Sony launches a taxi-hailing app in Tokyo - <AUTHOR> https://techcrunch.com/2019/04/22/sony-taxi-tokyo-japan/ <comment><USER2> I've used JapanTaxi (mentioned in the article) a fair number of times, and while there's nothing wrong with the experience of the app, oftentimes the biggest competitor to these ride-hailing apps is the fact that Tokyo's roads are so densely populated with taxis cruising everywhere that it's often faster to just hail one passing by than to open an app on your phone.

I feel the Uber service itself has a sort of a 'premium' feeling around it in Japan, with the cars/staff/pricing being higher-class than the run-of-the-mill taxis you can hail. As such they don't seem to be used too often. I only use Uber/Lyft when traveling to the US; In Japan I come into contact with the brand much more often from the context of Uber Eats.

<comment><USER3> > feel the Uber service itself has a sort of a 'premium' feeling around it in > Japan, with the cars/staff/pricing being higher-class than the run-of-the- > mill taxis you can hail.

Isn't the average Japanese taxi some big Toyota Crown sedan already? How much more premium than that can you go?

<comment><USER4> > Isn't the average Japanese taxi some big Toyota Crown sedan already? How > much more premium than that can you go?

Toyota Century :)

[https://www.wsj.com/articles/japans-new-emperor-picks-his- ri...](https://www.wsj.com/articles/japans-new-emperor-picks-his-ridean-old- school-toyota-11556366401)

Edit: Super short TL;DR from the article

> Introduced in 1967, the Century isn't for the flashy or hasty. Prospective > customers can wait months because Toyota hand-builds each one. Background > checks ensure the buyer is of an appropriate caliber, and not a member of an > "antisocial organization"—a Japanese euphemism for the yakuza crime > syndicates.

It's only sold in Japan.

Edit 2: Some more information courtesy of Wikipedia - [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_Century](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_Century)

<comment><USER5> Are we sure that's the same car used for taxis?

<comment><USER6> He's answering the question "How much more premium than that can you go"

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Doesn't matter, nobody will use it. Taxi service in japan is good enough to where this won't be a big factor. Ride hailing services are much more expensive than taxi's.

<comment><USER8> Are taxis there not trying to scam you as it is everywhere in the EU?

<comment><USER9> German taxis are fine.

<comment><USER10> Interestingly, Uber in Germany (Berlin at least) are taxis

[https://www.rbb24.de/content/dam/rbb/rbb/rbb24/2018/2018_10/...](https://www.rbb24.de/content/dam/rbb/rbb/rbb24/2018/2018_10/dpa- account/taxi.jpg.jpg/size=708x398.jpg)

<comment><USER9> I'd never use Uber

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I went to Japan last year and speak rudimentary japanese. One big challenge for taxi use was always explaining where I needed to go. If I could have plugged in the address in an app, I would have saved myself some confusion. That said, the Tokyo taxi drivers know the city better than any driver I've ever seen ever. GPS is almost a complete waste on them.

<comment><USER12> As a longtime Japan traveler, I recommend picking up business cards (called "shop cards" in Japan) for basically anywhere you go, because:

0\. Japanese business cards often have beautiful design.

1\. They are a good way to remember the cool places you visit.

2\. They often have a map on the back that show you how to walk there from the nearest train station(s).

3\. They have the address on the front, which you can show your taxi driver-- no verbal communication necessary! (besides the obligatory _onegaishimasu_ )

<comment><USER13> What is the japanese word for "shop cards"? Mise Meishi?

<comment><USER12> Literally you can just say, "Shoppu Kaado arimasuka?" (do you have any shop cards?)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> To people think public transit negates taxis - public transit in stops around 12am/1am until about 6am.

If you're trying to get home in those hours taxis are your only options. Many people that go out at night just sleep on the streets, its pretty crazy!

</comment><comment><USER15> I think the biggest thing for me when I was living in the suburbs of Japan is that I could taxi from a station to a remote destination, but on the way back I had to either take a bus or just walk the whole way back. I definitely wish I had uber then. There are also some stations where there are no taxis waiting too. Tokyo is a terrible place to launch since like a lot of people pointed out you'll see 5 or 6 taxis pass by while you're waiting for your ride to come.

</comment><comment><USER16> Who needs a taxi in Tokyo anyway? Can someone make a taxi-hailing app for inaka (Japanese countryside/less populated areas). You usually need to call a local taxi company there, but it's difficult to get a voice call SIM card for a foreign visitor. If you could get a taxi at a precise point of the map without having to somehow call and explain your whereabouts on the phone, it would be nothing short of a revolution.

<comment><USER17> The voice call SIM card is relatively less painful to obtain now. Previously you couldn't get it on a tourist visa, but now you can rent them from the airport (expensive) or buy them at electronics stores like Bic Camera and Yodabashi Camera.

<comment><USER18> You can get them at the airport too:

[https://travel.stackexchange.com/questions/73172/are- short-t...](https://travel.stackexchange.com/questions/73172/are-short-term- visitors-in-japan-allowed-to-buy-voice-enabled-sim-cards)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Interesting, as Sony is usually very bad at UX (PlayMemories, choppy PS4 dashboard etc).

<comment><USER20> Sony is not "one company", they have tons of independent branches/divisions working separately on different projects, so the failure of one group does not infer the failure of another.

<comment><USER21> Then why is it that every Sony product I've used feels clunky? Perhaps it is an issue with their approach to QA than any of the individual teams. If so, I don't expect this app to be any different.

Regardless, if people associate your brand with "clunky", they'll find reasons to dislike even a quality app. You really need to be consistent across your product lines to benefit from brand recognition.

<comment><USER20> > Then why is it that every Sony product I've used feels clunky?

Because good design is rare in general? Most products are designed very poorly, and big corporations are no exception.

<comment><USER22> big corps moves much slower, and they have bigger teams. its like food with too much seasonings.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> >Lyft has expressed an interest in Japan, where its investor Rakuten is a major name, but it has not expanded there yet.

Point to note, Rakuten owns Viber Messenger as well, so it could integrate taxi service on it for japan, though I presume that it doesn't have as much user base as LINE in Japan. Viber has larger user base overall internationally.

</comment><comment><USER24> >Because ride-hailing with civilian cars is illegal in Japan, the service will focus on connecting licensed taxis with passengers.

That is illegal wherever taxis are licensed.

Was uber/lyft really stopped in Japan because it's illegal?

</comment><comment><USER25> I am still amazed Uber IPO'd for what it did (even though it was still considerably less than they'd expected).

</comment><comment><USER26> I thought the general plan for ride-hailing companies was to exploit human drivers while losing piles of money in the hope that AI would eventually replace humans and make the whole venture profitable. I haven't heard anything about Sony having a self-driving car division, so what's their plan?

<comment><USER27> Taxi companies are profitable, and it's normal for big Japanese companies to have diverse business lines (Mitsubishi mining, Nissan insurance...)

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> Sony is trying something that is new for them .</comment>


How well does Khan Academy teach? - <AUTHOR> http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/how-well-does-khan-academy-teach/2012/07/25/gJQA9bWEAX_blog.html <comment><AUTHOR> I spend a lot of my time in outreach, enhancement, and enrichment activities, and I've now met several people who have taken to watching lots of the Khan videos. Some of them are doing spectacularly well, possibly partly because of them, although correlation versus causation, _etc._

However, I have had some seriously worrying conversations with people who have some deep, deep misconceptions, and who believe they have been vindicated by some parts of some of the videos. Again, correlation versus causation, _etc._ , but some of the things these people believe they've learned from the KA, and believe must be right because they (think) they've seen it on KA really worry me.

I agree with Sal when he says:

        We believe that we are in the early days of
        what we are and feedback will only make that
        better.  I agree with you that no organization
        should be upheld as a magic bullet for education
        woes.

However, part of that feedback will rightly be negative, and some of the fanboi-isms I see worry me almost as much as some of the misconceptions I see.

It's a brilliant body of work, certainly ground-breaking, and potentially revolutionary. But it has its problems, and denying that doesn't help.

<comment><USER2> > some of the things these people believe they've learned from the KA, and > believe must be right because they (think) they've seen it on KA really > worry me

What kind of things?

Are you suggesting that flesh-and-blood teachers or brick-and-mortar schools are less likely to spread misinformation or leave students with misconceptions? I can tell you a hundred false things I was taught by "real" school, and some of them are probably just things I _think_ I was taught.

<comment><USER3> _Are you suggesting that flesh-and-blood teachers or brick-and-mortar schools are less likely to spread misinformation or leave students with misconceptions?_

Possibly, because when you leave school you can realize your misconceptions and learn from other people, as well as pointing out other people's misconceptions. But if everyone uses Khan Academy, everyone will end up with the same misconceptions.

<comment><USER4> Except the self-fixing process you claim to be characteristic of physical institutional learning only happens when there is a significant number of people in the class that are A) In a position to think confidently and critically about the material B) willing to invest time and effort (often lots of both) in finding the correct conclusion and C) in contact with you about their insights. I have found the confluence of those factors to happen exceedingly rarely in physical classes and significantly less rarely in hybrid physical/online classes. This isn't surprising because lectures place severe limitations on two-way communication that online environments don't. With a traditional class structure (lecture/discussion section) I suspect at least 3/4 of questions go unasked and at least 3/4 of the received answers never get shared beyond the immediate group of individuals doing the asking (in comparison to an online forum, where the answers are googleable or at the very least spread to the entire class).

Also, online learning wins in the limiting case where courses have been iterated and feedback / FAQs taken into account. In a brick and mortar institution, "institutional memory" is effectively lost as professors retire or shift interests (if it ever existed in the first place) and their replacements introduce their own slew of idiosyncrasies, poor methodology, and misconceptions. In contrast, an online lecture never suffers this degradation. Sure, new lectures may replace old lectures (presumably at different sites), but _both will be available for a time_ and during that time, students will pick up on inconsistencies. That's not true of brick-and-mortar lectures, where the only source by which a student can verify the material they are presented is the textbook or its alternatives. Combined with the tendency of courses to discourage reading the textbook (it's almost always a less point- efficient use of time to read textbook chapters than to do homework, practice problems, and go to office hours, which provide information better matched to the material that will be tested on), the status quo is a recipe for failure. My experiences confirm that this recipe for failure produces failure (in the pedagogical sense).

The third factor that favors online learning with regard to misconceptions are its twin killer features: the pause button and the rewind button. These reduce self-inflicted misconceptions tenfold.

So, sp322, I think the opposite of what you stated is true. I would welcome a conflicting opinion, because usually when I go on rants similar to the above three paragraphs all I get are nodding heads.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I'm really starting to believe that these "critiques" of Khan Academy are just teachers and professors terrified of becoming irrelevant.

The question shouldn't be "How well does Khan Academy teach" (well, maybe someday). The important question right now is "Is Khan Academy a better learning tool than most high school and college teachers?". In my experience, the answer overwhelmingly is "yes".

I did have some truly fantastic teachers/professors on the way to a STEM degree, but they were rare. Most were terrible to mediocre, even at a semi- prestigious university. Khan Academy has greatly reinforced my understanding of some subjects, and it's been exceedingly easy to learn some new subjects.

So yes, it doesn't stack up to the top tier teachers and probably never will. But that doesn't matter, because there aren't all that many fantastic teachers and Khan Academy is better than the rest.

<comment><USER6> _I'm really starting to believe that these "critiques" of Khan Academy are just teachers and professors terrified of becoming irrelevant._

I try not to ascribe unstated motives to people, but I really wonder at the smell of pedantry and elitism in an article like that.

Khan offers a free educational service that is very popular. That is a Good Thing(tm)... PERIOD.

People are logging in to his site to learn things. Khan has created a whole model for learning online that has some people enthusiastic about learning more than they could by sitting in class -- yet the criticism from this article is that the Khan videos aren't ideal in using the latest buzz-wordy techniques approved by academia?

Maybe the authors of the articles/papers could interact with Sal Khan and offer help. Or if the authors really felt strongly about their qualifications vs Khan's, maybe they could offer free online teaching videos that were more "correct".

This type of headline sensationalism designed to take down someone doing a good thing is just sad.

<comment><USER7> > Khan offers a free educational service that is very popular. That is a Good > Thing(tm)... PERIOD.

Yes, because when something is popular and free, its got to be good. _cough_ religion anyone _cough_.

If that is considered to be the measure of quality these days, our society is doomed. Education is an important thing, ignoring it and treating this one man as some "messiah" of education when he clearly introduces wrong and obtrusive concepts for the sake of "getting it out to the masses" is not education.

<comment><USER6> Besides learning about his project online, I don't have any use of or interest in Khan Academy. There's no religion on my part, just a little disgust that a for-profit company would try to smear KA over minutia.

It would be like if Khan Academy was giving out free meals to homeless people and McDonalds fabricated reports on how the food was unhealthy and used their influence to get the Washington Post to carry the smear and add to it.

 _wrong and obtrusive concepts_

Now who is showing a religious level of bias?

I'm a pragmatist. If something is free that I need, I use it. If something is for-pay that I need and the price is justifiable, I use it. My commercial software architectures often mix proprietary and open source solutions and I don't make excuses for either business model.

One thing about free, you can always get a refund on your investment and you have to really suspect the motives and the character of someone who attacks "free". Not real surprising that the attacker in this case was a for-profit competitor, was it?

<comment><USER7> I don't know if we are talking about the same article, I'm talking about this one "How well does Khan Academy teach?" by the Michigan University math prof who outlines, in detail, basic concepts like adding decimals and multiplication that are taught at Khan Academy in a way that goes against research.

There is no religious bias, its a difference between a ineffective and wrong way vs. an effective right way. The professor performed no smear against Khan Academy, but the fact he only saw two videos that cause confusion in basic math concepts, it should make one skeptical, especially when someone like you justifies it on the basis of popularity, pragmatism and "minutia".

It seems like you read one article from the Washington Post that wasn't written very well and from that one article, deduce that WP is on some smear campaign. Absurdity of the highest order.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> The main criticism of the article is a bit silly:

 _Khan will put the video out there and see how people react to it. He perceives this to be a better approach than incorporating results of quality research projects into his instructional decisions. In the age of No Child Left Behind and its mandate for "scientifically based research" as the foundation for classroom instruction, this seems lazy._

Yes, Khan is doing his own scientific research, on the theory that he does a better job than the educational establishment. This might be arrogant (given the quality of educational research I've seen, I don't think it is), but it isn't lazy.

As for the claims that Khan does a worse job than other teachers, no data is provided to back this up. Just vague claims that if he did something different, he might get better results.

<comment><USER9> But just "putting the video out there and seeing how people react to it" isn't "scientific research." Science involves testable hypotheses and controlled experiments. Just throwing things against the wall and seeing which ones stick is something different.

<comment><USER10> "Putting the video out there" is an experiment. It's not _rigorously_ controlled, but it's about as controlled as a website is likely to get. So they put something out there, see how well it works, and maybe tweak it.

That's the very essence of scientific experiments. You don't always need a "hypothesis" to do science. (Or, if you like, the hypothesis is "This video will teach students to do X.")

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> This article is a critique of the traditional aspect of teaching (having a teacher lecture students). This is obviously important, so it's good to have professional educators provide feedback.

However, I thought the aspects that was supposed to be "revolutionary" was detailed tracking and analysis of students and that feedback loop (either back into the system, to the student themselves or to teachers). They seem to completely ignore this.

Khan Academy isn't disruptive because of Salman Khan's lessons. It's disruptive because of the underlying platform, which any teacher (some possibly better than Salman) or any student could take advantage of.

<comment><USER12> I think one of the most groundbreaking ideas they have is "flipping the classroom" [1], where students watch Sal's videos at home before class for homework, then in class they work on problems with the teacher and other students. That's where the ability for teachers to track and target deficiencies really becomes powerful.

[1]: [http://www.usatoday.com/life/people/story/2012-05-30/sal- kha...](http://www.usatoday.com/life/people/story/2012-05-30/sal-khan-profile- khan-academy/55270348/1)

<comment><USER13> I have seen this firsthand in Massachusetts and it was very powerful. The kids were all clustered around iPads or Macbooks, helping each other, doing problems, and reviewing what they learned for homework. The teacher was rotating around the room, helping stuck kids, encouraging others to do peer- to-peer coaching, etc. It was so absurdly different than how I "did school," yet so logical. The teacher felt she could now really differentiate her instruction, and the kids were impressively engaged. Gone are the days of 40 minute lectures and 10 minutes of practice— you know, where the kids who got the lecture blaze through worksheets and the rest sit dumbfounded and then take all their problems & questions home for the evening.

All that to say: yes, a dude sketching some problems on a tablet is not the "revolutionary" part (if there is one at all) of Khan Academy.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> One of the issues I have with Khan Academy is that they are using exactly the same style of teaching as in schools...just ported online. Is that really the best way to go about online education?

I find the AcademicEarth.org method of simply filming classes even worse. Yes, they do allow for what you'd normally call "quality education" to be accessible by anyone online, so that's a pretty big step, but I get this feeling that true disruptive online education is supposed to be something more radical...to make things 10x better for learning, not just replicate the offline learning experience.

<comment><USER15> I wouldn't call it exactly the same... The biggest difference that frequently gets glossed over is the Coaching interface. In normal schools it's hard to get one-on-one tutoring with someone who can actually help, as well as with someone who knows exactly what you're struggling with. I'm sure most people who've done tutor work have encountered students who can't even _describe_ what it is they're having problems with, they're that far gone.

What improvements do you hope to see? Making it easier to find short-term tutors would be on my list, throw up some IRC channels that tutors can monitor and get notified of students seeking help. I think one-on-one teaching is the most optimal.

As for how easy it is to learn, as long as we aren't hardwiring people's brains with information as seen in _The Matrix_ learning is going to still take work. (Not necessarily hard work in every instance, but work.) I'd like to see more ways to interact and make the knowledge part of one's own experiences rather than as received truth (something Polanyi got mostly right in his Personal Knowledge book). Of course I'm instantly suspicious of any technique or product that tries to oversell its ability to teach concepts faster with better retention, and even more suspicious when it tries to sell itself as "it's so fun the user won't even realize they are learning!" That said, I can see benefits of various systems over both doing nothing and the status quo. Tools like Anki for instance work well, if used. The advice some programming texts give to manually type the programs also has obvious benefits, basically a subset of techniques that train the mind to follow and notice common actions. (There was an app linked on HN a few weeks ago that replicates the motions of solving algebra problems without actually doing any algebra, I can see how "eliminating two like things from both sides" feeling "okay" may help some people a little.) Khan has mentioned that he has offline students watch lecture videos as homework and do problems or answer questions during classroom time, the opposite of the traditional school, I can see its benefits over the traditional method too for classes where information is typically transferred via lecture.

What things like KA, AcademicEarth, and Wikipedia all have in common though is that they change the utility function of learning. That is, when they're not being used as crutches to get through the traditional schools. Students can learn what they want, when they want, stress-free. The classical model is "pass the tests with scores above this threshold or die." (Not literally of course.) It encourages cramming and forgetting. Cumulative testing doesn't help because the course only lasts maximally 9 months (with a big break in the middle), and at higher levels only 3-4 months. Sometimes it's even just one term rather than a full semester. It's not enough. Add in repetition of the _wrong things_ (it's always the _most basic_ things that get repeated endlessly when they're the easiest things to remember!), poor communication between professors of what they actually cover, poor communication between student and professor of what the student actually understands, fixed deadlines, anxiety over money (whether living expenses or paying $1500 for a dumb class), anxiety over spending X hours of your life for a useless class/assignment, _retaking_ the entirety of a class instead of focusing on what you're missing specifically, being forced to take classes one has no interest or skill in, being exposed to one resource, _et cetera_ , it's amazing the classical system works at all.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> This article reeks of an academic defending his turf to me. Basically, it all comes down to the author accusing Sal Khan of willfully ignoring research. This is based on a quote that I believe is intentionally misinterpreted. Khan says "you put stuff out there and you see how people react to it". This is basic web testing stuff. That doesn't mean he's ignoring research. Like we don't willfully ignore design best practices with the assumption that A/B testing will sort out the UX. That would be stupid.

I like Khan Academy's videos. But if you watch Khan's TED talk, it's clear neither he nor bill gates sees khan academy as operating outside the education system. His lectures are meant as a complement to quality instruction in classroom by a teacher. Criticizing the Khan academy ecosystem as an independent and parallel instruction system is silly.

Khan is a great lecturer. He's better than every lecturer I've had. He may not be the best total educator. I wrote a blog post about this a while back: [http://cyclicreality.com/post/26719449459/why-khan- academy-i...](http://cyclicreality.com/post/26719449459/why-khan-academy-is- great)

The hype may be too much. Maybe it's not revolutionary. But getting a teacher who can explain and engage recorded and available free online is a great idea even if it's not the be all and end all of education.

</comment><comment><USER17> Oh for God's sake. Khan Academy is great complementary source. It doesn't replace schools and teachers. If you're a student and you devote extra time to understanding material you learned in class by watching Khan's videos, you're already on the right track, and you're going to do well because clearly you care. If you gain some incorrect understanding of a concept because the video either omitted some fact, or got it wrong, you'll get it wrong on the test, and you'll learn why. If there's a discrepancy between one of Khan's videos and what your teacher taught you, that's a great opportunity to ask your teacher to explain it.

I don't see the downside to such a great resource.

//

Also, there are many many terrible teachers out there. I had terrible teachers at the elementary and high school level. Teachers who were either incompetent or did not care. Khan Academy is not the problem.

</comment><comment><USER18> I find the notion that these videos are ineffective baffling. When I found these videos during my _university_ calculus course, they literally saved my grade due to the extremely poor quality of my professor (and TAs). I find Sal to be incredibly effective, no nonsense teacher who at this point has probably taught me 5 or 6 different subjects with efficiency that no professor, nor TA has provided.

As a recent graduate: Thank You, Sal! Keep up the good work.

<comment><USER19> The critique wasn't that they are innefective, it's that they contain poor pedagogy. Their specific examples are from arithmetic videos, where the presentation and notation is inconsistent or the examples/problems were insufficient and could easily lead to misunderstanding the material. Your experience is with the calculus videos. It's possible the criticism doesn't apply to them. Or because you were a more advanced student of mathematics and were being provided feedback from your course any poor use of notation or poor problem sets wouldn't have had the same, potentially negative, impact on you.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> tl;dr, with my own interpretation of the article: "although we are not students in today's world, we presume to know and understand the mind of today's student and can tell you from our own learned perspective that Khan just doesn't have what it takes to teach."

I'm certain I read nothing more than snobbery in this article. It reads like "we didn't think of this free online disruptive academy first" or "how dare you do something differently from and outside of Official Academia."

Do you know who the _best_ teachers are? I mean the absolute best, the ones who actually _get_ what the student is struggling with? Other students-- the ones who _just_ got through that particular lesson, the ones that _just_ had the exact same struggle. The students' ability to teach like this declines with experience with the material because it all starts to become second-hand and they forget all the little things they struggled with early on. When an instructor takes note of students teaching students and the hows and whys of that interaction and remembers to cover the same territory in the next class, he becomes the best non-student teacher he can.

My mother is my perfect anecdotal example of this. In her 50s, she's getting a degree. While taking calculus, she also worked in the tutoring lab. After understanding new material, she'd be an absolute godsend for students for about two weeks and then her helpfulness would fall off. (You could also attribute this to all these classes being mostly in sync with at most two weeks of lag - that being the case, she would be less exposed to the reteaching of the material ... and forget those little details.)

<comment><USER19> I think you took something different from the article than I did. They provide a critique, strongly worded at times, but not totally bashing Khan Academy or the general approach. They specify their concerns, and even offer suggestions on ways it can be improved (specifically, examining existing pedagogy and coordinating with some of the top math and science teachers to generate better content).

One of the authors is a current teacher, working with real students. He gets feedback from them either directly (by questions, comments, curses) or indirectly (homework, tests, quizzes) to gauge his effectiveness as an educator. Khan (until they added problems to the site) didn't have this feedback.

Their criticism boils down to a few main points.

1\. He uses an inconsistent presentation of algebra and arithmetic work and notation, which could lead to students becoming confused when he suddenly changes it.

2\. He uses a poor selection of examples, without offering more or better examples students may develop a mathematical toolset based on a flawed understanding, which will lead to problems further down the line.

3\. The problems available to students are insufficient to provide proper mathematical practice and ensure that some of the common misunderstandings are shown to be wrong.

<comment><USER6> So an article on the Washington Post site based upon a for-profit founder's nit-picking of Khan's materials is representative of the right way to go about improving what Khan himself says is an effort to supplement other educational methods?

There's a difference between constructive criticism that's effectively administered vs a publicly-rendered smear attempt that tries to hide behind pedantry.

<comment><USER19> My comment was in reply to delinka's TL;DR. And you seem to be using a similar one. I don't know that it's "representative of the right way" to put criticisms like this in such a public forum, but it's not exactly new either. The first article is (is that the for-profit founder you're referring to?) definitely not constructive criticism. This article is in response to Khan's rebuttal, and at least offers a claim of more substantial research into Khan Academy's offerings before they provide their criticism.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> I have looked at a few Khan videos and here is my 2 cents. The reason he/videos is effective is not because he is teaching a great content (I mean algebra is algebra). What he excels at is keeping _you_ engaged and interested throughout. This makes tremendous difference to anyone who wants to learn. There are lot of people who know great things but can they teach it to others? Now that is an art that Khan has mastered.

</comment><comment><USER22> Colin once again submits an article from the United States popular press, here a co-authored op-ed piece, about mathematics education reform in the United States, one of my main topics of personal research for more than a decade. The regular opinion column to which this guest piece was submitted, the "Answer Sheet" edited by Valerie Strauss, is basically propaganda for the current school system, and has been caught here on HN before stretching facts beyond all recognition to make political points.

<https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3327847>

Michael Paul Goldenberg has such a lengthy online trail of writings about mathematics education that as I entered his name in Google, autocomplete finished the search query

[https://www.google.com/search?q=michael+paul+goldenberg+math...](https://www.google.com/search?q=michael+paul+goldenberg+mathematics)

and I was led to some of his more recent writings. (I used to interact with him quite regularly online in specialized email lists about mathematics education reform, about a decade ago.) He, um, definitely has a point of view in his approach to education reform. It's all about the providers for altogether too many people who look at education results and school practices in the United States.

The response to the usual excuses for United States school performance by another observer,

[http://www.nationalreview.com/agenda/255997/are-tino- sananda...](http://www.nationalreview.com/agenda/255997/are-tino-sanandaji- and-nea-same-page-us-educational-performance-reihan-salam)

who points out how often critiques of schools in the United States are responded to by excuses that shift blame from providers of "education" to the learners in their care:

"Consider that Americans tend to have more disposable income than citizens of other advanced market democracies, at least some of which can be devoted to supplemental instruction. After all, parents have fairly strong incentives to secure educational advantages for their children. This suggests that our schools are performing very poorly indeed.

"Don't believe the hype."

is closer to reality than many of the critiques of outside-the-box approaches to mathematics education in the United States.

That said, I have been up-front here on HN in suggesting ways that Khan Academy can improve, for example by building more online practice that is truly problems rather than exercises (379 days ago),

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2760663>

"Just for friendly advice to the Khan Academy exercise developers, I'll repost my FAQ about the distinction between "exercises" and "problems" in mathematics education. It would be great to see more problems on the Khan Academy site."

and the Khan Academy developers have been listening, and I have had interesting off-forum email interaction with them as they attempt to improve the instructional model at Khan Academy.

To date, I recommend to my own children and to my clients in my own supplemental mathematics education program that they also turn to ALEKS

<http://www.aleks.com/>

(Yet another edit. About the time I posted this, someone else asked below another comment,

 _So who is making the site that will deliver more personalized instruction? Where is the research that site will use, telling all about which kinds of personalization are proven and how much effect they will have?_

and ALEKS is an answer to those questions in large part. Browse around the ALEKS site to see its links to its research base.)

and to Art of Problem Solving

<http://www.artofproblemsolving.com/>

for more online mathematics instruction resources, and I also share specific links to specialized sites on particular topics with clients and with my children. Besides that, I fill my house with books about mathematics, and circulate other books about mathematics frequently from various local libraries.

I also recommend that all my students use the American Mathematics Competition

<http://amc.maa.org/>

materials and other mathematical contest materials as a reality check on how well they are learning mathematics.

In general, I think mathematics is much too important a subject to be single- sourced from any source. Especially, mathematics is much too important to be left to the United States public school system in its current condition.

I was just rereading The Teaching Gap: Best Ideas from the World's Teachers for Improving Education in the Classroom (1999) the other day. It reminded me of facts I had already learned from other sources, including living overseas for two three-year stays in east Asia.

"Readers who are parents will know that there are differences among American teachers; they might even have fought to move their child from one teacher's class into another teacher's class. Our point is that these differences, which appear so large within our culture, are dwarfed by the gap in general methods of teaching that exist across cultures. We are not talking about gaps in teachers' competence but about a gap in teaching methods." p. x

"When we watched a lesson from another country, we suddenly saw something different. Now we were struck by the similarity among the U.S. lessons and by how different they were from the other country's lesson. When we watched a Japanese lesson, for example, we noticed that the teacher presents a problem to the students without first demonstrating how to solve the problem. We realized that U.S. teachers almost never do this, and now we saw that a feature we hardly noticed before is perhaps one of the most important features of U.S. lessons--that the teacher almost always demonstrates a procedure for solving problems before assigning them to students. This is the value of cross-cultural comparisons. They allow us to detect the underlying commonalities that define particular systems of teaching, commonalities that otherwise hide in the background." p. 77

Plenty of authors, including some who should be better known and mentioned more often by the co-authors of the article Colin kindly submitted here, have had plenty of thoughtful things to say about ways in which United States mathematical education could improve.

In February 2012, Annie Keeghan wrote a blog post, "Afraid of Your Child's Math Textbook? You Should Be,"

[http://open.salon.com/blog/annie_keeghan/2012/02/17/afraid_o...](http://open.salon.com/blog/annie_keeghan/2012/02/17/afraid_of_your_childs_math_textbook_you_should_be)

in which she described the current process publishers follow in the United States to produce new mathematics textbook. Low bids for writing, rushed deadlines, and no one with a strong mathematical background reviewing the books results in school textbooks that are not useful for learning mathematics. Moreover, although all new textbook series in the United States are likely to claim that they "expose" students to the Common Core standards, they are not usually designed carefully to develop mathematical understanding according to any set of standards.

In a January 2012 lecture,

<http://math.berkeley.edu/~wu/Lisbon2010_4.pdf>

Professor Hung-hsi Wu of UC Berkeley points out a problem of fraction addition from the federal National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) survey project. On page 39 of his presentation handout (numbered in the .PDF of his lecture notes as page 38), he shows the fraction addition problem

12/13 + 7/8

for which eighth grade students were not even required to give a numerically exact answer, but only an estimate of the correct answer to the nearest natural number from five answer choices. Even at that, very few students chose the correct answer.

Patricia Clark Kenschaft, professor of mathematics at Montclair State University in New Jersey, reported in her article "Racial Equity Requires Teaching Elementary School Teachers More Mathematics" in the Notices of the American Mathematical Society

<http://www.ams.org/notices/200502/fea-kenschaft.pdf>

about elementary teachers' knowledge of mathematics in New Jersey:

"The teachers are eager and able to learn. I vividly remember one summer class when I taught why the multiplication algorithm works for two-digit numbers using base ten blocks. I have no difficulty doing this with third graders, but this particular class was all elementary school teachers. At the end of the half hour, one third-grade teacher raised her hand. 'Why wasn't I told this secret before?' she demanded. It was one of those rare speechless moments for Pat Kenschaft. In the quiet that ensued, the teacher stood up.

"'Did you know this secret before?' she asked the person nearest her. She shook her head. 'Did you know this secret before?' the inquirer persisted, walking around the class. 'Did you know this secret before?' she kept asking. Everyone shook her or his head. She whirled around and looked at me with fury in her eyes. 'Why wasn't I taught this before? I've been teaching third grade for thirty years. If I had been taught this thirty years ago, I could have been such a better teacher!!!'"

A discussion of the Common Core Standards in Mathematics, "The Common Core Math StandardsAre they a step forward or backward?"

<http://educationnext.org/the-common-core-math-standards/>

gets into further details of how mathematicians look at the general school curriculum in the United States. It is not the worst curriculum possible, and survivors of the system often have access to outside resources to supplement school lessons, but the public school instruction in mathematics in the United States still shows plenty of room for improvement.

After edit: I was asked in a reply what I think about the essay "Lockhart's Lament." I think it is an interesting read, but less practical for reforming mathematics education than I had hoped. (I say the same in general about articles by Keith Devlin, the mathematician who popularized Lockhart's Lament.) To reform education, it is important to be relentlessly empirical, and look again and again and again at the best practices of the highest- achieving countries. That's why I prefer several of the links I submitted to Lockhart's interesting essay as policy guidance for United States parents, taxpayers, and learners.

Another edit: HN user danso just kindly posted

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4301758>

a link to a response by Sal Khan in the same Washington Post op-ed column about education. Direct link is

[http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/sal- kh...](http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/sal-khan- responds-to-critic/2012/07/25/gJQA83rW9W_blog.html)

<comment><USER6> _and the Khan Academy developers have been listening, and I have had interesting off-forum email interaction_

And THERE is the difference between genuinely-given constructive criticism and the questionably-motivated smearing that those folks working with the Washington Post are attempting to deliver.

Thank you very much for the links. I've already sent some of them on to my wife so that she and I can research them a bit more as instructional aids for our children.

<comment><USER23> As one of those who worked on one of the Washington Post pieces, I would invite you to come by my blog, <a href="[http://christopherdanielson.wordpress.com>Overthinking](http://christopherdanielson.wordpress.com>Overthinking) My Teaching</a>, where I think you will find my motives to quite pure-better understanding of student learning of mathematics.

In fact it was very important to me that the piece I co-wrote <strong>not</strong> be a smear piece. I can't speak for the comments I did not write. But a careful read of the post itself should reveal a claim backed up by evidence. The claim is that Sal Khan is lacking some important knowledge for teaching. That's not a smear. I would gladly engage in a discussion that pointed to evidence that he does know some important things about how people learn.

<comment><USER6> I looked at your blog. From my perspective, you folks are down in the weeds. Khan isn't using the optimal technique for teaching decimals? Who cares? The problem isn't that kids aren't learning optimal methods.

The problem with education in this country is that we funnel most all of our public education dollars into a system and related organizations that are only tangentially motivated to educate our children. Watch how the public school systems and teachers unions react to vouchers and charter schools and you'll see how much they care about educating kids vs protecting their turf and power base.

I've noted that those within the education system or closely aligned with it absolutely hated "Waiting for Superman". They nitpick it and try to blow up minor faults with it in a similar way to how you're going after Khan. To those of us outside of that power structure, that documentary showed how the establishment is utterly opposed to actually solving problems in education in this country if those solutions occur outside of that establishment.

I view your articles vs Khan to be in a similar vein. What Khan has done is he's added a solution to our society for our education problems that operates outside of the current public education power structure. Rather than build on what he's done and improve on it through working with Khan or doing something better -- you folks have taken the route of trying to publicly take him down in the media.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> From the article:

... ""I think frankly, the best way to do it is you put stuff out there and you see how people react to it; and we have exercises on our site too, so we see whether they're able to see how they react to it anecdotally."

Khan will put the video out there and see how people react to it. He perceives this to be a better approach than incorporating results of quality research projects into his instructional decisions. In the age of No Child Left Behind and its mandate for "scientifically based research" as the foundation for classroom instruction, this seems lazy." ...

I was agreed with the author until I read those lines. In my opinion they are disingenuous at the very least.

Every teacher, even those ones with a high knowledge on PCK, have to adapt their content every year. They try with an explanation on a topic and see how students react and based on that improve the content for the next year.

That's exactly what Khan said he is doing, publish and see how people react to those videos. It might be harder for him to measure the content in comparison with an on site teacher. But saying that "Sal Khan is on record as dismissing this research" seems an overstatement to me in the best case.

</comment><comment><USER25> This criticism does seem to be more harsh than is necessary, but I don't see what the problem is in seeking the advice from those with more experience teaching. Khan has created something amazing, but that doesn't mean he is infallible nor that his videos should stay as they are today.

If you read the second to last paragraph, they don't suggest that Khan Academy shuts down, or that he stops teaching. They literally just say, "Hey, it'd be nice if he asked some really great teachers to look over his examples before he uses them to make sure he doesn't confuse people." I'm not an expert, but sounds like it couldn't hurt.

</comment><comment><USER26> It's probably a good sign that Khan Academy is getting criticized by some members of mainstream media lately. It shows the growing importance of a great disruptive organization.

<comment><USER27> Or it may be just that it is worth criticizing? I personally found Khan Academy lessons of very poor quality.

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> I'm a huge fan of the Kahn academy videos and in order for it to get even better it needs people to criticize the curriculum so I am a big fan of this article.

I view Kahn Academy as the start to a new type of education that is in its very early stages. Kahn is a smart man who will probably take the criticism and use it to be better his instruction and add supplemental videos etc. I would be shocked if he didn't add in a 3rd comparing decimals video after this criticism.

Keep up the great work, I know I'm watching.

</comment><comment><USER29> "Comparing decimals. Decimal fractions (decimals for short — the numbers to the right of the decimal point) are a notoriously challenging topic in the elementary math curriculum."

Just to point out this is the most ass backwards way to talk about decimal fractions I have ever witnessed, but nothing would stop said Valerie Strauss on pedagogical insufficiency spotting... "decimals for short — the numbers to the right of the decimal point" ?!? Whisky Tango Foxtrot

Edit: downvoted is it because you would also believe decimal fractions are decimals and those are the numbers to the right of the decimal point per article explanation... because being a silent ignorant with a karma finger really fits you.

<comment><USER19> The author isn't Valerie Strauss.

"Decimals" is (in the US at least) a common way of referring to decimal fractions (that is, numbers represented like: 12.345) vs the whole number or integer representation that the students would already be familiar with (like 12) or other fractional notations like 6 7/10.

<comment><USER29> I am under the impression the author of the article is Valerie Strauss and she is presenting a small piece critique by Christopher Danielson and Michael Paul Goldenberg at the top of her article. If not, there is a problem with the placement of her name at the end of it.

As for the abbreviation presented, it is just terrible and is used in article while accusing others of lack of Pedagogical Content Knowledge.

<comment><USER19> So you believe she speaks about herself using "We" instead of "I"?

Her contribution is the first 2 paragraphs, the rest is the critique from Christopher Danielson and Michael Paul Goldenberg.

Edit: And please explain, how is the abbreviation terrible, because I've clearly missed something.

<comment><USER29> "We" may well be used instead of "I" and at the end it reads "By Valerie Strauss". The attribution is placed in a random way all through the article and that threw me.

The abbreviation is terrible because in the article it is used in reference to "the numbers to the right of the decimal point"; "decimals for short".

<comment><USER19> To the first point: The first and second paragraphs are italicized, clearly distinct from the rest. This is intended to show a distinction in voice (authorship). The content of the first two paragraphs are nothing but framing for what follows. You're either being excessively pedantic, or have elected not to read the article to have so much difficulty in recognizing authorship of the 2 parts.

To the second, I still don't see what makes that terrible. It's saying, decimals is short for decimal fractions, and provides a definition for decimal fractions.

<comment><USER29> Article starts with: "How well does Khan Academy teach? By Valerie Strauss", then "By Christopher Danielson and Michael Paul Goldenberg" on top of their contribution. At the end of the article there is a : "By Valerie Strauss". So attribution is displayed twice before text blocks and once after text blocks, if you don't see the failure in that, I am so sorry. I don't know how pedantic it is to confuse voices when they are attributed in two different ways when it is clear that the second way is the most common, but I will leave it to you to quantify it, not that I care for it. But do keep up the winding, you will be on to something, sometime soon.

Second: "Comparing decimals. Decimal fractions (decimals for short — the numbers to the right of the decimal point) are a notoriously challenging topic in the elementary math curriculum."

For the last time, decimals are NOT the numbers to the right of the decimal point like stated. "decimals" is being used for a subpar abbreviation of decimal fractions AND the left side numbers to the decimal point are a part of it, unlike what said authors state. Someone with pedagogical concerns should be awake when stating stuff like this and if you don't see the mess that is, that is your own problem. I have stated this already.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> The article misses the point of Khan Academy. The point is that the world only ever has to find _one good example_ of how to teach something.

If someone comes up with a theory on a better way to teach something, cool. A/B test it and keep the winner.

</comment><comment><USER31> Fuck that noise. If you don't like it, do it better; all this whining and nit- picking is without value. Khan Academy is innovative and game changing, but you can't innovate by insisting on perfection.

<comment><USER32> No, but after you inovation comes incremental improvement. If Khan Academy does not do this (and I have no idea weather or not they are), then another group will take their highly inovative idea and do it better.

</comment></comment><comment><USER33> Across the developed world libraries are closing, or being forced to reinvent themselves. They're doing this because their original purpose is being done better by new technology. It is simply no longer rational to have a big building to house information printed on slices of dead tree. Libraries and librarians do lots of important and useful things other than simply lend books, but they're having to figure out how to reinvent themselves now that the core service is obsolete.

The vast majority of contact hours in the vast majority of educational institutions consist of chalk-and-talk - someone writing things on a board and talking. The available evidence shows that there is no clear benefit to doing this in the flesh over delivering the same approach through video, and that there might be significant benefits to providing it in a modular format that can be paused and rewound. Sal might not be the greatest math teacher on earth, but soon enough, somewhere on the internet will be lessons by 99th percentile teachers on every imaginable topic.

If your best argument is "We can do what the internet does, only marginally better", then you're in deep trouble - we've seen how well that has played out for any number of people. The economies of scale are too great, the rate of iteration too rapid. You're just not going to beat the internet at supplying data. Educators and schools have to work out what they are uniquely equipped to do, or face the same inevitable obsolescence that is befalling libraries and travel agents and local newspapers and record stores and myriad other businesses.

</comment><comment><USER34> It should be noted that Kaplan, Inc. is owned by the Washington Post Co. and is, I believe, the WaPo Co.'s largest source of revenue: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaplan,_Inc>.

(I'm of the belief that it's possible for a large news company to give equal commentary share to competing interests, but I don't follow the WaPo's education coverage enough to be able to make a judgment in this case)

</comment><comment><USER35> It seems to me that most of the unpleasantness in Khan Academy criticisms stem from the fact that, most of these comment concern other peoples' comments on Khan Academy. Revolutionary/Messiah v/s borg/wrath-of-khan/emperor-without- clothes and so on.

This is sad because the actual message, which is valid in some instances and informative in all instances, gets lost in the noise. This is more so, given that people at Khan Academy are responding positively to specific concerns on specific topics.

And unlike for-profit companies, all his work, from the most boring video to the best, are available to be criticized. We only see a few clippings from, most likely, the very best videos from for-profit companies.

I hope the real critics and the real skeptics, i.e., those who would like to make Khan Academy a success, will continue to bring their specific concerns to the table; and just not all the distracting noise.

(Now, it is strange that the authors while pointing out the exaggerated praise for Khan Academy, fail to point out the abuse that Khan had to endure. Even stranger is that some commentators dismiss the abuse as "satire".)

</comment><comment><USER36> Where is the video that represents the "right" way of comparing decimals? I'd be genuinely curious to compare it with the khan video. And if that ever happens, then Khan Academy is a net win in my opinion.

I would think it would be easy for the "nit-picking experts" to produce that and it probably would have taken less time than the formal analysis they did. Probably cheaper too.

edit: wording

</comment><comment><USER37> Any critique that world-class teachers give Khan Academy would apply to most K-12 math teachers as well. I think people are worried because Khan Academy can spread much further (and do much more damage) than a conventional teacher, who is fired if standardized testing scores drop below an arbitrary amount.

BUT the same effect is seen on Wikipedia, which has been reviewed and corrected more than thousands of other encyclopedias, simply because it's so open and accessible. Khan Academy was originally run by one guy, but they're starting to open up and partner with other educational entities. They aren't going to go unchecked. By no means is Khan Academy hurting the education system, unless you look at things from an economic or political standpoint, in which case it's potentially disruptive. But that would be cruel, wouldn't it?

</comment><comment><USER38> "Our view is that content knowledge alone is inadequate for quality instruction."

I cannot disagree more. The best teachers I had were college professors who were all experts in their field and never took a class on pedagogy or education. But they had the autonomy to change their teaching style based on what was most effective for them and their students.

Our grade school teachers would be a lot better if they were experts in their domain of knowledge and given more leeway to teach according to their strengths and their students' needs. As it is, public school teachers are pretty much automatons whose actions are dictated down to the minute by school boards.

<comment><USER39> My best teachers were also content experts.

My worst teachers by a long shot were also content experts, holding, in one case, the research chair of an academic department in a renowned research university.

Couldn't teach to save his life and was lucky that the tutors put in a lot of extra hours so that around 50% of the enrolled students passed his fairly easy course (it was a revelation that after I had failed, and had to re-sit during the summer, I asked an academic in a related field to coach me based on a text, and his explanations were lucid, to the point, had an expository style that engaged and that he actually wanted to address the material at hand).

An intelligent person with some domain knowledge, good teaching materials and firm grasp on how students learn beats someone with all the domain knowledge in the world who is a hopeless teacher, in my experience.

</comment></comment><comment><USER40> It's kind of an interesting question. Is it better to educate masses with an inferior product that breeds misconception, or fewer people with a better product that limits misconception?

<comment><USER9> If it breeds misconception, can you really call it education?

<comment><USER40> Perhaps the word "breeds" is strong. I would argue that even though Khan's lessons are very imperfect, the accessibility offered may be a worthy trade- off.

If knowing math at a superficial level opens doors for other learning, it's hard to argue that it's NOT a worthy trade-off.

We as math teachers strive for perfection, but the truth is that having a deep understanding of what an equals sign is and how it should function isn't important for most people in their lives. Sure those in math careers will want that depth (and they'll get it, since Khan alone can't prepare them for that career), but everyone else will be fine whether they use the equals sign properly or not.

In a lot of ways it's like prescriptive vs. descriptive linguistics. Are we going to be the equivalent of a grammar nazi and come down hard on everyone we see that uses improper notation? Or can we be satisfied if there is some understanding there, even if it's imperfect or communicated poorly?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER41> One snob article vs. a huge body of innovative work.

Game, set, match to Mr. Khan.

</comment><comment><USER42> The thing I find most bizarre about Khan Academy (which, in principal, I love) is the whacky focus on Khan. Why not crowd source the tutorials?

In my opinion Stack Overflow is a better model for this stuff. Imagine something like Stack Overflow focused on video tutorials covering concepts that got up voted. (heck, maybe it exists.) why can't I upload my take on "slope" (or whatever) rather than just post Q&A on Khan's?

</comment><comment><USER43> Can anyone weigh in on their differing arguments regarding the definition of slope? I am not a maths expert by any means, but am genuinely curious who is correct here. Or is this a matter of one being technically correct versus the other being correct in practice?

</comment><comment><USER44> Khan Academy is social-network type of learning, where you learn from the community. This is good. But learning from expert educators is also essential and perhaps irreplaceable. There are a lot of short-sighted people, who are marveled by current technologies that allow people interact remotely and immediately jump to the conclusion that we have an answer to learning, while dismissing the entire tradition, culture and knowledge of and about learning that has been established for centuries. Now, if Khan wants to make a quick buck, that's fine. But he's serious about teaching and learning, he should realize that Khan Academy and its approach is only complementary (at extremely great at that) and is not a replacement of the traditional ways of teaching and learning.

</comment><comment><USER45> Wow, such a high quality discussion on HN especially compared to the one under the article. And on a topic that's only tangentially related to startups and tech...

</comment><comment><USER46> So because its not perfect, lets drag it through the mud.

This is ONE MAN.

</comment><comment><USER47> 170,000,000 lessons.

"We contend that"

No. You cannot contend against 170 million.</comment>


Nano-diamond self-charging batteries could disrupt energy as we know it - <AUTHOR> https://newatlas.com/energy/nano-diamond-self-charging-batteries-ndb/ <comment><USER2> This is silly. It's not going to disrupt Li-ion. Power outputs are way too low. C14 has a half life of 5700 years. This isn't going to output Li-ion levels of power/weight for 5 millennia. It looks like it might give you microwatts/gram, but this is much closer to existing nuclear tech like RTGs or beta voltaics than it is to Li-ion batteries.

<comment><USER3> what has half life to be with energy density?

<comment><USER4> The half life tells you how fast you're using up your fuel. A long half life means you're using the nuclear potential energy in your "battery" very slowly.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Lotsa claims, artist's rendition of possible product. Wake me up when it's on Amazon.

</comment><comment><USER6> > NDB says [the batteries] will be cost-competitive with, and sometimes > significantly less expensive than – current lithium batteries. That equation > is helped along by the fact that some of the suppliers of the original > nuclear waste will pay NDB to take it off their hands.

How much C-14 is produce annually?

</comment><comment><USER6> Unexpectedly, snopes [1] has a good overview of the technology until 2017.

[https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/radioactive-diamond- batter...](https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/radioactive-diamond-batteries- real-thing/)

<comment><USER7> From this article, it is 15 joules per gm of energy. That means 0.5kwh is generated for 100kg of these cells - typical battery weight in EVs.

But this is continuous process. So in 24hrs, you would get 12kwh which can be stored in super capacitors.

Assuming 10kms per kwh of EV range, this would be 120kms per day.

And if we allocate more kgs for battery, the range would increase.

<comment><USER8> Re-read that snopes article again; 15 joules/gram per day. That means in 24 hours, you only get 0.5kwh from your 100kg battery.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I'm not knowledgeable enough to comment on the validity of these claims but my gut feeling is along the lines of _" If it sounds too good to be true..."_

Also, the description of the technology sounds so simple that I find it difficult to believe no-one's thought of it before _ergo_ there must be a catch.

It would be great if this was for real though. The possibilities of such such a thing are almost unimaginable.

</comment><comment><USER10> So is this basically a charge based version of a RTG (hence the diamond semiconductor)?

Edit: apparently these devices are called betavoltaics

<comment><USER11> High energy electrons make their own current, no heat needed. But if you put it in a phone, the phone will be permanently warm.

Betting these will end up in pacemakers & telemetry only, but not for any legitimate reason.

<comment><USER10> Looks like betavoltaics in general have super low specific power

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I know this isn't necessarily a logic-based conclusion...

My first thought was "Chief Medical Officer? Huh? No. Thanks. I smell bs."

</comment><comment><USER13> Like many of the comments in the article said, I don't think this would be safe. Diamonds can be shattered and they do burn.

<comment><USER14> > they do burn

Yikes, I had caught the shattering risk and decided I'd pass on something built literally like the article said. But if these can _burn_... that takes it to "that externality needs to be fully mitigated before this is made widely available".

<comment><USER15> The ignition point of diamond is in the range of 700-800 °C in a pure oxygen atmosphere.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> In spite of all the grandiose claims, if their claims are even half of what they say, it would be pretty impressive!

</comment><comment><USER17> I'd love to believe it. It sounds plausible. I'd have to see a lot more to invest in it.</comment>


Ask HN: Where do you find airfare special deals? - <AUTHOR>

The web is full of fragmented info about special airline ticket deals, there are tens of blogs and forums that publish these offers.
I'd like to round up the most common places people check (forums, communities etc) into a public spreadsheet, so everyone can use them.
Let's leave the ticket search engines a side at the moment and focus on deals that are found by  enthusiasts and published on the web. <comment><USER2> Have had success in the past using Flightfox ([http://www.flightfox.com](http://www.flightfox.com)) where you get a 'pro' to find you a cheap flight (for a fee). Have used it twice and both times they found a cheaper flight than I could with the difference being greater than the fee.

Most recently I travelled Melbourne to NYC and they found if I booked an unrelated flight between Manchester and London, the overall cost of the routes I was travelling was much lower, even when paying for an extra ticket I wasn't going to use (though I'm still not entirely sure why)

I also read recently about Skiplagged ([https://skiplagged.com/](https://skiplagged.com/)) which finds flights from A - B - C which are cheaper than those simply A - B. If you are only travelling A - B this will be cheaper and you just don't hop on the flight from B - C. They're getting sued by United so obviously someone doesn't like what they're doing.

As for specifically deals, I use OzBargain ([http://www.ozbargain.com.au](http://www.ozbargain.com.au)) though this is obviously Australian focused.

</comment><comment><USER3> It might be interesting to you "Hack: VPN and Proxy for Saving Money on Online Booking of Hotels and Airplane Tickets" [https://privatoria.net/blog/hack-vpn- and-proxy-for-saving-mo...](https://privatoria.net/blog/hack-vpn-and-proxy- for-saving-money-on-online-booking-of-hotels-and-airplane-tickets/)

</comment><comment><USER4> Flyertalk forums: [http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/index.php](http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/index.php)</comment>


A History of Chop Suey - <AUTHOR> https://www.historytoday.com/archive/historians-cookbook/history-chop-suey <comment><USER2> Disappointed this isn't about the System Of A Down song.

</comment><comment><USER3> Reminds me of a similar story from HN which I remember doing a rewarding deep dive into:

[https://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/food-and-wine/chop- suey...](https://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/food-and-wine/chop-suey- nation/article30539419/)

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13258636](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13258636)

</comment><comment><USER4> I recommend watching The Search for General Tso. It's a documentary following the Chinese in America with the lens being on the the General Tso dish, in a very similar line to the article.

</comment><comment><USER5> Chop Suey or 雜菜 has a history way longer than what the article suggests. A clue to this is the Korean dish of Japchae (잡채) (the stir fried glass noodle dish in Korean restaurants), which is Sino-Korean for, you guessed it - 雜菜, when written in Hanja. This is traced back to the early 1600s in written records, purportedly invented in Korea. Given the circumstances, it was likely a Korean version of the original disk from China.

Another dish that bears this name has a even more direct connection - Indonesian Cap Cai. This is clearly a localised version of the original dish that either slightly precedes or is contemporaneous with the westernised dish.

So maybe this article is a history of Chop Suey in America, but definitely not Chop Suey as a dish in general.

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

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

</comment><comment><USER6> "More properly written tsa sui (Mandarin) or tsap seui (Cantonese)"

So in UK restaurants, 'Char Sui' is the same thing?

<comment><USER7> I'm curious about whether you're remembering the spelling correctly -- I did a quick google for "char sui" but couldn't find it, and found the other thing I do know, which is "char siu," a kind of marinated/roasted pork.

<comment><USER6> At the risk of appearing posher than I am, there's this [1], along with other links, I'm not sure if they refer to the same thing though.

[1] [https://www.waitrose.com/ecom/products/waitrose-chinese- char...](https://www.waitrose.com/ecom/products/waitrose-chinese-char-sui- pork/885142-555473-555474)

<comment><USER7> I think they refer to the pork I was thinking about -- the listing has a typo, but the packaging says "char siu pork." :)

Just to be clear, that's not related to chop suey.

<comment><USER6> Good point, Waitrose have obviously gone downhill, interestingly Tesco seem to have made the same mistake [1].

As counter examples I've found references the char sui chicken [2] and venison [3]. But I think you're right that it started off as pork, and not chop suey.

So I could 'legitimately' order char sui tsa sui? How am I pronouncing the 'tsa'?

[1][https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.tesco.com/groceries...](https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.tesco.com/groceries/en- GB/products/300497160&sa=U&ved=2ahUKEwj89tKswqDlAhUBL1AKHSBRCOMQFjAPegQIAhAB&usg=AOvVaw3zSIDNFY- cwFUpL50hThWM) [2][https://www.google.com/url?q=https://m.youtube.com/watch%3Fv...](https://www.google.com/url?q=https://m.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3D8VwqY0GTJ2s&sa=U&ved=2ahUKEwifq6GGwKDlAhWCEVAKHYfED7I4ChC3AjAFegQIBxAB&usg=AOvVaw0jDH-j8VUaY2vGX9iERIhX) [3][https://www.google.com/url?q=https://m.youtube.com/watch%3Fv...](https://www.google.com/url?q=https://m.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3DKExjJj8TLsw&sa=U&ved=2ahUKEwifq6GGwKDlAhWCEVAKHYfED7I4ChC3AjAGegQICRAB&usg=AOvVaw1WC6xb6yTZa58uW7BHjNYQ)

<comment><USER7> > So I could 'legitimately' order char sui tsa sui?

Not really, for a couple of reasons.

The "r" in "char" is a rising tone, which is distinct and different from the "tsa" in "tsa sui" (Mandarin) or "tsap" in "tsap seui" (Cantonese).

> How am I pronouncing the 'tsa'?

The "tsa" and "tsap" are (and I can't confirm this 100% since I only speak rudimentary Mandarin) most likely sharp falling tones, like when you say "Shit!" If you say "cha" with that tone, odds are that it'll sound like "chop" with the p not being very strong. The closest approximation is probably saying something like "it's a" but without the "i" and in the tone/falling pitch of a curse, like "Fuck!"

They're very distinctly different in most Chinese dialects, and Cantonese and Mandarin are distinctly different dialects themselves.

The other reason you couldn't say "char sui tsa sui" is that "char sui" (correctly, "char siu") is from Cantonese, but "tsa sui" is from Mandarin, so you can't really use them together.

Another issue is that foods don't always work like that -- imagine trying to go to the pub and ask for "salmon and chips" someone unfamiliar with pub culture and English might imagine that it's just fish and chips with salmon being the type of fried fish specified (not knowing that you can't specify the fish), or someone else might expect grilled salmon with chips on the side, but odds are you might not get anything at all because it's not something anyone usually serves. :)

<comment><USER6> "The other reason you couldn't say "char sui tsa sui" is that "char sui" (correctly, "char siu") is from Cantonese, but "tsa sui" is from Mandarin, so you can't really use them together"

People do that all the time. My favourite example is Lake Windermere. Where Windermere is lake in 2 other languages. And half the rivers in the UK seem to be named river in another language.

[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_river_name_etymologi...](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_river_name_etymologies)

<comment><USER7> I think that's different because it's a name.

Here, you have two different names that you're trying to use to order a food that doesn't exist, so it's a bit different than something with a shared etymology and history. It would be like walking into a pub (again) and asking for "tako and chips," where "tako" is Japanese for "octopus." There's no guarantee that the dish exists or that the person you're talking to even knows what "tako" is.

Mandarin and Cantonese are essentially completely different languages, so you're just mixing phrases that the other person probably doesn't know.

<comment><USER6> I would guess octopus is an imported word, so what you're describing has in a sense happened. The scenario reminds me of the (probably inaccurate) origin story for chicken tikka masala, where someone asked for some gravy to go with their dry chicken tikka.

So maybe I could try ordering a char sui tsa sui, then I can regale my grandkids with stories about how I invented the world famous dish :)

I suppose food is literally a melting pot, of cuisines and culture.

Ps, I think octopus would go better with French fries.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


How many Bitcoins were actually paid to the WannaCry authors so far? - <AUTHOR> https://wolfmankurd.github.io/WannaCryMoney/ <comment><AUTHOR> Seems only three BTC addresses are used for payments by WannaCry:

* [https://blockchain.info/address/13AM4VW2dhxYgXeQepoHkHSQuy6N...](https://blockchain.info/address/13AM4VW2dhxYgXeQepoHkHSQuy6NgaEb94)

* [https://blockchain.info/address/12t9YDPgwueZ9NyMgw519p7AA8is...](https://blockchain.info/address/12t9YDPgwueZ9NyMgw519p7AA8isjr6SMw)

* [https://blockchain.info/address/115p7UMMngoj1pMvkpHijcRdfJNX...](https://blockchain.info/address/115p7UMMngoj1pMvkpHijcRdfJNXj6LrLn)

Roughly 47 BTC (~100,000 $) were paid by a total of ~310 users. There have been 300,000 infected PCs reported [1]. If we asume that a payment is done per machine (at least thats what the WannaCry 'rules' demand), than only 0,1% of infected users pay.

Seems, crime does not pay (at least it does not pay as much as expected) ;-)

[1] www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/13/nhs-cyber-attack-everything-need-know- biggest-ransomware-offensive/</comment>


Spilled.ink – Indie Email Service - <AUTHOR> https://spilled.ink/ <comment><AUTHOR> This isn't my project, I just saw it and thought it looked neat and would fit with HN's audience.

I especially found the server-side asset fetching interesting:

"Spilled.ink fetches all related images on server as soon as the email is received and encodes them into the message. This hides your location, and whether or not you opened the message, from trackers."

This is really clever. Do any other services do this?

<comment><USER2> I mean, don't most web-clients do this by way of proxies hiding the original source? I recall that was a big blowup with GMail implementing it some years ago...

<comment><AUTHOR> Can't find any sources that Gmail does this, though I do use the UglyEmail extension: [https://uglyemail.com/](https://uglyemail.com/)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER2> How's this doing the push notifications? If it's using the trick that FastMail is/was using, I believe Apple stopped supporting the project that was enabling creating those push certificates in the first place.

I'd assume FastMail gets a pass on the notifications trick due to time implemented, but wouldn't a smaller player be SOL?</comment>


Russian fighter jets in US election ads - <AUTHOR> https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/sep/15/trump-election-ad-uses-stock-military-image-featuring-russian-fighter-jets <comment><USER2> of course he'd use that, might as well make Putin some coin

<comment><USER3> I'm sure the president personally approved that image /s

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Okay, okay. You finally caught the conservatives in a Biden moment.</comment>


The OCaml Platform (Talk: Fast, Flexible and Functional Programming with OCaml) - <AUTHOR> https://www.infoq.com/presentations/ocaml-browser-iot/ <comment><AUTHOR> Just stumbled over this talk in which the __Ocaml Platform __[1] was discussed.

Did anyone give it a try? Are the new developer tools the right step forward, and are they helping with industry adoption?

[1] [http://ocaml.org/platform/index.html](http://ocaml.org/platform/index.html)</comment>


Ask HN: Filing bug reports against your life? - <AUTHOR> I've been trying to think about what metaphor would work best for me for personal improvement and to-do work, and it occurred to me that it might be beneficial to use the 'bug report' metaphor.
I doubt the idea is unique, so am wondering if anyone has already used this stratagem against their own self-improvement work / tasklists, and if so, how they implemented it.
Thanks in advance for allowing me to pick your brain. <comment><USER2> [https://github.com/frabcus/house/issues](https://github.com/frabcus/house/issues) comes to mind, where someone uses GitHub issues to track defects & enhancements to their house.

</comment><comment><USER3> Just mark all your problems WONTFIX

Claim they're features.</comment>


Tesla Q2 2018 Vehicle Production and Deliveries - <AUTHOR> http://ir.tesla.com/news-releases/news-release-details/tesla-q2-2018-vehicle-production-and-deliveries <comment><USER2> When you read through the announcement and you realize that this is a company that even if it doubled it's current production rate it would still have orders for the close to a year's production, then you have got to pause and be amazed.

How many Model 3s could Tesla produce at its current facilities? 7,000? 10,000? 15,000? It wouldn't be enough to remotely satisfy the demand.

Truth is that once delivery picks up, more people will start to order since currently people like me think it's pointless to order a car that you would have to wait a year to get and that - in most parts of the world - you can actually not order yet. The orders are likely to increase proportionate to the production capacity as Model 3 will be made available around the world.

This company could build 3 Giga Factories around the world that each produce 10,000 Model 3s per week and demand would still not be met. Heck, they could have 10 Giga Factories and they might still not satisfy demand for Model 3.

And then there is the future demand for Model Y and - once they get economy of scale and battery prices go down a bit - demand for cheaper, smaller cars.

All this demand could be met by other car manufacturers if they too produced long range EVs of similar or better quality than combustion engine cars. But no-one does and no-one will for an other year. Don't say Nissan Leaf; it's not long range. And when they finally do, in 2-3 years or so, are you going to take a chance on one of the first competitive EVs from VW, Mercedes, BMW, Ford, General Motors, Hyundai, Fiat, Toyota or Mazda or are you just gonna stick with Tesla, which by then comes with even better specs than today?

Tesla is the Apple of the car world. There is still room for other producers to make the Android cars that spend 3-4 year playing the catch up game of being one-two models behind in specs, and then maybe finally catch up in 5-10 years. But Tesla will get the better customers and the fat margins if the traditionalists don't hurry. And hurry a lot.

<comment><USER3> > _7,000? 10,000? 15,000? It wouldn 't be enough to remotely satisfy the > demand._

Honest question: where on earth do you get this idea? You actually think there is global demand for ~800,000 vehicles with an ASP of ~$55k USD?

What are you basing this insane demand off of? Tesla won't even report the current backlog numbers. If they were increasing, you don't think they'd be boasting about it?

Where does the unlimited demand come from?

> _And when they finally do, in 2-3 years or so, are you going to take a > chance on one of the first competitive EVs from VW, Mercedes, BMW, Ford, > General Motors, Hyundai, Fiat, Toyota or Mazda or are you just gonna stick > with Tesla, which by then comes with even better specs than today?_

Wait, you're saying you're _not_ going to trust manufacturers that have been building and servicing millions and millions and millions of cars for, some of them, over 100 years, but instead you will trust Tesla who hasn't even proven they can sustainably build and service the few hundred thousand they've got on the road? Aren't EVs supposed to be simpler than ICEs?

I simply cannot understand this thinking.

<comment><USER2> More than 70M cars are produced worldwide every year. The 3 large German producers, Mercedes, Audi and BMW, are producing around 6M cars, of which many are priced similarly or more expensive than Model 3. That's just to mention some of the larger ones.

There is easily a demand for millions of cars within the upper end of the mid price segment like Model 3, and once the price of batteries goes down just a bit, EVs can reach the lower end of the mid segment.

We are not at the cheap segment yet, but it's just a matter of battery prices going down (through economy of scale; we actually don't need any breakthroughs in technology).

Then factor in charging networks. Right now, I don't have any supercharger near me. Next year I will. In 4-5 years I will have plenty.

As for not trusting the traditional manufacturers, I stopped buying Nokia and Ericsson and never came back, ones Apple marketed the iPhone. Not because they had had bad products or weren't trustworthy anymore. Just because it was obvious they produced the old tech and were behind on the new. People stopped buying horses and carriages when Ford produced his cars. Horses served us well for millennia.

And the hundreds of thousands of Teslas already driving billions of miles on the road are still driving well without the engines and expertise of BMW, right? People trust Tesla's tech now.

<comment><USER4> > Mercedes, Audi and BMW, are producing around 6M cars, of which many are > priced similarly or more expensive than Model 3

~$55k USD would be roughly equivalent to a 5 Series/E Class/A6. Combined, about 300,000 of these cars are sold per year in Europe. So to sell 800,000 Model 3s worldwide you've got to replace every single one of those BMW/Merc/Audi sales, and then some.

<comment><USER5> Why are you comparing to 5 Series/E Class/A6 ? it's in A4, 3 series, C class price range and size.

<comment><USER4> $55k isn't a 3 Series, at least in the UK.

<comment><USER5> You need to compare highest spec model and US pricing 340i xDrive Premium starts @ 54K in US

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> > _For the first time, Model 3 production (28,578)_

Interestingly enough, the Bloomberg model 3 tracker's [1] estimates appear to have been quite accurate:

      2018-03-31: 12,383
      2018-06-30: 39,872
                  </comment><comment>
            diff: 27,489

[1] [https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2018-tesla- tracker/](https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2018-tesla-tracker/)

<comment><USER7> It's fascinating to observe how close Bloomberg tracker's prediction came in forecasting the _actual_ production numbers using nothing but the the Vehicle Identification Number (VIN) of in-the-wild Model 3's as well as those from the NHTSA database. Talk about the boons of being a publicly traded company.

<comment><USER8> Sounds a bit like the German tank problem {0]

[0] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_tank_problem](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_tank_problem)

<comment><USER9> Fascinating. Excellent reference.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> That's good news.

As an aside what is the real world version of "technical debt?" Tesla's tent factories has helped them accelerate manufacturing, but is that a technical debt they'll have to come back and fix later? I've also read people speculate it could increase warranty return/recall rates due to contaminants (e.g. dirt, dust, etc) in the tents, which if true, could be another source of future debt.

<comment><USER11> I would think that the real technical debt is inside at their first super- automated GA line.

They now have the second line in the temporary structure which let them test some different methods and can provide some pressure relief while they rework the main GA line.

They have been planning to expand and build new buildings at the Freemont plant for quite a while now [1], so I would expect the 'Tent' line to move to a more permanent location eventually.

[1] [https://www.reddit.com/r/teslamotors/comments/8s9913/teslas_...](https://www.reddit.com/r/teslamotors/comments/8s9913/teslas_tent_was_planned_years_ago_as_part_of/)

Edit: As someone in the reddit comments pointed out, the new Tent/GA4 line is on the location of an already planned new building (#11 in the drawing), so perhaps the line stays in place and a more permanent building is built around it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> What I wouldn't give for someone to do a scraping project on HN comments on past submissions for Tesla, to create a timeline of "predictions Tesla will fail to meet a certain goal" vs "date of Tesla successfully meeting that goal."

I would find that really interesting.

<comment><USER13> Hmm. So Tesla/Musk have really ambitious goals that they often miss. Is that a bad thing? The way I look at it no. Whenever Tesla announces something you have to take it with a big grain of salt but that's about it. Also remember that they're attempting something hard / never done before.

If there is something that bothers me about Tesla it's their attitude when a crash happens.

<comment><USER14> > Also remember that they're attempting something hard / never done before.

Well, building car is hardly something that hasn't been done before. They seem to be suffering from extreme NIH caused by the illusion that 100% of the stuff they do has never been done before/need disruption.

That is based on the reports suggesting that Tesla is not failing with its electric powertrain, rather it is failing in traditional part of the car assembly which is sad because the experience in those area are massive, locally and abroad.

So basically, "Is that a bad thing?" Yes, if what I say is true, because it eats the lead that Tesla has to provide no specific benefit. No, if either indeed, there is a hard, never done before, and currently unknown ingredient to Tesla that is going to increase their lead once they get it right.

Or No, because, well competitors are starting to get on the market and Tesla slowing down a bit give them time to catch meaning a more competitive landscape, which is good for everyone on the consumer side.

<comment><USER15> I hear this bit with "traditional car assembly" often. But is it really true? The powertrain isnt really the only difference - EVs are built fundamentally differently (and especially the Tesla models) from the ground up as compared to ICE based cars. If you look at the base series of most large car companies (on which most variants are eventually based) - they've been around for decades in some cases - making it easier to tweak and adjust over time, so production in and off itself hasnt changed that drastically.

<comment><USER14> > But is it really true?

I don't know. We all know that, as anything, a modern car is very complex by itself and even the simplest modern production line requires far too much expertise to understand if you are not working directly in the field. So, you have to trust reports, which with an overhyped company like Tesla are more likely than not be laughingly biased in one direction or another.

It is a bit annoying that Tesla has such a track record of failing to reach their own objectives. It is bad IMO, because Tesla is not really under any kind of market pressure (no competition, and client queueing for years), their objective are only investors milestones. As an investor, I would really start thinking Musk is either delusional, hired the wrong people or is humouring me because in reality I'm the one lucky enough to be allowed to invest in Tesla and I should be grateful rather than wasting his time with silly metrics.

It only really matters if you are an investor though.

Consumer win both ways: either Tesla is giving the rest of the market a chance, or they are ready to revolutionised car production the same way the Japanese did in the 90's.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> That's amazing, but when reading through the numbers in the article this makes me wonder:

".. Q2 production totaled 53,339 vehicles, a 55% increase from Q1, making it the most productive quarter in Tesla history by far. For the first time, Model 3 production (28,578) exceeded .."

So the total Model 3 production was 28,756 in Q2, which is on average only 2212 vehicles per week. It seems that they have been able to pull up the production rate to above 5000 only in the very last week. Nevertheless that's an astonishing achievement.

<comment><USER11> Yes, but as far as I know that was the stated goal.

From the May 2nd financial results letter:

"We continue to target Model 3 production of approximately 5,000 per week in about two months, although our prior experience has demonstrated the difficulty of accurately forecasting specific production rates at specific points in time because of the exponential nature of the ramp."

[http://ir.tesla.com/static- files/1b240f1e-b519-4b40-b14b-fea...](http://ir.tesla.com/static- files/1b240f1e-b519-4b40-b14b-fea44698c3af)

<comment><USER17> 5000 per week also was Musks prediction for december 2017: [https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/881757617416056832](https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/881757617416056832)

<comment><USER18> The goal wasn't 5000 per week, it was 20000 per month. They have achieved the former but not the latter. This requires actually sustaining the production rate which has so far been highly violate with lots of temporary total shutdowns for retooling.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Some other threads:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17436604](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17436604)

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17437408](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17437408)

</comment><comment><USER20> Kudos to Tesla. I've been a somewhat vocal skeptic on a lot of things Tesla- related, and this is still two quarters later than initially promised, but I'm still impressed.

It's been hard to tell from the outside whether "late" just meant "we underestimated this, so we're late", or if it meant "we underestimated this so badly we'll never get there." Even when I started to believe it would just be a matter of time, I was concerned that there wouldn't be enough capital to get here. But flamethrowers or whatever got us here, and I'm impressed.

<comment><USER21> Flamethrowers were Boring Company. Roadster 2 and Semi reservations probably helped, though.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> When is Tesla's quarterly call? Anyone knows their dial code. Because this is going to get interesting and I really want to listen to the live call.

<comment><USER23> Tesla does a live webcast of these calls on their investor relations site at [http://ir.tesla.com/](http://ir.tesla.com/)

The next quarterly update will be sometime early August.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> I am pleasantly surprised. Did not expect Tesla to reach that goal before at least October. Great job Team Tesla. Congratulations. With that aside, it's going to be even more challenging maintaining the pace.

</comment><comment><USER25> I'm surprised how small the production team is (judging only by the picture). For some reason I expected there to be much more people.

</comment><comment><USER26> I always find the forced PR photos a bit strange, is this normal for a lot of companies across the pond?

<comment><USER27> In the US Army, they'd make us pose for shoots like this after something we jokingly called "Mandatory Fun". You can come to this totally optional event to promote $SOMETHING this weekend, and if you do, you get the day off Monday. If you don't, you get to scrub the halls, wax the floors, and inspect the vehicles at the motorpool.

It was optional "technically", but mandatory in reality.

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> It's a great day to be a shareholder and owner. :)

<comment><USER29> I agree, as an owner of a total market index fund.</comment></comment>


Wire Chat App is now actually close-sourced - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/caura/wire/issues/10 <comment><USER2> I've used the same Wire's repo (wireapp one). also agree that their code practices are good ones. I never quite dug that deep though (we are a large company and decided to build our own chat), so can't comment on the bulk of the issue. Sounds like a major pain.</comment>


Ask HN: A different approach to ending Patent Trolls - <AUTHOR>

I know patent trolls are a hot topic on the internet right now, and there are really great initiatives like http://fixpatents.org/ that are taking the fight right to the government, but it seems like things rarely (or too slowly) get fixed when the government is involved. I've been trying to think of a different way of approaching the problem. HTML 5 has badges you can put on your site pledging that you support a forward thinking web (http://www.w3.org/html/logo/). Patagonia created "1% for the Planet" (http://onepercentfortheplanet.org/) publicly pledging they will donate 1% of their profits to environmental causes.<p>Could it work to approach software patents the same way? Maybe a public pledge or badge on your startup's site saying that you will never participate in patent trolling. If you put the badge on your site, you will be listed on a central site of all awesome companies making the pledge. If you make the pledge and then go back on your word, then the people of the internet will publicly shame you. What does HN think? <comment><USER2> Twitter has made this announcement:[https://blog.twitter.com/2012/introducing- innovators-patent-...](https://blog.twitter.com/2012/introducing-innovators- patent-agreement)

I haven't seen too many others following suit.

My guess is it's similar to putting land development rights into an environmental conservancy -- if binding on a company, it impacts its valuation.

<comment><AUTHOR> Ah, that's pretty cool. When I worked at Zappos/Amazon they had a similar approach to patents. They patented a lot of our code, but promised to only use it for defensive purposes. Which makes sense because we got sued a lot.</comment></comment>