dota 2 player the option of buying a "compendium" for $10, and each compendium increases the prize pool by $2.50. That means Valve makes $7.50 per compendium sold.

I just ran the math, and as of right now there have been ($3,365,563 - $1,600,000)/$2.50 = 706,255 compendiums purchased. Since Valve earns $7.50 per compendium, that means they just made $5.3M in a couple days. And they're set to make even more next year, since the Dota 2 playerbase has some nice exponential growth: [http://steamgraph.net/index.php?action=graph&appid=570&from=...](http://steamgraph.net/index.php?action=graph&appid=570&from=0)

I'm not sure there are any articles about this yet, because this news is so new. I wish I had a decent article to submit to HN instead of this link. But this is certainly newsworthy, so it's a matter of time before you start hearing other news sources talking about it.

EDIT: If you're looking to see what a Dota tournament is like, here are two great matches from last year:

Game 1 [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OaGSi1YTA-E](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OaGSi1YTA-E)

Game 3 [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ajQuCZx- yx8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ajQuCZx-yx8)

The production quality is so good!

EDIT2: Also, Valve made a movie called "Free to Play" which documents what life is like for top-tier Dota players: [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UjZYMI1zB9s](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UjZYMI1zB9s)

<comment><USER2> I watched (OK, not all of it) one of the games you linked and I don't understand any of what the commentators are saying. It relies heavily on knowing what the hell is going on to be appreciated. FPSs don't have this problem, yet they remain a smaller niche.

Even if you don't know anything about Doom, you'll have no trouble following this: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hcSj0lk- vEo](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hcSj0lk-vEo)

...I can't believe I'm recommending anything - I don't even like spectator sports. But I used to play doom back when e-sports were still science-fiction.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yeah, agreed, that's Dota's single biggest flaw: it's hard for newcomers to watch it and enjoy it like a game of football. Although, in fairness, football's popularity may have something to do with that.

If you watch Free to Play (linked above) it helps clarify things somewhat. (It's pretty interesting anyway.) But it may be an unsolvable problem, which would be unfortunate.

Then again, the tournament scene is still in its nascent stages. Once the production quality goes up some more, there may be a brief intro for each hero selected that describes to the audience what the hero can do and what its items usually are and what they do.

<comment><USER3> >Then again, the tournament scene is still in its nascent stages. Once the production quality goes up some more, there may be a brief intro for each hero selected that describes to the audience what the hero can do and what its items usually are and what they do.

It might happen that way, in one single game the teams go through 20 heroes of which 5 are banned by both sides and 5 are picked by both sides.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment> 2Pacalypse- Here's a neat prize pool tracker where you can compare it to the last year's international: [http://dota2.cyborgmatt.com/prizetracker/international2014](http://dota2.cyborgmatt.com/prizetracker/international2014)

</comment><comment><USER4> I don't know if Valve does this on purpose, but their remake of titles (Team Fortress, Counterstrike, Dota) all keep essentially the same gameplay mechanics but introduce new enhancements (graphics, UI, matchmaking, etc.).

This is important for eSports. Having to learn a new game every 3-4 years so you can follow along is difficult for viewers. It also allows professional players who invest the training to transfer their skills more easily.

It's different with other companies -- Blizzard, for example, created a new game in StarCraft II. It shares a few similarities with Brood War, but the differences are vast. I really, really like Valve's approach.

<comment><USER5> They explicitly stated that Dota 2 would be mechanically identical to Dota 1, to the point where some of of the quirks imposed on Dota 1 due to engine limitations were intentionally reproduced in Dota 2.

It's just started to deviate away from that now, but it is kept remarkably similar - bugs and all. For example, using the item that teleports you a set distance forward teleports you only 80% of its max distance if you click _beyond_ its max.

The other one is 'orb effects' \- certain enchantments which add some effect on your standard attack. They do not stack with one another - only one works at a time - except for one of them [1] which does stack with only the life- steal ones.

This makes dota have a learning cliff more than a learning curve, but the depth of the gameplay is pretty crazy as a result.

[1]: [http://dota2.gamepedia.com/Eye_of_Skadi](http://dota2.gamepedia.com/Eye_of_Skadi)

<comment><USER3> Apart from graphics, attack animation, environmental changes and various effects. Dota2 is no different from Dota 1 per se.

All the changes that you see right now in dota2 are now map updates for dota1 ( yes the crazy 6.80 update which essentially changes a lot of gameplay was a (map) update in dota 1 too )

For example, The orb effect had always been that way. 'Orb effect does not stack' Do you remember that on items in dota1? It used to explicitly say that in the item description in dota1. In dota2 they explain it a bit better.

<comment><USER5> Sorry, I wasn't clear: I know that orb effects are identical in dota 1. I am saying that many of the quirks of dota 1 have been carried over to dota 2 - Skadi's orb interactions is one example of that.

One difference, for example, is the interaction between naga siren's net and manta style - in dota 1 it dispells the net, but not dota 2. There are subtle differences like that but they are the exception.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Wow that's pretty crazy. I love that Valve is a juggernaut of gaming yet still a private company. Any rumors as to what Valve's financials look like these days? It has to be into the billions of revenue with Steam, etc. at this point.

<comment><USER7> That's interesting, I didn't really think about it until you mentioned it but they _must_ making a lot of money.

I couldn't find any specific rumors or estimates that are more recent than 2011. I did find a VentureBeat article from Jan 22 2014 that said that Dota 2 made $80 M and TF2 made almost double that at $139 M in 2013.[1]

Pricewaterhouse Coopers "Global entertainment and media outlook: 2013 - 2017" estimates that globally "entertainment and media" will grow at a compound annual growth rate of 5.6% over the next five years.[2]

So, even if you assume that they won't release Left4Dead 3, Half Life 3, etc over the next few years, just from Dota2 and TF2 alone their revenue for 2014 is likely to be more than $230 M. And that's a bare minimum guess. It's likely to be much more than that. But that's the lower bound of the estimate I guess.

Not bad.

[1] [http://venturebeat.com/2014/01/22/doat-2-made- around-80-mill...](http://venturebeat.com/2014/01/22/doat-2-made- around-80-million-in-microtransaction-revenues-in-2013-according-to-analyst- firm/) [2] [https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/global-entertainment-media- outlook...](https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/global-entertainment-media-outlook/data- insights.jhtml)

<comment><USER8> I think it's pretty safe to assume that all their own game revenue is dwarfed by the 30% steam cut they take on the sales of everyone else's games.

<comment><USER9> And then the asinine fees to change your Steam profile's background...

And then the asinine fees to sell an item to another player...

And then the asinine fees they take for community map rotations...

And then the asinine fees they take for community skins and items...

It's both amazing and disgusting how much money Valve makes from their little value-add services.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I just can't wait until someone cracks the nut on competition FPS again. FPS competition is interesting to people who don't even play games, the way boxing is, so it will inevitably be huge at some point.

<comment> Ono-Sendai CS:GO is becoming quite popular. [http://blog.counter- strike.net/](http://blog.counter-strike.net/)

<comment><USER3> It always has been. And the popularity never dropped. CS:GO just replaced CS:Source and CS from being the second most popular game on steam.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Also to note, the American qualifiers for the tournament will start tomorrow and run until Thursday. There's a good mix of North and South American teams in the qualifier and the stuff that is planned for the broadcast seems pretty exciting.</comment>


Show HN: Does speeding really save time? Speedr – My side project of 6 months - <AUTHOR> https://jakehilborn.github.io/speedr/ <comment><AUTHOR> Hey everyone, this is the first Android app I've put on the Play Store. Check it out and let me know what you think.</comment>


For Cats, a Big Gulp With a Tiny Touch of the Tongue - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/12/science/12cats.html

<comment><USER2> "The project required no financing. The robot that mimicked the cat's tongue was built for an experiment on the International Space Station, and the engineers simply borrowed it from a neighboring lab."

It's mindblowing enough that it took until the year 2010 to figure out how cats drink water. How do we live in a modern world with all the unimaginable wonders of science and integrated circuits and space travel, with more people studying exotic data from space probes and particle accelerators than there were scientists of any variety 500 years ago, and yet until now a cat drinking water was a complete mystery to us? The fact that figuring it out was a side project using borrowed equipment is a punchline.

<comment><USER3> This _is_ a wonder of the modern world: Extreme high-speed digital cameras, the kind of stuff that Harold Edgerton became renowned for a mere fifty years ago, are now so cheap, easy to use, and sensitive that some guys at MIT can afford to aim one at their cats for extended periods of time on a whim.

Back in Edgerton's day you had to take ultra-high-speed photographs using extremely bright strobe lighting. I don't know for sure that he never photographed a cat lapping, but I can't imagine that the typical cat was happy to sit around drinking when strobes were going off and a high-speed film spool was cranking nearby. Plus, there was probably a crazy backlog of other, more serious things to film. So it was probably hard to collect enough data to be sure you knew what was happening.

I helped a lab shop for one of these high-speed cameras a few years back. They were not cheap, but they were cheaper than some cars, and they've probably gotten even cheaper since. When these things get to the point that we can all afford one, we are going to have some serious fun.

All hail the semiconductor optics folks! Buy one a drink today! ;)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Calculating the balance between opposing gravitational and inertial forces is yet another reason why cats are awesome.

<comment><USER5> _Calculating the balance between opposing gravitational and inertial forces is yet another reason why_ evolution is awesome.

Fixed it for you.

edit: Really? Downvotes for promoting evolution? Just because I did it in an amusing way?

<comment><USER6> No, more likely because you did it using a Slashdot meme, which, while some might find it funny, most here find it obnoxious.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> It's interesting that this is quite different from how dogs drink: [http://bethesignal.org/blog/2009/06/13/how-do-dogs-drink- wat...](http://bethesignal.org/blog/2009/06/13/how-do-dogs-drink-water/) They scoop up the water with their tongues by curling it _backwards_.

<comment><USER8> It looks like there's also a column of water involved, like with the cats.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> > The lapping frequency should be the weight of the cat species, raised to the > power of minus one sixth, and multiplied by 4.6.

I wonder how mass^(-1/6) has the same unit as frequency.

<comment><USER9> I'd presume that the 4.6 has some units attached to it that the reporter missed. (Which unfortunately is important since we're given no other indication what units of mass are to be used.)

1/6 sort of makes sense though. Mass is directly proportional to volume, and it's probably the length of the tip of the tongue which is important, so there's a cube root right there. Throw in a square root for good measure (those tend to show up in physics problems) and invert it since the frequency presumably decreases w/r/t mass and you're at mass^-1/6.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> I wonder if this will take next year's Ig Nobel prizes in both veterinary medicine and physics...

</comment><comment><USER11> My cat is too lazy for math. She lays next to water bowl with her chin resting on the edge and her paw dangling into the water, then just rotates her wrist to bring her wet paw up to her mouth and licks the water off her paw. Repeat.

</comment><comment><USER12> >The cat laps four times a second — too fast for the human eye to see but a blur

I'm pretty sure that's not true.

I mean, the 4 Hz thing is probably true, but my eyes have little trouble discerning 4 Hz.

<comment><USER13> well it would very much depend on 4 Hz of what. It's really easy to notice flickering white light at 4 Hz but it's alot harder to see something that moves a long distance back an forth at 4 Hz.

<comment><USER14> I can see my cat move her tongue back and forth four times a second just fine.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> The fact that they lap at precisely the right frequency... Darwin's theory is so perfect, and I just figured out how to put in words why it is. _feedback_.

Feedback really is king.

<comment><USER16> I agree that evolution did play the crucial part in developing the drinking method for cats, which is now part of their instinct, but the precise frequency can be learned during their lifetime, it does not have to be instinctive. Cats train their drinking technique daily for long stretches of time, so they have plenty of chance to optimize their drinking frequency. And the thing is, that is feedback as well: cats, being quite impatient, try to drink water as fast as they can, so they try to move their tongues faster, only to discover that they are spending more time getting their drink, so they slow down their tongues again, and get more water.

<comment><USER17> The only way to find out is have a cat drink at reduced (not zero) gravity.

New mission for NASA: "Cat on the moon."

"I believe that this nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a cat on the Moon and watching him drink."

<comment><USER18> Huh... if it is evolutionarily ingrained, then that means that Dogs would be far better space-pets.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


The Snooper's Charter would devastate computer security research in the UK - <AUTHOR> http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/11/the-snoopers-charter-would-devastate-computer-security-research-in-the-uk/ <comment><AUTHOR> It gives me the creeps that we live in a world where we have surpassed even orwells imagination. I don't know whether it's the human condition that produces these totaly overboard going laws or just plain stupidity on the part of the legislative. if its the latter then the question is what does that say about the people being governed by those power and control hungry politicians.</comment>


Apple isn't developing a Flash alternative named Gianduia - <AUTHOR> http://ajaxian.com/archives/gianduia

<comment><USER2> Finally, someone who gets it right. I was confused seeing the "Flash alternative" headline replicated on all major german technews sites.

</comment><comment><USER3> Apple stores have a "concierge"? Oh brother.

I'm starting to get embarrassed that I own a Macbook. I wonder if I can decal it up to look pedestrian...

<comment><USER4> Concierge is the software that they use to keep track of support appointments, not an individual person.

<comment><USER3> Ah. Don't I feel foolish.

<comment><USER5> It's a complicated word, Apple should know better. Using Apple should be easy.

<comment><USER6> It's actually shorter than "receptionist" :-P</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: How to increase reading speed - <AUTHOR>

What are the best way to increase reading speeds. I am reading at about 300 words per minute rate which I find unsatisfactory. <comment><USER2> What is the reason you are concerned with reading fast? Maybe it's just me, but I think that comprehending what is read is far more important than finishing reading quickly.

<comment><AUTHOR> I want to read more faster, want to read more articles more books in the same amount of time. I currently have not very good speed about 200-300 words per minutes (however, English isn't my native language).</comment></comment>


GrowLab: Accelerating Startups in Vancouver (Canada's YC) - <AUTHOR> http://www.growlab.ca/apply-to-grow <comment><USER2> Very cool, but couldn't they have picked a better name? "Grow Lab" in Vancouver?

</comment><comment><USER3> Not to hate, but:

1) Canada's YC is...YC. There is nothing preventing a Canadian from applying to and participating in YC.

2) It's misleading when they say "Grow Lab has matched Y Combinator's relationship with Yuri Milner and SV Angel (Ron Conway)" -- the $150k cash is important, but it's not even half of the value you get from those guys when they invest, even as part of a YC class.

</comment><comment><USER4> Wow, apparently they matched the 150k Yuri/SV Angel deal now. Will be interesting to see how well they do. Vancouver is a bit of a disadvantaged market compared to SV, so I wonder if they will have enough large exits.</comment>


Porsche Design's expensive 2-in-1 laptop hits the FCC ahead of April release - <AUTHOR> https://liliputing.com/2017/03/porsche-designs-expensive-2-1-laptop-hits-fcc-ahead-april-release.html <comment><USER2> Why does it have to say "PORSCHE DESIGN" right in your face? When I open my current MacBook Pro, I don't see any Apple logo or words, either on the topcase or on or around the screen. (I do recall that very old MacBook Pros did have a label under the screen, but Apple hasn't done that crap in years!)

I will not buy a product made by a company so insecure about its place in the world that it insists on shoving its ugly branding in my face as I use it.

Furthermore, it is especially galling that they use the word "design" to promote a thing that's so blatantly tacky.</comment>


Be happy Bike to work.  - <AUTHOR> http://csharpening.net/?p=1291 <comment><USER2> Please anyone reading this don't wear headphones, you've removed one of the most useful senses for knowing where there's a potential problem.

I'd love to cycle to work, the only problem is it's a 160 mile round trip, so it's not too sustainable. I've thought about cycling the journey from my house to the train station but then I've got the additional problem of dealing with a bike on a busy train (two trains really), storing it at the office (small elevator) so I keep getting the bus. If I ever work closer to home I think I will, everyone I know that does is in much better shape than me and generally a bit more awake at 9am.

<comment><USER3> I wear headphones and listen to music all the time when biking. There is absolutely no problem doing so. I watch where I am going and I can easily hear any meaningful sounds through the music.

Or do you mean headphones that completely shut off the environment? That would be pure stupidity and neglect. But also something far different from just listening to music on a bike.

<comment><USER4> I ride to work every day. Most of my commute is on a popular bike path. I always warn people before I pass them. Every few months, someone decides to do a U-turn or a left turn, without looking, right into my path, while I'm passing them, leading to a near-collision. So far, 100% of the adults who've done this have been wearing headphones. (I've had one kid without headphones do it; I said "on your left" and she got confused and veered left into me. Now I just say "passing.")

Based on this, I think joggers and cyclists with headphones are significantly more dangerous to themselves and others than those without.

Of course, it's possible that _you_ are different and can hear fine through your headphones, but I'm skeptical. (Just as I'm skeptical of people who claim they can drive fine while talking on the phone, or while drunk.)

<comment><USER3> Correlation is not causation. I would much rather think that those people were distracted or something. Not giving attention to their environments.

I CAN hear fine with my volume setting. Believe me.

Listening so loud or with headphones that cut out other sounds is dangerous, of course. I was not talking about that and I thought I had made that clear.

Just don't tell me that I cannot listen to music while biking. Unless you want to argue about the possible distracting itself, then we could go on about car radios.

<comment><USER5> Trust me -- I can text and drive at the same time. I'm a pro.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I have been bike commuting for nine years. The biggest things that change since the initial rush of delight?

First, as time goes on, you care a lot more about safety. Newbies may write about how they can meditate or listen to music while riding, but experienced riders know they must always stay alert. You shouldn't be meditating, you should be focused on potential dangers.

Second, the weight loss? Not as big a deal as time goes on. Don't ask me the medical reason why, maybe it's the same phenomenon as when people who haven't worked out for years start a program and quickly lose 10 pounds of water weight but then find the rest is harder to lose. Commuting usually doesn't involve the intense aerobic activity associated with road racing.

The 300 dollar bike you are satisfied with? I didn't stay satisfied after a few months. After trying many options (too many) I took Sheldon Brown's advice and ride a touring bike, with disc brakes, fenders, rack, and panniers.

<comment><USER7> > Don't ask me the medical reason why, maybe it's the same phenomenon as when > people who haven't worked out for years start a program and quickly lose 10 > pounds of water weight but then find the rest is harder to lose

It's because the body is extremely good at adapting to whatever you do to it. Even if you were riding for a hundred hours a week at maximum aerobic output, your body would slowly adapt and you would stop making gains (getting faster, losing weight).

Over a long period of exercise, you have to constantly vary what you are doing to your body so it won't adapt and plateau. Keep throwing different challenges at your body, and it will keep adapting in an attempt to deal with these new challenges.

Try sprinting home from work at max output a couple of days a week, then intentionally go for an extremely long ride on the weekend at a sustainable pace. Don't do the same thing day-in, day-out

Also, eat less calories if you want to lose weight.

<comment><USER8> Also, people struggle with weight loss because they approach it only from the side of burning excess calories with exercise, but as long as their caloric requirements stay the same, the moment they stop exercising, calories start piling up again. If you want to burn more fuel, there is longer lasting approach: grow a bigger engine. That means: gain some muscle. The more muscle you have, the more calories you will be burning, even while eating an ice- cream on a couch. Muscles will also make you look less flabby, because toned abs will keep your belly in check.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> One thing that I love about my bike commute is that it takes 50 minutes by car, in good traffic...up to 90 minutes if traffic is bad. When I ride by bike, it's always 65 - 70 minutes. I might lose 30 minutes of my day, but the 2.5 hours of total fitness more than makes up for it, not to mention the boredom of sitting in a car idling on the highway...which has obvious environmental impacts.

<comment><USER10> Long ride!

I love that my bike ride is much more consistent in time than driving or taking the train. Heavy traffic just doesn't slow me down much. Conversely, open roads don't let me speed up much either.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> My ride to work is over an hour each way. Been doing it every day for years here in the northeast U.S. A mostly residential route. Funny thing is if I take the bus, it takes the same amount of time.

I started doing this out of a distaste for cars and statistics show that driving is actually much more dangerous then biking.

Weather-wise, I far prefer snow to rain. The hardest part is cold feet in the winter - never found a great solution. My advice is, if questionable weather is a deterrent, dont bike those days. But dont let it stop you from biking at least when it is nice out.

I do a single ear headphone with audiobooks (note I am not in a city). Gotta have something to listen to or I would be bored to death. Music can drown out important road dangers. Spoken audio has enough space and quiet that emergencies easily get my attention.

<comment><USER12> Have you tried neoprene booties? They worked great for me in the midwest. My feet stayed plenty warm, and I didn't even bother to wear thick socks.

The hands were always my biggest problem.

<comment><USER11> Yup. I used to wear booties when I wore clipping shoes. But then I switched to heavy boots without clips and it was warmer. Never had a problem with hands. I got some down ski mittens. In fact they are too hot - but the key is 'mittens'. Once I discovered that, there was no looking back.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I agree with almost everything said here. When I was living in San Francisco, though, my bike commute was only slightly longer than my bus commute (not because I am that fit, only because buses in San Francisco are terrible). SO MUCH less stressful! I did notice one thing, though: I wasn't reading as much or listening to podcasts as much anymore.

I live in NYC now and fortunately I'm a very short walk to work. I can't wait to buy a bike and start riding again, though I'll need to figure out how to fit one into my tiny apartment ...

<comment><USER14> Do it! I'm a NYC'er as well and getting a bike was one of the best decisions I've made recently. The city has gone wild with bike lanes, etc. and you'll be in good company.

And as for storage, a friend suggested something like this to me:

<http://www.shelterness.com/diy-bike-wall-storage-racks/>

Solves two problems - storage and wall art! ;)

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> The problem I have with this is I tend to uhh sweat more than a normal person. (Not because I'm out of shape, just because I sweat a lot...) I don't think I would feel comfortable biking to work simply because I would then smell all day and that's not exactly something I want to happen.

<comment><USER9> Shower at work? Once every couple of weeks, I load a work drawer up with fresh clothes, hand towels, etc. Guess I'm lucky that we have a gym in the facility, but I know others that just shower at the sports club down the street from their job.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> You should really wear a helmet 24/7!! Also body armor. Listening to music on a bike is clearly suicide. Please do not take ANY risks. At all, ever.

Also, become an entrepreneur. Take the plunge. Live your dream.

<comment><USER13> What's the benefit of not wearing a helmet when biking?

<comment><USER17> The benefit? You're not sending out the message that biking is dangerous. Would you send your kid out cycling if everyone is wearing helmets? When cyclists are called "road warriors"?

A helmet is necessary when road racing where there is a distinct risk of dropping over your handlebar: remember, a helmet only protects against hits directly on the top of your head.

Normal commuting? In the city? Biggest risk is getting hit in your soft side by a car or tipping over and hitting the road with your legs or hand or so. Where does the helmet help there?

Best protection: more cyclists on the road. Nobody in the Netherlands wears a helmet (apart from road racers) and you don't get 2000 killed cyclists per day :-)

<comment><USER18> Not sure where you get your info, but it is flat out wrong. It's not at all uncommon for bicycle commuters to hit an opening door or pulling out car, go over the handlebars, and smack their head on a very hard window or body panel --right where a helmet would protect them.

Ask any ER physician in a city (I know several) about head injuries from bike commuting and they will no doubt have stories.

As for sending the message that biking is dangerous: _biking is dangerous_. The correct message for kids to learn is that most things in life worth doing are dangerous, and the key to a successful life is learning to properly manage risk. Wearing a helmet is part of properly managing the risk of riding a bike.

<comment><USER17> Depend on the country, or more likely on the amount of cyclists. In the Netherlands, they consider the 1000kg steel cars to be the real dangerous threat, not the cyclists. It may sound like a play of words, but it isn't. Everyone cycles, so when you hit a junior cylist, you've pretty much potentially hit everyone's kid. People have been known to get a veritable witch hunt on their asses by local newspapers that way.

The car driver gets the blame, not the cyclist that forgot to wear a helmet.

So the key to safe biking is lots of bikes. Sadly, dressing up like for an execution ("I will get hit by a car door and the car owner can just say sorry and move on so I'll wear body armor") won't get society nowhere.

Note that it might very well be an individual's best choice in some countries, probably also in yours... But it is a sad best choice.

<comment><USER18> It's not about blame, it's about preventable injury. It's about reducing the chance you'll get a call from the hospital saying "your kid has had a bike accident and she is in a coma." I've had friends who work in ERs have to make those calls. In many cases if the kid had been wearing a helmet they would have had a mild concussion. Instead their life as they knew it is over.

If you don't want to wear a helmet, that is of course your decision. I just object--strongly--to your contention that helmets aren't necessary in commuting. That statement is just not based on any measurable facts.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Others have mentioned it, but it's worth saying again: please don't wear headphones while biking in a busy city. It only takes the one time when you need swerve around that parked car's open door and but can't quite hear the car that is about to pass you...

<comment><USER20> Don't depend on your ears to find out where another vehicle is located, use your eyes.

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> I also happen to bike to work and it's indeed a refreshing experience. For me, the hard part is on the morning where the ride is 10km of climbing only — it starts in somewhat traffic heavy streets and ends in a peaceful quiet forest. The good thing is that the evening ride requires almost no effort, and it's a real pleasure to feel the wind on the hot days.

I wouldn't do it if I couldn't take a shower at work, though.

(Also, piece of advice : take your breakfast AFTER the ride. Your guts will thank you for not doing it before and you will enjoy the taste of food even more)

<comment><USER13> Food is so delicious after a long ride. This is true in general of strenuous exercise. You've earned it!

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> Please don't ride with headphones in _both ears_. You cannot hear other cylists, for one, who may be passing you. In urban environments, this is particulalry problematic. Why? Because their is (1) already very limited space (crosswalks, jawalkers, doors opening, busses, etc); and (2) there is a huge range in speeds of _cyclists_ (lycra-guys, delivery-men, hipsters, commuters). One ear is plenty (look at pro-cyclists).

In CA it is also ILLEGAL, apparently.

The Law: Riding with Tunes

Only five states regulate the use of headphones by cyclists, and generally the limitations are directed at all vehicle operators. Two of those states–Florida and Rhode Island–prohibit any use of headsets. The intent is to ensure that vehicle operators won't inhibit their ability to hear sirens and vehicle horns.

The other three states that regulate the use of headsets–California, Delaware and Maryland–prohibit their use in both ears; in these states, one ear must be left uncovered. Maryland makes an exception to this law for riders on bike paths.

[http://www.bicyclelaw.com/road-rights/a.cfm/road-rights- list...](http://www.bicyclelaw.com/road-rights/a.cfm/road-rights-listen-up1)

</comment><comment><USER23> My work is about 4 miles from where I live and I usually run back home and it takes exactly the same amount of time as public transportation. I would jog to work as well but we don't have showers at work. I might just start experimenting with wet naps/towels, etc soon. I think that running truly is the greatest and safest way of commuting if the distances are reasonable.

</comment><comment><USER24> As someone who will be commuting by bike soon, I have to ask: what do you do when it rains/snows?

<comment><USER25> Wear the right clothes and bring a set of clothes to change into. :)

I bike to work in Ireland (150+ rain days a year - yay). Rain clothes takes care of that - just make sure they aren't too heavy.

When I was younger I worked as a mailman in Sweden for three winters, using a bike for 2-3h a day, every day. You don't even need a lot of clothes for that - a fleece over a set of thermal underwear will do you down to minus 10 C or so, after that you want a thicker jacket on top. Heat from the exercise keep you warm enough anyways.

For both rain and snow - get a good pair of gloves (hands are the only part that really sucks when wet/cold). For the cold, get a decent set of thermal underwear.

<comment><USER26> I've found a good, British-style rain cape is light years better than waterproof jackets and pants. Better airflow means you sweat less.

Another trick for the cold: unless it's Sweden-cold, you should be a bit chilly when you get on the bike, otherwise you will overheat rather quickly.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> I know this is an uncool thing to say, but I hated biking to work in downtown DC. DC has done a great job adding bike lanes, but they aren't everywhere. I found it to be quite the opposite of meditative and I arrived at work sweaty and uncomfortable.

<comment><USER28> I alleviated my sweat problem when I biked to work by taking almost miniature bird baths in the sink, or using baby wipes.

<comment><USER27> I'm pretty sure I would need a change of clothes to be comfortable again.

<comment><USER29> definitely - I've been riding to work in DC for 10+ years, but a shower is definitely a requirement to do it year round. I'm fortunate to work in a building now with a shower, but before that, I just got a membership at a nearby gym. The gym membership was cheaper than parking or metroing every day.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> > "Be happy Bike to work"

You're not a Londoner, I see.

<comment><USER31> I used to bike to work in central London. It requires being alert, but it was far better than driving, taking the tube or taking a bus.

I never wore headphones though. I would have considered that suicide.

<comment><USER13> Agree with the headphones bit. I can't believe it when people bike in a city with headphones and no helmet on.

<comment><USER32> It's a pretty big fine in NY (headphones) that's actually enforced. Also illegal in most cities AFAIK.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> Yes! I used to live in Bernal Heights in San Francisco and commute to SOMA everyday, and this is how my commute options broke down, time and money-wise:

Bike to BART, BART to Powell - 30 min, $1.75

Bike straight to work - 30 min, free

Bus to BART, BART to Powell - 30 minutes, $3.50 (I think?)

Bus to work - 45-60 minutes, $1.75

Bum a ride to work - 30-45 minutes, free

AND biking adds many non-quantifiable benefits, as the OP states. It's the best way to clear your mind, other than maybe a long walk or hike.

[edit for formatting]

</comment><comment><USER34> I am bike commuting to work for more than 6 years now. I do this through the whole year, summer and winter, everyday.

Always have a set of water proof clothes in your backpack. My experience is, if it rains it usually starts 10 minutes after you left home.

I had chronic pain in my knees probably from sitting before monitors the whole day. After one week of bike commuting to work the pain was gone.

</comment><comment><USER35> This matches my experiences. I ride most mornings before work since I telecommute, but it's the same idea. The positive effect on my mood surprised me — it only takes a little bit of exercise!

As an aside, please be careful wearing headphones when you ride. There are plenty of flame wars over that (and helmets, and brakes) over in /r/bicycling.

</comment><comment><USER36> I work from coffeeshops and such, which is inheriently flexible. I've started trying to walk or bike as much as humanly possible. It helps to have a terrible car that is frankly embarrassing to drive. I definitely feel better the days I walk a few miles.

<comment><USER37> Don't be embarrassed by a cheap or low-quality car. All that means is that you're more likely to not be paying monthly bills to pay off your car. That's a good thing to be proud of.

<comment><USER38> As long as it doesn't spew clouds of blue smoke every time you slightly press on the gas pedal. Those cars should be violently scrapped with prejudice! (and all diesel trucks too actually...)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER39> Never wear headphones while biking in a city. Unless you want to die.

</comment><comment><USER40> Regarding the helmet: they truly are a no-brainer. Even the cheap 30 buck ones the OP talks about must meet the minimum federal guidelines for safety (in the US). No need for a more expensive helmet, which mainly provide less weight (avoid neck strain over long rides) and better ventilation.

Helmets save lives and do not have to look dorky. But you do get a bad case of hat hair.

<comment><USER41> I don't want to discuss if helmets actually have any safety advantage (there are studies claiming both things).

But I don't think that biking is a particularly dangerous activity. I don't wear a helmet while walking on the street or while driving a car, so why should I wear a helmet when biking?

<comment><USER42> In a car you have airbags, which are sort of like an external helmet.

As for walking, there are a lot more things that can go wrong on a bike. You can hit a pothole, get your wheel caught in a train track, slip on an oil patch, get doored, have your chain get stuck, not be able to clip out of your pedal, get something caught in your spokes, take a corner on some sand, hit the ground with your pedal, etc.

These things aren't very likely, but any of them provides a fair chance to lose control of your bike and then hit something or the ground at a decent speed. The more traffic you ride in the more likely something will happen. And if you ride every day to commute, you'll almost certainly have some kind of incident sooner or later.

Personal anecdote section:

I bike commuted for 2.5 years in the south bay without any major incidents. Later, I had been bike commuting in SF for about a month when I had an accident that involved hitting my head on a parked truck and then the ground (at least I think). The helmet ended up slightly scraped up. I don't know how badly my head would have been injured without it; it may have been just a scrape as well. But I'm quite happy I didn't get to find out.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER43> i've been an avid cyclist all my life, you have just hit the beginning of what cycling is such an amazing activity, that an i think endurance sports go hand in hand with the entrepreneurial life. congrats on this!

</comment><comment><USER44> Post added to our action wiki <https://didthis.com/bikecommute> Thanks for inspiring us to "redo" & spread this lifestyle meme!

</comment><comment><USER45> A fellow Madisonian! I happen to cross Old Sauk Rd. on my bike to work as well! I also run, and use MapMyRun for that.

</comment><comment><USER46> Sorry, I live next door to work, the time to get the bike out I would already be there by foot :)

</comment><comment><USER47> Nice Hotlinking.

</comment><comment><USER48> What about walking? Why the focus on biking?

<comment><USER49> Walking is a fantastic commute. It would be nice if people would structure their lives to walk. My ideal commute would be a five to ten minute walk to a nice office down a street with apartments and shops(it's currently ten feet, which has good parts and bad).

But for many people, including the author, bike commuting is the most practical for the distance covered. And for some, talking about bikes and bike gear is much more rewarding than talking about shoes.

<comment><USER50> 5-10m is too short. You need a good half hour to do some productive thinking. My current walk is about 45m which is fine too. The bus saves maybe 15m so I usually walk.</comment></comment></comment>


Smalltalk's two-fold failure - <AUTHOR> http://richardkulisz.blogspot.com/2011/02/smalltalk-software-industrys-greatest.html

<comment><USER2> Lets go through his "8 great exceptions":

"1 - variables are not objects." Yes, ok, they are "slots", if you like, that names and hold reference to an object. You can in every Smalltalk I've used, do metaprogramming to change an object's "shape" at runtime. That is, modify the variable definitions. And yes, if you like you can add this as a nice high-level API, such as 'thisContext addVariablesNamed: #('name1' 'name2' 'name3')'. However, be warned, Smalltalk is intended to be a Class-oriented language, so you are modifying all instances of this class, not just the one object. You can add new "attributes" to a single object, but then I wouldn't recommend using variables, but instead, roll your own framework for handling "attributes on objects", which can among other things "send messages to a [attribute] to query when it was last read from or written to".

"2 - the existence of variables is bound early at compile time, not at runtime." Yeah, by definition of being a class-oriented language that's generally considered an ok thing to do. If you really don't like it, do some metaprogramming, change the compiler, or use a language like self or javascript.

"3 - assignments and hard returns are not messages" - Interesting. Now the author is simply upset that his favourite language isn't as pure as he would like.

"4 - the unary, binary, and keyword order is not how the compiler actually evaluates anything." Yes, over the years, the compilers have gotten more complex and try to optimise things. There are corner cases where they get it wrong. Regardless of language, I always follow this rule: "If you think that perhaps someone else reading your code might not understand the order of operation, use parenthesis." I follow this rule in C, Smalltalk, even Ruby ;)...never trust a compiler.

"5 - #at:put: doesn't return self" hmmm...I don't buy his argument that it should return the receiver instead of the put argument. Its a library design decision and was made long ago. Call it cruft or bad design if you will. But I bet there is someone from the late '70s still kicking that can recall why they did it that way.

"6 - on object creation, the #initialize method isn't sent by default" I don't see this as a problem. It seems like he wants the language to behave like C++ now and guarantee some "constructor" be called. I like that Smalltalk doesn't assume I want to construct all objects this way.

"7 - when a collection triggers #grow" Don't like how a specific collection class works? Use a different one or write your own. Collections by default also won't handle concurrent access well...so write one that is thread safe. This is a minor gripe about a library, not the language.

"8 - the compiler cheats with True and False by inlining them. " The compiler cheats on lots of things and for good reason. People want code that performs well, and in days past, they cared a great deal about memory. This isn't a language issue, its what happens between the compiler and VM and is implementation specific.

"9 - there is no infinite object cloner out of the box". Also a library issue. Write your own "infinite cloner". I for one, thank our Smalltalk creators that they didn't add such a nuclear device to the core libs. I've seen enough bad code over the years without something this easily abused laying about.

The author sort of lost me when we was bashing functional languages. As nice as Smalltalk is to work with, not having side effects (functional) is truly amazing!!

<comment><AUTHOR> Note that his point here is not with the expressive power of Smalltalk, but with the complexity it puts in front of the programmer. Workarounds or the existence of ancient wisdom about why things are the way they are aren't really responding to the point he is making.

I agree that 6 and 9 are very weak points.

 _bashing functional languages_ \- the rants detract from the seriousness of the good points the author makes, who seems to be pushing a Common Lisp is the true way line. In fact, ideas from pure functional programming could clean up several of his exceptions: in support of this I can point to Peter van Roy's comments on PL design convergence.

<http://lambda-the-ultimate.org/node/1805>

<comment><USER2> I should also add that Smalltalk didn't "fail" for its technical faults. It failed (in an oversimplified nutshell) because the companies that owned the Smalltalks had business models of charging per developer seat and their investors would not allow them to "pivot" and drop all that revenue to plug it into a browser for free. Sun could afford to give away Java for free as there was no business model behind what started as a lab experiement. Combine this with "the Internet age is coming" mantra that hit in the mid-90s and you have a perfect storm that put a hold on enterprises moving forward with Smalltalk. The internal priorities of enterprises were either put on hold or changed to address "this new Internet thing".

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> This guy appears to be a well-known troll, which is supported by the incoherent nature of this article and the rest of his blog:

<http://let.sysops.be/wiki/Richard_Kulisz>

<comment><USER4> The article reminds me of Xah Lee's production: there seems to be kernels of truth scattered all over, but they're embedded in a great morass of nonsense, contradictions, insanity and downright trolling.

I liked his declaration of 8 exceptions, followed by the listing of 9 items.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> If the author had been a Lisp hacker, the conclusion of this amusing polemic would have ended with the announcement of a project to create the One True Dialect. I don't see why he doesn't, though based on others' comments, it's apparently because he is a troll.

I've always been charmed by Smalltalk, though having spent years in 90% functional programming land (mostly Scheme and Clojure), I</comment>


Amazon expands middleman role in latest online payments push - <AUTHOR> http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/06/09/us-amazon-com-payment-idUSKBN0EK0HW20140609

<comment><USER2> This is a confusing headline. What it really means, I think, is simply that you can now do a recurring transaction against Amazon as a payment type. So they're not really helping "merchants do subscriptions" like other services in that space do. Merchants would already need to know how to handle a recurring/subscription transaction. They could now just add an Amazon payment method next to CC's and PayPal where before they couldn't.

</comment><comment><USER3> Very interesting and much anticipated move. The title is slightly misleading. What they offer is an alternative to PayPal with recurring.

If you are running an eCommerce site that is built on an independent platform, it really does add more value to accept payments via Amazon just like PayPal as an alternate payment method.

Will be interesting to watch if they expand the service to a global market or keep it restricted to US only approach. PayPal's strength is in making it a global play, especially in markets where trust factor / dispute resolution is important.

</comment><comment><USER4> My first thought was that it would be nifty to pay with Amazon, but my second thought is that I would rather give a less trusted party my credit card number than have to sign in with Amazon to do it (and have to be wary of phishing). Getting a new credit card is easy, and I am fairly confident that nothing overly bad will happen when I use my credit card on a website.

<comment><USER5> You haven't used Kickstarter? They've been using Amazon for payments for quite a while now.

The experience is okay. Comparable to PayPal, but maybe a little simpler.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> It looks like Amazon has the exact same rate (lowest tier) as Paypal: 2.9% + $0.30.

</comment><comment><USER7> What they charge as a 'fee' for each CC transaction will determine what competition in the online payment space will look like over the next few years...

</comment><comment><USER8> Being in Canada, I wish amazon didn't require an American address and CC to use this.</comment>


Ask HN: Is there a service that provides quick hit technical help? - <AUTHOR>

I am a single non-technical founder and -- while i'm learning a ton of frontend coding due to my startup -- I often wish there were a service I could go to when I'm in a pinch or when I know the thing it'd take me an hour to figure out could be done in a minute by someone who knows what they're doing.
Stackexchange is great, but sometimes I'd rather just pay someone $50 for the simple css/javascript fix.
Is there a marketplace for these types of small tasks composed of programmers looking to earn some extra cash in their downtime? Something cheaper and more democratic than tweaky, but more curated than odesk. <comment><USER2> Fiverr maybe?

[http://fiverr.com](http://fiverr.com)

Edit: 2 r's not 3.</comment>


MenuetOS - An OS written entirely in assembly - <AUTHOR> http://www.goodgearguide.com.au/article/315421/we_talk_developers_behind_menuetos_an_operating_system_written_entirely_assembly_language/ <comment><USER2> Assembly gives you the ability to write finely tuned, lightweight, fast software. It also gives you the ability to write poorly designed, bloated, slow software.

Replace the word "Assembly" with "C" in the above sentence, and it remains true.

Good on them for doing it Assembly. I don't have the patience for Assembly or C, so I appreciate those who do.

<comment><USER3> Replace that with most other languages.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Writing this in C would be how much slower? Not much.

Modern bloat comes from the software footprint, not so much about performance gains anymore. Compare the UI of MenuetOS with the latest GTK and the 100 shared libraries involved.

It's not so much that C would be slow but that with C and high-level languages it's very easy to do lots of the wrong kind of work.

<comment><USER5> I remember when I was taking an assembly class in college we always joked about how ridiculous it would be to write an OS in assembly. I'm surprised someone actually did it.

C is so close to assembly that these seems quite unnecessary. Although I do agree with one of the developer's points that Assembly has a kind of beauty about it.

<comment><USER6> Back in the day, _every OS_ was written in assembly. Writing Unix in C rather than assembly was actually a controversial innovation at the time.

<comment><USER7> Unix was written in PDP-7 assembly and _then_ ported to C.

The porting to C also cemented C's winning of the systems programming race, and fully liberated systems programmers from the underlying machine. C made the machine-word obselete by standardizing on a few types with relative widths.

If that wasn't the case, something like BLISS would have caught on, and BLISS didn't look the same on different platforms; its data types mapped 1:1 to underlying machine words and you had to deal with explicit alignment, allocation, and linkage. Explicit addressing modes and explicit heap and stack allocation modes. IOW, a royal pain in the butt, even though bliss was expression-based and well thought out (read all about Olin Shivers' praises for Bliss, though personally I don't see why: <http://www.paulgraham.com/thist.html>)

C is good.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Years ago, I booted this off a floppy drive and was impressed by how feature rich it was given that it was written from scratch in assembly language. Looks like it's prettier now.

</comment><comment><USER9> If they wrote this in pure assembly as a personal project: congratulations and good on them. However, if they actually believe that this is a performance benefit I have to say that they know just enough about hardware optimization to be dangerous.

One of the great things about writing the core in C and then either optimizing for the compiler or writing the inner loop in the target ISA is that one can adapt with the CPU architecture. Anyone who has done development for true high performance architectures knows that you need to optimize for memory architecture as much as CPU architecture. When the new Xeons come out with double the L2 and a larger cache line and X cores in NUMA layout, writing everything in the Pentium 3 ISA is going to look pretty stupid.

</comment><comment><USER10> Cool! Now, is there a HOWTO for re-building it to my ARM phone? ;)

<comment><USER11> that's the thing with assembly, you can't port it that easily.

<comment><USER12> You use a compiler that accepts the assembly code, and produces output for the target architecture.

This was how DEC VMS was ported from VAX to Alpha and later to Itanium, as a substantial part of that operating system is written in VAX Macro32 assembler.

<comment><USER10> That however is very much one-way street. Porting native Itanium assembly (I know, I know..) to VAX would be substantially more challenging task.

Similarly, if you attempt to port this (admittedly neat) system to ARM using such approach there'd be a lot of bumps. Beginning with all those clever SSE2 hacks not being able to expand automatically, through deficiency of caching and optimization assumptions made for original architecture in new circumstances, to conceptual mismatch of certain parts. E.g. what if you want to handle a case when system has to boot up in ARM Thumb mode? You just can't abstract that away with assembly.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Be sure to check Triangle OS: <http://www.wcools.nl/>

It's even more impressive because it's a one-man effort, IMO.

<comment><USER14> I think Ville Turjanmaa wrote almost all of Menuet.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> Hearing stories like this makes me think about how things 'used to be done' - what was once common practice now seems like an impressive parlor trick, cool hack, or marathon of hacker cool!

</comment><comment><USER16> This reminds me of a guy I knew who wrote an ASM based OS for the m68k called Synthesis or Synthetix or something like that. It even had it's own window manager, and was apparently blazingly fast. It was especially as a developer station as they'd written their own C compiler in assembly that for it's time was (allegedly) the fastest compiler out there. I think his name was Henry Massalin.

</comment><comment><USER17> Kids stuff. Try doing that on a Z80. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SymbOS></comment>


Amazon's Cashierless Store Is Almost Ready for Prime Time - <AUTHOR> https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-11-15/amazon-s-cashierless-store-is-almost-ready-for-prime-time <comment><USER2> So they've spent an extra year with people who fit the demographics of an Amazon employee trying to trick their systems. That should protect them from people who fit the demographics of an Amazon employee.

There still seem to be many of the issues people brought up a year ago, such as how this depends on the presence of a phone with the appropriate app installed, or what happens with groups of people in which only one person has the app (such as with kids).

More to the point, I can see how this would be better for Amazon, but I'm not sure it's better for most shoppers. Amazon gets to charge people who graze on produce while in the store, and kids who consume snacks in the store, and can presumably produce video evidence when customers throw a fit. But they can also overcharge me for things and how am I supposed to know that? Check the app in the parking lot to make sure I have everything it charged me for? What recourse do I have if not? What if something wasn't charged as marked on the shelf? I've already paid at that point. I've gone through this enough times with stores high-end and low-end to know it's inevitable for Amazon.

The leverage is all Amazon's, and the convenience doesn't offset that for me. I know I'm not alone, but maybe there aren't enough like me to dent their ambitions.

<comment><USER3> I presume you can check your cart via the app before checking out... in terms of overcharging, how do you know when you're overcharged at the store when the cashier checks you out if you have more than 10 or so items? Do you remember all the prices of each item?

<comment><USER4> Yes. People who care remember the prices.

<comment><USER5> Congrats if you are able to do so.

I often try to predict the value of the items in the shopping cart when waiting in the cashier queue. Most of the time shopping in a supermarket, I can predict the total sum in a range of +/\- 2 Euros. My girlfriend? Perhaps in a range of +/\- 5 Euros. My mother? She would only be irritated if the sum is at least 10 Euros above what she expected. And that is for 15-25 items and a total sum in the range of 40-60 Euros. But there is no way my mother, my girlfriend or even I would detect small over- or undercharging most of the time.

<comment><USER6> It's not about the total, but the prices of individual items as they show up on the checkout screen, which are pretty easy to remember (they're mostly the same week to week).

My local supermarket has some specials which are loyalty card only, so when the item is scanned the full price shows up. I use this to determine when to use the loyalty card for minimum tracking, minimum time, and minimum price (it doesn't have my personal info associated with it, but still connects purchases and it's faster to skip).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> You know what I find convenient? Cash. You just take it out of your wallet and hand it over in exchange for goods. No tracking, no receipt emails, no machine learning of my behavior to figure out when my partner is pregnant or whatever, no extra apps, no facial recognition, no 2-4% charge for businesses that only doesn't apply if you're an international monopoly.

Oh, my phone is out of batteries. Guess I'll just give up and head home.

Oops, looks like a hurricane/forest fire/proletarian uprising has knocked out local infrastructure. (Luckily, this almost never happens anymore!) Man, it would be great if we had a medium of exchange that would work under these adverse conditions. Guess I'll just barter my Harry's razors and other hipster goods to get some formula for my baby!

<comment><USER8> Cash is somewhat ok until you buy something. It's fine to carry around say £100 in a few notes, but then you buy something and you get back £5 and £10 notes and a handful of change and now it's a big jingly mess of shrapnel. I think contactless credit cards are the best right now. You don't need to hand anything over, get anything back, or enter anything, just wave the card.

<comment><USER7> I personally love $5 and $10 bills. I frequently do exact change when I have a bunch of those. Buying a BLT at the bodega? That's $5.75 with a coke. Here's $6. At the end of the day, I fire my change in a bucket and bring it to a machine once a year to get exchanged.

Also, taking out $100 in 2017 is silly, at least if you spend more than $200 a week, which is most non-students here. I just get out the max that the ATM will let me have and I never regret it.

"But what if I get mugged?" This is silly. If you actually do get mugged, you want to have a big load of money on you, not $3.29. Happy muggers mean fewer dead programmers.

<comment><USER9> This works less well with other currencies

If you're working with euros your largest denomination coin is 2€ . In Yen it's 500 yen! This is not chump change and just throwing those coins into the charity box can leave you with effectively increasing your lunch pricing by 50% if you have a "give all coins to charity" policy.

If you have the cash for it more power to you, of course.

<comment><USER10> Who said anything about charity?

<comment><USER9> Ah, I think I misread the original comment to be something like "drop the coins in the tip jar". Please disregard.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> > Engineers are also figuring out which person to charge when a couple goes > shopping together.

This made me giggle. I've tried to figure out the same thing myself when shopping with a significant other or close friend. I'm having a hard time imagining how this would be cast as an engineering problem.

<comment><USER12> A "split the bill" function in your receipt?

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> My pain point isn't checkout, it's wandering around a store and dodging large carts in narrow aisles. Maybe they'll tackle that next.

I really wish Amazon would let me put dry and frozen goods in an app, then have kiva robots fetch those while I just browse produce. Like, you could leave the produce section normal, people freak about produce, but make the rest of the store a robot filled warehouse that customers don't even enter.

<comment><USER14> People spend more money when they spend time wandering around the rest of the store.

<comment><USER13> Yeah, planet money had a good episode debating whether that's why they put milk way in the back of the store.

But people also spend more money when it's easy to do so, and when they aren't frustrated by the process. How many trips to the store aren't even happening because it's an ordeal?

Malls are playing the strategy of keeping people in store, while the internet is lowering barriers to the experience.

Malls are dying and the internet is winning. There are a lot of reasons, but 'make it easier for customers to give you money' is probably not an awful business model.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> There's a YC company also working on the same thing, here's their demo from 3 months ago [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yeS8TJwBAFs](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yeS8TJwBAFs)

[https://www.standardcognition.com/](https://www.standardcognition.com/)

<comment><USER16> Nice! It sort of looks like they're deliberately exaggerating their hand motions when they pick up an item to maybe ensure the camera gets a good look?

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> > Shoppers visiting an Amazon Go store will scan their smartphones upon > entering. Cameras and shelf sensors will then work together to figure out > which items have been removed and who removed them, the person says; there > will be no need for tracking devices, such as radio frequency chips, > embedded in the merchandise.

Hold on - "shelf sensors"? Wasn't Amazon originally advertising this as being _purely_ camera-based, and that was why everyone was so skeptical it could ever work sufficiently well? 'Shelf sensors' could cover a heck of a lot short of embedding individual RFID sensors...

<comment><USER18> I wonder if it still is camera based, and just a disconnect with the press' understanding of Amazon's technology/terminology. I consider a camera to still be a sensor, in this fashion. So, a camera pointed at a shelf could still be a "shelf sensor."

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> I still dont see anyone in Amazon Bookstores. Expecting them to close soon. Why is there so much fascination to reinvent physical stores when we are perfectly happy to get stuff delivered to our homes.

<comment><USER2> In October 2017, an estimated $486.6 billion in sales took place at retail stores in the U.S.

For e-commerce, the total for the entire three-month quarter was $115.3 billion.

[0] [https://www.census.gov/retail/](https://www.census.gov/retail/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> What if I don't have an Amazon account? Can I even enter the store?

<comment><USER21> Very likely no. Much like costco, I suspect.

<comment><USER2> One person in a group must wave around a Costco card for the entire group to enter.

I wonder if I would be allowed to grocery shop as I do now, with my adult daughter who doesn't have an Amazon account of her own.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> No mention of people wearing masks or putting them on after the fact or better yet, completely changing clothing? That's the easiest, simplest and cheapest way to beat this.

<comment><USER23> How do you figure? Identification isn't only based on your face.

From the article:

"Employees have tried to fool the technology. One day, three enterprising Amazonians donned bright yellow Pikachu costumes and cruised around grabbing sandwiches, drinks and snacks. The algorithms nailed it, according to a person familiar with the situation, correctly identifying the employees and charging their Amazon accounts, even though they were obscured behind yellow polyester. "

It links to an account on your phone. You're under full surveillance while in the store.

To go any further down the premise you're suggesting, you're already getting to traditional methods of walking into a store, stealing merchandise, and then running for it.

<comment><USER24> Pfff. If I could get a waiver of legal liability in advance I can think of multiple ways to get around that. Since there aren't any cashiers whose safety could be threatened I'm heartily in favor of people developing creative hacks for the brief duration that remains before we turn the whole damn world into a capitalist panopticon.

<comment><USER5> So, why trying to be creative? Just robbing the store in a conventional fashion should do - and facing security/police when leaving. Good luck.

<comment><USER24> Because that's boring and not responsive to the situation.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> Except if you wear red

</comment><comment><USER26> It'll be "almost ready" for prime time once it undergoes extensive adversarial "testing" by Seattle bums. Until then it's a PR exercise.

</comment><comment><USER27> There's a real danger of someone forcing an Amazon customer back in to the store at hidden gun or knife point.

</comment><comment><USER28> > _Employees have tried to fool the technology. One day, three enterprising > Amazonians donned bright yellow Pikachu costumes and cruised around grabbing > sandwiches, drinks and snacks. The algorithms nailed it, according to a > person familiar with the situation, correctly identifying the employees and > charging their Amazon accounts, even though they were obscured behind yellow > polyester._

Okay, so 3 employees tested it? This tech is going to be "tested" in the real world by tens or hundreds of thousands of people in the first few months/year. Something tells me things will go far from smoothly.

I've only had an experience with a "semi-cashierless" store, sort of speak, where the cashier would scan your stuff, and then it would give you a ticket, and you'd go to pay with it at a not-so-intuitive machine. Oh, and you also had to scan it again before you left the area at the designated exit-gate.

Let me tell you, it felt like both a more frustrating experience than just paying the cashier _and_ it took longer time. The only thing this did is save the cashier 15 seconds per person, while the store paid for a dozen of those machines who knows what.

So we'll see if this is indeed a better experience, or it's just meant to save Amazon money on not having to pay for cashiers, while giving customers a more frustrating experience and making them spend more time in the store to register every item (for the same number of purchased items).

Apple's Face ID can't even identify your own face 100% of the time. How is Amazon's tech going to identify (from a distance) millions of people that pass through the store and every item they got with 100% accuracy??

<comment><USER29> You need to have an app on your phone and scan a code from the app/phone to enter. My guess is that it is based on location tracking of the phone (via either Bluetooth or WiFi) rather than facial recognition.

<comment><USER21> Probably some facial / clothing recognition goes on as well when you scan to keep track of you.

<comment><USER30> How about if someone dressed in a niqab, how will those people be identified?</comment></comment></comment></comment>