Google bans Zoom from employees' computers - <AUTHOR> https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/pranavdixit/google-bans-zoom <comment><USER2> Some thoughts:

1\. Google's threat model may not be your threat model, and it definitely isn't the threat model of my daughter's school. A corporation like Google may be concerned using native applications, written in unsafe languages, written by developers from other corporations in China. That said, Zoom isn't wrong for everyone.

2\. Google is motivated to push their own solution for obvious reasons.

3\. Tavis, or others, at Project Zero might know some things, maybe we'll find out.

<comment><USER3> > Google's threat model may not be your threat model, and it definitely isn't > the threat model of my daughter's school. A corporation like Google may be > concerned using native applications, written in unsafe languages, written by > developers from other corporations in China. That said, Zoom isn't wrong for > everyone.

Google's threat model surely differs in some way from a school, but the specific threats you named seem like threats equally applicable to the surfaces identifiable in the threat model of a school.

<comment><USER4> The threat model for a school is kids/others disrupting sessions and creepers using access to gawp at (or communicate with kids). Since the Chinese government is unlikely to feel the need to compel Zoom to do that, the fact that they have all the keys centrally stored is not a problem.

Google's threat model actually does include state level attack (And specifically by China) to steal IP or access confidential user data.

<comment><USER5> I great worry that China's intelligence service has the zoom traffic of American's routed to the Chinese zoom servers, so they can intercept.

<comment><USER6> Yes, but why does it matter if China intercepts your American school children? Why would they want to? That's not a reasonable threat model.

<comment><USER7> It still leaks information. How many kids you have, their name, some things about their personality, who they are friends with, etc. Think about how someone who wants to hurt or control you could could use that information.

<comment><USER8> You seriously think the Chinese government is going to stoop to K&R with random Americans?

The Chinese government is the last entity I'd be worried about with this kind of information (unless, of course, you live in China). Certain criminals in your own country are a much bigger concern.

<comment><USER9> Doubtful. But "the Chinese government" is comprised of individuals who might want to make a quick buck selling information on various markets. Perhaps to those certain criminals better positioned to take advantage of it.

This is similar to the concern some of us had over giving local government departments access to our full Opal card public transport travel histories here in Australia. Not all government employees are up to no good, but some are. Don't give them more than they need.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> (disclaimer: I work at El Goog)

A number of companies have rightfully banned Zoom's native apps, given how insecure they are. I had previously uninstalled it when the news about the secret web server they install came out. Google is still allowing use of the web app, but the web app bizarrely doesn't support Grid/Gallery View, which is the main reason my friends/family wanted to use it.

Hangouts Meet was optimized for work meetings where most people would be dialing in from high-bandwidth meeting rooms, not everyone individually dialing in from home, but hopefully now they've heard the loud feedback about the especial usefulness of Gallery View during quarantine times and will introduce the feature soon.

For now I'm using the Chrome extension that enables this feature client-side using JS/CSS, and staying tf away from Zoom. With how little I used Zoom before quarantine, I don't understand the adoration for it (I found its UI confusing and quality similar to other tools), and I haven't been able to find any benchmarks comparing its video quality for people on less good internet connections (my home network is pretty strong).

<comment><USER11> We switched from google hangouts to zoom a while ago because the quality "felt" better. We are a small distributed team where our internet connections run the range of fast to slow. We didn't track numbers or anything, but fewer dropouts, frozen videos, better sound quality, etc. Maybe we all just had better internet days each time we used zoom though. Never know.

The UI is initially confusing, but so is the UI for every video chat app I've used. It seems to be the fad to have "clever" UI in video chats apps (controls that auto-hide, non-standard icons, low contrast, non standard control placement (use the standard toolbar luke!) etc.

On top of that zoom has always "just worked". The "just worked" thing is now resulting in security woes, but still. Start a meeting, send link. Done. Online works, dial in works.

Contrast with hangouts (dropped non-chrome browser support for at least a year). To this day we have users that can't use slack video for unknown reasons (app store slack doesn't work as well as slack installer slack or something). WebEx is some horror show that seems to constantly re-install itself for each meeting. You're lucky if you can get it going before the meeting is over.

Where most apps stop at video chat and maybe poor quality screen sharing, zoom has a pretty deep enterprise feature set. Good webinar support, integration with SIP systems, SSO, recording etc.

<comment><USER12> When you say hangouts, do you mean old hangouts or the newer Hangouts Meet? They are 2 very different products.

<comment><USER13> It is, as of today, just Google Meet, no "Hangouts".

<comment><USER14> I thought so as well, but apparently it's called Google Hangouts Meet. [https://gsuite.google.com/products/meet/](https://gsuite.google.com/products/meet/)

(disclaimer - I work at Google, but not on teams that build video chat software)

<comment><USER13> Disclaimer: also work at Google

[https://www.theverge.com/2020/4/8/21214059/google- hangouts-m...](https://www.theverge.com/2020/4/8/21214059/google-hangouts- meet-rebrand-video-chat-conferencing) you would be incorrect

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> "Employees who have been using Zoom to stay in touch with family and friends can continue to do so through a web browser or via mobile."

(Disclosure: I work for Google, speaking only for myself)

<comment><USER16> Yeah this should be higher. Also work @ G, and it's just the desktop version of the app that's been disallowed. We can still run the Zoom web app on corp machines.

<comment><USER17> One thing that puts me off about Zoom is the way it tries to push you into downloading the desktop app when the web app should be fine and is what I prefer.

It uses shitty dark patterns that require two or three clicks and at one point, if I'm not mistaken, waiting for a link to appear after a delay.

In my most recent experience with it, it led to a zip file being automatically downloaded to my computer. This when I already have had plenty of previous experience with the web app and was deliberately trying to reach to the web page for a meeting for which I had been sent a URL.

Slack does similar things but isn't quite so aggressive about it.

<comment><USER6> > One thing that puts me off about Zoom is the way it tries to push you into > downloading the desktop app when the web app should be fine and is what I > prefer.

I'm pretty sure they do that because their web app is garbage, and they know people will get a much better experience in the native app.

Notably, Zoom's native app is truly native; it's not some electron wrapper like Slack or Teams. I don't think it's a coincidence that Zoom is both (A) the only major solution that seem to work consistently with large numbers of participants, and (B) the only one not using WebRTC.

<comment><USER18> > and they know people will get a much better experience in the native app.

not if I'm a user who is actively trying to not install the native app. for me, and likely many others, security and privacy trump performance benchmarks and UI/UX all day, every day.

<comment><USER19> And in that case you can use the web app. The grandparent talked about a "dark pattern" and it's really hard to see one if the native client is better than the web version.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Zoom has a not very well published chrome app (intended for chromebook users). You can install it in normal chrome and it gives you a much better experience than the web version without all the issues of the desktop app.

I trust zoom a lot more when it is running inside a chrome sandbox than as a native app.

<comment><USER21> I use this because I have a pixelbook and it works pretty well except for two issues: (1) minor issue that you have to click the "leave meeting" button, you can't just close the window or else it strangely relaunches and (2) major issue is that you can't change your video background which is a killer feature IMO.

<comment><USER22> I haven't been able to find a way to change my video background on the Linux client either. The image recognition software must be difficult to reliably implement for their lower-value platforms (as in, it would cost them too much to get it working well relative to the number of users).

<comment><USER23> Works for me on Linux, after signing in (I'm using a paid plan).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> I mean, Google bans MS Office from employees' computers as well (with special- case exceptions), so they use Docs instead. Since Google has Meet (Hangouts), this isn't really surprising.

It mainly sucks for when an employee (especially in sales) has a call with a client that uses Zoom and can't use Meet, because then you're forced to dial in, which just puts you at a disadvantage when everyone can see everyone's face except yours.

Edit: per comments, people can still use the browser version of Zoom, so doesn't seem that bad.

<comment><USER25> MS Office isn't "banned" from employees' computers at Google. If you need it (and some do) you must request it specifically, because it costs Google a nontrivial amount of money for every user. Same thing with any piece of commercial software: for example, I have Adobe Photoshop on my Google laptop, and I had to request it because it costs Google a few hundred bucks, and most people don't need it at all.

Before Google Docs existed, many employees used MS Office, and when Docs was being rolled out Googlers were incentivized to switch to Docs by being offered kudos, swag, etc (ie, the carrot, not the stick).

<comment><USER26> > because it costs Google a nontrivial amount of money for every user.

Google is the fourth biggest public company in the world as measured by market cap.

A Microsoft 365 "E3" license is $20/user/month. They can afford it.

This restriction is entirely about eating your own dogfood.

<comment><USER25> Yes, we can afford it, and that's why if you want MS Office you click a button on a web page and get it immediately. But why would we throw away money by having it installed by default?

<comment><USER27> Can you guys stop astroturfing here. Nobody is dumb enough to believe that Google is saving money by not using office.

<comment><USER28> > Nobody is dumb enough to believe that Google is saving money by not using > office.

Maybe I'm dumb, why wouldn't they be saving money by not paying for Office? Obviously they could buy it for every employee, including the majority that don't need it, but why? They could also just light money on fire (but why?)?

<comment><USER27> Office is business productivity software. You don't buy it for every employee, you negotiate a license for the number of seats in use. It has way more features than google docs and is standard everywhere. It's like saying you could save money by having programmers write code on pencil and paper. You saved the money on the computer but you have a net loss because you lost the power and efficiency of real time editing, compiling and debugging. These corporate guys just drink the internal koolaid/spin from hr or whatever and come here repeating nonsense as if its fact and it annoys me. It's dogfooding with some minor privacy/security concerns since microsoft is competitor, we get it, just call it what it is and move on.

<comment><USER29> > It has way more features than google docs and is standard everywhere

I work for another FAANG and we don't use MS Word. It certainly isn't "standard" for us. It's not standard for two of the three FAANG companies, so "everywhere" is inaccurate. Being popular isn't the same thing as standard. Pages is a far more usable for the vast majority of use cases. Most people aren't creating extremely complicated word processing documents in their day- to-day. Word is a bloated mess. Keynote is far easier and more elegant than PowerPoint. Excel however certainly shines for big spreadsheet work, but for most spreadsheet work Numbers and the google spreadsheet are perfectly fine.

<comment><USER27> This isn't about the merits of excel over sheets, it's about employees coming on the board and lying to promote their company. Google makes 1.61 million in revenue per employee. Honestly it's only going to get worse, because if you see the videos of the company meetings, Sundar was always the super loyalist that would say anything to protect Google or run interference for senior leadership. And now that he's CEO they will start aping him.

<comment><USER30> Your reasoning is based on the belief that Google is sacrificing productivity by not giving all employees office. GP is directly contradicting that line of thought, which makes the rest of it fall apart.

<comment><USER27> there is two narratives, which do you think is more likely:

1\. Google is dogfooding it's own products to improve them and make them competitive and stop potential data/privacy/security leaks by using external software.

2\. Google is trying to save 20 bucks

There is nothing wrong with Google docs or sheets and I have used them both. But sooner or later you make enough documents or work with enough spreadsheets you're going to want or need some feature that office has.

<comment><USER25> Why should it be an either/or thing? Both are valid reasons for Google to prefer its employees use Docs. However the fact that you _can_ choose to use MS Office without any special permissions somewhat undermines your reasoning in point 1.

Google may be a rich company but it's also a very frugal company in many ways, particularly wrt technology (they pioneered the "huge amounts of redundant cheap hardware" approach to DC construction, for example). When Googlers were being coaxed into switching to Docs from MS Office, the financial benefits were front and centre to that pitch.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> God please don't make me use a non-zoom video conferencing tool!

I have used about a dozen over the years in my role as a consultant, and Zoom has been by far the most reliable. I'm hopeful lots of good can come from the scrutiny, but please Zoom get your act together so I don't have to use some other buggy thing that doesn't actually work.

<comment><USER31> I knew I would get downvoted. But folks seriously don't remember the pain before Zoom. And the current pain anytime we have to use a GoToMeeting, Google Meet, Webex or other tool that barely functions.

Human interaction that actually works right now is so important. And I simply have a hard time trusting another product to actually do the call reliably

<comment><USER32> Google Meet is the only one of these that has always worked reliably for me. Doesn't require any strange clients, works in most browsers, never randomly fails to move just some person's audio and so on.

Disclaimer: I work for Alphabet, but already held this opinion before I did.

<comment><USER33> > worked reliably for me

Every second time I'm using it, I either don't hear the other people, or people do not hear me. YMMV.

<comment><USER32> If you have these issues, especially so frequently, I'd wager it's a problem on your end.

<comment><USER34> Almost all problems on video conferences are on the user's end. What Zoom excel at is to mitigate most of those user issues by trying to figure out all the corner cases that the user might be in.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> Same in my org. Employees cannot setup Zoom meetings but can join meetings set by others from outside the org but only via browser. Zoom apps are banned and all installed apps in managed devices will be removed by IT.

</comment><comment><USER36> I hope that Zoom will make it easier to use their web client because of this.

<comment><USER37> This is lifechanging, the zoom native app is a security nightmare and the web experience is deliberately crap.

<comment><USER38> This might explain why the people around me don't understand why it's so popular. None of us is reckless enough to install their application, so all we've seen is the web version.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER39> Zoom's issues are fixable... unlike a hardware defect like the macbook pro keyboard and the iphone antenna that didn't work well... Zoom is clearly better than the alternatives and has my 80 year old uncle talking about it. This too shall pass.

<comment><USER40> I uninstalled zoom and refused to use it after they did that skanky "start up a local webserver to avoid Safari's user-safety questions". Then everyone was using Zoom, so I gave them another chance and installed the native client. Turns out the native client install also contains skanky hacks to avoid user- safety questions. So I uninstalled it again, and now my company has told us all not to use the native app.

Once may have been an honest mistake. Twice (and now more) is definitely a culture problem that's not going to be fixed without massive turnover.

</comment></comment><comment><USER41> Zoom have responded very quickly to the complaints levelled against them. Their problems are more PR than techinical now.

<comment><USER42> Yeah, but allowing China access to meetings seems so bone-headed that I question what other problems may be lurking.

</comment></comment><comment><USER43> You can make joining via the web an option. No app install required. Details at [https://support.zoom.us/hc/en- us/articles/115005666383-Show-...](https://support.zoom.us/hc/en- us/articles/115005666383-Show-a-Join-from-your-browser-Link)

Note, works best in Chrome (likely Chromium) based on what the docs say.

</comment><comment><USER44> Must be nice to be an upstart. You have a throng of tech savvy people to defend you at best and forgive you at worst.

If this was a Microsoft/Google product it would be pilloried to death.

</comment><comment><USER45> I work at a large corp, our own in house video conf went down for a few hours. Our backup conference system also tied to same system of course went down. Rather than postpone meetings we took them on zoom. It just works and I hope they get over this security issue and start ramping up their feature set.

</comment><comment><USER46> Is it not common for companies to control what apps are installed on corporate computers, and where company data is stored (cloud providers, etc)? I get the whole Zoom backlash, but this is taking a specific instance of company and app and harvesting clicks.

</comment><comment><USER47> I'm seeing references to Zoom "getting over these security issues". Some of the issues (e.g. not requiring passwords) can be relatively easily addressed. Others, like transmitting symmetric encryption keys over the wire and storing them in databases in China, are more fundamental to Zoom's corporate strategy. I doubt Zoom would change the most jarring of their security gaffes in a way that would satisfy security-focused companies like Google.

<comment><USER48> It seems to me Zoom follows the "dont ask for permission, ask for forgiveness later" model. You don't accidentally send data to China. Zero excuse.

<comment><USER47> Not sure why this is getting downvoted. I totally agree.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER49> It doesn't matter what your personal threat model is: these videoconferencing apps have become de facto critical infrastructure for many countries almost overnight with no scrutiny and a joke security posture, because the IRL channels they replace are unavailable. This has dire implications for all of us, both in terms of espionage and the potential for massive disruption.

Threat modelling is fine for your home security, but it is now dangerously anachronistic when evaluating anything connected to the internet. One solution would be to at least educate people about the need for a security mindset on a massive scale, or at worst craft some laws to force it.

I'm sure there are many people who would accept the risks of drink driving: we don't let them.

</comment><comment><USER50> How do people feel about BlueJeans?

<comment><USER51> They are banned at my work. We are told to wear trousers.

<comment><USER52> [https://dilbert.com/strip/1996-10-08](https://dilbert.com/strip/1996-10-08)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER53> I would assume Zoom is banned at many corporate offices. I can name two not published

</comment><comment><USER54> I just wish Slack didn't use so much firepower on my machine, it seems to make my Macbook pro 2015's fan go wild and the CPU to spike, and it seems to "rot" over time, and get worse.

</comment><comment><USER55> I put together instructions for creating an install-free dock icon for Zoom. Nothing ground breaking here, I just combined several sets of instructions I found useful.

[https://blog.joeldare.com/creating-an-install-free-dock- icon...](https://blog.joeldare.com/creating-an-install-free-dock-icon-for- zoom-on-mac/)

Zoom stopped the browser login from working for a few days, but it seems to be back working now.

</comment><comment><USER56> A more existential question is why the ____Google and MSFT with 'All the King's Horses and All the King's Men' can't make a _basic, reliable, video conf_.

I understand there are some business reasons here and there (MS wants people on Teams not Skype) but it doesn't matter.

'Basic Video' should be as common, robust and reliable as making a phone call.

<comment><USER57> All of our meetings at Google are using GVC (aka Google Meet from gSuites), and while there are people who have reported problems (mostly in low bandwidth situations and/or using Firefox), my experience is that it is quite reliable. I've had video conferences from my Dad's Senior Center (obviously, pre- COVID-19) using a MiFi box, and there things were more reliable if I turned off my camera, but other than that, I've personally never had any problems using Google Meet from either a Linux box running ChromeOS, or a Chromebook. In fact, I've never had to worry about attending meetings remotely so much that I really can't speak to the reports of people complaining about Google Meet being unreliable.

</comment></comment><comment><USER58> Spoiler alert: Google has paid for a third party assessment of zoom, the pentest came back with catastrophic results

<comment><USER59> Source? The article doesn't mention that.

</comment></comment><comment><USER60> I believe Google also bans non-Google file sharing tools like Dropbox or OneDrive from employee's computers too.

</comment><comment><USER21> Can someone with more experience using Jitsi comment on benefits/limitations for use at work? We typically have 2-5 people on calls but occasionally up to 20. I tried it a bit with 1-1 calls and it was pretty great but I'm assuming there are some limitations vs Zoom to be aware of.

<comment><USER40> At work, our team of 4 has been using it for several weeks too, and it's been just fine.

Our church group has been using it with 12-ish participants once a week for several weeks now. There are individuals who consistently have problems, but since it's always the same people, I tend to think they'd have similar issues with Zoom. (Zoom meetings with different sets of people have had similar sorts of issues.)

People are saying that Firefox "technically works" but that due to limitations in the spec, one person in your conference using FF causes everyone else's cpu to go through the roof. (Can't speak authoritatively on that, but FF is labeled as not fully supported.)

Fundamentally, I think it probably comes down to the business model. The company that runs meet.jit.si, 8x8, doesn't make money on that service; they make money selling some large integrated business solution. Running the free service seems to be less of a loss leader than a massive pool of beta testers. So they aren't pushing it as hard as Zoom, where (at least originally) the free version was limited to 40 minutes to directly up-sell you to the paid version.

Two other things about Zoom:

1\. Easy to get the client installed, and once it's installed, it's easy to use. Of course, they consistently do that by working around the protections your OS has in place by dodgy methods.

2\. It seems to work well in China. Not sure how Jitsi fares in that respect.

EDIT: Some cool things about Jitsi:

1\. NO INSTALL AT ALL for desktops. People just click the link and bam, you're in a meeting.

2\. Rooms are created when a URL is visited. So if you want so split into two groups, half of you can just add "2" to the URL, and bam -- group is split in two. Ready to join back together? Delete the '2' and you're back together again.

Anyway, all that to say -- I think Jitsi is definitely worth a try. Tell people to use something Chromium-based until they've fixed the issue with FF (I use Brave) and give it a shot.

</comment></comment><comment><USER61> I prefer Zoom primarily because of two things:

1\. We used google meet a lot, but it's very CPU intense and also does not run in Safari so I have to start Chrome to run it 2\. It's a better UI and Video Conf experience, hands down.

I realize that it has issues but nothing truly major as far as I can see.

</comment><comment><USER62> A question: I have avoided installing the native macOS Zoom client, but I use the iOS native app on my iPhone. Does the iOS app have the same vulnerabilities as the macOS native app? I searched in these comments for 'iOS' to see if someone already discussed this. Thanks.

</comment><comment><USER63> Is there any technical merit to this ban? Why would forcing use of web version mitigate any concerns? (The concerns I have heard are lack of proper end-to- end encryption, servers in China and the possibility to join chatrooms by guessing a name (zoom-bombing)).

<comment><USER64> Seems perfectly sensible to ban all software that is not pre-approved by IT, InfoSec and Legal.

You can't safely assume all your employees are properly assessing the risks unless that is their actual job. If you only allow what you know then you can reason about your risk.

<comment><USER65> Google's reputation as an employer stems in large part from rejecting that belief, and more generally the enterprise bureaucratic culture it lives in.

Engineers aren't clamoring to get into the kinds of companies where IT needs to pre-approve software for their workstations.

<comment><USER66> You might be disappointed to know that native applications need pre-approval in most cases. There's a whitelist.

Of course, after years and years and hundreds of thousands of engineers, the whitelist is pretty robust.

I don't know for sure, but I bet Zoom has been on that whitelist, and "banning" is removing it from that whitelist.

<comment><USER65> I'll be absolutely stunned if people are really having to raise JIRA tickets instead of typing "brew install" but my information is secondhand so what do I know.

Our laptops are configuration managed, force upgraded, and surveilled, but we all have root and IT has never stood in the way of "power user" behavior. The extent of the frustration in engineering is that their management processes sometimes eat CPU. My understanding is that most of the Valley is like this.

<comment><USER67> [https://github.com/google/santa](https://github.com/google/santa) is used to whitelist binaries on Macs, but you can fill out a form to instantly opt out. One of the options for why is "I use a package manager".

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER68> this is more incentive bias playing out. taking the opportunity to push google hangouts.

</comment><comment><USER69> If the tech community can't prioritize security over features, it's pretty rich for same community to declare that the "average joe" doesn't care about security.

<comment><USER70> The same "tech community" that's been drinking the "move fast and break things" and "be disruptive in your market segment" koolaid for 15-20 years? Unsurprised.

<comment><USER69> I was a bit unclear in my original post. I meant this tech community here.. lots of "don't make me use something else" posts in a community of people who ostensibly are tech oriented.

But your point stands either way. I'm just surprised at the pass being given to Zoom given the blitheness of their gaffes.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER71> Why Zoom is making so many silly mistakes. They should take advantage of this situation instead they are blowing up. Every time they apologies or make statement trust has been lost.

</comment><comment><USER72> Other large technology companies that manufacture stuff but are not Chinese have made the same decision.

I write like this because I am not sure what I can disclose.

</comment><comment><USER73> Ban is not long term. You need a better solution. Not sure it is from google. But not from china or associated with china is important.

</comment><comment><USER74> What's surprising to me is that it _was_ allowed before. They have had their own videochat solution for years, so I would expect the usual "eat your own dogfood" approach.

<comment><USER75> What do you use when Hangouts is down to discuss fixing Hangouts? :)

<comment><USER76> Duo [https://duo.google.com/about/](https://duo.google.com/about/)

<comment><USER77> What do you use when duo/hangouts/meet is down?

<comment><USER78> E-mail.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER79> It makes sense. Doesn't hangouts work for this purpose?

</comment><comment><USER80> Google banning competition? Totally unexpected.

</comment><comment><USER81> Hangouts is not that bad

<comment><USER82> Yeah, it's working, sometimes for most of the participants. Than turns your computer into a toaster before it clogs it completely.

<comment><USER83> Agreed. This is my biggest complaint with it, the functionality is amazing but if you're on any sort of laptop the poor thing will melt halfway through a meeting.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER84> Smells like banning due to Google competing directly with Zoom.

</comment><comment><USER85> LOL, of course!

</comment><comment><USER86> Chrome has similar installers etc

</comment><comment><USER87> I don't like zoom either, but what exactly made them the HN punching bag of the month? Ad/surveillance giants like Google or FB are typically spoken of with notes of reverence and awe on here. Zoom gets lit-up for sending data to FB, but FB gets a pass? I don't know I just can't get into the mood. _extinguishes torch in moat_.

<comment><USER88> > Ad/surveillance giants like Google or FB are typically spoken of with notes > of reverence and awe on here.

Uh. Are we reading different websites? This is the most vocally anti- everything-FAANG community I've seen on the Internet, since about 2017 or so. Except Apple, mostly.

<comment><USER89> Netflix also seems to be acceptable.

<comment><USER90> I'll just chime in that Apple and Netflix the FAANG companies I dislike the most, for balance ;)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER91> That's pretty embarrassing for google if their own employees prefer zoom over google hangouts.

<comment><USER92> It's more the following workflow:

\- your friends set up a zoom happy hour \- current personal laptop is fubar or super old/unsupported \- you use work laptop, installing zoom

As someone not in sales, I have never seen anyone try to use Zoom for actual work meetings.

</comment></comment><comment><USER93> I interviewed at Google a while back for an SRE position working with the Hangouts team. My first interview was in another office and the audio in Hangouts session would not start. We ending up having to move on to the next interview. I'm not surprised even Google employees don't use it.

<comment><USER94> > I'm not surprised even Google employees don't use it.

I wouldn't go that far - there's something like 250k hangout meetings per day at Google[0] and that was before Covid.

[0] [https://www.blog.google/products/g-suite/how-google-went- all...](https://www.blog.google/products/g-suite/how-google-went-all-video- meetings-and-you-can-too/) (2017)

<comment><USER95> Relevant text from your link:

 _" Nearly a decade has passed since we built the first prototype. Face-to- face collaboration is ingrained in Google's DNA now—more than 16,500 meetings rooms are VC-equipped at Google and our employees join Hangouts 240,000 times per day!"_

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER96> Google banning it is almost an endorsement for me. Anything the Chocolate Factory hates can't be all that evil.

Joking asides, this is a weak way to promote the fact they have a competing tool.</comment>


Destroy All Software screencasts free this week - <AUTHOR> https://www.destroyallsoftware.com/screencasts <comment><USER2> Nice quality content, I'll definitely take advantage of the free period. The cost to sign up seems very high for what this is though. I expected a one time cost, or maybe $5 or so a month. $290 annually seems expensive for a single format of lessons from a single teacher. Even the current promotion seems onerous. As a point of comparison, Safari Books Online does sales for $199 annually just about every year and has content from countless instructors in many formats, including live training. Perhaps I'm missing some information, as I only read the sale page before viewing content.

Not posting this to complain. I'd really like to see quality content like this reach more eyes, and I hate to see the author shoot themselves in the foot by putting up such a high barrier to access it. It's entirely possible I'm just not aware of the costs that go into creating this content.

<comment><USER3> The cost to produce quality content is quite high. Even if you are "only" putting together a screencast, the cost of learning that content, planning how to teach it, editing it, and inevitable retakes can all easily stretch to 20x the length of a video. I'd call that estimate fairly optimistic, to be honest, it can go much higher.

To use an example I'm familiar with: Code School courses took about 6 or so hours to complete (including challenges), but take 4-6 months of effort by an average of 4 people at any given time to create. We tried many times to tighten that timeline up, but being too aggressive inevitably resulted in a course we weren't 100% happy with.

Pricing isn't as obvious as it seems, as well. We raised our prices from 25/mo to 29/mo ages ago, which was a large net positive for the company from a revenue standpoint. We ran pricing tests a few times, as well, and anything below 29/mo performed much worse overall (we didn't get enough extra signups at a lower cost to break even). Sales & free weekends have a big impact, though.

As I've watched the space coalesce it seems like the very successful companies will be the ones that create some kind of "degree" (accreditation doesn't matter, only how much the community trusts them) for individuals, or companies that chase down enterprises for continuing education dollars. Or both. Both tend to charge a premium over that 290/yr price point, which you need to in order to be wildly successful due to the massive churn in the education space.

All that to say, from my perspective, $290 a year is very reasonable, and is probably the right price point.

Source: was the CTO of Code School

<comment><USER4> Free market will judge the right price. Lots of people put free content out there, some of it pretty good. Not as good as Code School's content, but people have to see the value difference. Just because you put a lot of hours in doesn't mean people will appreciate it and pay more for it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Some exceptional content on writing tests in the early seasons.

Also a great demonstration of what a very skilled typist can do in vim.

</comment><comment><USER6> Dunno what's up with the name (being silly I think) but anyway these are well done! Just watched the Malloc From Scratch one: [https://www.destroyallsoftware.com/screencasts/catalog/mallo...](https://www.destroyallsoftware.com/screencasts/catalog/malloc- from-scratch)

<comment><USER7> Borrowed from [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Destroy_All_Monsters](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Destroy_All_Monsters) "a 1968 Japanese science fiction kaiju film featuring Godzilla"

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> One of my favorite talks ever is [https://www.destroyallsoftware.com/talks/wat](https://www.destroyallsoftware.com/talks/wat)

<comment><USER4> He said Captain, I said...

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> Oh boy, what a great source of content. Is there a curated list of the best/most popular ones?

edit: ok the sales page has recommendations from the author: [https://www.destroyallsoftware.com/sale](https://www.destroyallsoftware.com/sale)

<comment><USER10> Personal list of favorites:

Functional Core, Imperative Shell/Boundaries are two versions of the same talk. One of the best talks I have ever seen on software development, articulates some really great concepts about software design. Applicable in so many places.

Sucks/Rocks series: this one is specific to Rails, but if you write Rails, is quite good. Gary doesn't write things the same way that most people write things, and for good reasons. This explains the details. See also "Fast tests with and without Rails", which you can probably generalize to other frameworks fairly easily.

The "stubs and mocks" sections, together, are really good: Gary is a fan of mocking, and many people aren't. He talks a lot about why, and how to properly mock things.

I just watched "malloc from scratch" yesterday and really enjoyed it.

The conference talks are already free, but while you're digging into DAS...

I very much recommend "The Birth and Death of JavaScript". It basically predicted WebAssembly before WebAssembly existed, and is just a really excellent talk regardless of the subject. You'll see why when you watch it.

"Ideology" is also a fantastic talk about things programmers believe and why.

<comment><USER11> > It basically predicted WebAssembly before WebAssembly existed

I really love that talk, but this is a bit of a stretch considering that it could apply to asm.js as well, which was available the year before the talk was recorded. Remember the unreal engine demo on Firefox?

<comment><USER10> Yeah, that might be fair. I feel like Wasm is a pretty significant step over asm, and is much closer to the world presented in the talk, but it would also be 100% reasonable to just be talking about asm. Good point.

(I was lucky enough to see the talk live, so the timeline of events gets a little messed up in my head sometimes...)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Wat?

</comment><comment><USER13> nice pun

</comment><comment><USER14> Meta: mods please make it "screencasts".

There are enough cats online. :)

<comment><USER15> This is already a difficult to read title. I think the company name should be cased properly, to at least hint that it is a noun, and possibly make it possessive: Destroy All Software's.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: How do I make the jump to tech companies? - <AUTHOR>

Dear HN, I'm writing this hoping to get some amazing advice as I'm very lost and depressed about my situation. Similar ASK HN post inspired me to write this. I'm graduating in Computer Science this year from a small state university (very small) and I've been working in a big enterprise(not tech) around my school for 2 years as full stack developer (internship). I can do what web devs do and what people from bootcamp do, better and fast as I've seen these people here at this company. It employs around 400 devs and I'm considered as the one of the best in the organization. I've been offered 68k at this where starting is 50k for starting developer once I graduate. I've got similar offers from around the area. It's one of the biggest employers in our state and I like working there, I'm doing all the heavy lifting more than 2 technical architects and five other senior developers. However, I'm not learning anything I didn't know (from doing few side projects). I'm doing all Microsoft stack from Javascript, C#, ASP .net MVC(pretty similar to ruby on rails) T-SQL, Sharepoint etc. I'm happy that I'm writing large programs in C# (which is nice lang btw) but I'm only learning business rules from these "senior devs" and which database has what data. <comment><AUTHOR> Continued:

I'm considered one of the good result by our school(professors and junior are proud of me) as it is very focussed in graduates getting such jobs as our's is a small unknown school. So, needless to say I am very bad at technical interview that tests algorithms, data structures and puzzle-ly problem solving as needed to the technical interview. 'm very lost and depressed about this as I'm come close to getting out of school and seeing myself being stuck in companies which do tech work but are not tech companies like Google, Facebook etc. How should I prepare myself to do better in technical interview as my cs and math background is weak to get into let's Google, Facebook, Microsoft etc? It seems like there tons of stuff to memorize to do really well in these interviews.

Thank you.</comment>


Machine learning and porn videos - ejack-app http://www.ejack-app.com/ <comment><AUTHOR> "We're building a profile on your porn habits, and this sentence doesn't sound creepier by the word."

<comment> ejack-app True. That's why you we don't ask for email or facebook login.

</comment></comment><comment><USER2> thank you for this app. we can now browse ad free and download the vids too. bonus if u could display the actors etc is there a donation button ? u are doing us great service

<comment> ejack-app You are most welcome! Unfortunately, we do not have any info on the actors in each video... Feel free to share it with your friends :-)</comment></comment>


How Boston Got Its 'T' - <AUTHOR> https://www.citylab.com/design/2018/09/how-boston-got-its-t/570004/ <comment><USER2> This was a fascinating read! I had never thought about what the MBTA was like before its current design. Color-coding the lines particularly seems like an obvious-in-retrospect way to orient passengers, and it's hard to imagine how confusing the system must have been without this.

</comment><comment><USER3> Recommend watching "American Experience: The Race Underground" on Netflix www.netflix.com/title/80991259.

</comment><comment><USER4> Ionic compared to what</comment>


Ask HN: Best daily "get-stuff-done"/todo app? - <AUTHOR> I have a bad habit of getting off on tangents when I'm trying to get my work done each day.  The tangents relate to my work, but they go off into more "research-level" depth on a subject than is really necessary to just get the work done (as a chemical engineer, you wouldn't believe how much time I've spent teaching myself group theory).
I've been reading up on this problem, and some studies indicate that making a todo list of manageable action items for each day results in modest productivity gains.
What's a good app for this?  I've tried using a paper notebook, but I always lose it or forget to mark things off.
I need something that is either a mobile app or runs on OS X.  In contrast with the myriad todo apps that already exist, this one needs to have task completion as its primary objective; i.e., it needs to prod me to stay on task and get things done — incentivize completion.
What all is out there? <comment><USER2> Google Keep is actually maturing into something quite useful, especially if you also use an Android phone and other Google apps. You can set reminders, easily create lists, and even add collaborators. There's both web & mobile versions, and it also integrates nicely with Google Now & voice commands.

</comment><comment><USER3> I love workflowy: [https://workflowy.com/](https://workflowy.com/)

I Use it as to-do list, organizer, idea jotting, project manager.

> some studies indicate that making a todo list of manageable action items for > each day results in modest productivity gains.

Don't sweat too much on this. As log as you actually get the work done, even pen and paper can be fine.</comment>


Zuckerberg could run Facebook while serving in government forever - <AUTHOR> https://techcrunch.com/2017/01/04/connector-in-chief/ <comment><USER2> Why does this sound like the plot to a dystopian sci fi novel? Facebook's interests aren't anything close to my interests.

<comment><USER3> Then don't vote for Zuckerberg? Technically, if he were to be a representative or other elected government official, he would be obligated to uphold the interests of his constituents, not the company he owns, just like any other representative.

Granted, it might be a concern that he would use his position to help his company, which is why officials usually have to put their assets in a blind trust.

He would still have to get elected first, though. So if you're basically expecting that he's going to be corrupt, then don't vote for him and encourage others not to.

<comment><USER4> Americans have this odd tendency to vote for celebrities.

<comment><USER5> other countries dont?

<comment><USER6> Well, some don't. It doesn't imply a more informed electorate, tho.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I was going to post asking what experience Mark has in government but then I remembered the American population just voted to elect a reality TV 'star' and rich-from-daddies-money mediocre businessman as President. So yeah I guess Mark is highly qualified in that he has several times Trump's net worth.

<comment><USER8> Another way to describe Trump is that he ran a business that created more value than the S&P 500 (the top 500 businesses on US stock exchanges) over a 30 year period, created a world famous brand associated with quality and luxury, created a tv show that dominated ratings for a decade, and crushed two political dynasties that have held power for almost 40 years.

<comment><USER9> "a business that created more value than the S&P 500 (the top 500 businesses on US stock exchanges) over a 30 year period"

What's this based on?

<comment><USER8> [https://dqydj.com/donald-trump-beat-sp-500-index- funds/](https://dqydj.com/donald-trump-beat-sp-500-index-funds/)

Admittedly questionable source, but I've seen it elsewhere and the approximation seems fair.

<comment><USER9> There's probably a clearer way to phrase that point. I initially thought you were saying that Donald Trump made more money than the entire S&P 500!

<comment><USER8> haha. I reread my post and it was a bit gibberishy. Ooops.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> As someone who shares a lot more political opinions with Zuckerberg than Trump, having the man who controls Facebook holding political office has just as much potential for corruption as Trump does, and is almost as scary.

Politicians have a lot of levers to shape media coverage without owning one of the largest sources of information in the modern world.

<comment><USER10> I searched for "blind trust" and didn't see it. Is there some legal quirk I'm missing here where Zuckerberg gets a pass on conflicts of interest, or is it part of the general lack of ethics the incoming Administration seems to be planning?

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> I'm not sure why people are saying Zuckerberg would be better than a regular politician. His public statements have been pretty vacuous, which probably means he is trying to obscure his real positions like any other politician. I'll reserve final judgement on his competence for office until he starts being more concrete, or if someone can point me to some position papers. But for now color me suspicious.

The prospect of a global surveillance apparatus is chilling though, and Zuckerberg already has one of those - albeit with voluntary participation. Digital privacy is a major fault line in emerging politics, and Zuckerberg is one of my bete noires in this area.

</comment><comment><USER12> Some fun facts: Zuck's favorite book(s) growing up was the Ender's Game series [1]. He learned Mandarin and spoke to Chinese audiences [2]. As such, I don't think he's setting himself up to be POTUS, that seems too small for him. (One of Zuck's role models is Bill Gates, and Bill clearly believes that folks like himself can do more for the world outside of Government than inside it.)

IMO, Mark's setting himself up to be Hegemon of Earth: [http://enderverse.wikia.com/wiki/Hegemony](http://enderverse.wikia.com/wiki/Hegemony)

[1] [http://favobooks.com/enterpreneurs/90-zuckerberg.html](http://favobooks.com/enterpreneurs/90-zuckerberg.html)

[2] [https://qz.com/532834/mark-zuckerbergs-20-minute-speech- in-c...](https://qz.com/532834/mark-zuckerbergs-20-minute-speech-in-clumsy- mandarin-is-his-latest-attempt-to-woo-china/)

</comment><comment><USER13> Just login to Facebook with your SSN to check your IRS and other government services...

</comment><comment><USER14> Facebook.gov : The new platform to tie in all branches of the government: Healthcare, DMV, Criminal Records, Credit ... Bonus if the API endpoints for each Service uses GraphQL.

</comment><comment><USER15> Politics and tech mixing sounds bad for global shared tech.

Seems like tech or internet balkanization is coming fast.

<comment> dj-wonk Why do you say "balkanization" and what do you mean by it?

Why might it be bad? Why might it be good?

There are so many factors. For one, I'd rather have someone in government who understands technology. So many parts of government are lacking in basic technical capability.

On the other hand, I find Facebook's awareness of the social fabric to be somewhere between inchoate (that's charitable) and a convenient illusion that is fundamentally mostly marketing-driven. (I don't fault a company for being market-driven; however, such incentives are not structured to properly serve people and communities).

But I don't know too much about Facebook's social design as compared to Zuck's goals for possibly serving in government or where he would like Facebook to go.

<comment><USER15> This article explains it well. [http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2013/1...](http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2013/10/internet_balkanization_may_be_a_side_effect_of_the_snowden_surveillance.html)

Tech companies controlled directly by us politicians will probably make this existing backlash worse.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> I must have missed something; why are people discussing Zuck serving in government?

<comment><USER17> Recent announcements and actions by Zuck suggest that he's going to run for office one day.

1) Reveals he is no longer an atheist ([http://nypost.com/2017/01/02/mark- zuckerberg-reveals-hes-no-...](http://nypost.com/2017/01/02/mark-zuckerberg- reveals-hes-no-longer-an-atheist/)) 2) 2017 New Years goal to meet people in every 50 state ([http://www.businessinsider.com/mark-zuckerberg-personal- goal...](http://www.businessinsider.com/mark-zuckerberg-personal-goal- for-2017-meet-people-in-every-us-state-2017-1))

etc.

<comment><USER18> It suggests he may be Buddhist. You can't really use a religion other than Christianity if you're pandering to Americans.

<comment> dj-wonk I, for one, would not put limits on the ability of politicians to pander in ways that I would find implausible.

But in the case of religion (even Buddhism), I find it plausible. Demographics and expectations about religion are changing. Religious belief and alignment does appear to be softening. See: [http://www.pewforum.org/2015/11/03/u-s- public-becoming-less-...](http://www.pewforum.org/2015/11/03/u-s-public- becoming-less-religious/)

More broadly, I think the models of cognitive dissonance and tribal behavior are sometimes more important than arbitrary labels. If enough voters feel comfortable with a candidate (on their own terms) they can dismiss any number of externally-imposed labels about their candidate.

<comment><USER19> Offering an anecdote with as little commentary as possible, but having gone to a small religious high school, I have friends who argue they'd "never vote for anyone who isn't Christian" but managed to do some mental gymnastics in order to vote for Romney, who during the primaries they seemed to oppose for being Mormon.

<comment><USER20> Now I feel ignorant, Mormonism doesn't count as a sect of Christianity?

<comment><USER21> There's a fairly common standard among mainstream Christian groups as to what constitutes the boundary of Christianity formed by adherence to certain understandings of foundational doctrines (basically encapsulated into the common Nicene and Apostle's Creed's.)

This is generally held to exclude (as I recall), for different (though overlapping) reasons, Mormons, Seventh Day Adventists, Jehovah's Witnesses, and Unitarians, among others groups that describe themselves as Christian. (In contexts where the definition in question is being used, these and similarly situated groups may be referred to as "pseudo-Christian cults".)

This definition isn't consistently important outside of academic theological contexts within the body of mainstream Christianity, though, as lots of regular believers use either a much broader definition in daily conversation, or a narrower one that amounts to agreement with the particular religious beliefs of the individual in question.

Particularly, in US political contexts, political groups organized around politically conservative policies justified by appeals to Christianity have very often sought to appeal across traditional theological boundaries to reach politically-significant populations, and this is absolutely the case with trying to draw in LDS members; so, in terms of conservative _political_ Christianity, Mormons are usually accepted, even if there is an academic theological standard which holds them as distinct from Christianity.

<comment><USER22> Politicians in the US are mostly either Catholic and Protestant.

Jehovah Witness and Seventh Day Adventists are the same thing. Mormons along with Jehovah Witness are Restorationists so neither Catholic or Protestant.

Mitt Romney who ran against Barack Obama in 2008 was Mormon. There have only been 8 Mormons who have run for President in the history of the US. Mitt and his father were 2 of that only 8.

Bernie Sanders was the first Jewish candidate to win a Presidential Primary.

The US has never had President who wasn't either Catholic or Protestant. This article gives an interesting look:

[http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/02/12/almost- all-u...](http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/02/12/almost-all-u-s- presidents-have-been-christians/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> _" They 'trust me' ... dumb fucks."_

<comment><USER24> ahhaahah exactly the quote I was thinking of. Zuck is hilarious.

ZUCK 2020

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> Oh please no

</comment><comment><USER26> Would be a massive conflict of interest.

Zuck is also setting himself up for President, which is a little egoist. That said, anyone thinking that is on some level ...

</comment><comment><USER27> Mark should run for President. If either Him or Peter were running, I'd vote for either of them. It'd be very good for innovation, people wouldn't suffocate under Business Regulation, and the US would have Utopian policies (I imagine). If Peter or Mark decide to become President, they should compete with Justin Trudeau, to see who can be more Socially Liberal.</comment>


GovCon7 - <AUTHOR> https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL57405A52DEECDAE8 <comment><USER2> Should have a [2011] tag. Not sure why this Palantir content is posted now?</comment>


Ask HN: Best Resources to Learn to Manage Linux Boxes via SSH - <AUTHOR> Definitely something I haven't done too much of before. New job requires a lot of SSHing and I'm only a little familiar with the practice. Can anyone suggest a good resource for tools and how to use them effectively, and when? I'm thinking netstat, iostat, etc. <comment><USER2> If you'd like to learn system administration, visit [http://www.sabok.org](http://www.sabok.org) and [http://verticalsysadmin.com/blog/training-program-to- make-a-...](http://verticalsysadmin.com/blog/training-program-to-make-a- novice-system-administrator/)

As for the tools you mention see [https://medium.com/netflix-techblog/linux- performance-analys...](https://medium.com/netflix-techblog/linux-performance- analysis-in-60-000-milliseconds-accc10403c55)

</comment><comment><USER3> If you want to become a professional and not just a dabbler I would recommend reading some of the following books I have in my bookshelf:

[0] RHCSA & RHCE Training and Exam Preparation Guide by Asghar Ghori. This book will help insure you know your stuff as your system engineer/administrator wise.

[1] A Practical Guide to Linux Commands, Editor and Shell Programming Third Edition. This book will cover the majority of what you would need and want to know when connecting to a remote linux system over ssh.

If you want to get under the hood and become an expert, the following books should help get you started:

[2] Advanced Programming in the UNIX Environment

[3] The Linux Programming Interface: A Linux and UNIX System Programming Handbook

[4] Linux Kernel Development 3rd Edition

To get a nice general overview and get up and going quickly:

[5] How Linux works: What every superuser should know

[6] The Linux Command Line

[7] Python Crash Course

[8] Automate the boring stuff with Python. This is a great book to help you think about how to automate most of the repetitive things you will end up doing on a regular basis.

[0] [https://www.amazon.com/RHCSA-RHCE-Red-Enterprise- Linux/dp/14...](https://www.amazon.com/RHCSA-RHCE-Red-Enterprise- Linux/dp/1495148203)

[1] [https://www.amazon.com/Practical-Guide-Commands-Editors- Prog...](https://www.amazon.com/Practical-Guide-Commands-Editors- Programming/dp/013308504X)

[2] [https://www.amazon.com/Advanced-Programming-UNIX- Environment...](https://www.amazon.com/Advanced-Programming-UNIX- Environment-3rd/dp/0321637739)

[3] [https://www.amazon.com/Linux-Programming-Interface-System- Ha...](https://www.amazon.com/Linux-Programming-Interface-System- Handbook/dp/1593272200)

[4] [https://www.amazon.com/Linux-Kernel-Development-Robert- Love/...](https://www.amazon.com/Linux-Kernel-Development-Robert- Love/dp/0672329468)

[5] [https://www.amazon.com/How-Linux-Works-Superuser- Should/dp/1...](https://www.amazon.com/How-Linux-Works-Superuser- Should/dp/1593275676)

[6] [https://www.amazon.com/Linux-Command-Line-Complete- Introduct...](https://www.amazon.com/Linux-Command-Line-Complete- Introduction/dp/1593273894)

[7] [https://www.amazon.com/Python-Crash-Course-Hands-Project- Bas...](https://www.amazon.com/Python-Crash-Course-Hands-Project- Based/dp/1593276036)

[8] [https://www.amazon.com/Automate-Boring-Stuff-Python- Programm...](https://www.amazon.com/Automate-Boring-Stuff-Python- Programming/dp/1593275994)

<comment><AUTHOR> This looks like a gold mine! Thanks so much!

<comment><USER4> The RHCSA/RHCE stuff is good, I passed the RHCSA a couple years ago and it's a solid set of foundations.

There's a good chat (devopschat.slack.com) that's useful for learning stuff like this.</comment></comment></comment>


Scientists SMASH five of the biggest mysteries of modern physics - <AUTHOR> https://cosmosmagazine.com/physics/scientists-smash-five-of-the-biggest-mysteries-of-modern-physics <comment><USER2> Great one pager on this new theory.</comment>


Reflections from a Token Black Friend - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/@rnagarajah2/reflections-from-a-token-black-friend-2f1ea522d42d <comment><USER2> Found this really interesting thank you. As a white dude who grew up in rural UK I had very limited contact with anyone who wasn't white growing up and its not really changed too much as I've grown up and joined the world.

One of the problems people like me have is that the entire 'issue' is disconnected from our reality. The only context I have is the history I've learnt and the things I read now. The media I consume essentially. My subconscious has a load of shit programmed in to do with the idea of a black person or black people. I don't understand all of it but I _know_ I have prejudice that I don't want. What I do have is a desparate desire to always treat people equally and a lot of fear that I will get something wrong.

Unfortunately it's an order of magnitude easier to 'post something' than it is to change the way you react to people. To be vigilant of your own mind, to be constantly aware and sensitive to what's going on around you. To accept that you have predudice and you need to work in order to mitigate it. To accept you probably will do or say the wrong thing, to be OK with this and accept that you may need to change. It's hard. We can shout and post and demonstrate as much as we want but this is about other people, not ourselves. Will anything change after this? I fear not because we want other people to change, not ourselves.

</comment><comment><USER3> This was really good and enlightening. Things like this should be required reading in schools across America. Along with a complete revamping of American History to hammer in the reality of what happened.</comment>


List of 350 professional Slack and Discord communities - <AUTHOR> https://communities.complish.app <comment><AUTHOR> It's hard to find a list of current, active professional online communities to connect with other professionals in your field.

Here is a categorized, searchable list with current invite links. It's collaborative, so feel free to suggest other helpful, significant communities.</comment>


News News: Faster, Fewer Flamewars - <AUTHOR> http://ycombinator.com/newsnews.html#29apr09 <comment><USER2> I'm skeptical of the exponential delay -- seems like another way of saying "if you're in a drawn-out conversation with somebody, take it somewhere else because you're boring us"

Which then limits your options for participating in a controversial subject to a) doing nothing, and b) making some grand overarching statement and not caring what comes after it.

Neither of these seem to add to the site.

I understand the desire to prevent emotions from overwhelming posters, but geez, sounds like throwing the baby out with the bathwater!

I've found that if both sides are honest and stick to an intelligent conversation, a lot of times you can learn a lot by the time you're about 7 levels in. Most of the time you learn that the two sides, while posturing, aren't really that far apart.

I like deep threads every now and then. Shows me how people are thinking. Shows how they react on their feet. Shows the depth of their position (or lack thereof). Teaches respect for each other and community values.

Flamewars? Not so much. But HN hasn't exactly been a nest of flame-waring, at least as far as I can see. There are heated discussions, they blow over, then life moves on.

But hey, not my call. I hope this works out the way you want, Paul! I'm always willing to see how an experiment works out. After all, I was one of the original orange members. (or was it red?) : )

<comment><USER3> What if readers could vote on the exponent? Maybe add a "flamewar" button that raises the exponent, which starts out at something innocuous like 1.1.

<comment><USER4> I suspect that it would be easier (though I don't know how practical) to simply zero the exponent for arguments that are getting upvotes. At least then it doesn't penalize the discussions generally accepted as quality.

<comment><USER5> Or, slightly more moderate: suppose the delay is depth^1.75 seconds: each upvote could be a slight reduction in the 'depth' factor: (depth-score/3)^1.75 or something like that. Could also be useful because becoming more "flamey" means you're actually increasing the depth via down votes.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> The one day timer for /noobs should start ticking when they make their first submission, not when they create their account. Otherwise spammers can just wait a day before submitting anything.

<comment><AUTHOR> I haven't seen any cases yet of spammers letting accounts mature before using them. There would be no practical benefit. All the limits depend on karma, not account age.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> _Rtm just made a couple changes to Arc's internals that have made the site visibly faster._

I was just reading the wikipedia page on Arc yesterday and it talks about an unofficial fork of Arc which came about because of a perception of slow development in the official branch.

How are those two branches playing these days? Is there any cross-pollination of code?

<comment><USER8> Currently the last release of Arc is one year old. The fork (Anarki) has had more visible development, although it has slowed down after october 2008. You can see the full history here: <http://github.com/nex3/arc/commits/master/> . There has been no cross pollination of code: the anarki fork fixes a few bugs that are still present in the official release of arc and it has a few interesting extra features, such as the possibility of defining your own functions to be called when a non-function object gets called. Another interesting implementaton of arc, which does include a few features from anarki, is rainbow: <http://github.com/conanite/rainbow> .

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> I'm a newcomer to HN but I was amazed to find out how long it's been around. It has the feel that many of my favorite sites had in their infancy which they inevitably loose as time goes on.

It's great to hear that the system is constantly being improved to maintain this environment, bravo.

<comment><USER10> Change is a constant on HN. Site changes, algorithms, etc. But through it all the community has remained largely tightknit and focused, which are definitely feats of their own.

<comment><USER11> There is one constant: widespread paranoia, justified or otherwise, about the quality of the site and alleged degradation. This since approximately day 1.

<comment><USER10> Because the community here is largely composed of early adopters and tech people. People who have been part of other sites who we grew attached to and watched as they degraded around us.

Is it paranoia? I don't think so. I think it's a fervent and constant vigilance against such.

But even then, it's definition has changed. The acceptable topics has broadened. We held open forums through the political season to discuss whether we wanted political news, etc.

So even then our definition of quality submissions has changed.

<comment><USER9> If nothing else it proves that this Quality is sustainable, even if the cost is eternal vigilance (which isn't so bad, and I imagine not outside the nature of the sort who frequent this site).

<comment><USER12> Maybe it's just me, but I thought I had been watching the site go downhill in the past month or so. I have rarely found a submission I really wanted to upmod in that time.

<comment><USER11> It's not just you, everyone thinks the site is going downhill in round-robin fashion.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> _there is now an exponential delay before reply links appear on deeply nested comments_

I think this is a fascinating idea.

<comment><USER14> I'd prefer to be able to enter my comment as soon as I can think of it, but do not have it show for other people until the time is up.

<comment><USER11> I'm thinking this would significantly affect the effectiveness of this new feature. Maybe we'd get some flamewar thread depth transferred into breadth but otherwise have about the same quantity of flame comments?

<comment><USER2> Exactly.

Let's say I'm really mad at your comment you just wrote. Really mad.

So the little "reply" button isn't showing up.

Do I a) stop being angry because a little button is disabled or b) find some other way to vent online?

I'm voting for b. And if you're going to vent anyway, I'd rather you nest it. That's what nested comments are for, anyway -- stuff that gets more and more detailed about a particular conversation.

<comment><USER15> That's why I think auto-collapsing threads with less then a certain threshold of karma after a period of time might be the way to go.

<comment><USER16> Forget _auto_ -collapsing, I'd like to be able to collapse period.

It happens quite often that I've already read a really long thread and just want to skip over it to the new stuff, or that the topic discussed in the thread is just not that interesting to me, but the topic of the post is.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> I'm officially nicknaming <http://news.ycombinator.com/noobs> _The Land Of The [dead]_

</comment><comment><USER18> Is it possibly to give a nice brief summary of the kind of change that brought about this speed up? Because... damn the site is fast now!

<comment><USER19> I was going to ask that too: what are the "couple changes"?

<comment><AUTHOR> Some common functions that took n arguments used to generate garbage when given 2.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Do we even have flame wars? I'm a fairly active reader and I don't really remember ever seeing one on here.

<comment><USER21> They are ignored by most of the most active users here, which keeps them small and contained, because they never gain much karma, in most cases.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> Thanks for making HN faster. I visit the site repeatedly throughout the day and the slowdowns can be frustrating.

</comment><comment><USER23> Shouldn't there be a link to the the noobs list on the lists page? There isn't (yet).

</comment><comment><USER24> i like the idea of exponential delays for deeply nested comments. i wonder if there is a more direct way to force people to take their time in writing replies. maybe a timer on how long a reply textfield is active (i know, full of flaws, but a start, at least).

if it doesn't inhibit thoughtless replies/comments, at least it will destroy the excuses of "oh, i should have thought about my response a bit more", and "that's not what i meant, i should have clarified that point."

<comment><USER25> It also might simply cause people to work around the feature, by adding new top-level comments (that are actually replies to nested comments). I will be interested to see how well it works.

<comment><USER26> Opening "link" in another tab is a better workaround.

<comment><USER18> Hopefully the delay is enforced at the server. Have you checked to see if opening 'link' in another tab defeats the restriction?

<comment><AUTHOR> As you guys have discovered, the restriction is in the code that generates the reply links, not the code that receives the replies. I'm hoping this will suffice.

<comment><USER11> May I inquire about your thought process with respect to security implications when you wrote this code?

A. "I know this is sloppy and will be found out sooner or later, but I hope people will respect the restriction anyway."

B. "I know this is sloppy, but I hope nobody will find out."

C. "This isn't really sloppy, as I know full well the security implications and don't care about them at all."

D. Didn't really think about the implications.

<comment><AUTHOR> C is the closest, but this is not even a question of security.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> I just assumed it was a bug... You can just click on [link] and then comment still right?

</comment><comment><USER28> Another clever idea is to add delays to troublemakers' site-browsing experience. Not my idea, I picked it up somewhere.

Not that it was added according to the post, but I am just saying that it is clever. :)

</comment><comment><USER29> When arc3 ?</comment>


10%? 20%? Apps Are Changing How We Tip - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/26/style/10-20-apps-are-changing-how-we-tip.html <comment><USER2> I'm a native Californian who has been abroad in Vietnam and Italy for the past year and a half (where tipping is very, very uncommon). Tipping was just second-nature before I left the states. However, when I visited over the summer, I couldn't believe how wrong tipping felt. Wrong to feel social pressure to tip. Wrong to feel an internal obligation to tip, due to the (often) low wages paid to restaurant employees. Wrong to feel "cheated" by the menu price (which is 15-25% below the actual cost of the meal).

I can only hope that tipping ceases to exist in the States someday. Not only for my own benefit; but for the benefit of most employees who rely on tips to get through their lives.

<comment><USER3> I'm a native Ohioan and have (had?) lived in California for the past 4 years. Currently I'm abroad in South America, and I have to say I _miss_ tipping. Why? Because when there isn't an incentive for the staff to give good service, I often get _terrible_ service. It can take ages to get served, I'll often request something when food is first brought and don't receive it until I'm already done with my meal, etc. Part of this is certainly related to the laid back attitude of Latin America cultures, but if the service employees were incentivized to give better service they probably wouldn't stand around talking to each other for 15 minutes while my friends and I are waiting on another beer.

Now I do hate that in the States there are now tip jars at all sorts of establishments, but to me restaurants and bars I much prefer tipping culture.

<comment><USER4> I live in Japan right now where there is absolutely no tipping (not even "sometimes tipping" like in Europe) and the service is better than I've experienced anywhere else, including the US. And here it's not just limited to restaurants, even in shops you get service with amazing attention to detail (oh your bag looks heavy, here's a piece of foam to pad the handle...)

<comment><USER5> Indeed. Tipping or no-tipping is really not a black and white issue. Just because they do not receive tips does not mean they don't care. For all you know they could get fired for standing around - like you would be with a regular office job.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> There's a very interesting episode of Planet Money about tipping[1].

I was neutral on tipping before listening, and now I'm staunchly against it. Not only is it discriminatory, it has no effect on the quality of service.

[http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2011/06/24/137346289/why- we-t...](http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2011/06/24/137346289/why-we-tip)

</comment><comment><USER7> Like a lot of Americans, I never went out of the country, so really had never given tipping a second thought besides laughing at Buscemi in Reservoir Dogs.

Having been to Europe and Asia a few times in last few years, I've seen the other side now. And yeah, what we do is just strange, and I don't think it's helpful at all. The service still has the usual variation of suck vs. fine.

The thing is that I feel like part of a problem. The truth is that even here I probably overtip (15-20% on -any- service, taxi, hair, whatever) mostly because I can't remember our tipping rules on all the various things you're supposed to tip for, and because trying to do calculations on the fly are a burden. It's either "the couple of bucks in my pocket" for stuff like carrying bags or "20% on the final bill" for almost anything else because that's what's easy to figure out quickly in my head.

Further, I don't carry cash anymore for the most part, so I'm constantly shorting delivery people, service professionals, all that, because I can't add the tip to the final bill but don't have currency.

So really wish we'd back off of it. I'd happily just bump up the portion of my payment on a number of things by 15%+ if that's what it took to compensate people fairly without my having to try to remember what's right. Then I could tip for actual exemplary service instead of just feeling mildly confused (or screwed) all the time.

</comment><comment><USER8> I've thought about this too. Instead of "tip creep", I hoped technology would have enabled us to emerge from this nonsensical tipping culture (the US is in dire need of change in this regard).

<comment><USER9> Until we can legislate that servers make at least $7.25/hr nationwide, no amount of technology is going to move us in that regard.

<comment><USER10> Which states don't enforce that employers have to make up the difference if tips aren't enough to bring a server up to at least minimum wage?

<comment><USER11> If they have to make up the difference often enough, they'll just let you go.

<comment><USER12> Perhaps, but the owners still have to pay-up. Otherwise, the failing is in the enforcement of the laws.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> (I live in Canada)

They can do whatever they want. I go to a variety of places for lunch. Some places have tips, some places don't.

When they have tips, I tend to tip based on extent and quality of service(I never tip with percentage). My average tip for a lunch service is about four dollars, when they go above and beyond, are especially prompt and helpful, or respond to my emotional condition, I tend to tip higher.

Lunch is my only daily meal, and service at lunch is just as important as the food in my opinion, whether I'm taking somebody along and want to be taken care of, or just trying to eat something that will relieve stress from work.

I don't experience any pressure while tipping; I just add my few bucks, and if something special has happened, I add a couple more; I don't bother myself with percentages, except maybe to keep above the bare minimum 20% gratuity so I don't get any funny looks out the door.

</comment><comment><USER14> To me it sounds (from comments, not article), that the reliance on tips is because ibstead of paying the wait staff a proper wage, they can set their menu/advertised price lower and make assumptions.

Now as someone who not obly worked in hospitality but also ran a few restaurants, this is an insane premise. How the hell could you rely in professional wait staff (not students but actual trained and comitted staff), if you cant guarantee them a good wage to vegin with.

Tipping is supposeto show your appreciated for exceptional service, to force your staff to assume its a guaranteed alotment is bullshit.

Also, im in japan now (out of hospitality yay), i get exceptional service everywhrre with no expectation of tips, and damned if i dont tip a hell of a lot more here.

</comment><comment><USER15> Just off the top of my head ... why not precalculate the tip for the majority of people who don't to fiddle with it, and simply let people change the tip if they really want, for those times when the service was atrocious?

<comment><USER16> I thought Square did this, but it must be one of the other systems. There are buttons for 15%, 18%, and 20% and a custom button that allows you to enter an arbitrary amount.

<comment><USER15> Right, but instead of those buttons, making you choose, the default would just be 15% (or whatever is standard for that type of service) and the other choice would be to "tweak it"

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Very interesting indeed, Libertatea.

<comment><USER6> In case you're wondering, you're being downvoted because you're not supposed to say things like "this is interesting" or "I agree" on HN. Comments are supposed to have content to them. Otherwise they should just be in the form of upvotes.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> Interesting, hope this topic/discussion picks up steam here on HN. I'm really curious to see what people have to say about tipping in general.

#Edit. More info why I'd like this to be discussed on HN.

I say this, as I've discussed this topic many times with many individuals online. Frankly, most of them are very very hostile. I've received death threats from servers for suggesting the remove of the tipping culture. To be fair, it was on Facebook, but at the same time that is a bit disturbing. These are individuals making credible, violent, disgusting threats because they can't consider alternate views on something they are single-minded on.

I do generally find that HN discussion is quite a bit better. If not for the fact that downvoting is much more strict, then for the quality of ideas/insights that people here have. Sometimes, quite different to what I've been exposed to before. +1 for that.

<comment><USER6> In case you're wondering, you're being downvoted because you're not supposed to say things like "this is interesting" or "I agree" on HN. Comments are supposed to have content to them. Otherwise they should just be in the form of upvotes.

Check out the link I posted elsewhere to the Planet Money episode on tipping.

<comment><USER18> got to love HN's unwritten rules.

<comment><USER19> who's unwritten? [https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html](https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html)

<comment><USER6> If this is a rule, it actually is unwritten. There's nothing in the guidelines that says to upvote instead of writing "I agree" comments.

However, this is a de facto rule because people will downvote such comments, so I thought it was worth warning people about.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Cisco posts kit to empty houses to dodge NSA chop shops - <AUTHOR> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/03/18/want_to_dodge_nsa_supply_chain_taps_ask_cisco_for_a_dead_drop/?mt=1426694168077

<comment><USER2> If they really wanted to dodge the NSA they wouldn't have released a press release about this let alone tell everyone about it. Sounds like a stupid PR stunt to me.

</comment><comment><USER3> I'm sure that Cisco doesn't really think this would stop a targeted attack (as others have said, they've doubtless got insiders who can point these things out), but then they've got to try and do something to reduce the inevitable consequence of the Snowden Disclosures, which is that any organisation who has reasons to not want "Five Eyes" agencies to have easy access to their systems will have a strong incentive not to use hardware and software which could be intercepted and backdoored in this way...

</comment><comment><USER4> Oh come on...So i'm guessing we are to assume the NSA doesn't have an insider electronic or human threat who can find out where these "empty house" packages are being sent and intercept that way?

How much money does the USG pay to Cisco per year? The fake shock of so many US companies who have been collaborating with the NSA for years is grating.

</comment><comment><USER5> This reads like an Onion article.

If they're that concerned, they should deliver them themselves using their own personnel. And wait until that process gets compromised..

</comment><comment><USER6> Translation: Cisco have now just completely gotten in bed with the NSA and the kit is backdoored before it even leaves the factory. There is no way the NSA would stand for someone as big and "establishment" as Cisco to get away with this sort of raspberry and Cisco desperately need _some_ positive coverage to try and earn their trust back.</comment>


Ask HN: Facebook Messenger alternatives for Android? - <AUTHOR> Pardon my French. I'm looking for a FB Messenger compatible app with less permissions. <comment><USER2> Face Slim Unofficial app built around the mobile Facebook site. Open Source.

[https://f-droid.org/repository/browse/?fdid=org.indywidualni...](https://f-droid.org/repository/browse/?fdid=org.indywidualni.fblite)

Facebook Lite Official

[https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.facebook.l...](https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.facebook.lite&hl=en)

</comment><comment><USER3> This is a very bad idea. Look at the catastrophe that happened when people used 3rd-party Snapchat clients.

If you can find an open-source Messenger cloent, then great. Otherwise your only safe choice is Messenger.</comment>


Amazon Launches 'Send to Kindle' Button For Web Developers and WordPress Blogs - <AUTHOR> http://techcrunch.com/2013/03/19/amazon-launches-send-to-kindle-button-for-web-developers-wordpress-blogs/

<comment><USER2> Well, about time!

When I bought a Kindle more than two years ago, one of the first use cases I discovered was finding an article on the web, deciding it's too long to read on a glare screen and wanting to send to the Kindle's browser. What I ended up doing was adding the articles to Pocket (Read It Later at that time) and crafting a small PHP script that turned the RSS feed of Pocket's items-to-read into a simple page with links, suitable for Kindle.

I still use Kindle for that sometimes, although I've moved with most of my Web reading to a tablet.

</comment><comment><USER3> Hmm, not sure how this is any improvement over the product of the same name from Klip.me, which I've been using for the past year. What's more, that product is a browser extension allowing you to send any article from any website to your device. This one requires individual content websites to add a button for every piece of shareable content—seems like a totally backwards way to implement this compared to what already exists! Kind of surprised Amazon's playing catch up so uncreatively...

<comment><USER4> Amazon have offered a chrome plugin to do this since last year, this is just another way of doing it (one that doesn't need the user to sign up for or install anything).

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> What's missing for the kindle is a decent RSS reader. hopefully with the closure of google reader something will come up.

<comment><USER6> I had responded with a proposal for an RSS reader app way back in the day when they were soliciting applications for SDK access.

Never did get any sort of response..

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Already started to implement this on my blog <http://www.millwoodonline.co.uk/blog>, works well with schema.org meta data too.

</comment><comment><USER8> I feel a patent coming along for this awesome piece of original thinking... /sarcasm

</comment><comment><USER9> Does amazon charge the kindle user for this? How does it deliver to your kindle?

<comment><USER5> Data sent by wifi is free , data sent by cellular isn't.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Great, another button to pollute the UI along with all the social ones. :(</comment>