Apple Is Selling a $200 Book of Pictures - <AUTHOR> https://www.apple.com/shop/product/MLXF2LL/A/designed-by-apple-in-california-102-x-128-inches?fnode=e3dab1ef62269dc4b92a00d07ea341796a9507b1d97ea1e182a2f925ac703bc3d815ea840144ec7cc2f2c08670656b73a5a0eaf9284d09194cedb3721fed11d8d9916e125d0c8fb17d5f96bb2be822b03bcecf683d2c1e65b1156d2d5eccd8d2 <comment><USER2> It's art though right? I mean, the last known sale of Matthew Barney's Cremaster 2 DVD sold for US$571,000 in 2007 - secondhand.

So what?

</comment><comment><USER3> and the 13x16 is $299.00

</comment><comment><USER4> [2016]</comment>


Rayton Solar has crowdfunded almost $3M. What are the risks? - <AUTHOR> https://www.startengine.com/startup/rayton-solar <comment><AUTHOR> My brother sent me a link to this crowdfunding campaign. It's intriguing that I might be able to invest in something like this at such an early stage. As far as the science goes, it feels like it could be a solid investment, and if they can fine tune the process, surely there could be other uses for thin sheets of silicon outside of just solar panels (vapor barriers? semiconductors?).

As for the financial side of things, I'm pretty clueless. Surely it's somewhat risky, but I don't really understand what those risks are. What do you think?</comment>


What do our customers think of us? - <AUTHOR> https://dryeyeshop.com/blogs/news/what-do-our-customers-think-of-us <comment><AUTHOR> A unique view of what customers think online retailers control and how they phrase it. I've never seen a retailer publish all unedited comments sent by customers - good and bad.</comment>


This just makes me sad that someone hasn't made a Cryptonomicon trilogy - <AUTHOR> http://trailers.apple.com/trailers/focus_features/blacksea/

<comment><AUTHOR> seriously -- what's up with Enoch Root? [http://www.ibiblio.org/java/cryptonomicon.html](http://www.ibiblio.org/java/cryptonomicon.html)</comment>


Homeland Security considering weaponized drones to immobilize targets - <AUTHOR> http://blog.syracuse.com/opinion/2013/07/homeland_security_has_consider.html

<comment><USER2> I believe anyone who thinks they will _not_ do this if they think they can get away with it (like they did with all the mass spying) is really, really naive.</comment>


Debian and Tor Services Available as Onion Services - <AUTHOR> https://bits.debian.org/2016/08/debian-and-tor-services-available-as-onion-services.html <comment><USER2> Normally, you need the apt module for Tor transport... But what if you wanted to be able to run .onion addresses from any program?

I wrote this: [https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/doc/LinuxDNSre...](https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/doc/LinuxDNSresolverForOnions)

I wanted to be able to send data to Tor onion endpoints within my code, mixed with regular IP or DNS addresses. This modification allows the Linux system resolver handle Onions as it would any other address.

<comment><USER3> Be careful with this if you're expecting anonymity though. The Tor browser does a lot of work trying to prevent identifying information from being sent to the other side. If you run an arbitrary protocol over Tor without any of that, it's much easier for the server to fingerprint the client.

<comment><USER2> Absolutely. I highlighted this as one of the warnings in the Howto I made. Any protocol you use _must_ be vetted for security and privacy, if you intend to use Tor for those purposes.

My purpose is very different. I wanted to communicate with any machine I owned. Every machine has an Onion hidden service, and every machine can talk to Onions seamlessly.

What this allows is I can code against a [hash].onion, and know that the data goes where I want it. I can run Mosquitto (MQTT database) on one node, and other nodes can publish data to it. It matters not where they are, what networks they reside on, or if I get the "DynDNS, firewall holes, dynamic- static internal IP", and the rest of that junk set up right.

I also use Node-Red, and can use .onion addresses as valid services elsewhere. It allows me the ultimate network flexibility. I think of .onion addresses as being on a "Really Long Ethernet Hub" that only listens to the machine talked to.

EDIT:

> If you run an arbitrary protocol over Tor without any of that, it's much > easier for the server to fingerprint the client.

Agreed. I control both endpoints.

<comment><USER4> Still not sure why would you want to use it like that.

OnionCat with virtual domain names would be better IMHO.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I wish more systems went this way, Arch, Gentoo, Fedora and all BSDs.

</comment><comment><USER6> I wonder if Debian volunteers searching a more friendly tor address?

<comment><USER5> There is very little benefit from such addresses [http://news.netcraft.com/archives/2014/06/25/steam- phishing-...](http://news.netcraft.com/archives/2014/06/25/steam-phishing- attacks-exploiting-look-alike-domain-names.html)

<comment><USER6> I disagree

Domain squatting is even harder on tor, but how am I supposed to know the real Debian is on xyabdjfhkj1345 or xvhdjakeueg12567?

<comment><USER7> If debian generated an onion address like debiandebxwnjx6t.onion (just made that up), how would that help you determine that the .onion address is owned by debian?

All it proves is that someone ran a vanity key/address generator on his GPU for a couple of days to get a nice-looking prefix. I could do the same thing at home and get a different address with the same prefix, and you wouldn't be able to tell the difference without comparing the whole address.

<comment><USER6> You're right, by itself it doesn't

However, with several Debian volunteers they can get a more friendly-looking address. One person alone with a GPU can't compete with that

It's a proof of work (just like bitcoin)

<comment><USER8> One person with a botnet can compete

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I wonder why I2P service/protocol is not as popular as Tor?

Why would debian not host their sites on I2P

<comment><USER4> It's less popular for several reasons:

* Tor heavily used to get some anonymity in big internet.

* Tor have bundle browser solution that anyone can use.

* I2P is Java and not everyone know there is C++ client.

* I2P also audited less have more undergoing changes.

While I2P can be used to do exactly same things as Tor it's just not goal of project.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> We also need reproducible build to finally cover most of debian ...

<comment><USER11> [https://tests.reproducible- builds.org/debian/reproducible.ht...](https://tests.reproducible- builds.org/debian/reproducible.html)

Isn't >80% most of Debian?

<comment><AUTHOR> 80% is misleading, since there are still variations that are missing, like user shells, build paths and filesystems (disorderfs isn't used yet).

[https://tests.reproducible- builds.org/index_variations.html](https://tests.reproducible- builds.org/index_variations.html)

<comment><USER11> Sure, but variations are there so the reproducible builds are more robust and can be done natively. It doesn't mean that you can't reproduce these packages, just stick to the standard build paths, filesystems, etc...

Also, I see that user login shell is varied.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Mysterious US Helicopter Used in Bin Laden Raid - <AUTHOR> http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011/05/aviation-geeks-scramble-to-i-d-osama-raids-mystery-copter/ <comment><USER2> How many helicopters and of what kind would it take to evacuate 22 people/bodies plus the SEALs and pilots? Certainly more than a single remaining Blackhawk.

I wonder if the inadvertent tweeter might have been hearing the support copters coming in after the initial raid to pick up the prisoners/crew and that the explosions were also after the fact--the post-raid destruction of the downed helicopter.

I suspect that as the story is progressively refined, we'll learn that rather than being a flawless triumph, the actual reason for success was the depth of backup planning and redundant systems.

This will be ultimately be a story that becomes a lesson in how the military learns from its failures (Operation Eagle Claw: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Eagle_Claw> and the Rattle of Mogadishu aka Black Hawk Down: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Mogadishu_(1993)>) rather than from its successes.

<comment><USER3> There were a total of 4 helicopters (including the Chinook), from what I've read. Two went in, while two others hovered nearby. Apparently, Obama himself asked them to have a backup plan: [http://swampland.time.com/2011/05/03/obama- pushed-for-fight-...](http://swampland.time.com/2011/05/03/obama-pushed-for- fight-your-way-out-option-in-bin-laden-raid/)

<comment><USER4> _Obama himself asked them to have a backup plan: [blah blah url]_

Do you really think that the US Navy Seals don't bother to think "Hey maybe we should have a backup plan for this hugely important and very risky mission" unless the President comes up with the idea?

The linked article does smell a bit like the President trying to insert himself into the story.

 _Mr Burns: You, Strawberry, hit a home run!

Daryl Strawberry: Okay skip! (hits a home run)

Mr Burns: I told him to do that.

Smithers: Brilliant strategy, sir._

<comment><USER5> The President might have known something the Seals didn't about the possibility of resistance from the Pakistani military. Other folks pointed out that forty minutes was plenty of time for Pakistan to scramble jets, etc., and much has been made of the precarious nature of power in the Pakistani military. Perhaps Obama had intelligence that the incursion might provoke a group of Pakistani military officers to defy their government's orders and launch an armed response, possibly because of the location of the strike, or possibly as a prelude to a coup. He wouldn't necessarily have shared that with the SEAL team, he would have just told them to be prepared to "fight their way out" if necessary.

<comment><USER4> Perhaps this, perhaps that, or perhaps like any other politician Obama pushes himself into the limelight when things go well and blames someone else when things go badly. I don't hold it too far against him because it's what all politicians do, but I reserve the right to call him out on it too.

* Perhaps Obama had intelligence that the incursion might provoke a group of Pakistani military officers to defy their government's orders and launch an armed response, possibly because of the location of the strike, or possibly as a prelude to a coup. He wouldn't necessarily have shared that with the SEAL team, he would have just told them to be prepared to "fight their way out" if necessary.*

The operation was under the direct control of the CIA, and I think we can assume the CIA has just as much intelligence knowledge as the White House does.

And now personally, if I had reason to believe that men under my command were _likely_ to be entering into actual hostile contact with the military of the sixth largest country in the world (and a nuclear power to boot) then I'd probably actually have shared that information with them. They're big boys, they can handle it, and if they see the Pakistani Army showing up then they need to know whether they're allowed to shoot.

<comment><USER5> _And now personally, if I had reason to believe that men under my command were likely to be entering into actual hostile contact with the military of the sixth largest country in the world (and a nuclear power to boot) then I'd probably actually have shared that information with them._

When he (purportedly) said "fight your way out," who else could he have been talking about fighting? I think it's safe to assume they got a lot more specific than speculating about fighting undefined hypothetical resistance that might happen to materialize outside this compound in the middle of Pakistan.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> What's amazing to me, especially after seeing these few photos of wreckage, is that everybody inside got away alive, according to the Pentagon. Intuitively, I've always thought that any helicopter crash = death sentence. Clearly, that's not true.

<comment><USER7> Odds are the helicopter hit a tail rotor on a fence or some such thing, and had a relatively uneventful landing, even though it was too damaged to be used for extraction.

Helicopters can quite easily land if they lose power, etc., through a process called autorotation.

It was the explosive charges that were set and detonated before the team left that did the vast majority of the damage.

<comment><USER8> I landed my AH-64 Longbow using autorotation many times in the late-90s Janes simulator. I really wish somebody would come out with a good battle helicopter sim again.

<comment><USER9> DCS Black Shark is an excellent PC sim. Recommended, plus available on Steam too.

<http://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/series/black_shark/>

(Also, check out the A-10 sim too - it's from work they did with the US National Guard Air wing as a training simulator).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> It's a stealth optimized MH-60. Nothing to see here, really.

<comment><USER10> Yes.

Given the number of remains, it appears to be trivial. If it wasn't they'd clean them up not just blow them up.

They'd blow it up in a hostile country such as Serbia where the remains of F-117 were transported to China afterward and the present Chinese stealth technology is a result of reverse engineering of those remains. F-117 was 20 years old in 1999 - and if this helicopter was so new and so secret that nobody has seen it before, they'd go pick it up as Pakistan is a "friendly" state.

It's just a standard transport helicopter (like MH-60 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sikorsky_UH-60_Black_Hawk>) modified for special forces to have less of a radar cross-section. For example, they put rotor screws under a plate.

It's not so important for a helicopter to be stealth - if the pilot has NVG, it can fly during the day right over the trees, and few radars can pick it up, unless it accidentally flies over (in the radius of about 8km) of a mobile surface-to-air missile launcher. And they know where these are: JSTARS tells them where the sources of radiation are, and they set their path around those. They also avoided all towns where someone would detect them based on noise and make a phone call, or, god forbid, tweet.

<comment><USER11> "They also avoided all towns where someone would detect them based on noise and make a phone call, or, god forbid, tweet."

you mean like this? -> <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2505610>

edit: changed link. did not realise i was linking to a fake hacker news site.

<comment><USER12> It's a little bit tough to avoid the town that contains your target.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Does anyone else think the helicopter in the photo looks too small to be anything but a drone?

<comment><USER14> "What the hell's this? A helicopter for ants?"

Yeah, part of the back, maybe ECM detail, looks like it should be the front, and it crossed my mind it might be a drone.

But yeah, just the back part.

<comment><USER15> The hub looks to serve the same purpose as the ducting around the tail rotor in the canceled Comanche project. It serves to reduce interaction between the main rotor and the tail rotor, thereby reducing the amount of noise the helicopter makes.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> I don't know anything about aviation..but I did see a show years ago about a new prototype US helicopter...and the first image on Wired, to me, 100% reminded me of it. Googling, I'm sure what I'm talking about is the RAH-66 Comanche.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing/Sikorsky_RAH-66_Comanche>

Do a google images search, the thing looks [relatively] identical.

<comment><USER17> The tail rotor is noting like the shielded one on the Comanche: [http://sitelife.aviationweek.com/ver1.0/Content/images/store...](http://sitelife.aviationweek.com/ver1.0/Content/images/store/0/14/8065b635-752f-4a63-ae97-84beaff28a19.Full.jpg)

<comment><USER18> Indeed it's more like this:

[http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/attachment.php?attachme...](http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=155097)

via:

[http://www.pprune.org/military-aircrew/450526-stealth- uh60-u...](http://www.pprune.org/military-aircrew/450526-stealth-uh60-used- obl-raid-2.html)

Potential forward sweep of stabilizer, "coolie hat" on the rotor.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> according to the guy that was live tweeting the event.. it wasn't that quiet

<comment><USER17> More likely Radar and IR stealth than silenced. It was the trip in from Afghanistan they concealed. By the time they were over Abbottabad it was too late to do anything about it.

<comment><USER20> This brings up another good question. Can a helicopter really fly all across Pakistan and back to an aircraft carrier?

Could they even make it to Afghanistan? I was under the impression that helicopters don't exactly have a whole lot of range

<comment><USER17> I assumed they returned to Afghanistan and transfered the body to a plane.

<comment><USER21> They did. Some of the supposed pictures of Osama are from in the hanger at the Afghanistan airfield.

<comment><USER4> That's also where (as I understand it) they did all the DNA testing and so forth. The final stage in which the body was flown to the aircraft carrier was just for disposal (a decision I think was sensible -- rather than allowing "the body" to become a rallying issue for terrorists it's better just to dump it in the sea before anyone knows you've got it).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> It's incredible that I tried to search the type of helicopter used via Google without success. All results where about the crash not the type of helicopter.

Few hours later the answer came via Hacker News.

</comment><comment><USER23> From the Army Times article:

That crash landing might have been caused by a phenomenon known as "settling with power," which occurs when a helicopter descends too quickly because its rotors cannot get the lift required from the turbulent air of their own downwash. "It's hard to settle with power in a Black Hawk, but then again, if they were using one of these [low-observable helicopters], working at max gross weight, it's certainly plausible that they could have because they would have been flying so heavy," the retired special operations aviator said, noting that low-observable modifications added "several hundred pounds" to the weight of the MH-60, which already weighs about 500 to 1000 pounds more than a regular UH-60 Black Hawk.

[http://www.armytimes.com/news/2011/05/army-mission- helocopte...](http://www.armytimes.com/news/2011/05/army-mission-helocopter- was-secret-stealth-black-hawk-050411/)

<comment><USER24> A WSJ article stated that the high walls around the compound induced a vortex ring effect. [http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405274870456940457629...](http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704569404576299500647391240.html) In a normal landing the rotor downwash would spread out across the ground but in this case the walls channeled the moving air back up and into the rotor again, causing it to lose lift. Of course I don't know whether that's true or not, but it seems plausible. [https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Vortex_ring#V...](https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Vortex_ring#Vortex_ring_effect_in_helicopters)

<comment><USER25> Given the level of skill, training and experience a pilot would need to be allowed to fly that thing, and after rehearsing the raid in a life size replica of the compound - I think it's unlikely.

Even doing a PPL you learn about the effects of vortexes, wind shear, turbine wash etc. And these guys have many, many, many orders of magnitude more training than that.

More likely some combination of weight, altitude, excess speed... but I guess we'll never know.

<comment><USER26> Apart from the obvious, such as landing under fire, dealing with the effects of the other helicopter in a confined area, or simply pilot fatigue after the fast, low flight to get to the compound, it could be some freak effect like that.

Flying deep into Pakistan undetected and landing in Bin Ladin's backyard is a hell of a trick, no ordinary pilot could do that.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> stop posting bin-ladin news! this is HACKER news, not ANY news!

</comment><comment><USER28> Sorry for being off topic, but I'm really glad none of the troops suffered casualty or injuries. These guys also didn't lose their cool, granted they are the seals bit still.

</comment><comment><USER29> I want to believe

</comment><comment><USER30> After seeing those digital mock-ups, I remembered seeing this helicopter before: <http://j.mp/k57dFf>

<comment><USER31> I don't get why people use short URLs. Yours isn't working already. And I could never know where the link is taking me. Maybe it will take me to your honeypot.

<comment><USER32> It leads to this picture: <http://imgur.com/s0rzv> which is of Airwolf.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> Cool, more $$$ down the drain just to kill one man in someone else's country. Good stuff.

It looks like an oversized UAV more than a helicopter.

I also like how computer geeks ignore the politics of the situation and get distracted by shiny things ;p

<comment><USER34> 1) That is the tail rotor, not a fuselage... 2) Even if that were the fuselage of a UAV, there wouldn't be anything particularly "oversized" about it. UAVs are pretty big. 3) That is rather matte, not really shiny at all.

</comment></comment><comment><USER35> Dr. Steve R. Pieczenik said yesterday that Osama Bin Laden died in 2001 and that he was prepared to testify in front of a grand jury (see interview for details <http://goo.gl/PaMRa>).

Pieczenik is on the Council on Foreign Relations and served as the Deputy Assistant Secretary of State under three different administrations, Nixon, Ford and Carter, while also working under Reagan and Bush senior, and still works as a consultant for the Department of Defense. He is a former US Navy Captain, and he went through Harvard Medical School while he simultaneously completed a PhD at MIT.

<comment><USER34> Testifying in front of a grand jury is boring. Providing _evidence_ is interesting.

<comment><USER35> Listen to the hour-long interview where he provides details.

<comment><USER36> I'd rather not waste an hour of my life listening to a conspiracy theorist.

<comment><USER28> It's not good to be dismissing unpopular ideas, a very popular idea before Iraq invasion was ....(you know the story). I'm just saying listening to both sides of the argument before conclusive making up ones mind is a good idea. I have not seen the said video and am not endorsing it, just commenting on the idea of openness, with all due respect. :-)

<comment><USER4> This particular dumb theory can be easily disproved: if the US government really _were_ involved in some dumb-ass scheme to kill Bin Laden in 2001 and then not bother to tell anyone about it for nearly ten years (even, say, circa 2004 when Mr Bush _really_ would have liked to have that for his re-election campaign) then they'd also be supervillainish enough to kill this guy for talking about it.

Sometimes it's not good to dismiss "unpopular" ideas, but it usually is a good idea to (provisionally) dismiss dumbass ideas which don't appear to make sense and for which there isn't any damn evidence.

<comment><USER28> Think you missed my point my man, you are talking about analyzing and then dismissing the idea (totally agree and cool), I am speaking of people who dismiss prior to analysis just because the idea is unpopular and not a part of the mainstream ideology. Hope this makes sense.

<comment><USER4> Well for a start it's not about "ideology". Ideology is about the way the world _should_ be, and it's a matter on which the reasonable people of the world can and should disagree.

The date of bin Laden's death (if indeed he is dead, if indeed he ever existed) is a fact-of-the-matter thing; it's either one way or it's another way, and there shouldn't be much room for reasonable people to disagree at all. Reasonable people may be _uncertain_ on such matters, but they should all share similar degrees of uncertainty.

<comment><USER28> I am not sure why you insist on missing my point repeatedly when I have clearly stated right from that start that "I have not seen the said video and am not endorsing it". My point was about attitude not the video, again in even simpler language:

Dismiss because everybody says so without giving any thought = Bad. Dismiss after thinking about it and looking into it = Good.

Ironically, I should dismiss your response because you're repeatedly beating the same dead horse. ;)

<comment><USER4> _Dismiss because everybody says so without giving any thought = Bad. Dismiss after thinking about it and looking into it = Good._

So whom, exactly, are you accusing of dismissing it without giving it any thought?

<comment><USER28> I am happy you finally get what I've been trying to say Mr.3. And no, I'm not getting into it again with you :-) (it's a public forum, look it up). It's not that serious anyway. Happy Cinco! :)</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Anonymous' response to Sony PSN Hack - <AUTHOR> http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/05/04/973151/-Anonymous,-Sony,-and-the-rule-of-law

<comment><USER2> Anyone can write a blog post as "anonymous". Anyone can sign their action as "anonymous". This theoretical group has no known boundaries or members, so is any "Press Release" from them really worth distributing?

<comment><USER3> They are not "anonymous"... the are "Anonymous" (a proper name) or as the say in the post Anonymous Enterprises LLC (Bermuda) :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Well written, but a little out of proportion. I doubt any one would have taken these allegations seriously.

<comment><AUTHOR> Of course, however its the public image that counts, and if Anonymous don't defend themselves, people will just believe the lies

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> > Anonymous Enterprises LLC

?</comment>


Yes, we're being bought by Microsoft - <AUTHOR> https://mojang.com/2014/09/yes-were-being-bought-by-microsoft/ <comment><USER2> For people without children, here are some quick notes on the situation in kiddieland:

\- My son is 7. We bought iPad edition first, shelled some more for PC edition last month, and I'm sure I'll be forced to buy more in the future if MS puts a price tag on it.

\- I spend a fair amount of time during weekends for deciphering the modding world, trying to find something called CraftBukkit, learning to mod, finding launchers, finding maps shown on some Youtube video etc. because the son is mad about it. BUT, he's spending hours trying to learn JS (ScriptCraft on Bukkit) just to make an exploding arrow. I truly believe this is analogous to C64 days back then.

\- School started today, he's moved to another school this year. The first thing he asked to his news friends was about Minecraft. Then he advertised how PC version is superior to the one on iPad.

\- My 2 yo daughter knows what Minecraft is, tells she'll play Minecraft when she grows up.

\- While we were shopping for school supplies last week, saw two people asking for Minecraft licensed school bags for their kids.

\- We live in Turkey.

<comment><USER3> My children (ages 6 through 10) had a similar experience to what you described in your comment.

It pretty much sums up why we've banned Minecraft from our house.

EDIT, To clarify:

I fully encourage them to learn to code. We let them use Scratch and write love2d games.

I've banned it from our house because we want them to build real things that they can actually use. We want them to learn how to build furniture and tree houses and real circuits.

I banned it because we want them to live in the real world.

EDIT 2:

Don't be shy, downvote me if you disagree. It helps me to know just how far off my perspective on life is from that of the average HN visitor. Which in turns helps me to know whether I should just reading/writing comments.

<comment><USER4> A few scattered thoughts about the parent comment's statements:

1) Your first edit makes it sound like you value hardware over software. I don't think that is your intent, but it confused me for a bit.

2) The implied definition of "the real world" scares me. It seems to be a common cultural thread. It creates instances like this, where parents dismiss interactions in video games as less real than those in flesh and blood. But, in its extremes, it also creates a culture where threatening someone on social media or in game chat is ok, because "it is not real". It creates a weird dichotomy where making a new friend at a bar is somehow better than making a friend online. A lot of pop culture media is currently struggling with the narrow pre-internet definition of the real world. I think that this is going to be an ongoing issue as our lives become more digital.

3) Based on your other comments below, it sounds like, if you had been my parents, you would have banned everything I loved for my entire childhood. My childhood was defined by a series of obsessions up until I graduated high school. A large portion of my early life can be summed up by Legos, Power Rangers, GI Joe, Sonic the Hedgehog, Scooby Doo, Dragon Ball Z, anime, and live theater (think Shakespeare). None of those things have any direct real world application, but they did give me a series of common frameworks for social interaction. "Oh you liked Scooby Doo when you were a kid? Me too!"

4) Based on Edit 2, I would downvote you, but I don't think that is the purpose of downvoting. I don't favor downvoting items that are adding to a discussion just because I disagree with them. Instead downvotes should be reserved for posts that are off topic (to the point of attempting to derail a discussion), incendiary, etc.

<comment><USER3> 1) It's more of a distinction between the virtual world and the physical world. My household values the physical world much more. Call me old- fashioned, but I take my notes on a pen and pocket notebook, rather than an iPhone or text editor or todo-app.

2) I used that phrase out of habit. I meant the physical world as opposed to the virtual world. But even though they're both "real", there are very important differences.

3) Yeah, I probably would have.

4) The fact that there is no official clear purpose for downvoting implies it's up to the community to decide. Which is actually a really cool social experiment on their end, but in practice it's just utterly stupid, and I'm really sick of it.

<comment><USER5> You deny your children's autonomy because you wish to impose your values on them.

I find that deeply disturbing.

Your choice to ban a fun relaxing game because your children enjoyed it is as weird to me as people who ban rock music because SATANIC SUBLIMINAL MESSAGES or people who ban Elvis Presley because JUNGLE MUSIC or the Scottish cult who banned calculators not because they wanted to improve mental math but because SATAN TALKS TO YOU THROUGH SCREENS.

Children have obsessions - see lists of dinosaurs for one example. And of course they're competive - "zx spectrum is much better than vic 20". It's probably a good idea to remind them that they're not infallible and to encourage a few other interests.

But, your children your choice, I guess.

<comment><USER6> My wife and I are planning to have children soon. We have thought about this heavily and have considered a non-digital household at least until they are 9 or 10 specifically so we can encourage them to express their individuality. This isn't an easy choice: it is much easier to entertain a kid with an iPad than with a box of Lego's.

My problem isn't so much that digital devices can't be used creatively (we know they can), just that they are too easy for kids to slip into deep passive consumption modes (like say TV).

<comment><USER7> I'll just point out that a large percentage of my kids' screen time is taken up using the iPads to look up lego instructions online.

<comment><USER6> That is reassuring. I'm really ok with them having access after early childhood.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> That's 2.5 Instagrams, or 0.33 Nokias. What do you feel, realistic, too much, too little?

Personally I feel this makes (much) more sense than instagram, these guys have a very loyal following, a tremendously strong product and actually make money.

Congratulations to everybody on the selling side in this deal, too bad it had to be Microsoft but with amounts like that there are not too many companies on the acquiring side.

Does anyone know if this was stock / cash / a mix?

edit: this Microsoft - Mojang deal will do more to get people into (games) programming than a million $ adspend by codecademy would

edit2: right now (16:43 my time) microjang.com is still free

Wonder how long it will take before that is a registered domain.

edit: microjang.com is now no longer free.

       Registrant:
          Microjang Development (DR is US)
          PO Box 100439
          NY, NY 10163-4668
          US (UNITED STATES)

<comment><USER9> It feels pretty reasonable to me, unless you think that it's a flash-in-a-pan that will decline fairly soon. If you think it's a franchise brand that will either hold steady or grow, then it's not really a huge purchase price. Mojang has profits of somewhere around $100-150m on revenues of $300-400m, so this values them at 15-25x profits, or 6-9x revenues, both of which are lower than most recent major tech purchases (e.g. Google paid something like 10-12x revenues for Nest). Heck, a 15-25 P/E ratio isn't even out-of-line for an established tech company without huge growth expectations (Intel and Microsoft both trade around 20).

The terms seem pretty generous, though, a completely clean buyout with no requirement that the principals stay for even a little bit.

<comment><USER8> Is it a cash deal or a stock deal or both? The release mentions 'dollars' which makes it seem this is an all cash deal. That would be quite something, but since there is no lock-up for the founders it makes good sense that it would be just a cash deal.

<comment><USER10> For Microsoft stock?

I think it doesn't matter that much. Microsoft stock is notoriously stable for tech stocks, so the difference between an all cash deal and an all stock deal wouldn't be too big after, say, a year or something.

Notch also probably wasn't too pressured to make the sale, so the terms would be understandably in his favor.

<comment><USER8> I think it would matter a great deal.

If an opportunity to re-invest came along in that window then you'd miss out, microsoft stock is relatively stable but has seen both 'up', 'down' and 'neutral' years where up and down were on the order of 20 to 30%.

On top of that, cash is king, simply put: there is absolutely no uncertainty at all.

Given the option between x in cash and x in stock or a mix or stock and cash you should _always_ go for the cash.

And something a bit less than x is probably still preferable in cash.

<comment><USER11> Yes, heaven forbid the 2.5B drops down to 1.75B. They'll have to move to the poor house, for sure.

<comment><USER8> Let me give you a hint: if you ever are in the position to do a major exit get yourself a tax lawyer. Or you indeed might find yourself in the poorhouse after all.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> There goes all hope of Minecraft being released as open source.

There was a blog post from several years ago from Notch saying that after he made enough money with the game, he would "probably clean it up and release it as open source". Oh well.

Instead now we have the DMCA-infighting and an atrocious modding community that hosts their binaries on shady file upload sites, their "project page" in a forum thread, make their measly money from adfly-like sites and have never heard of Github.

So much wasted potential. Anyhow, congratulations Microsoft.

<comment><USER13> To be honest, despite what Notch said _several years ago_ I don't think it was ever well on its way to being open-sourced. Any hope that he would "clean it up" vanished when he lost interest in taking active part in development and passed it on. Not to mention that they've been working on a public modding API for years that never took off.

> Instead now we have the DMCA-infighting and an atrocious modding community > that hosts their source code on shady file upload sites, make their measly > money from adfly-like sites and have never heard of Github.

Couldn't agree more, but it's more of a consequence of most modders being new and inexperienced developers and kids. Some of the bigger and more professional modding projects like Bukkit are already hosted on GitHub [0], so I wouldn't blame it on just being closed source. It's not guaranteed that it would be that much better, though it might be because that way a lot more existing developers might feel like contributing.

[0] [https://github.com/Bukkit/Bukkit](https://github.com/Bukkit/Bukkit)

<comment><USER12> Bukkit is possibly the only shred of sanity in the Minecraft world. I know its original developer (Nathan Adams) and he is absolutely top-notch (no pun intended) and deserves every bit of success he had with Bukkit and later with Mojang - he now works there.

So no, bukkit isn't the problem. The problem is all the bukkit mods, and the situation between bukkit and mojang. Urgh.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I have been trying to understand why Microsoft would buy Minecraft. Even though Minecraft is really important, and wildly successful, but the price tag for a game studio with one successful game is rather odd, considering it is unlikely Minecraft will sell millions of copies more (it is already the most sold game ever made). This is a long shot, but it may explain it:

If Microsoft is trying to build its own Steam competitor (which given Valve's current strategy to make Linux an alternative gaming platform to Windows, makes sense), then Minecraft is the perfect acquisition to start it up, for a number of reasons. It is the best selling video game of all time, with over 15 million copies sold for the PC (54 million copies across all platforms), and it has over 100 million accounts registered. It is possibly the only successful indie game that has never integrated with Steam, and that has a very young userbase (based on my experience) which, given their ages, probably isn't part of Steam's userbase. All of these aspects make it a great strategic acquisition if Microsoft wants to make a new and successful game marketplace and platform for Windows.

Anyone else has any other idea why the 2.5 billion price tag?

<comment><USER15> Look at what Microsoft was able to do with Bungie. They took Bungie, who was effectively a one-hit shop, and milked the Halo IP for the better part of 10 years. Hell, they were centimeters from spinning it into a Hollywood blockbuster.

This is the exact same play and frankly, they're pretty good at it. They're going to turn the Minecraft franchise into a Xbox/Windows exclusive. Obviously that's going to piss off a lot of folks, but it's still going to result in a ton of XBox sales - at least as many as Halo was responsible for. They'll iterate on this for the next 10 years and my guess is they'll do it quite successfully.

<comment><USER14> The thing is that what makes Minecraft strong is its community, unlike Halo. You won't see Minecraft succeeding at being Windows exclusive, or by making Minecraft 2, 3 or 4. There is a plethora of community mods made and being made for MC, you won't see that happening for any sequel, not at the same level.

<comment><USER15> I don't think that's true - at least not for children.

My kids are fairly young, but both of them play Minecraft on the Xbox purely for the creative outlet. They've only played a few times with other kids on Xbox live.

I suspect as they grow older they'll be more interested in online multiplayer. However, like most parents, I haven't figured out how to let that happen and still shelter them from the frothing insanity I used to regularly encounter when I'd play Halo back in the day.

<comment><USER16> Private servers, with whitelists. Because the other players are not anonymous, they're less likely to behave poorly. As the admin, you can ban them, and either call their parents or let your kids deliver the news in person, much as you could if someone came over and started breaking things in person on a play date.

""" Hi, this is Alice's dad. Mal has been really mean to her when playing on our Minecraft server. It's a shared creative world that Alice, her friends, and cousins have been cooperating to build a city in together. Mal decided it would be fun to destroy most of the city, and cover the rest of it in lava.

This really Alice's feelings, as she and the others have spent a long time building together.

Unless Mal will apologize to Alice and the rest of their friends, we aren't willing to let Mal play with us this way. """

There's probably a better way to give the "your kid's being a jerk to my kid" than what I came up with off the top of my head, of course. I suspect that the rest of your kids' peers would swiftly ostracize griefers, as well.

<comment><USER15> Great idea. Thanks!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Very peculiar seeing this news after Notch was so critical of the OculusVR sale to Facebook.

Seeing as I bought my premium Minecraft account on 8/1/2010, I must be due some sort of equity for supporting him at such an early stage.

edit: Oh, and what do you think will become of the old alpha/beta/release builds? I'm thinking about going ahead and archiving them all in case access to them is revoked. Not sure if I'm being too paranoid, but I much preferred the simpler versions without all the distractions like XP, hunger, and those weird tall black guys.

<comment><USER18>
      Very peculiar seeing this news after Notch was so
      critical of the OculusVR sale to Facebook.

Well, a lot of the criticism of the Oculus sale was because the product seemed so at odds with Facebook's main products and lines of revenue.

Microsoft, on the other hand, has the xbox and has been publishing games since at least the 1990s, maybe the 1980s?

<comment><USER19> Microsoft Flight Simulator 1.00 is from 1982. It's the oldest I know about.

Even QBasic Gorillas is from 1991, and published by IBM. Not Microsoft.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> > He's decided that he doesn't want the responsibility of owning a company of > such global significance

> The founders: Notch, Carl, and Jakob are leaving

Yeah, that's exactly what I suspected when the rumors started. Markus doesn't really want to run a company, so he's cashing out and doing his own thing. Good on him.

<comment><USER21> What I wonder is what Carl and Jeb are going to do though. Do those three have another collective project? Or is it all sunny beaches and martinis? Or a Carl/Jeb project while Notch tinkers away?

<comment><USER22> Jakob =/= Jens

[http://minecraft.gamepedia.com/Jakob_Pors%C3%A9r](http://minecraft.gamepedia.com/Jakob_Pors%C3%A9r)

[http://minecraft.gamepedia.com/Jens_Bergensten](http://minecraft.gamepedia.com/Jens_Bergensten)

<comment><USER21> Haha, I just realized this and came back to see if someone had corrected the mistake. Sure enough :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> I could see this being a huge play for young developers by Microsoft. They have been positioning themselves as a platform agnostic services provider, investing in or purchasing cross platform development frameworks, and opensourcing a lot of their technologies (e.g. C#, .NET, Rosetta, OWIN). Now all they need are developers to adopt their technologies.

Minecraft has a huge modding community and a lot of first time coders are getting into the scene because they love Minecraft. Imagine Microsoft ports Minecraft to C# or possibly C while maintaining full support for all existing platforms. Then go about developing a great API/SDK for modders and making it incredibly easy for anyone to download Visual Studio and the Minecraft SDK.

They just introduced an entire generation of developers to MS technology.

<comment><USER24> Don't forget ASP.NET vNEXT project will run their testing suite against mono as well:)

I made a similar comment. Confirmation bias tells me your on the ball :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> I'm trying, but I just don't see any good coming of this. The comments from Mojang seem incredibly naive, everything is going to change.

First people to make money on this will be lawyers. There's going to be a blizzard of copyright takedown notices going out to every unlicensed (most all) Minecraft merchandise and spinoffs. The offline fan ecosystem is going to get slaughtered.

Mostly I'm just sad for all the kids. They love Minecraft, and this won't end well.

<comment><USER26> Same thing was said when Facebook acquired Oculus Rift. We have yet to see the horrible "downfall" and "messing around" with Oculus by Facebook. I think sometimes people are exaggerating the perceived damage acquisitions cause.

<comment><USER27> They haven't even shipped a product. It's way too early to tell how hands off Facebook is going to be.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> I think this just demonstrates the power of the internet/social networks and an increasingly interconnected world.

Notch creates a small game on his own, improving on Infiniminer, it catches the imagination of an entire generation. Without the internet and social networks this would have never happened. Without this game having a multiplayer mode added (which happened fairly early on) it wouldn't have happened. I wonder what it would be like it Doom was first released into a similar environment but maybe it's a little less universal.

People in their bedrooms recording themselves playing video games speak as loudly, or more loudly than traditional media. PewDiePie has 30 million subscribers - he can make any game just with a mention.

It's interesting now our networks are concentrating and distributing influence, power and wealth. Nothing I could have predicted and I'll enjoy seeing what comes next.

</comment><comment><USER5> Be interesting to see how MS deal with YouTubers.

Shutting down Etho, Yogscast, etc is likely to lead to hordes of 13 year olds _hating_ MS for ever.

Maybe there'll be an MVP programme for YouTubers? </s>

I just hope MS can sort out modding: a sane mod interface would make many people very happy.

<comment><USER29> Why would this lead to those channels shutting down? Did i miss something in the posts?

<comment><USER30> I presume the assumption is that with Microsoft now owning Minecraft (and presumably the copyright over it, among other things), they could leverage that to get videos of Minecraft pulled off of Youtube.

Personally I doubt it extremely, but you never know.

<comment><USER31> Microsoft hasn't done that with any of their other properties in the gaming division. Now Nintendo has quite a few times.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> That Mojang is worth 62.5% of Star Wars is a testament both to Minecraft's value and how much Lucas destroyed Star Wars in the last 20 years.

</comment><comment><USER33> > There's no reason for the development, sales, and support of the PC/Mac, > Xbox 360, Xbox One, PS3, PS4, Vita, iOS, and Android versions of Minecraft > to stop. Of course, Microsoft can't make decisions for other companies or > predict the choices that they might make in the future.

Linux is absent, but I wonder if they lump that in with "PC".

</comment><comment><USER34> I'd feel much better if they would clarify the term PC. As a long time Linux user and Minecraft fan; I'd hope the Linux client continues to thrive similar to the way the Skype client has after the Microsoft acquisition. The fact that the list uses the term PC instead of spelling out "Windows,Linux,etc." worries me some.

<comment><USER35> Unless Microsoft moves the game away from Java to some other language, I don't see how that would happen. The "Linux client" is just the raw .jar that is wrapped by the Minecraft.exe Windows executable. They both pull down the same assets and Java bits and pieces before running the main process.

<comment><USER36> I'm worried about that too - the real issues is the platform-specific "natives" folder.

<comment><USER37> That's mostly lwjgl. So they would need to move away from that before that goes away.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> Holy crap, 2.5 BILLION? And on top of that Notch and Jakob (and Carl) are leaving? I understand Notch's decision (as he has been doing his own thing), but I did not imagine Jakob or Carl leaving.

</comment><comment><USER39> Seems to me like the most sensible tech purchase in a while, PE ratio is a bit more normal and it has massive and sustained traction amongst young people. It remains to be seem if M$FT will fuck it up, but that's a different question.

</comment><comment><USER40> The thing I can't wait to see is how Microsoft intends to recoup the cost in FY2015 like they say they will. From what I read Mojang only made ~$300 million off Minecraft last year, so where is the other $2.2 billion going to come from in the next 9 months? I will be surprised if there isn't a big write-down on this purchase come July.

</comment><comment><USER41> Worse kept secret ever.Good for Notch and everyone else though, a well- deserved cash out and completely understandable. Notch never striked me as a guy who wanted to run a big company like Mojang in the first place.

</comment><comment><USER42> >What about the other editions of Minecraft? Will they stop being developed?

>There's no reason for the development, sales, and support of the PC/Mac, Xbox 360, Xbox One, PS3, PS4, Vita, iOS, and Android versions of Minecraft to stop.

So what is happening to the Linux edition that has been fully supported since day 1?

<comment><USER38> So Linux is not PC anymore?

<comment><USER43> In a Microsoft press release, you have some rights to be circumspect on how 'PC' should be interpreted.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER44> One of the things you need to understand about these deals, and deals like it (Nokia), is that Microsoft is using trapped overseas cash to make these acquisitions.

(If they repatriated this cash to the US instead they would lose something like 40% of it to taxes)

Its a good time to be a foreign (to the US) company.

</comment><comment><USER45> TL;DR: We don't know Microsoft's plans. But don't worry, everything will be fine.

Yeah, right. It's MS we are talking about. MS don't even hide their mindset here:

[http://www.microsoft.com/en- us/news/press/2014/sept14/09-15n...](http://www.microsoft.com/en- us/news/press/2014/sept14/09-15news.aspx)

 _> Minecraft fans are loyal, with nearly 90 percent of paid customers on the PC having signed in within the past 12 months._

That's MS for you. DRM to be expected.

<comment><USER46> Minecraft has DRM. You have to register with Mojang and enter your account in the game to play.

</comment></comment><comment><USER47> > Microsoft acquired Mojang for a smooth 2.5 BILLION dollars.

Impressive.

I hope that Microsoft won't disrupt Minecraft's development (e.g. like they did with Skype, making Linux a third-rate platform - which should not happen since Minecraft's coded in Java).

<comment><USER48> I'm just waiting for them to announce a rewrite in C#.

<comment><USER49> Given how similar the two languages are, I wonder how hard it would be to automate such a translation?

<comment><USER50> On a _language_ level, not that hard (though the result wouldn't be idiomatic in a lot of places). But on a library and API level ... Either you move everything that uses the stdlib to your own standard library excerpt that you maintain for both languages to be identical. Or you find compatible implementations in the other language (or translate Apache Harmony to C# as well). Or you'll deal with all the things that your program could call and emit code that does the same thing in the target language, with more code where standard library functionality differs slightly.

And then there is the problem of external libraries and their APIs. Either translate them as well, or find API-compatible replacements, or find replacements and handle the API differences yourself.

Actually, it comes down to the same thing either way, when considering the standard library just as _a_ library, among the others.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER51> With $2.5 billion, you could buy 3 blocks of gold:

[http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=1+cubic+meter+of+gold](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=1+cubic+meter+of+gold) == $765 million.

</comment><comment><USER52> One thing that needs some explanation is the fact that because Minecraft predates Mojang, at one point Mojang was only licensing the Minecraft trademark from Notch (even though Notch was the majority owner of Mojang). (If you look at the bottom of minecraft.net you will see: "Mojang © 2009-2014. "Minecraft" is a trademark of Notch Development AB")

I hope that MS's lawyers were smart enough to make sure they were actually buying Minecraft and not just a license...

<comment><USER53> I'm sure they were smart enough to know what they were buying and I assume they bought "Minecraft" as well Mojang.

</comment></comment><comment><USER54> $2.5 billion and the founders get to walk. That is impressive. No golden handcuffs.

</comment><comment><USER55> Coming soon, Minecraft 2.0! Exclusive to Xbox One.

<comment><USER8> That's my guess too. Or at least, released first on Xbox.

<comment><USER56> I'd package it for free on Microsoft platforms - the solitaire of the twenty- first century - and keep selling it on other platforms at the current rate.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER57> Well, this will be an interesting ride. At least now Notch will have enough time and money to fund that Psychonauts sequel!

</comment><comment><USER58> A copy of the blog post if the site is down: [https://archive.today/TbJQh](https://archive.today/TbJQh)

Xbox announcement: [http://news.xbox.com/2014/09/games-minecraft-to-join- microso...](http://news.xbox.com/2014/09/games-minecraft-to-join-microsoft)

<comment><USER38> And an image mirror (credit to @duncangeere on Twitter): [http://i.imgur.com/Vcyx0Yx.png](http://i.imgur.com/Vcyx0Yx.png)

</comment></comment><comment><USER59> Notch went from having trouble with Paypal over a poultry $750k to being a Billionaire. That's awesome.

<comment><USER60> How did he run afowl of paypal?

<comment><USER61> paypal tend to be weird

<comment><USER59> I've used PayPal for many years with no problems. While I don't defend what they did to Notch- Any bank would have.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER62> Well, there goes a ton of support for the current Forge-related modding community.

"Take care everybody. rm -rf .minecraft MS free for 20 years. Not starting now!" [https://twitter.com/minecraftcpw](https://twitter.com/minecraftcpw)

</comment><comment><USER33> He's a bit disingenuous.

Don't care about the money at all? Open-source it and let it thrive.

Care about the money a bit, but really want the game to survive? Want the community to have faith in its future? Sell it to Valve for $25m or something on the condition that an API gets built. If it's worth a fraction of its sell price, Valve would have jumped on it.

But instead, it got sold to a company devoted to closed source software and killing its game purchases. And Notch got a fat check for it.

Listen, I can't judge him, and I won't. The game is great, and he built it. But every action in this says it's about money, while none of it shows a care for the game. We'll see how it pans out, but history tells us to be suspicious.

</comment><comment><USER63> I can't see this being a good thing for anyone that cares about Minecraft at all. I wonder how long it'll be before:

1) The older Minecraft binaries suddenly become unavailable for download which will effectively kill many launchers, mods and modpacks

1a) Microsoft aggressively uses DMCA notices to kill off the modding community when the modding community tries to work around #1 by hosting the binaries themselves

2) Microsoft adds unnecessary integration with the win32 API via JNI to Minecraft in order to make it Windows-only despite the fact Minecraft is written in Java

2a) More aggressive DMCA usage to kill off the community attempting to work- around #2

Those are just off the top of my head but I'm sure I can come up with more not too far-fetched scenarios.

<comment><USER64> MS have open projects and code up on github now. I know it's inconsequential but the old rules don't quite apply.

</comment></comment><comment><USER65> I think the most significant part is that the founders at Mojang are leaving:

> The founders: Notch, Carl, and Jakob are leaving. We don't know what they're > planning. It won't be Minecraft-related but it will probably be cool.

</comment><comment><USER66> They'll probably create a market. Right now mods/skins are for the most part being given away for free. I think the obvious thing to do is allow mod creators to sell at a profit if they wish.

</comment><comment><USER67> Is this the first product Microsoft will own that's written in Java? They support it on Azure but I'm not aware of them selling a software product that's based on Java.

<comment><USER68> Interesting, I know it was released on PS4 and Xbox One. I imagine it was re- written in C++ or, at least, a non-Java language. Porting from Xbox to PC seems trivial if Mojang wants to replace their Java version. My guess is that there will be a new Windows version with a sane mod system and written in C# or C++ soon as MS's first hand-out to fans. The broken mod system and the performance issues need to be addressed and getting off Java is the best way to do this.

<comment><USER69> The console/mobile ports were a C++ rewrite, I think. The mobile version and previous-generation console releases definitely were.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER70> Ran some math with friends. Minecraft is from 2009, so it's 5 years old. [https://minecraft.net/stats](https://minecraft.net/stats) says it's sold ~16M pc and mac copies and the front page says at $27. That's about $432M in its entire life [assuming everyone paid full price, which they didn't, there have been loads of deals over the years]. Now that doesn't take into account mobile and console. For android the $7 pocket version is reporting 5M which is $35M. I don't have numbers for iOS and console but I can't really imagine they come close to PC and Mac. And as my friend reminded "Well I'm one if those 5m and I paid $0.10 [for the android version]"

I have a hard time understanding where they get the $2.5B valuation considering its revenues. Another friend thought advertising: " heck, even brand recognition - if they put "Microsoft Minecraft" on the title, I'm sure that's comparable to a few superbowl ads &tc"

So we ran that math.

"the average cost of a 30-second advertisement was around $4 million" \- wikipedia [ [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Bowl_advertising](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Bowl_advertising) ] "Super Bowl XLV, played in 2011, became the most-watched American television program in history with an average audience of 111 million viewers " \- wikipedia. 16.7M people have bought minecraft [mincraft.com/stats pc and mac] + 5M for android. That's still a fraction of a super bowl ad (like 16%) or ~$670,000 value in super bowl advertising terms. Except I suspect anyone actually in advertising would say the value of a finely crafted 30 second video advert massively beats your company name under a game title.

Regardless of quibbles, the advertising potential seems off by many orders of magnitude. also as was mentioned: "Is brand recognition something ms has a problem with?"

So where is the $2.5B coming from? Especially when the gamesutra article [ [http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/225611/Minecraft_studio_M...](http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/225611/Minecraft_studio_Mojang_has_been_bought_by_Microsoft_for_25B.php) ] has them saying they think they can recoup the full value in 1 year!

<comment><USER71> Mojang reported profits last financial year of $128 million (approx, allowing for conversion rates to USD).

Microsoft is trading today on a P/E multiple of 17.6.

That means, in super simplistic terms, that $128 million in extra profit increases Microsoft's market capitalisation by ($128 x 17.6 =) $2.2528 Billion.

Given those profit figures are 6 months old, and the negotiating team would have access to current data, $2.5B is about on the money. Recoup full value != recoup the $2.5B in profit.

</comment></comment><comment><USER72> Personal statement by notch - [http://notch.net/2014/09/im-leaving- mojang/](http://notch.net/2014/09/im-leaving-mojang/)

</comment><comment><USER73> Mojang's new roadmap starting next sprint -

Minecraft kart racer, brawler, side scroller, kinect game, store.minecraft, themed COD maps, Forza tracks, minecraft 2 pre-order beta access

<comment><USER74> I know you're joking, but if anything could get kinect to take off, it might be a really great Minecraft implementation.

<comment><USER73> Agreed

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER75> No one has mentioned merch or licensing yet here.

I would offer an educated guess that Minecraft is/was the single most valuable indie game IP outside of actual game sales.

</comment><comment><USER76> I like this quote from Gruber:

"It's almost impossible to overstate just how big a deal Minecraft is for my son and his friends." [1]

My son is 8, and he and his friends are CONSUMED by the game. I wonder how Microsoft is going to leverage this fact for reaching new users...

[1] [http://daringfireball.net/linked/2014/07/25/minecraft](http://daringfireball.net/linked/2014/07/25/minecraft)

</comment><comment><USER77> > The founders: Notch, Carl, and Jakob are leaving. We don't know what they're > planning. It won't be Minecraft-related but it will probably be cool.

</comment><comment><USER78> I look forward to a post from MS about their plans. I still believe that with a proper modding API minecraft could quadruple its current impact.

</comment><comment><USER79> Very interesting that my 8 and 10 year old sons two weeks ago declared Minecraft boring after 3-4 years of all that they could consume play.

</comment><comment><USER80> Ok, everyone here is bashing Microsoft and making doom and gloom predictions but let us think about what the possible benefits could be:

* A bigger development team that could optimise and speed development of minecraft improvements

* Maybe actually make an official, well-designed, modding API.

I agree that the scope for them screwing it up is huge, but lets try to think at least a little bit positive.

</comment><comment><USER81> >There's no reason for the development, sales, and support of the PC/Mac, Xbox 360, Xbox One, PS3, PS4, Vita, iOS, and Android versions of Minecraft to stop. Of course, Microsoft can't make decisions for other companies or predict the choices that they might make in the future.

Translation: MS hasn't killed them yet, but probably will soon.

<comment><USER82> Just like they killed Skype and Office on iOS and Android?

<comment><USER27> Most opinion seems to be that Skype has consistently gotten worse after the takeover.

<comment><USER82> That's subjective. An objective fact is that it still exists on non-MS platforms, it's interoperable across platforms, and there hasn't been a "Skype 2" to replace it on MS platforms only. If that same holds true for Minecraft, that allays most of the largest fears people have.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER83> I find it amazing that there wasn't a clause tying Notch and the other founders to the company, at least for a transitional period. Usually when you buy a games company it isn't the product you buy so much it's the creative talent. But to counter my own argument, few games companies have a product as strong as Mojang.

<comment><USER84> Notch and the founders haven't been driving Minecraft for awhile now. They hired from the community, and basically let them run things. And really, Notch doesn't have much creative talent w.r.t to content. He did build a nice framework though.

</comment></comment><comment><USER85> I hope they won't ditch cross-platform and go for Windows + Xbox only. Or try to make "Minecraft 2". Damn

<comment><USER86> With Microsoft, I think Minecraft 2 is a given. You didn't expect Disney to NOT release another Star Wars trilogy after acquiring the franchise from Lucas, did you?

<comment><USER87> To be fair Lucas had been planning on the third trilogy since Empire Strikes Back.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER88> Ludumdare is bigger than Y combinator now.

</comment><comment><USER89> I hope that a clr port of minecraft would be out soon. Modding minecraft with java is not an option for me as it is way too verbose. I am trying to use clojure but getting it to work with the gradlew custom buildscripts used by minecraft forge is very painful. Modding minecraft with F# sounds fun....

</comment><comment><USER90> Not clear to me exactly what Microsoft is buying here. As far as I know the development studio Mojang is tiny, maybe a few dozen people. Minecraft itself has a huge community, and made a lot of money, but it's not clear how Microsoft leverages that into anything other than goodwill.

</comment><comment><USER91> So, MineCraft 2 will be an X-Box/Win8 tablet exclusive made by a AAA development studio, I suppose.

</comment><comment><USER92> This makes me sad. I see that there is the potential for good to come from this, I don't think it will happen. At least Jeb is staying. There might have been some pretty big problems for Minecraft if he didn't stay.

</comment><comment><USER93> I keep reading the lego comparisons but i think that's staying a little too inside the box. Block for block, if you will. A better comparison is "Minecraft is the digital equivalent of playing in the sandbox".

</comment><comment><USER94> Perhaps Microsoft has a similar project in the works, and instead of fighting over IP and copyright, they just bought the company. Like Intel or Cisco buying innovators to avoid patent litigation.

<comment><USER92> I very much doubt it. The two companies have been working closely on the Xbox version. I don't think for a second that Microsoft has any intention of making a game similar to Minecraft.

<comment><USER95> Well, Project Spark certainly looks at least inspired by Minecraft.

<comment><USER92> Have you used Project Spark? I don't think it was.

<comment><USER96> Can you elaborate: better/worth? To me it seems impressive, the way remixes remind git forks etc.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER97> Did Minecraft ever take on any VC money? I think not, so this 2.5b is very, very different than the stuff you see here. Not comparable to Instagram in net profit for the founders.

<comment><USER61> 2.5B is a lot of money anyway. But your right. I dont think you need to half it for the founders (+company people)

</comment></comment><comment><USER98> >There's no reason for the development, sales, and support of the PC/Mac, Xbox 360, Xbox One, PS3, PS4, Vita, iOS, and Android

Confirmation that the Linux version has been killed then

<comment><USER99> There never was a Linux "version" , it is built entirely in Java.

<comment><USER98> just because it is java doesn't mean there isn't critical code in there to make it work on Linux. Filepath code for instance is often platform specific in java.

<comment><USER99> It's pretty straight forward to write platform agnostic filepaths in java. More likely Linux is just a subset of "PC" here or this press release was hastily written.

<comment><USER98> I think considering that was something most people were worried about before the purchase it would have been a pertinent time to clarify.

<comment><USER99> Linux installs are unlikely to be more than a couple of percent of their customers. Even so I doubt that they would have a reason to ditch Linux support and keep up support on other platforms unless there was a technical reason to do so.

<comment><USER100> Are you for real? What platform do people use to host the servers?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER101> First thing to do: ditch Java; port the game to C#.

<comment><USER96> That would be awesome! But I doubt they would do it, some people might become unhappy and also it means extra costs.

</comment></comment><comment><USER102> All I can say is that my daughters are so lucky that Games for Windows Live is dead and won't be integrated into Minecraft.

</comment><comment><USER103> Hope they don't decide to bundle it with Windows. My kids will have zero productivity for their whole life.

<comment><USER104> Install some *nix flavour on their computers and problem(s) solved....

</comment></comment><comment><USER105> > _Everything is going to be OK._

Yeah, with $2.5 bil in the bank, I'm sure it will.

</comment><comment><USER106> More power to you, Mojang employees, and may you see many happy returns.

</comment><comment><USER107> Think Microsoft-VR.

Billions in VR-device/console sales secured via platform exclusivity. See Halo(Bungie)/Xbox etc. Games dictate console sales.

Minecraft will actually be a lot more effective. Massively popular among every demographic. Smart move and good timing.

Hats off to New-Microsoft.

</comment><comment><USER108> Well, it was fun while it was lasted. Being on OS X, I'm not going to pretend that Microsoft will support us for any longer than they have to.

</comment><comment><USER109> The skype effect is near

</comment><comment><USER110> Minecraft 2: now with Micro-transactions, Achievements and More!!

<comment><USER111> Minecraft already has achievements.

<comment><USER110> Gross

<comment><USER112> Don't worry, you can ignore them.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER113> Next steps:

\- Replace Mojang/Minecraft account with a Microsoft Account, use it to login

\- Minecraft installer comes with Bing

\- Minecraft ported to C#, Java version discontinued. Name changed to Microsoft Minecraft 1.0

\- Minecraft servers can only be run in Azure, legally

<comment><USER114> >Minecraft servers can only be run in Azure, legally

I wouldn't mind if it would use Azure Cloud CPU farms for some bad-ass physics and other cool stuff. Not very likely though.</comment></comment>


A chip-integrated coherent photonic-phononic memory - T-zex https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-017-00717-y <comment><AUTHOR> tl;dr eli5:

This is research into photonic (optical fiber) links and how to store several different colors (frequencies) in a vibrating material. The vibrating material is still a transmission but because it to 100,000x slower than light, it represents "storage."

(In case you are confused, this research is just about the storage, and not the optical link.)

</comment><comment><USER2> "Controlling and manipulating quanta of coherent acoustic vibrations—phonons—in integrated circuits has recently drawn a lot of attention, since phonons can function as unique links between radiofrequency and optical signals, allow access to quantum regimes and offer advanced signal processing capabilities. Recent approaches based on optomechanical resonators have achieved impressive quality factors allowing for storage of optical signals. However, so far these techniques have been limited in bandwidth and are incompatible with multi-wavelength operation. In this work, we experimentally demonstrate a coherent buffer in an integrated planar optical waveguide by transferring the optical information coherently to an acoustic hypersound wave. Optical information is extracted using the reverse process. These hypersound phonons have similar wavelengths as the optical photons but travel at five orders of magnitude lower velocity. We demonstrate the storage of phase and amplitude of optical information with gigahertz bandwidth and show operation at separate wavelengths with negligible cross-talk."

Definitely don't follow this!

<comment><USER3> Basically they found a way to store the exact peroperties of a light signal in a sound wave.

This means that the quanta of light can be stored in another form and then I assume reconstructed in a reverse process.

This means that the entire information that is stored in it is preserved rather than a sampled approximation.

This sounds like an acoustic delay element (used in electronics, primarily analog electronics for video/audio and other analog signal processing voodoo boxes) for optics.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Opto-acoustic delay line memory?

</comment><comment><USER5> So they're converting light into phonons and back and using the slower propagation of phonons as a buffer in an otherwise photonic processor? Clever!

For those wondering, phonons are lattice vibration quasiparticles, they aren't elementary particles.

<comment><USER6> To anyone without a physics background, And just in case the phrase lattice vibration quasiparticle doesn't leap out of you, by way of analogy consider ripples in a pond. Particles are well-defined ripples which propagate while virtual particles our secondary effects of interaction between particles or the background "water" itself. Meanwhile quasiparticles in this case are things which behave very much like the first kind of ripple, within the context of a solid crystal lattice.</comment></comment>


Frame-Dragging Clearly Visible - <AUTHOR> http://einstein.stanford.edu/highlights/hl_111209.html

<comment><USER2> My dad is a thermal dynamics engineer at Lockheed Martin. He helped design the Dewar for the payload. The Dewar is a giant thermos containing enough liquid helium to keep the satellite's sensitive instruments cooled to below 4 degrees kelvin for the duration of the experiment (1 year).

<http://einstein.stanford.edu/gallery/dewar/dewar_lift.jpg>

The team had a bet going on how long the satellite would be able to record meaningful data while in orbit. He won the pool after guessing correctly to within +- 24 hours on the year-long mission. This is my dad on the left :

<http://einstein.stanford.edu/Library/images/He_dep-MOC-1.jpg>

Like jmillikin says, the science team collected terabytes of data and ran over several deadlines to report their findings. The precision required for the experiment is really quite phenomenal. Measuring discrepancies in gyroscopic alignment to within the 4 marcsec/yr is not trivial.

</comment><comment><USER3> Not a lot of context in this announcement.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frame-dragging>

<comment><USER4> See <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity_Probe_B>

The spaceflight section of this experiment ended a few years ago, but there were major unanticipated problems with the recorded data. Stanford figured out where the errors were coming from, but correcting them requires time-consuming computer simulation.

This announcement means that they've figured out and compensated for enough noise sources that the signal is becoming visible, and it's within a decent margin of error of what they expected.

Analysis is scheduled to continue on into 2010, but this is great news.

<comment><USER5> I can't help but remember all the fuss a few days back from the UEA scientists applying corrections to their own climate change data.

These guys spent years coming up with complex modifications to the raw data in order to match the frame-dragging they were expecting to see. Are we going to accuse them of falsifying data and bowing to political pressure too?

<comment><USER6> Deep in your heart you know earth is flat.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Obtaining this result cost us about a billion dollars.

I'm as excited about confirmations of General Relativity as the next person, but when you think about the kinds of non-trivial planetary science or cosmology experiments you could fire into space on a billion-dollar budget, the decision to throw dollars at Gravity Probe B (not to mention the ISS...) is regrettable.

<comment><USER6> At least they did not put humans on the Gravity Probe B.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Can we have a title on this that indicates that it's physics, not tech, please? I wouldn't have clicked if I had known it was physics.

EDIT: um, I'm not commenting to complain that the post is on HN; I'm commenting to complain that the post is on HN with a title that makes it look like it might have to do with computers (e.g., windowing systems or frames in web browsers).

<comment><USER9> I like physics, but as a layman I have no idea what they are demonstrating. (Something to do with relativity, got that...) A little background information would be appreciated!

<comment><USER7> One of the predictions of General Relativity is that a spinning massive body will drag neighboring spacetime along with it - that is, impart a bit of the spin to anything nearby. See <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frame_dragging>

This is a very subtle effect if you don't have a neutron star or black hole around, but using gyroscopes built to crazy tolerances, this experiment appears to have demonstrated it (at a head-spinning cost).</comment></comment></comment>


Difficulty Focusing at Day Job (startup on the side) is Building - <AUTHOR>

It has always been hard.
From time to time I get very invested and lost in my work (I work in finance) but I usually drift and think of my startup. I make sure to never actually work on anything at work but sometimes I'll read relevant news, Google to solve coding questions / issues I have and so on. Then some days it is just terrible. Literally just sit there staring at my computing in this sort mental pain and frustration.
My job is actually pretty good! illt really is ideal for what it is (accounting background and in corp finance). I certainly would be happy (presumably) if not for my newfound love of coding and creating spurred by my startup. But I can't help be so passionate for my startup that it remains on my mind all the time.
I just wish I could get a REAL month to work on it. Wake up and get to have nothing else in my way. The day job tires me out.
What do you do to get through it? I really can't afford to be without any income just yet unfortunately. At least the startup has monetization strategy baked in but with that isn't an option yet.
Any insight would be great. I'm going crazy. <comment><USER2> Well, you will inevitably get the advice that you should quit.

Barring that, I say create strict barriers for yourself to ease the mental context-switching. Say for example, you will focus 100% on your day job from 10AM to 7PM weeknights, and you will go nuts on your startup at all other times. Even just writing down these rules will help you focus. By working more effectively during the day, and assuming your boss isn't a nazi guarding your time, you can actually finish your work earlier and spend more time on your startup.

Another suggestion, wake up one or two hours earlier to work on your passion project. Since you mention being too tired when you come home at night, this is a way to make sure you are making incremental progress day by day.

Eventually, you really will have to "burn the boats" so to speak and quit. I'm not sure what's keeping you from quitting, but I'm assuming you have good reasons (mortgage, kids, debt). It will be tough to bootstrap all the way until profitability. Is there any way you can work on contract while you continue developing your startup?

Best of luck

<comment><USER3> I am currently doing #2 on my own startup. Getting up earlier in the day to work on a passion project is ideal since I have the most mental capacity at that time of the day. Also, giving a strict 2 hours workspace, I know exactly what I need to focus on for that day.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> What about taking a break from your startup? I noticed back when I was working on mine that I got into the habit of working at my job all day, then working on the startup all night, and it was way more stressful than I realized.</comment>


Uber loses ground in US as rival Lyft accelerates - <AUTHOR> https://www.ft.com/content/b4fb76a6-52dd-11e7-bfb8-997009366969 <comment><USER2> The company I work for, only has Lyft as approved service for travel and expenses.

Everyone used Uber mostly, and then they announced Lyft is the only approved one. Not sure why that decision was specifically made when majority were expensing Uber trips

<comment><USER3> Finance (or maybe HR if it's an after-hours perk or something) gets incentives/kickbacks? Can anyone that works in this area confirm?

<comment><USER4> That's called commercial bribery and it's against the law in most states, including California. Enforcement is pretty slack in the US (surprise surprise) but given that it involves employees making personal profit at the expense of employers companies generally would not tolerate this sort of behavior.

<comment><USER5> Do airline miles, hotel points, and car rental loyalty rewards count, and credit card rewards count?

Whoever is earning the rewards can earn quite a bit by choosing a higher priced options since it earns them more.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> If you could see only one chart then I would say this is the one [0]. I was under the impression that Lyft & Uber were on quite even footing.

> The reports of Uber's impending death are greatly exaggerated. - Mark Twain

[0] [https://archive.fo/Q0gkJ/595ad70474d05aa1f7b15600fe5ccec2f25...](https://archive.fo/Q0gkJ/595ad70474d05aa1f7b15600fe5ccec2f257e9b6.png)

<comment><USER7> But that's just the aggregate US figure, right? Individual cities, especially "bellwether" ones, might show Lyft past the tipping point.

<comment><USER8> No, it's not past the tipping point, the article shows graphs with 60-80% for NY, SF and Boston.

<comment><USER9> It's interesting, while I don't live in one of those cities, I've been meaning to drop Uber over all of their apparent complete lack of ethics. I hadn't done so yet, but this article has reminded me of it and I'm installing Lyft now.

As much as we hate to think it, both awareness and social proof in decision making matter. And while I wouldn't have admitted it, part of it was thinking in the back of my head that quitting wouldn't make a difference. Seeing the graph showing the real impact of the #quituber campaign was both surprising and to be perfectly honest a bit motivating to me to keep to my word to use Lyft. Maybe not a full quit, but at least a 50/50.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I don't know if it's because I've been under a rock, but I noticed Uber advertising on TV for the first time this weekend with a "everyone needs a side-hustle" tagline. I noticed it because it's always a little jarring when SV technology companies turn to traditional media advertising (I still remember the Google SB ad), but I took it as a sign that Uber's organic driver growth has taken a real hit recently and they're now having to actively work to attract drivers.

<comment><USER11> Uber has been doing a bunch of product placement before this. They've had some relatively forced mentions on shows like SNL.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> I know plenty of people who say "I'm getting an Uber", while using the Lyft app.

So Uber has definitely won in that department - all they have to do is not screw it up (any worse than they already did).

People will forget, and over time that name recognition will give them back the market share.

<comment><USER13> There are plenty of examples of trademarks that became generic terms for product or services where the initial trademark owner did not dominate in that market very long. Heck I could argue a genericized trademark may be a bad thing and signify the lack of uniqueness in the service Uber provides if all other competitors are described using the same term.

<comment><USER14> >There are plenty of examples

Name five?

<comment><USER15> [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_generic_and_genericize...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_generic_and_genericized_trademarks)

Aspirin, cellophane, kleenex, thermos, band-aid, crock pot, jacuzzi, photoshop, etc.

<comment><USER16> Shocking to me is that Tylenol is missing from that page. You hardly ever hear it called acetaminophen, even in hospitals.

Edit: Even the main Tylenol page links is ambiguous: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tylenol](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tylenol)

It's a wiki, so I'll guess I'll add it.

<comment><USER17> I think it's just a US thing, we (NZ) refer to it as paracetamol or the equivalent brand name "Panadol", the others are more globally used.

<comment><USER18> I wish it was more clear. There are three main widely available OTC medications that broadly cover main categories such as pain reliever, fever reducer, etc:

Ibuprofen (known colloquially more commonly as Motrin or Advil in the US)

Acetaminophen (also known by chemical name paracetemol outside of the US and brand name Tylenol in US)

Acetylsalicylic acid (also known as Aspirin, was previously a trademark but now a generic name)

I always try to avoid using the brand names in favor of the actual chemical names to dodge ambiguity and confusion (there are other brand names for acetaminophen, acetylsalicylic acid, and ibuprofen over the ones I have listed even in the US), but even then in the case of acetaminophen it cannot be avoided. Further compounding (pun intended?) difficulty is trying to pronounce acetylsalicylic acid to the layman instead of just saying "Aspirin". In the US at least, you can get away with saying ibuprofen vs "Motrin" and acetaminophen vs "Tylenol", but the Aspirin problem is a bit more of a difficult hurdle to overcome in terms of layman's communication.

Slightly tangentially, when referring to airports I even have the same problem. I always try to go by IATA airport code, but those apparently have ambiguities as well: AUS is the IATA airport code for Austin-Bergstrom, but in ICAO terms it's actually known as KAUS, presumably to avoid conflict with other airports outside the US who might also answer to the callsign "AUS"

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> I'm looking forward to the tell-all about Lyft's PR black ops against Uber.

<comment><USER20> I've got a buddy who works for (possibly one of multiple?) Lyft's PR firm, and has worked on that account.

You don't need any sort of 'black ops' when your competitor is busy generating their own bad headlines. Instead you just call up your journalist connections every time Uber does something stupid to make sure they saw it.

<comment><USER21> I don't know. It's very convenient that Lyft is seen as the do-no-wrong Uber alternative.

Once the dust settles, it will be interesting to see whether Lyft is as innocent as everyone presumes.

<comment><USER22> Given how Uber operates, if Lyft is doing anything wrong, I would expect Uber would already be publicizing it, and indeed be trying to make it look a good deal worse than it really is.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> Based on the chart below, Uber still owns 80% of the market. So, still in a very dominant position.

I wonder why Gett is not figured in there.

[https://www.ft.com/__origami/service/image/v2/images/raw/htt...](https://www.ft.com/__origami/service/image/v2/images/raw/http%3A%2F%2Fcom.ft.imagepublish.prod- us.s3.amazonaws.com%2F50d74d98-52d9-11e7-bfb8-997009366969?source=next&fit=scale- down&width=600)

<comment> joatmon-snoo Gett doesn't exist out of NY. Lyft does.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> Anecdotal, but Uber has a social stigma with a lot of my left-er friends.

</comment><comment><USER25> This article really fails to make a compelling case for Lyft other than the switches coming from the #DeleteUber campaign. While I agree these market share grabs from the underdog are huge, I feel like the author is overstepping the wait of the data. Relying really heavily on narrative.

</comment><comment><USER26> Would love Lyft over in the UK. Uber is the only taxi company (they are a taxi company if they like it or not) with an app which doesn't crash on launch

</comment><comment><USER27> HN link is still paywalled for me, so here's the archived version of it that's not paywalled: [https://archive.fo/Q0gkJ](https://archive.fo/Q0gkJ)

</comment><comment><USER28> paywalled...

<comment><USER29> The web link at the top of HN works, but the chart in the article tells most of the story: [https://www.ft.com/__origami/service/image/v2/images/raw/htt...](https://www.ft.com/__origami/service/image/v2/images/raw/http%3A%2F%2Fcom.ft.imagepublish.prod- us.s3.amazonaws.com%2F50d74d98-52d9-11e7-bfb8-997009366969?source=next&fit=scale- down&width=600)

<comment><USER30> I'm actually shocked that #deleteuber had that large of an impact. Maybe this is the cynic inside me, but I feel like social media campaigns like those didn't have much impact. Guess I was wrong.

<comment><USER31> at the end of the day it's just an app... there is no Uber infrastructure such as a bus stop... very few real assets... and not a ton of IP if every car company, Google, and others are competing.

they had a great brand and the only thing they had to do was not fuck it up before they reached the next level. and instead they spent most of their cash on fighting rivals, built a culture that is eroding the brand and behind on the next thing in transportation.

<comment><USER32> Getting your app on someones phone is a substantial, lasting competitive advantage. Getting them to use it regularly is even more of one.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> "Lyft, which completed a $600m fundraising in April, has expanded into 150 new cities this year " seems like this would skew the numbers a bit. Uber is already everywhere it needs to be in the US. Lyft is irrelevant until they prove they can compete internationally imo, they are way behind uber here

<comment><USER34> > Lyft is irrelevant until they prove they can compete internationally imo, > they are way behind uber here

Why should they compete internationally?

From what I can see, international competition is wildly unprofitable, subject to the whims and vicissitudes of local politicians, and subject to local competition who understand their market far better than any foreign firm.

<comment><USER35> International travel is a major use case for these apps. When I'm traveling I don't have my car with me and my usage of Uber skyrockets.

</comment></comment></comment><comment> throwaway-1209 100% fake news. There's no way they actually have any ride data from either company to back up this claim. In fact there's another bit of equally fake news posted to HN right now that says that recent events have failed to put a dent into Uber marketshare. "Journalists" should stop making shit up, and instead stick to reporting facts.

<comment><USER36> "...according to data from Second Measure, a research firm that uses anonymised credit card data"

Perhaps not 100% accurate, but not 100% fake either.

<comment> throwaway-1209 Second Measure relies on undisclosed data sources of unknown accuracy. So this is very much like those reports from "anonymous sources familiar with Comey's thinking" (an actual quote).</comment></comment></comment>