Tom Perkins (KPCB): Progressive Kristallnacht Coming?  - <AUTHOR> http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304549504579316913982034286 <comment><USER2> Here is some perspective from Germany, the prime exporter of horrible history in Europe: Tom Perkins is now disqualified from any meaningful discourse. Comparing some hate-mail you recieve to what happened in 1938 amounts to a declaration of complete intellectual bancrupcy.

There are some pocket-tricks of discourse which can be forgiven. This is not one of them.

My house is next to a memorial commemorating the place where there used to be a Synagogue which was severely vanalized in 1938 and subsequently confiscated and destroyed. The Jews of my home town were later deported to death camps. I attended the memorial service at the site on the 75th anniversary, a few months back, with a reading of eyewittness accounts and all.

Do you know why most of us only know a little bit about what happened that day? Because consuming too much of the (readily available) information existing about it will throw you into despair, which is something anybody who starts reading about it soon finds out. That is how bad that day was.

Comparing himself to Pogromnacht! Fuck this guy. Not his "class", but him specifically.

<comment><AUTHOR> "The Nazis were special" is totally the wrong lesson to take away from the horrors of WW2. "Never again" doesn't mean "this could never happen again", but rather "we will never let this happen again."

I have no problem with pointing out parallels between other events and things which, in the past, had horrible outcomes. Excessive and crippling war reparations are (rightly) avoided because of the example of the rise of the Nazis. (As well as unfairness to those who didn't directly take part). Central registries of minority or disfavored groups can be wisely opposed on the basis of what the Nazis and others did with those registries on coming into power; even today the German postal system has some protections lacking in the US system for that reason. Rwanda, rather than the just the Nazis, is a great example of the risks of a political incident either manufactured or exploited to wage wars (civil or of conquest) and trample on civil liberties (including right to life); 9/11 and the disproportionate and ineffective US domestic and international response might be a fresher example still.

It is the violence, combined with scale of the Seattle WTO through Occupy, which is potentially relevant here; the google bus incident is a sideshow, but in the same general category. It certainly isn't Germany 1938, but inequality creates the kind of precondition for violent change, on the right or left, that has been tragically exploited in the past.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Kleiner Perkins has taken pains to distance itself from Mr Perkins' words:

[https://twitter.com/kpcb/statuses/427185213261623297](https://twitter.com/kpcb/statuses/427185213261623297)

"Tom Perkins has not been involved in KPCB in years. We were shocked by his views expressed today in the WSJ and do not agree."

Mike Godwin posted a while back that he was going to charge $5/violation. How big a bill should Mr Perkins get?

<comment><USER4> "Tom Perkins has not been involved in KPCB in years."

Really now? Apparently he's still listed as a Partner Emeritus:

       http://www.kpcb.com/partner/tom-perkins

To quote from KPCB's own linking page to the above:

 _By continuing their relationship with KPCB long after leaving, they bring our portfolio companies the benefit of decades of deep experience._

</comment></comment><comment> vezzy-fnord Kristallnacht is a bad metaphor for this. Not because it's Nazi Germany, but because Kristallnacht was an act of violence instigated by a ruling minority against an ostracized minority.

Inverting it makes it a different situation entirely, which you could simply describe as a "riot", "unrest", "rebellion" or whatever isn't a blatant clickbait.

<comment><USER4> It's far worse than a "bad metaphor." It's holocaust trivialization, basically.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> The "kristallyacht" joke is improved by knowing that Tom Perkins _killed a guy yachting_. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Perkins_%28businessman%...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Perkins_%28businessman%29#Personal_life)

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> There is a literal parallel (broken crystal/broken glass from bus windows), but the true question is: is the power of the government on the side of the "1%/jews" or on the side of the "progressives/Nazis"? Outside of SF city government (which is so ineffective as to not really matter), most government seems solidly on the side of the elites. While many Jews in pre-WW2 Europe had economic power (and many didn't), they didn't generally have political or military power.

Consequently, this seems more like (at the extreme) the rise of the communists in Russia, progressive movements in the US in the early-1900s which caused the income tax, massive increase in size of government, and alcohol prohibition, rather than the Nazis.

<comment><USER5> Well, remember that the Nazi government did not have power for quite some time. It was only when the German government itself could no longer control the populace (remember, humanity was in the middle of a Great Depression, and Germany was hit extra-special-hard due to the world blaming them for WWI), that the Nazis really took hold. Unlike most capitalist nations, the people with all the power in Nazi Germany were those who were more loyal to the Nazi party, not the richest members of the German society. That is of course contrast to the way America works.

Until the US government completely collapses, and power falls into the hands of some crazy person, I'm pretty sure we won't have to worry about any kind of "Kristallnacht" taking place.

<comment><USER6> For many WSJ readers, that has already happened - their editorial board is heavily invested in the idea that Obama is just about the worst thing ever to happen to the US.

<comment><AUTHOR> USG -> Weimar Republic is seeming like a pretty legitimate parallel in a lot of ways; ineffective, etc. More so in 2008; that the world economy seems to have mostly survived makes it much less of a risk, but if China imploded and/or 2008 repeated itself, I would be extra suspicious of someone promoting a State-led program of national renewal.

<comment><USER7> I would suggest that it seems the more legitimate the less one knows about the Weimar Republic. The US has never been through a catastrophe such as WW I and its immediate aftermath were in Germany; and for all the lively efforts here and there, the US government is generally perceived in the US as the legitimate government, as the Weimar government was not perceived by large portions of the governing classes--the courts and the military, notably.

<comment><AUTHOR> I don't know as much as I'd like about Weimar; is there a "standard" good book on it in English? I know WW2 and WW1 a lot better, but the Weimar-and-rise-of- Nazis part always falls into the cracks.

<comment><USER8> Standard I'm not so sure.

Eric D. Weitz, _Weimar Germany_ covers the period, focusing extensively on the cultural and artistic aspects.

[http://www.powells.com/biblio/1-9780691157962-0](http://www.powells.com/biblio/1-9780691157962-0)

Related, from Powells:

[http://www.powells.com/subjects/history-and-social- science/e...](http://www.powells.com/subjects/history-and-social- science/europe/germany/weimar-republic/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Tom Perkins is over 80 years old and it could be his age. He might also reveal the true sentiment in his social circle.

Living in a bubble is interesting thing. Being on the News Corp. board, consuming News Corp. owned media and then writing an opinion in News Corp owned magazine.

<comment><USER10> He owns a customized Japanese fishing trawler (called "Dr. No") which he uses to transport his own submarine. He lives in Jimmy Page's former mansion.

The bubble he lives in has its own zip code.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> This is actually the opposite of the current circumstances.

"Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power."

Benito Mussolini

So the merger of the State with investment banks, oil companies and others in the 1% that fund the rise to power of politicians is a corporatist state. Now while the politicians praise those that fund them to power, they wage wars on "the other" in this case Muslims overseas, which while helping oil companies, investment banks etc also gives them a boogie man to scare the public into submission and help consolidate their power to do whatever illegal activities they want, such as spying on everyone or kidnapping now renamed "rendition" etc. The fact that this article is so easily dismissed shows how bad things have gotten and how unlikely it is to end well for any of us.

</comment><comment><USER12> My deity, what an absolutely sickening comparison.

The simple fact is that the 1% have achieved grossly disproportionate wealth thanks to the inherent self-reinforcing nonlinear distribution of rewards from capitalism itself, massively aided and abetted by a corrupt financial system. Indeed it is mainly the latter which is at fault.

In short, Tom, you and your companions may (or may not) deserve to be rich as a result of cannily buying and selling other people's labors, but you certainly don't deserve to be as rich as your are.

</comment><comment><USER13> RE: "the demonization of the rich"

What exactly attracts an American billionaire to a haunted house in Scotland? You be the judge. First, some history: "Boleskine House was the estate of Aleister Crowley from 1899 to 1913."[1] "Crowley purchased the home in order to perform the [Abramelin] operation"[2]. In the Abramelin operation, the magician must summon the twelve Kings and Dukes of Hell (Lucifer, Satan, Leviathan, Belial, etc.), and the "magical goals for which the demons can be employed are typical of those found in grimoires:"[3], e.g., money. "The current owner, American venture capitalist Tom Perkins, has owned the building since the mid-eighties and is looking for a tenfold increase on the £800,000 he reportedly put down on the property."[1] "Crowley's summoning of strange entities, mixed with the strange legends and folklore surrounding Fortean occurrences at Loch Ness, have led some, including cryptozoologist Richard Freeman, to ask whether the famous occultist's ritual 'worked in a way that Crowley had not foreseen?'"[4]

[1] [http://www.jimmypageguitar.com/News-165-Jimmy+page+house.htm...](http://www.jimmypageguitar.com/News-165-Jimmy+page+house.html) [2] [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boleskine_House](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boleskine_House) [3] [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Book_of_Abramelin](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Book_of_Abramelin) [4] Did Aleister Crowley Unleash Demons at Loch Ness? at [http://www.dailygrail.com/Magick-Circle/2012/8/Did- Aleister-...](http://www.dailygrail.com/Magick-Circle/2012/8/Did-Aleister- Crowley-Unleash-Demons-Loch-Ness)

</comment><comment><USER14> for fucks sake. this is tasteless exaggeration.

</comment><comment><USER15> The world would be a better place with more guys like Tom Perkins in it. The envious should have no place in politics or power.

</comment><comment><USER16> "We have, for example, libelous and cruel attacks in the Chronicle on our number-one celebrity, the author Danielle Steel, alleging that she is a 'snob' despite the millions she has spent on our city's homeless and mentally ill over the past decades."

What is this trash? Calling someone a "snob" is libel now? Who upvoted this? Why is it on the front page? Come on.

Flagged.

<comment><USER17> I found the dissonance between the prominence and reputation of the speaker and the crudeness of the remarks interesting, hence my up vote. Comparing hoodlums tossing rocks to Kristallnacht is beyond depraved.

<comment><USER16> Is HN really an appropriate place to point out stupid letters to the editor?

<comment><USER3> This stupid letter to the editor has (a) made the news elsewhere (b) been explicitly disowned by his firm: "Tom Perkins has not been involved in KPCB in years. We were shocked by his views expressed today in the WSJ and do not agree."

<comment><USER16> Regarding (a), the news contains lots of Stupid Celebrity Stories, but that's the kind of thing I look at HN to get _away_ from.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Firefox 6 - WebSockets are back - <AUTHOR> http://hacks.mozilla.org/2011/05/aurora-6-is-here/ <comment><USER2> Firefox 4 ditched WebSockets for security reasons. Does anybody know the justification to add it back now? More specifically, do they fix the security issue of WebSocket, or do they just give up to the popular demand?

<comment><USER3> Yes, the security concern has been fixed using masking. [http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-hybi- thewebsocketproto...](http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-hybi- thewebsocketprotocol-07#section-4.3)

<comment><USER4> Maybe someone could explain the original security concern, and how masking is able to address that concern?

<comment><USER5> In the original protocol, it was possible to get two endpoints to transact over Websockets even if a middlebox between them didn't perfectly enforce the protocol. This is bad because it potentially confuses the middlebox about which parts of the stream are HTTP/1.1 requests or not, which can allow attackers to poison caches.

In the new protocol, Websockets traffic is (trivially) encoded so that it (a) can't accidentally be interpreted by either endpoint as something other than Websockets and (b) can't confuse middleboxes.

Basically, "new" Websockets has custom Websockets encryption that nothing other than Websockets will be speaking, so, if you're talking Websockets, it's because both endpoints consented to do so.

<comment><USER6> That seems like a horrible solution - now we have to wait until all companies update their proxies to support websockets.

<comment><USER7> No, just the opposite - this change was necessary to get WebSockets to _work_ with old, broken proxies. Previously those proxies might interpret part of the body of the WebSocket traffic as an HTTP header; now they will correctly just pass the traffic through.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> That's good news, WebSockets is probably the second coolest thing to come out of the HTML5 movement, right after WebGL I think. Everything else is cool and all but those two are major changes.

<comment><USER9> I'm also happy and couldn't agree more, but I would make it more generic: Canvas/WebGL is the huge change. And I would add Local Storage as a distant third to WebSockets' strong second. The rest is fun but not game changing.

<comment><USER4> Local Storage is limited to 5MB, which cripples the ability of indie game developers to effectively use WebGL as an alternative deployment platform.

<comment><USER10> It has unlimited storage if you use Chrome's Webstore. I suppose it will just take a while before the other browsers can figure out how to implement it the right way for more than 5 MB of storage.

<comment><USER11> Other browsers have figured it out. Other browsers had it figured out before there was a Chrome Webstore.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> In case you're wondering what _"this API will be temporarily namespaced"_ means, see <http://bugzil.la/659324>. Before Firefox 6 is pushed to the release channel, the constructor will will be changed to "new MozWebSocket()". Once the JavaScript API is stabilized, it will be changed back to "new WebSocket()".

</comment><comment><USER12> Rwaldron has some good coverage of this over at [http://weblog.bocoup.com/javascript-firefox-aurora-6-and- eve...](http://weblog.bocoup.com/javascript-firefox-aurora-6-and-eventsource- api)

Funny, I just posted this link to Rwaldron's coverage right before you posted to the link he is responding to.

</comment><comment><USER13> IE does not inherently support WebSockets, so apps with worker threads will block. You can support WebSockets in IE clients using this hack:

<http://bit.ly/irM6XV>

</comment><comment><USER14> What are some potentially practical uses of WebSockets?

<comment><USER15> Anything that Comet or other long-polling techniques provide, really.

The advantages of WebSockets include constantly changing specifications which are neither backwards- nor forwards-compatible, a lack of proxy traversal, an arbitrary and unreasonable limitation on binary data transfer, and lack of unified browser and server support.

<comment><USER16> I've held off on using WebSockets until binary frames are supported. I'm amazed they haven't been so far.

<comment><USER17> Ericsson has a working implementation for this, they do voice and video browser to browser with Webkit:

<https://labs.ericsson.com/apis/web-real-time-communication>

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2600585>

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> I still don't understand "web" sockets. I mean, to get a web page, I already have a TCP connection. TCP connections are bidirectional. All we need is for the browser to write stuff to the socket and read stuff from it.

Yes, I understand that proxies may assume HTTP is request/response... but that's fine. My app breaks when you use that proxy. I can live with that.

The future-proof fix is to add some Cache-control header that says, "hey, this response is infinitely long! don't cache!".

</comment><comment><USER19> Also, the 'Web Console' developer tools are interesting. Somewhat rough at the moment, but it has some useful features.

<comment><USER20> I am completely in love with the persistence of the console between pages; Really, really helpful for a whole bunch of hard-to-debug cases.

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> Do you guys know of good tutorials on WebSockets?</comment>


Ask HN: Selling your contract work - <AUTHOR>

I'm just curious if there is any service out there that allows you to buy and sell the current contract jobs you have to others in the form of leads / introductions?<p>When I need to part ways with a contract I don't want to leave the client without a developer. I've noticed that my recommendations are highly regarded by the client. Usually I will tap into my network and pass along the work no strings attached, but couldn't almost guaranteed work for a set amount generate revenue? I'm sure there is something out there and would like to see it. <comment><USER2> Interesting idea. It also would be worthwhile to explore the potential of a marketplace where you can buy and sell retainers or monthly maintenance contracts.

For example, let's say you built a website for a client and included a monthly maintenance contract to fix any security issues, yet you do not have the time to service that obligation. Then you could go to such a marketplace, sell that contract, and fulfill your contractual obligations.

<comment><AUTHOR> I hadn't thought of that, but you're right, it's fairly common to have a retainer with certain contracts. It's related enough fit well into a site like that.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> I don't know of anything like that, but could definitely see a market for it.

We do some of that in a consultancy masterclass I am part of, but nothing that organized.

<comment><AUTHOR> So I've never been apart of a group of consultants, I usually just have personal connections that would fit well taking over the contract. I imagine this is commonly done with other consultants, but I'm not sure of the frequency.

Sometimes I just want to get rid of a client and it would be nice to find an exact fit than refer a friend who isn't totally qualified for the position.</comment></comment>


The travails of Detroit - <AUTHOR> http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/2b815a94-0863-11de-8a33-0000779fd2ac.html <comment><USER2> Interesting that, on an anecdotal basis at least, the decline of detroit and manufacturing mirrors the rise of technology and information.

While computers were enjoying increasing market share in businesses and homes through the late 70s on, auto and other manufacturers struggled to compete with foreign imports and labor outsourcing.

Are the two connected? Is the rise of information technology at all related to the decline of America's manufacturing base?

<comment><USER3> The rise of technology has made manufacturing less labor intensive causing services to become relatively more emphasized.

[http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/535980/service- ind...](http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/535980/service-industry)</comment></comment>


I'm writing a book about algorithms and Lisp - <AUTHOR> https://lisp-univ-etc.blogspot.com/2019/07/programming-algorithms-book.html <comment><USER2> This seems like the perfect book to round out these:

\- Berkeley: Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs [Racket version] ([http://berkeley-cs61as.github.io/textbook.html](http://berkeley- cs61as.github.io/textbook.html))

\- Duke: Discrete Math [Racket] ([https://www2.cs.duke.edu/courses/spring15/compsci230/syllabu...](https://www2.cs.duke.edu/courses/spring15/compsci230/syllabus.html))

Can anyone recommend other core CS books/courses that uses Lisp (or variants) or other functional languages?

<comment><USER3> Paradigms of Artificial Intelligence Programming (Norvig)

<comment><USER4> Lisp in Small Pieces

<comment><USER5> This book is poetry. If you have never seen it, please check it out.

<comment><USER4> It's one of my favorites along with SICP, CTM, PAIP and The Art of Prolog.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Maybe this will ease my OCD brain of feeling like I need to get get an undergrad in CS to continue by programming career and "earn my stripes". Maybe all I need is exposure to algorithms to feel like I'm more fit for the job. This might do just that. Looking forward to it.

<comment><USER7> A CS degree is just a collection of topics that you study. Look up the topics, find books, articles, etc on the topics, find a mentor, study the topics, "get degree". The only thing missing are metrics but the metrics aren't the point.

My local university has a book store and the books per course are all there so if I wanted to I could pick up all the books for a CS degree and read um. I could find a list of profs too and I bet if I emailed some I could find one that might talk back.

There's all kinds of ways to go about this :)

<comment><USER8> Metrics give you feedback on your level of mastery.

<comment><USER9> > Metrics give you feedback on your level of mastery.

Metrics _can_ give you feedback on your level of mastery, but this varies wildly with whoever is providing the feedback.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I would advise to put quite an effort into syntax highlighting, naming, and all the other things that will help an untrained eye to read the code.

<comment><USER11> He is planning on using LeanPub and they support specifying what programming language code snippets are written in so listings tend to look pretty good.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Any Lisp book that is written today owes it to the Lisp community and the rest of the world to write in a modern, safe, and digestible style. One issue with many Lisp books, especially older and self-published ones, is that they contain the author's pet style or pet idioms, and they wouldn't fly in a team environment. I think this is especially important because Lisp books are for learning, and if it's just that much more difficult to Google(/ddg/AltaVista), it will be a frustrating disservice.

Common Lisp has extremely reasonable and regular syntax if you stick to some basic rules and you don't "flex" the language gratuitously. Written in such a way, the structure would be familiar to the modern Python or Java programmer. Yet the language is a workhorse when the problems get tough or gnarly.

Looking forward to the publication of this book. Seeing introductory algorithms in modern Common Lisp would be a great resource.

<comment><USER12> Going to push back on this. Lisp is written to be "flexed". And people can and should write it however they want. I think treating students like they're all incapable of googling is utterly infantilizing and nothing about it serves any purpose other than stroking the authors ego. The vast, and I mean seriously vast, majority of programming books waste pages and often multiple whole chapters on treating the user like they can't find the documentation, like they can't reason about different syntactical constructions, and it leaves the learner hobbled and weakened when going out into the real world and trying to read, let alone write, actually code to accomplish a real task. People can cry about Paul Grahams style in ANSI lisp, or Let over Lambda, anyone who can work through either of those books is going to be fine reading Practical Common Lisp (or whatever). Also, finally, Common Lisp isn't exactly known for being a "team language" and the overwhelming majority of projects that _I_ know of were originated by one person. I for one hope the author contributes his work in whatever way will he feels like. Lisp is a liberating language to use, we should write about it in the same way

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> would be nice to have a book with a bunch of algos and pseudocode to implement into any language you see fit.

<comment><USER14> Something like CRLS? That is fairly implementable pseudocode, but maybe still too hand wavey at times.

<comment><USER5> It really is; it's irritating that they say it can be trivially proved with induction, robbing me from understanding the crux of the problem.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Can u make a JavaScript version?

<comment><USER2> Sigh...

<comment><USER16> It's a legitimate question. As much as I love Lisp and prefer it over Javascript, focusing an algorithm book on just Lisp considerably reduces its audience.

<comment><USER17> I would suggest you to read it before jumping to conclusions (as the new chapters will be published). Lisp will not be the main focus of the book, for those who don't plan to use it at work, it may be perceived just as pseudocode. As for Javascript, I believe that explaining algorithms using it is counterproductive as the language has too many limitations that will impede expressing everything I need idiomatically. I'm not saying that you can't program algorithms in JS, but it's not pleasant and productive. Besides, JS is not the language I'm interested in, at all

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> >The book will be freely available with a CC BY-NC-ND license.

And yet there is no link to any existing download[sad cat sounds]

<comment> phoe-krk > will

That's future tense that you just quoted.

From the first paragraph of the blogpost:

> Now, I'm, finally, at the stage when I can start publishing it. But I intend > to do that, first, gradually in this blog and then put the final version — > hopefully, improved and polished thanks to the comments of the first readers > — on Leanpub.

<comment><USER19> Also HN didn't keep my edited title. I did add a [WIP] tag ..</comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: Biggest problem in link sharing today? - <AUTHOR>

What's the biggest problem with link sharing today? Oversharing? Information overload? Categorization of feed items by topics, types, keywords and interests? Something else?
Do you something feel you'd like to share many more interesting items, but you're afraid to flood your friends feed on Twitter/Facebook/Google+ and get unfollowed/hidden?
What problem would you like to see solved in link sharing? <comment><USER2> On the recipient end, what I'd like to see is some kind of central place I can go to which stores all the links people have shared with my email/FB profile/twitter etc. I can then sort through the list by date, category or whatever. If I don't have an account already, I link my email/profile info and it shows me the stuff waiting for me.

Obviously this would require some centralised service and for all sharing services to integrate with it - so perhaps this isn't much use. I'd certainly find it useful though. All these links pass me by if I'm busy.

<comment><USER3> I second this but I'd love to sort/filter links by quality and/or relevance. Some posts get superseded quickly (drop in relevance) or are debunked (drop in quality) over time so bookmarks should not be just collect-and-forget.

I hope Avos.com is reading this stuff.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I think often I just want to let people know that I stumbled upon something; I don't really care if they actually check it out or not.

So, I don't quite like the FB way of listing all my links as posts. If it would say something like "<Person's Name> has stumbled upon 5 links today, click [here] to expand", I think that might be better.

I don't have a stumbled upon account (and I'm not entirely sure how that site works).

<comment><AUTHOR> Something like Facebook shows album photos may be? Thumbnails next to each other, with a headline like you suggested saying how many you have shared per day?

Also I feel sharing should be one-click, something like Google +1, without the need to fill any status/heading/description/tag fields.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> The problem with links is quality and structure. If you are just wasting some time on fb you don't need it, but if you are doing a research this is rather useful. Yet, nobody does it.

I have been learning web development in python the last months and what I am missing is a good way to keep truck of my sources and to share also. What if somebody just learnt the same thing and has a handful collection of links? No way he can share.

</comment><comment><USER6> Not just link sharing, all kinds of archiving job are still difficult. Categorization by keywords labeling forces you work like a libarian. I usually don't remember what tags I used the first time and can't find what I want.</comment>


Subversion in 2010 and Beyond - <AUTHOR> http://subversion.wandisco.com/component/content/article/2-news/30-subversion-in-2010-and-beyond-see-the-presentations.html

<comment><USER2> Some interesting data from a survey: <http://www.ddj.com/architect/222301141>

Quote: "More than one-third of developers use Subversion for source code management; that's almost triple the share of the next most used SCM tool, Microsoft SourceSafe"

<comment><USER3> That sourcesafe is the second most used SCM scares me.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I'd be interested to hear the opinions of HN'ers. Is there any reason these days to choose SubVersion over git?

<comment><USER5> We've had this debate before, but something along the lines of:

* No GUI for Git on Windows

* Everything knows how to work with Subversion already (tools, testing, continuous integration, idiots)

* Companies like centrally controlled and backed up solutions

* Why change when what you have works for you

<comment><USER6> > Companies like centrally controlled and backed up solutions

git wins fast over svn for backups.

git backups are redundant, always up-to-date, easily verifiable, and easy to turn into proper master repositories.

The more people you have working on a project, the harder it gets for anything to get lost.

<comment><USER7> To be fair to the subversion guys, its pretty darn easy to setup real-time backups. Use svnsync and hook it up in some post-commit hook.

Having said that, to have git completely backed up, it's not as simple as a clone. You will need to mirror another repository so that you can get all of the branches, tags, etc. Additionally you will need some sort of post-receive hook so that your mirror is kept up-to-date.

Now, my conclusion with backups for svn and git - both need some intervention. Its not as simple as "press this button and it just works".</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Crime in New York City Plunges to a Level Not Seen Since the 1950s - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/27/nyregion/new-york-city-crime-2017.html <comment><USER2> As a former SF resident now living in Manhattan I can definitely say I generally feel much safer in NYC than I did in SF. I'm guessing it's a combination of the fact that most of Manhattan is so gentrified that there are few pockets of poorer communities where gang-related activity can thrive and the number/visibility of police is comparably much higher. Taxes and CoL are comparable, so I definitely feel like I'm getting more for my $$ as far as security and safety goes.

<comment><USER3> Where in SF did you feel unsafe?

I walk around all parts of the city considered "dangerous" (Bayview, Mission, Ocean View/Ingleside) and nothing has happened to me. Really the only "bad" area SF has is the Tenderloin and it's common sense not to be out there wandering around even during the day.

<comment><USER4> > it's common sense not to be out there wandering around even during the day

It seems pretty bad that a major western city has a completely no-go area right in the middle. Dismissing it as not a problem because it's common sense to avoid a large area of the centre of the city doesn't help the argument!

<comment><USER5> I've never felt unsafe walking around in the Tenderloin, e.g. carrying an infant. The main 'problem' people have is that there are poor people living there in SROs, and a good number of homeless people loitering all the time. But they mostly keep to themselves. Some folks certainly have substance abuse or mental health problems and will be talking to themselves, and if you walk through you might get shouted at, and sometimes there is a shouting match out in public, and statistically there is some amount of crime between residents, but it's generally not a physical threat to people walking through. It is by no means a 'no-go area'.

<comment><USER6> > I've never felt unsafe walking around in the Tenderloin, e.g. carrying an > infant.

Are you joking? Or just insane?

I'm a 160 lbs male and would not walk through the tenderloin at night. It's really fucking scary. Almost everyone there is homeless and on drugs. The bad kind of drugs.

I would go so far as to say that someone carrying an infant through that area might be endangering the child.

<comment><USER7> Kid or no kid, the Tenderloin is fine as long as you "fit in"... but if it looks like you can be scared out of some cash, you will get the predatory stare.

<comment><USER8> My wife got attacked in San Francisco in Tenderloin around 11am, a few blocks away from Clift Hotel on the second day of the trip. I guess her carrying a Starbucks cup made her a target.

The fact that SF tolerates shit like this under the banner of "acceptance", "it is mental health" or whatever the hell it may be is mind blowing.

<comment><USER9> CCW would help, though that's not available in CA.

<comment><USER8> Between hot coffee into his face and her doing a little bit of a small joint manipulation, she was fine. Just shocked.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> > and crime will have declined for 27 straight years

> But criminologists differ about the cause of the continued declines. Mr. > Zimring said that while better policing accounted for much of the decline in > crime since 1990, it was no longer a primary driver. New York is "tiptoeing" > toward a 90 percent crime decline for reasons that remain "utterly > mysterious," he said.

The "27 straight years" caught my eye, and reminded me of something I saw a good decade ago, so may I suggest something controversial?

It doesn't perfectly match 27 years ago, but this is across the whole US, not just NYC - (popular) violent video games are highly correlated with the drop in crime: [http://oi25.tinypic.com/2r6ns4y.jpg](http://oi25.tinypic.com/2r6ns4y.jpg)

(Correlation <> causation, but I _definitely_ think it merits more investigation... does anyone else happen to know more?)

<comment><USER11> It's also long enough for kids to grow up entirely after the ban on tetraethyl lead in gasoline. [http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-27067615](http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-27067615)

<comment><USER10> Two things bother me about this theory:

* First instinct is that the fall-off should be more gradual if it's based on people's ages, not have that sudden sharp descent. I don't put a lot of weight to this though since the 20-year gap makes it sound like the exposure has to be under a certain age (and so within a relatively small range), which would appear as a relatively sharp drop.

* Second, after noticing the graph doesn't actually look like the one I posted (which jtmarmon posted confirmation to in a google doc), I took a closer look: It claims to be using "violent crimes per 100,000 population", but instead matches this chart from wikipedia [0], which isn't scaled by population - it's using raw numbers from the UCR data tool [1]. If the gasoline line is labeled wrong as well, then there's probably no issue, but if it's labeled correctly then half the correlation for this story isn't actually a correlation. Not sure where to look for that one, though.

[0] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Violent_Crime_in_the_Unit...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Violent_Crime_in_the_United_States.png)

[1] [https://www.ucrdatatool.gov/Search/Crime/State/StatebyState....](https://www.ucrdatatool.gov/Search/Crime/State/StatebyState.cfm)

<comment><USER12> Remember that lead gas disappeared quickly, and that poor people who commit violent crime get incarcerated and killed.

What happened to poor, mostly black youth in cities was akin to a war — a generation or more lost.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Reported crime.

They also reclassified many crimes. Also, cops aren't always eager to take reports (I speak from experience).

Yes, there are less homicides than ever, but it's still painful to watch manipulation of statistics in slow motion.

On the flip side sex crimes are quite up (again, reported).

<comment><USER14> > _cops aren 't always eager to take reports (I speak from experience)_

Cops have no say in whether to take or not take a report. Call 311, make a police report, meet the officer dispatched to you and sign. I agree that getting the NYPD to actually _act_ on a police report is puzzlingly difficult.

<comment><USER15> > Cops have no say in whether to take or not take a report.

One time I tried to report a theft. I gave up after the third time the cop who was answering the phones at the local police station hung up on me.

<comment><USER16> The other day I tried to report someone who was blatantly trying to sell me a stolen computer. I was disappointed to find that they don't maintain any kind of database of serial numbers of lost and stolen electronics.

The implication is that, if you do lose something or have it stolen, there is no way for the police to help you get it back.

<comment><USER17> That's mostly because the percentage of people who keep track of the SN of their electronics is close to 0.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> I visited NYC a year ago for the first time. It amazed me the amount of police present everywhere. The sheer number of police out and about was shocking.

<comment><USER19> Maybe you were in tourist areas (if not, where did you see them)?

I would complain that I don't see enough cops on the street (live in Brooklyn, work in Manhattan)

<comment><USER20> Manhattan is saturated with police as well as integrated with a web of linked surveillance cameras. Brooklyn has fewer but still far, far more then other parts of the country, especially out west. New York City has roughly 50,000 police officers and a police budget of over $4 billion dollars just for the city alone. On top of that you have state troopers and a variety of other agencies (like the MTA, the many federal police agencies in the city and the heavily armed army/national guard troops that are often visible in uniform/armor at Penn Station and other places around the city) who have their own police officers. Within 30 miles of the city you have thousands and thousands more police officers from Nassau, Westchester, Suffolk, and other surrounding counties (as well as additional police forces from towns within these counties). You're talking about 70,000+ officers within a 50 mile radius.

By comparison, Arizona has a total of about 14,000 police - for the whole state. Colorodo has about 12,000. Most states are comparable to this. You are just far, far less likely to see police officers in most other places in the country. As a New Yorker, I'm always astonished by the lack of police presence in other states (let alone other countries) because policing is so ubiquitous here.

<comment><USER21> >70,000+ officers within a 50 mile radius

Sounds like a prison.

<comment><USER22> 70,000 sounds low; a 50-mile radius would bring you close to Hackettstown, NJ; at that point, you're almost into PA.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> They have transferred the poor off the streets to prison cells.

Super harsh sentences for serial small crimes, drug dealing, etc.

You remove any young male who has potential to become a criminal from the street and all you're left with is white collar crime.

Unpopular facts.

<comment><USER24> That doesn't explain the similar drops in crime in Canada, most of Europe, Australia, and a ton of other countries. The US is nearly unrivaled in incarceration, but crime hasn't dropped faster of further than in comparable developed nations with lower incarceration rates.

<comment><USER23> Most of Europe never had the crime and murder rates of NYC during the same timeframe. 70s and 80s in Vienna, Berlin, Paris, Madrid, etc very different than in NYC.

<comment><USER24> NYC then should see a larger drop then as it reverts to the mean. Those cities may no have had peaks as high as New York, but their peaks were during the same time period. Half of Berlin was in the GDR where heavy handed surveillance networks tracked most residents, so it isn't really comparable.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> I wonder if people should consider that "freedom" includes being free of fear and threat. Where I live, even children can go out on the streets at night without a second thought. Without having to fear violence, hate, gangs or the authorities. There is something wrong with a society that prioritizes freedom of speech and the right to carry a gun, over the right to not live in fear and to human dignity.

<comment><USER26> if you can't advocate for yourself or defend yourself, any freedom from fear or human dignity afforded to you is a happy accident. it may last for a while, but what will you do if things change?

i concede that the sea may change for guns sometime in the next century; they can make things very chaotic as population density increases. still, i maintain that freedom of speech is a necessary, if not sufficient, condition for a stable and free society.

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> St. Louis had almost as many homicides as NYC this year.

Population of St. Louis: 312,000

Population of NYC: 8,537,673

[http://amp.kansascity.com/news/local/crime/article191211704....](http://amp.kansascity.com/news/local/crime/article191211704.html)

<comment><USER28> St. Louisan here. What's really impressive about our murders is that basically ~95% of them take place within two small neighborhoods inside St. Louis city limits, which itself is but one small subsection of the metro area, which actually has a population hovering around 3 million. Those two neighborhoods, Dutchtown and North City, are _impressively_ dangerous, so dangerous that even diluting them with the rest of the city still places us at the top of "most dangerous cities" lists year after year.

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> Most of the people with heavy lead exposure are now beyond the age for violent crime.

White collar crime is bigger than ever. Today's organized crime operators have better things to do than shake down shopkeepers for protection money, run a numbers racket, or try to resell stolen goods.

</comment><comment><USER30> This is especially good news:

 _As of Dec. 20, police officers intentionally fired their service guns in 23 encounters, a record low, down from 37 in 2016. The Police Department said officers were relying more on stun guns, which were used 491 times through November, compared with 474 times during the same period in 2016._

</comment><comment><USER31> While I agree that NYC is much safer than when I first moved there five years ago -- threats still pose themselves from time to time (as anywhere will).

For example, I fell asleep for the first time on a 2 train last month, and was robbed. It was one of those, "Ah, this is definitely on me," moments. Easily preventable; however, it's still crime, nonetheless. Most importantly, I didn't report this (as many others in similar situations will not), so the statistics are probably not as accurate as headlines would like you to think.

</comment><comment><USER32> Having visited Manhattan several times in the last couple of years, I have to say that it does feel like a police state being there. In some senses it's great, because you don't have to worry so much about crime as much, but it also speaks to the police state that NYC and the rest of the US is turning into.

So I'm not surprised that crime has fallen, given the sheer number of police officers present.

</comment><comment><USER33> NYC is a wonderful and safe place to visit or live. People raised on too many cop shows may miss this. It's not perfect -no place is - but it is quite safe.

</comment><comment><USER34> So I've lived in NYC for 7 years now so have some personal experience with this. Note that I live and work in Manhattan so my experience is probably skewed and is only really anecdotal anyway.

My personal experience with the NYPD has been very good.

\- As others have noted, heavy police presence in heavily frequented areas, particularly by tourists.

\- During Sandy I was in the area without power. At night a police cruiser would go down my street every couple of hours (IIRC) with the lights on but no siren, I guess looking for looters.

\- I had a car alarm go off at 1:30am early Sunday morning right outside my window. While I was figuring out what to do and calling 311, a police van turned up (around 1:50am) and broke into the car and disabled the alarm. I went out to speak to the officers and they said just call my local precinct and any unattended car alarm is cause for the police to come up (defined as >10 minutes).

That all being said, there's a pretty dark side to policing and the criminal justice system in NYC too, most notably in the treatment of minorities. Some examples:

\- New York's ridiculous gravity knife law [1], which seems to be used by police selectively to target minorities. The New York legislature has now twice overwhelmingly passed reforms only to have this (now twice) vetoed by Governor Cuomo on thin justification [2]. One can only presume he's kowtowing to the law and order crowd.

\- Alleged racial bias in pedestrian stops, seemingly often under the guise of seeking a mysterious African-American male suspect in his 20s who is 5' 10" (which can be pretty much anyone).

\- The appalling case of Three Years in Riker's Island Without a Trial [3], as win-rate obsessed prosecutors use stalling tactics, the imbalance of power, the ignorance of suspects and plea deals to deny people due process.

\- The arrest of James Blake [4].

\- Chokehold death of Eric Garner [5] for a relatively minor offense.

[1] [https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/31/opinion/new-yorks- outdate...](https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/31/opinion/new-yorks-outdated- knife-law.html)

[2] [https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/24/nyregion/gravity-knife- cu...](https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/24/nyregion/gravity-knife-cuomo- veto.html)

[3] [https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/10/06/before-the- law](https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/10/06/before-the-law)

[4] [https://www.boston.com/sports/tennis/2017/09/19/ex-tennis- st...](https://www.boston.com/sports/tennis/2017/09/19/ex-tennis-star-james- blake-testifies-about-his-mistaken-arrest)

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

</comment><comment><USER35> It's surprising to hear this within the context of Chicago experiencing such high levels of homicide. Do they give any context as to why NYC is out performing other large cities?

<comment><AUTHOR> Chicago apparently has greater concentrations of poverty, particularly among African-Americans:

edit: forgot the URL for this story [https://www.thecut.com/2016/07/why-is- new-york-so-much-safer...](https://www.thecut.com/2016/07/why-is-new-york-so- much-safer-than-chicago.html)

> _A 2015 study by Rutgers University public policy researcher Paul A. > Jargowsky found that more than a third of all poor African-Americans in > Chicago live in census tracts with poverty rates above 40 percent, compared > with 26 percent of poor African-Americans in New York._

The headline news about Chicago homicides and shootigns (e.g. _" WAR ZONE: 10 Killed, 28 WOunded in Chicago Over MLK Day Weekend [0])_ don't convey how concentrated the violence is in specific areas of the city. I visit (middle- class) friends who live downtown and uptown (along the lake) and it feels as safe as any of the nice parts of Manhattan when I lived there.

Chicago Tribune does an excellent job tracking shootings [1]. You can easily see -- after zooming in a little -- on even their overplotted dot map that areas other than Chicago's west and south sides, shootings are virtually nonexistent:

[snapshot] [https://imgur.com/gallery/uPfSG](https://imgur.com/gallery/uPfSG)

FWIW, according to the Tribune's tracker: _In Chicago, 3,543 people have been shot this year. That is 784 fewer than 2016._

[0] [http://www.drudgereportarchives.com/dsp/search.htm?frompage=...](http://www.drudgereportarchives.com/dsp/search.htm?frompage=1&StartRow=97&maxrows=50&searchFor=Chicago)

[1] [http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/data/ct-shooting- victims-...](http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/data/ct-shooting-victims-map- charts-htmlstory.html)

<comment><USER36> >> Chicago apparently has greater concentrations of poverty, particularly among African-Americans

So how does that explain Detroit, which has more poverty than Chicago, but also has a NYC-like downswing in homicides?

 _In metro Detroit, 49% of African Americans who are poor are living in census tracts where at least 40% of the residents are poor, the highest rate among the Top 25 metro areas_

<comment><USER37> [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_Detroit](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_Detroit)

"Detroit has the second highest murder rate in the United States"

violent crime is down everywhere in the US, so it is still useful to see the relative ranking to other cities

[https://www.statista.com/statistics/191219/reported- violent-...](https://www.statista.com/statistics/191219/reported-violent- crime-rate-in-the-usa-since-1990/)

<comment><USER38> "In 2015, Detroit had its lowest number of criminal homicides in 40 years"

is the point.

<comment><USER37> most cities are reporting this trend

<comment><USER36> Except Chicago isn't, which was the whole point of bringing up Detroit

<comment><AUTHOR> And yet that specific metric for Detroit -- "lowest number of criminal homicides in 40 years" \-- is virtually useless as it doesn't account for Detroit's massive population decline.

Via the FBI's UCR tool which has data from 1985-2014: [https://www.ucrdatatool.gov/Search/Crime/Local/RunCrimeJuris...](https://www.ucrdatatool.gov/Search/Crime/Local/RunCrimeJurisbyJurisLarge.cfm)

Unfortunately I can't deeplink to pages so here are screenshots:

[https://imgur.com/a/LGgJh](https://imgur.com/a/LGgJh)

\- Detroit having ~300 homicides is very good compared to the ~400 homicides it had in 2000. However, that doesn't quite match up to its population decline. The homicide rate in 2000 was ~41.6 per 100K, compared to 43+ in 2014 (and 2015 and 2016 I think).

\- Meanwhile, Chicago's 2014 homicide rate was 15.2. In 2015, it was 17.5. And in 2016, it jumped to 27.8 [0]

That jump is a huge jump compared to historic trends. But still a relative low for Chicago when considering 1990-forward. According to the Tribune's homicide tracker, the number of homicides in 2016 was 792 [1]. In 2017, it's tracking to be 664 homicides, which would be a rate of ~23/100K. Still not great but seems too early to say that Chicago is on an unchanging course of increasing crime. And it doesn't make much sense to argue _but what about Detroit?_ when comparing Chicago to NYC.

[https://imgur.com/a/LGgJh](https://imgur.com/a/LGgJh)

[0] [http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/data/ct-homicide- spikes-c...](http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/data/ct-homicide-spikes- comparison-htmlstory.html)

[1] [http://crime.chicagotribune.com/chicago/homicides](http://crime.chicagotribune.com/chicago/homicides)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER39> This isn't surprising at all for anyone who has read Better Angels of Our Nature by Steven Pinker. The decline of violence is a ongoing trend in the species.

</comment><comment><USER40> Seriously, Lead Pb. [0]

[0] - [http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2016/02/lead- exposure...](http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2016/02/lead-exposure- gasoline-crime-increase)

</comment><comment><USER41> Does this cause the NYPD forces to be downsized?

</comment><comment><USER42> this is in direct correlation with higher living costs/rent/food etc.

street thugs cant afford to live in new york hence lower crime. its not result of any policies.

</comment><comment><USER43> Manhattan has increasingly become a gated community since the city neared bankruptcy in the '70s and the banks slowly negotiated more power in running things (as explained in Adam Curtis' 'Hyper-normalization' video essay). It's arguable that the NYPD has almost become a private security force for the city's wealthy residents, given how thin the presence is in places like The Bronx and East New York.

<comment><USER44> These numbers are for the entire city, not just Manhattan. The bad old days of the late 70s-early 90s are over, just accept it. It's weird how hard some people fight good news.

<comment><USER43> The figures don't tell the story of all of the burroughs. Can you convince a cab to take you to the Bronx after 10 pm? I've had quite a few drivers tell me that they refuse to go there.

Btw, the 'mourning old New York' thing pisses me off as well, as things have moved on and it's a welcome change that crime is down in Manhattan. I'm observing, not judging, when I say that the the city is playground for the rich.

<comment><USER45> I've had no trouble taking cabs and ubers to and from the bronx at least a dozen of times (and in particular the south bronx) at all hours of the night and all days of the week. A few times it was an uber pool that had other riders in it (meaning they managed to find a cab too).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER46> Surely most crime is done online these days.

</comment><comment><USER37> The poor have been priced out. Go to big cities that still have a large segment of objectively poor people and you will see the attendant crime.

<comment><USER47> That is my hypothesis, as they were gentrified out of NYC they moved to places like Newark.

<comment><USER48> Sorry but thats not true Bronx is quiet poor and its just one subway ride away.

<comment><USER49> There is also the PATH to consider if you're going to mention 'one subway ride away'.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER50> Do crimes committed by the NYPD count?

</comment><comment><USER42> drug trade is at all time high in new york. massive amounts of drugs go through the city every day. its a major drug hub.

plus its a new generation of thugs out there that understand that killing people attracts unwanted attention. hence lower violence.</comment>


Ask HN: Why crossing light beams don't collide/decrease each other's brightness? - <AUTHOR> Why light doesn't interact or interfere with another light? For instance: http://mrclarkrbhs.wikispaces.com/file/view/galarie_psl.jpg/339906824/440x277/galarie_psl.jpg <comment><USER2> Light does experience interference, but in a wavelike manner, not a purely additive manner. Here's what wikipedia has to say.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interference_(wave_propagation...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interference_\(wave_propagation\)#Optical_interference)

</comment><comment><USER3> Same reason a room doesn't get quieter when lots of people are talking.

</comment><comment><USER4> Because photons are massless and behave like waves.</comment>


Announcing a new GV general partner: MG Siegler - <AUTHOR> http://blog.googleventures.com/announcing-mg-siegler-2013-05-06

<comment><USER2> MG Siegler built his fame from pageviews, and the pageviews were of his incessant strategy of creating flame-bait for the idiotic, but large, minority of people who think that their smart-phone is an extension of themselves.

Here is his recipe:

1) State that, in some way, Apple is better than Android in an absurdly over the top, intellectually dishonest way.

2) Let the religious masses passionately state their love/hatred

3) Profit.

None of this makes him remotely qualified for anything in the tech business.

<comment><USER3> I would think that the partners at Google Ventures who spent weeks interviewing and vetting (and ultimately hiring) Siegler would have a much better idea of his qualifications for working in this space than you would.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Not to be snarky, but this seems like a major win for Google in at least two ways:

1.) Tap into Siegler's influence and impressive list of contacts.

2.) Shut down a rather effective, vocal critic of your company. I can't imagine Siegler will continue his current line of Google rhetoric.

<comment><USER5> I would agree on the 2nd point but trust me, anyone "influential" would be easily accessible to Google Ventures. This is only helpful to startups and maybe an unknown venture fund.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Wow didn't see that coming I suppose Google knows what they're doing though. Is KR also a general partner?

I threw up in my mouth a little bit reading the title.

</comment><comment><USER7> For some reason I would find it hard to take him seriously as a business person.

<comment><USER8> That is why Bill Maris, the managing partner at Google Ventures, wrote: "MG Siegler is joining Google Ventures as a general partner (...) we're thrilled to add his unique perspective."

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> What happened to Crunch Fund?

<comment><USER10> Crunch-what?

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> wat

<comment><USER12> I usually downvote snarky superfluous comments like this on HN, but find myself tempted to actually upvote this one.

Hammer. Nail. Head.

Must... resist...</comment></comment>


Microsoft used MiPad name a decade before Apple iPad - <AUTHOR> http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/projects/mipad/default.aspx

<comment><USER2> just one more bit of proof that being first isn't always an advantage</comment>


Deprecation notice: Removing anonymous gist creation - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/blog/2503-deprecation-notice-removing-anonymous-gist-creation <comment><USER2> I'm surprised they kept this feature active for so long. Exposing a product / feature without authorization is like opening the flood gates for spam zombies to invade.

<comment><USER3> It's a special kind of spam that doesn't affect users. The victims are server bandwidth and server disk space. Users only benefit. They can safely reduce this operating expense by requiring login because everyone already has a github account. Other services probably couldn't as easily overcome the registration hurdle: pastebin, jsfiddle, jsbin, etc.

</comment></comment><comment> james-skemp I didn't even know this was a feature.

No stats on how many people use this, though, which is interesting. I wonder if that's an oversight or intentional.</comment>


I, for One, Welcome Our New Haskell Overlords - <AUTHOR> http://robnapier.net/haskell-overlords

<comment><USER2> > Maybe my monad intro could be improved. I'm aware that it doesn't perfectly > explain why lists are also monads.

Actually, I think it does: Because a list is one kind of box.

> But starting the discussion with monoids and the monadic laws closes the > conversation. It says this is something unrelated to shipping products. It > shouldn't be in the first paragraph, let alone the first sentence.

Exactly my complaint about most monad explanations. I've been programming for 30 years. Even though I have a bachelor's degree in math, I don't want to wade through abstract algebra before I can acquire a mental hook to hang FP on. _First tell my why I should care,_ and then you can get down to the technical/mathematical details.</comment>


Why Health Insurers Don't Care About Big Bills - <AUTHOR> https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2018/05/25/613685732/why-your-health-insurer-doesnt-care-about-your-big-bills <comment><USER2> Discussed yesterday:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17170195](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17170195)

</comment><comment><USER3> Damn. What an _infuriating_ story.

Not so much for the subject of the story ... who could afford it ... but there are people out there who worked and scrimped for 20 years, and get wiped out by this _racket_.

"There were charges for physical therapy sessions that never took place and drugs he never received."

This is complete bullshit. How in _hell_ does it survive the scrutiny of the courts?

</comment><comment><USER4> This is why we should have fixed the problem and instituted single-payer healthcare.

If you keep letting insurers insert themselves into a process where they are not needed, they're going to find a way around whatever rules you make to drain common people of as much money as possible. Better to just remove them from the process.

<comment><USER5> Is it true turning a terrible system over to the US government is going to solve fraud, waste and a abuse?

<comment><USER6> Can it be worse than what we have now?

<comment><USER5> Yes? See Medicaid and the VA.

<comment><USER4> I dunno, how many people with medicaid or VA benefits go bankrupt due to medical bills like people with regular medical insurance do?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> It's sad reading these stories makes me hope that I don't get old and instead get mauled and eaten by wolves instead so I don't have to deal with this.

</comment><comment><USER8> I've had slightly better experience with the Kaiser Permanente hospitals as the insurer and hospital/doctors are all part of one system and most of the costs are fixed. Even still there are incorrect billing issues at times that can take a month or two to correct. And the copay on specialty drugs can still be huge.</comment>


Ask HN: What Programming Book would you buy right now (if it existed) - <AUTHOR> Whacked from reddit (http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/8aixn/programming_books_that_you_would_buy_right_now_if/?sort=new), but I would love to hear HN users's opinions.<p>I would buy "Inside The Python VM", (replace Python with Erlang or Lua or V8) and "A Hacker's Guide to Hadoop Internals" <comment><USER2> Software engineering in functional languages. Pretty much every programming book I have read found about functional languages has been about learning a language with examples that are less than a page. I am curious what thought patterns and structures you use to build something larger.

<comment><USER3> [http://www.amazon.com/Real-World-Functional-Programming- Exam...](http://www.amazon.com/Real-World-Functional-Programming- Examples/dp/1933988924/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1239127812&sr=1-1)

I came across a blog excerpt from this book that looked pretty neat. It isn't out _yet_ but could be good.

<comment><AUTHOR> "I came across a blog excerpt from this book that looked pretty neat. "

<http://tomasp.net/blog/functional-net-update.aspx>

has the table of contents. I am not sure if it has any insights on functional programming in the large, but it does look neat.

<comment><USER3> Found the blog post I was referring to:

[http://www.markhneedham.com/blog/2009/04/04/functional-c- the...](http://www.markhneedham.com/blog/2009/04/04/functional-c-the-hole-in- the-middle-pattern/)

Also has a link to buy a pre-release version of the book

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> "The definitive guide to dealing with Huge MySQL databases"

<comment><USER5> it's called don't use mysql for that. (sorry i'm a trolling postgres user, please don't mark me below -1)

in a non trolling way, I'd like to see a PostgreSQL for MySQL, SQL Server, and Oracle users.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Why's (Poignant) Guide to C.

<comment><USER7> Typeset in lovely, 50-column ASCII.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> 'The Design and Implementation of Virtual Machines' or 'Theoretical Computer Science by Example'.

<comment><USER9> > 'The Design and Implementation of Virtual Machines'

Oh that book already does in fact already exist, and it's amazing:

[http://www.amazon.co.uk/Virtual-Machines-Versatile- Platforms...](http://www.amazon.co.uk/Virtual-Machines-Versatile-Platforms- Architecture/dp/1558609105)

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> It's not a programming book but... "The Dream Machine: J.C.R. Licklider and the Revolution That Made Computing Personal"

It's an awesome book about the history of computing, human-computer interaction, and all sorts of things you're familiar with but may never have known where they came from or how they evolved.

[http://www.amazon.com/Dream-Machine-Licklider-Revolution- Com...](http://www.amazon.com/Dream-Machine-Licklider-Revolution- Computing/dp/014200135X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1239139092&sr=8-1)

</comment><comment><USER11> Programming Clojure (<http://www.pragprog.com/titles/shcloj/programming- clojure>) - it semi-exists - presently only available as pdf beta book.

<comment><USER12> The book appears to be very close to release. I've been downloading each release for the past few months and the latest one is great. It was also a nice surprise to see that in addition to PDF the latest update is also available in epub and mobi (compatible with Kindle) formats.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> _Programming Collective Stupidity: Harnessing the Ignorance of Crowds_

</comment><comment><USER13> "How to Determine Exactly What Users Really Need"

(All programming becomes much simpler after that.)

<comment><USER14> They exist in the consultingware/project management mold. [http://www.amazon.com/Mastering-Requirements-Process- Suzanne...](http://www.amazon.com/Mastering-Requirements-Process-Suzanne- Robertson/dp/0201360462) is an example.

<comment><USER13> I'm taking the bait. I'll either love this book or hate it. Either way, it's on the way from Amazon. I'll let you know later. Thanks, ibsulon.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> "Indie MMOs for Small, Distributed Teams"

I wouldn't even mind if it took longer than 21 days.

</comment><comment><USER16> Real programming in Prolog. Eiffel system programming. Lua system programming.

I've found books for prolog, but they all start off with logic programming. It's kind of weird, or is it just me? And the other 2 I've not really seen any decent books for them. Unless I'm wrong? (A subtle cry for help.)

</comment><comment><USER17> "How to/not to become a religious zealot of your favorite language"

<comment><USER18> I'm guessing that will be a favourite to recommend to others, too :)

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Some of the suggestions I liked from the reddit discussion ( direct quotes, see [http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/8aixn/programmi...](http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/8aixn/programming_books_that_you_would_buy_right_now_if/?sort=new) for the full list)

\- Plan 9 Unleashed.Or perhaps "Distributed computing with Inferno and Limbo"

\- a book like Gödel, Escher, Bach: Eternal Golden Braid that explores Church/Lambda Calculus; Curry-Howard

Isomorphism; and Category Theory and Monads. ... "Oleg, Toulouse-Lautrec and Rachmaninoff: On Type Reasoning".

\- The Complete Lisp Machine."

An in-depth historical and technical guide, with classic papers, discussion, circuit schematics. Features not only the MIT/Symbolics/TI family, but the nearly-forgotten Xerox PARC systems. Chapters with deep commentary on the design decisions by the original designers.

\- The Implementation of Functional Programming Languages, _2nd Edition_ , by Simon Peyton-Jones

\- Retro Game Programming for the iPhone & iPod touch

\- series of books on specific kinds of general purpose applications and a discussion of their design and implementation techniques.

For example, the first book could be about writing a graphical word processor. It would explain some data structures for representing text content, lines, paragraphs and the like with the tradeoffs between them. Then explains layout engines, using state machines to model GUI interaction, designing file formats, and other pure gold of programming :)

Then it would be littered with case studies of both commercial & open source applications and a huge bibliography referring to important related books and research papers, preferably with commentary.

\- Programming Factor, Real World Factor and Filthy Rich Client in Factor.

\- Well Explained Solutions To Difficult Graph Problems Done In MapReduce

Non-trivial Recommendation Engines With Practical Concerns Highlighted And Straightened Out

\- Core GNUstep Programming. \- \- A revised, modern version of Lisp in small pieces

\- Programming in Octave \- Twisted Network Programming, or any decent intermediate/advanced book on Twisted.

\- The Complete Haskell. An encyclopedic work that spans the full range from category theory to network programming, everyday scripting, and distributed systems. Not for Java programmers; this book doesn't skimp on the theory as Real World Haskell does -- you'll learn to recognize the algebraic patterns that allow Haskell experts to distill out an Applicative, a Monad, or an Arrow from a collection of functions. Sample code (available on the Web site) includes a persistent distributed MUD server, a set of statistical logs analysis tools, an email spam filter, and a compiler for GoatC, a small imperative language.

<comment><USER19> yeah, those ones.

Especially a decent book on Factor, I'm trying to learn it form the documentation but apparently I'm not trying hard enough.

oh and, "The Life and Adventures of Chris Double", that crazy bastard seems to show up in my google searches for everything sooner or later. TraceMonkey internals, NDS homebrew, dylan, factor! Is there anything he can't do?

<http://delicious.com/tags/bluishcoder>

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> Relevance of Knowledge for Programmers.

Would give a reasonably detailed, comprehensive overview of all the timeless theory and techniques (CS theory, math, design, etc), where they come from and what they're actually useful for.

So many projects are made much harder because a fundamental bit of theory has to be rederived from first principles for lack of knowledge...

Imagine someone who never heard of a graph:

"Okay, now I know I need a structure that's a bit like a tree except each node can have multiple parents... Now, how do I find the shortest path between two nodes?..."

</comment><comment><USER21> "How to break the iPhone app store rules and still get your app accepted (every time)".

</comment><comment><USER22> Anything on Tokyo Cabinet / Tokyo Tyrant

</comment><comment><USER18> "Writing a Compiler in 24 Hours"

<comment><USER23> Write algol languages with sexp syntax and you pretty much cut your compiler hacking in half (just focus on semantic analysis and code generation.)

You can further cheat and write a short and tidy attribute grammar for a tiny block-structured and well documented dialect like Oberon, and your grammar will be 1:1 translation from production rules straight to assembly language. No optimization, and certainly no intermediate representation. What you're left with is a clone of the first Turbo C without dynamic memory allocation (just static allocation with a strict stack discipline)

Then you can run around and say you're a compiler hacker. That's how I started :-P

<comment><USER24> How would an algol language with sexp syntax differ from scheme?

<comment><USER23> It wouldn't have any of the following:

First class continuations.

First class lexical closures.

Automatic garbage collection.

An explicit Eval function.

Explicit READER and PRINTER functions for builtin parsing and serialization of code and data (not sure if Scheme requires these, but they make a lisp Lisp)

A full numeric tower.

Hygienic macros (or any macro for that matter; CPP doesn't count)

Symbols as datatypes.

An interactive REPL.

Tail-call elimination.

Variable-argument procedures (with no kludges; va_list, va_start, va_end is not the way to do it.)

Delayed evaluation constructs.

Multiple-value returns.

Quoted forms (a sexp syntax does not necessarily mean QUOTE is available.)

We Lisp2 hackers might pick on Scheme for its Algolishness, but that doesn't make it any less of an excellent language. Scheme is a purists wet-dream come true and a fine Lisp dialect, albeit an algolish one ;-)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> A book on learning x86 assembly on recent processors.

</comment><comment><USER26> "Thinking in MapReduce"

</comment><comment><USER27> "The Java Environment for Java Haters": covering the JVM, the better web and GUI environments, essential legacy libraries, tools, and whatever else is worth carrying over as Clojure and Scala gain traction.

</comment><comment><USER28> Right now I wish I knew of a Pickaxe for Python.

Also, I want a MacRuby book.

On a slightly related note, how does the Kindle do with programming books? I am thinking about picking one up to use primarily as a reference screen.

<comment><USER29> if the rumored 8x11 "textbook" model kindle comes out, i think it'll be perfect. as it is now, its not too great. i thought it would be an ideal technical library, but don't expect to get a lot out of code examples or images. the readability of the code examples varies depending on their visual treatment and the language, with the less verbose languages with subtle design (i.e. no darker background, giant Courier New, etc) being most readable.

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> My fictional choice would be "The Oracle Optimizer: A Treatise"

Database related books tend to be too high level and never dig down deep enough.

<comment><USER31> I would highly recommend Expert Oracle One-On-One. It contains everything you need to know to use oracle to the fullest extent.

[http://www.amazon.com/Expert-One-Oracle-Thomas- Kyte/dp/18610...](http://www.amazon.com/Expert-One-Oracle-Thomas- Kyte/dp/1861004826/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1239131558&sr=8-1)

</comment></comment><comment><USER32> Calling Useful Java Libraries from Clojure for People who have Traditionally Despised Java And Know Nothing About It.

</comment><comment><USER33> Coders At Work (<http://www.codersatwork.com>)

</comment><comment><USER34> \- a book on learning to trust your intuition, with good and bad programming and architecture examples

\- a functional language cookbook... like erlang or haskell cookbook

\- a book comparing cultural differences between countries in the work and education worlds

</comment><comment><USER35> Norvig's Paradigms in AI book - <http://norvig.com/paip.html>

</comment><comment><USER36> I would love a book on advanced XNA. Everything around at the moment is for beginner to intermediate.

</comment><comment><USER5> a book on postgresql 8.3 (or the to be released 8.4) with some good strong chapters on various PL languages. I'm thinking one on PL/Perl a few on PL/pgSQL, one on PL/SQL, one on SQL/PSM (maybe). several on the rest of Postgres.

</comment><comment><USER37> P=NP: An Illustrated Guide

</comment><comment><USER38> Twittering for dummies

</comment><comment><USER39> "Become a R0ck$tar programmer in 21 hours".

</comment><comment><USER7> _On Clojure_

</comment><comment><USER40> s/Book/eBook

Get with the times

<comment><USER7> You're at -8 because you forgot the trailing slash.</comment></comment>


Anonymous Postings for your neighborhood - <AUTHOR> https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=xdk.intel.ad.circle <comment><AUTHOR> The main purpose is creating sharing platforms for local communities. Pls give me feedback</comment>


Introducing Mozilla Firefox optimized for Yahoo - <AUTHOR> http://downloads.yahoo.com/firefox

<comment><USER2> WTF! Why is this on the HN first page?!

"Yahoo optimised" = Firefox + yahoo toolbar + yahoo search engine default + other yahoo crap.

And anyway, I like my Firefox "unoptimised", thank you very much.

[http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/releases/late...](http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/releases/latest/)

<comment> mh- _I like my Firefox "unoptimised", thank you very much._

well, that's one way to be satisfied with modern browsers.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> > Sorry, Mozilla Firefox optimized for Yahoo! is not available for your > system.

You can compile Firefox for Linux easily, so this shows just how much adware they added.

</comment><comment><USER4> "Sorry, Mozilla Firefox optimized for Yahoo! is not available for your system." << This is where they already failed.

<comment><USER5> A nice touch is that the list of supported systems includes "Linux" (which I'm on), but I still get this message. My navigator.platform is "Linux x86_64", not sure how they are misinterpreting that.

<comment><USER6> Have they removed Linux as being supported? I can't find it on the supported systems page.

<comment><USER5> Linux doesn't appear in the English version of that page, but it does in the German one that they are serving me (ignoring accept-lang, geolocating my IP, I guess)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Curious. I get redirected to [0] on Debian/Opera, with the following content:

      Entschuldigen Sie, Mozilla Firefox für Yahoo! optimiert ist nicht für Ihr System
      verfügbar.

      Die für Yahoo! optimierte Mozilla Firefox Version ist nur für folgende
      Betriebssysteme verfügbar:
      […]
      Linux

(paraphrasing: Apologies, the version of Mozilla Firefox optimised for Yahoo! is not available for your system. It is only available for the following operating systems: […] Linux […]).

On the other hand, the UK version of that website, [1], doesn't mention Linux at all:

      Sorry, Mozilla Firefox optimised for Yahoo! is not available for your system.

      The Yahoo! optimised version of Mozilla Firefox is only available for the
      following operating systems:
      Windows XP SP2
      Windows Server 2003
      Windows Vista
      Windows 7
      Windows 8
      Mac OS X 10.6 or later

      See the System Requirements for more details on hardware and software
      requirements and recommendations.

So, two questions:

\- Why is the German version apparently available for Linux and the English one isn't?

\- Why don't you allow me to download the version for OS A from OS B? OS A might not have a browser yet, after all.

\- Why are you still using browser sniffing like _that_ in 2013?

[0] [http://downloads.yahoo.com/de/firefox/blocked](http://downloads.yahoo.com/de/firefox/blocked)

[1] [http://downloads.yahoo.com/uk/firefox/blocked](http://downloads.yahoo.com/uk/firefox/blocked)

<comment><USER8> > So, two questions 3 in fact :) But I share 3 questions.

While trying to access it with _Firefox_ on Linux, I also get redirected to a "blocked" page in French which does mention Linux.

But the "system requirement" page does not mention Linux, only Mac and Windows. This page does say the minimal requirements where provided by Mozilla, but Mozilla does provide a Linux version, so that's strange.

Maybe Linux was "just" a translation error or they decided not to support it in the end and forgot to edit the translations ... btw ironically August 25th is the birthday of the first newsgroup post about Linux. Happy Birthday Linux !

So what's this "Optimized for Yahoo" version ?

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> You are currently using Firefox® version 26 Click the download button if you wish to install Firefox 23

o.o

</comment><comment><USER10> I feel nostalgia for IE6 toolbars now.

This was the wrong way to integrate Yahoo into Firefox. Firefox should have done it as an "option" rather than Yahoo doing the reverse. They successfully made this version of Firefox feel like a crapware toolbar analog that will sniff my browsing history and add no value to my browsing experience or life. Google, on the other hand, successfully did what Yahoo is trying to do. They released what was perceived to be a new browser: Google Chrome. Few had heard of Chromium before Google massaged the codebase it into Google Chrome, but everybody's heard of Firefox. Yahoo should have developed the Super Awesome Browser 9000 (even if they used a previously unknown browser as a starting point -- Opera doesn't count) instead of just slapping some branding on one of the most popular and famous browsers. Perhaps they also thought piggy backing on the Firefox branding was going to help them; it won't.

I predict this version of Firefox will be adopted by almost nobody, primarily because nobody really cares about Yahoo; their search just isn't up to snuff and their relevance is slowly fading. Yahoo is on borrowed time and they're executing poorly.

Oh, and fuck you Yahoo for not making your crapware available to Linux users.

</comment><comment><USER11> Partnering with Yahoo (or increasing their partnership) is a potential long- term revenue stream for Mozilla if Google decides to back out of their deal (which, afaik, they show no sign of doing), but I'm not sure bundling the Yahoo toolbar with what would be a good browser is the way to go about that.

</comment><comment><USER12> System Requirements:

      Windows

        Operating Systems

          Windows XP SP2, Server 2003, Vista, 7 or 8

        Minimum Hardware

          Pentium 4 or newer processor that supports SSE2
          512MB of RAM
          200MB of hard drive space

      Mac

        Operating Systems

          Mac OS X 10.6 or later

        Minimum Hardware

          Macintosh computer with an Intel x86 processor
          512 MB of RAM
          200 MB hard drive space

Sounds like a relic

</comment><comment><USER13> Is this new? I though they had this for a very long time.

</comment><comment><USER14> Doesn't like Linux > [http://screencloud.net/v/xtbW](http://screencloud.net/v/xtbW)

</comment><comment><USER15> It's interesting that they chose to release this with FF 23. In a few weeks, FF 24 will be out which is an ESR. Seems like that would be an easier path to take for something like this since they'd have to deal with a major update every 10 months instead of medium updates every 6 weeks.

</comment><comment><USER16> Do they mean optimized, literally? or just toolbars, default search engine etc?

and also how does it circumvent google search engine revenue deal with mozilla?

</comment><comment><USER17> I guess they didn't get the memo about the new Firefox logo.</comment>


Schneier: Security companies can't explain their products - <AUTHOR> http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2008/04/the_rsa_confere.html <comment><USER2> RSA isn't an end-user conference right now; for the majority of the vendor dollars spent, the prospects are:

* Fortune 500 director/security people

* OEM partners

* The trade press

If you have a different target, it has _always_ been dumb to shell out for RSA. So, I disagree with the premise of Schneier's post, and with the conclusion. Nobody is trying to sell anti-lock brakes to grandma (at least, nobody serious). They're trying to:

* Sell them to Ford

* Sell them to Enterprise Rent-A-Car

* Sell them to Progressive Insurance

* Sell them to Car & Driver</comment>