MacBook Air Stickers - <AUTHOR> https://www.apple.com/macbook-air/stickers/index.html <comment><USER2> Your brief: _create a video ad that features the company logo in the middle of the screen for the full 30-second advert, without losing people 's attention._

Placing your company logo so prominently for so long in a video ad is rare – it's hard to find an excuse to leave it there for the full ad. But it works in Apple's _Stickers_ ad here.

The video ad reads both as an invitation to get creative with the space on the back of your laptop, and as an optimistic style guide handed down from above: _"by all means shove stickers over your MacBook, but – hey – if you 're going to do that, they may as well interact with our logo in a fun way instead of covering it up!"_ (Clearly, my own MacBook contravenes the suggested guidelines: [http://d.pr/i/iGOa](http://d.pr/i/iGOa) )

<comment><USER3> To each their own of course, but I find these plastered laptops kind of childish. I can't be the only one right?

I don't really understand why I'd broadcast different brands that might align with what I do professionally everywhere I go. Then again, I am not one to like things on Facebook either, might be a similar tendency.

This seems more of a trend in America than it does here in Europe. Maybe it is similar to the more American custom to communicate 'witty' things on t-shirts?

<comment><USER4> I think you're being unfairly downvoted, mostly because I don't think _childish_ quite conveys the thought. There _does_ seem to be some personality type that likes a lot of flair in their life -- jewelry, stickers, tattoos, busy t-shirts -- and it's always felt a little odd to me, too.

At risk of being reductionist, it is kind of hard to understand why anyone would feel compelled to signal their likes and group-identities to strangers in such an overt way. But I'm probably revealing more about my own personality by saying that than I am theirs.

<comment><USER5> > At risk of being reductionist, it is kind of hard to understand why anyone > would feel compelled to signal their likes and group-identities to strangers > in such an overt way. But I'm probably revealing more about my own > personality by saying that than I am theirs.

I think the second sentence is more true than you might like to admit. People have been decorating things for as long as there have been modern humans. There is some evidence that even Neanderthals modified their environments for aesthetic reasons [1].

The desire to make things beautiful -- including our own bodies -- is as old as history itself, and even older. If you don't partake in this then I, for one, consider that a bit sad. You're missing out on a huge part of life.

[1] [http://www.theguardian.com/science/2012/jun/14/neanderthals-...](http://www.theguardian.com/science/2012/jun/14/neanderthals- first-create-cave-paintings)

<comment><USER4> To be fair (and as a sort of vote for the this-behavior-is-childish camp), I was much more into this sort of thing when I was a younger person.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> This seems like a complete paradigm shift from the Jobs-days of so closely holding and protecting their brand. Refusing to dilute it with Home Simpson and poorly drawn Golden Gate bridges...

...Or maybe they could just want to increase accessory sales.

<comment><USER7> Yes. Compare this, and the iPhone 5C, with "here's to the crazy ones"… it's depressing.

<comment><USER8> Under Jobs, the iMac G3 was invigorated with a similar aesthetic flush.

<comment><USER9> Oh man, remember the Flower Power iMac? Blue Dalmatian? Things got crazy...

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Don't know if it can really be considered "interesting" or not, but at the very end the logo flickers between the new style single shade and the old style rainbow colours. Might we see a return of the old logo?

<comment><USER11> I'm pretty sure that it was a sticker.

<comment><USER12> He's talking about the quick transform that happens on the digital logo at the end (white, black, rainbow, and cycles)

<comment><USER13> You can get transparent rainbow stickers you can put on the apple logo on the back of MacBooks. I agree that that was probably the intended meaning.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Can a cinematographer explain to me why the Apple logo (or even the whole laptop) doesn't stay centered but shifts a few pixels now and then?

Would the clip look too polished (not real) if the logo remained at exactly the same position for the duration of the clip?

There must be a 'movie-technical' reason for this because it deviates from an otherwise pixel-perfect Apple ad.

<comment><USER15> As a videomaker, I was a little stunned by how 'imperfect' it was, for a few of the shots.

It has to be a conscious artistic decision, because it would be trivial to 'nudge' the frame around in an NLE (we'll assume Final Cut here, right?) to make sure the Apple logo never moved.

There are also some shadow inconsistencies that could've been skipped, there's no need to actually swap out the entire laptop for each shot, could just use the logo/sticker area.

<comment><USER15> I agree with the other commenters, but sort of wonder if they missed the mark by going "half way" gritty/raw/stop-motion. The Gondry example is a perfect one, because he doesn't make each shot 99% close to the one before it. If you're going to make it imperfect, really make it imperfect. It'll look better if it doesn't look like a mistake.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> A little bit off topic but... can someone please remind me why does Apple continue using this horrible thing called QuickTime Plugin?

<comment><USER17> Because it is their own product, and it could be seen as a negative move to not use it?

<comment><USER16> And they can absolutely use it as a fallback for HTML5 video.

Using WMP Plugin, RealPlayer plugin, QuickTime, Flash, etc. is so... 2007.

MS also has(had) Silverlight but at some point they just stopped using it and most of the videos I've seen recently on their site(s) are HTML5 (no plugins required).

But not Apple. Everything (I've seen) on their site is QuickTime.

<comment><USER18> What browser are you using? Everything shows up as HTML5 video for me.

<comment><USER16> Chrome. On Ubuntu.

> Everything shows up as HTML5 video for me.

That's weird.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> What stood out the most to me is that some laptops are actually dirty, you can see the dirt on them. Guess they went with the "Ok, get the as raw as you can, we want machines that have been used". Kinda cool, especially from Apple since they are normally so strict and 'clean'

</comment><comment><USER20> Jonny Ive is crying right now that his brushed aluminum is being cover up by vinyl.

<comment><USER21> I've had to cover all exposed metal parts on my MBP in vinyl. It gives me a rash otherwise. I bet he didn't think of that when choosing materials...

<comment><USER22> I believe people are much more likely to be allergic to vinyl than to aluminum (or Aluminum Oxide)

<comment><USER23> People are allergic to nickel, which is used in aluminium alloys.

<comment><USER22> Humm

Maybe it's this one? [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/6061_aluminium_alloy](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/6061_aluminium_alloy) (a guess from here: [https://discussions.apple.com/message/8612485](https://discussions.apple.com/message/8612485))

Anyway, when I'm using a wristwatch I don't have a problem with the case, but the strap is often itchy (not to the point of irritating the skin, though)

<comment><USER21> It's possible. You can nickel treat alu to give it a consistent durable finish as alu oxide is quite easy to dent and this deposits some on the surface.

Another thing I've seen is that a friend of mine's MBP has started to dissolve. It is pitted and looks burned. Turns out some people's sweat eats them as well.

Probably a bad material choice if you ask me.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> It's curious to me that they're not selling these stickers. These are mostly ones I've seen on various third-party sites.

I'm also amazed they managed to get the rights for all those characters (Disney was probably easy, but the Simpsons and Warner Bros.?)

<comment><USER25> The Simpsons are always jokingly referring to Apple. They have the apple logo with two bits out of it. I'm sure The Simpsons are happy to tie their name like this.

<comment><USER26> You probably meant 'the Simpsons' instead of your first Apple?

I don't think the portrayal of Apple in the Simpsons is very positive though, it's often shown as cultish.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> I always thought the Iron Man ones were great.

[http://www.karenhealey.com/wp- content/uploads/2012/09/colorf...](http://www.karenhealey.com/wp- content/uploads/2012/09/colorful-iron-man-macbook-decal-2.jpg)

<comment><USER28> Wow .. love it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> Is it just me or did that feel like that came from Dre/Beats ad team?

<comment><USER30> It certainly feels like it came from a company that would buy the Dre/Beats team.

That is: historically Apple has emphasized the emotional pitch to the things that _you (can) do_ with their gear, and the expression of personality _through that use_.

This commercial is much more an emotional pitch to the gear _in-and-of itself_ , and the expression of personality via (crass/commercial) _personalization_ of the gear.

It's not wholly incompatible with the older Apple approach, but it's _much_ more in-line with Beats' approach.

This also seems to walk directly into the old criticism that Apple is primarily an enabler of _corporate consumption_ as opposed to _creation_.

It's unclear whether they're ignoring those old knocks with new confidence, or are simply unaware of how this looks (and more importantly: how _the shift_ looks).

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> That's a pretty interesting move from Apple, I know a few people who are part of the stickers-on-laptop set (myself included) and those that refuse to besmirch the looks with stickers. I'd always assumed that Apple would fall into the second group, but it's nice to see them showing off a small cottage industry.

</comment><comment><USER32> Love this, reminds me of the silhouette iPod adverts.

</comment><comment><USER33> It's really interesting that there's dirt on some of these MacBooks. Presumably they must be real machines used by Apple employees or customers, and they intentionally didn't clean them.

<comment><USER34> Not sure if it means anything, but your comment reminded me of this blog post written after Steve Jobs died: [http://daringfireball.net/2011/10/universe_dented_grass_unde...](http://daringfireball.net/2011/10/universe_dented_grass_underfoot)

</comment></comment><comment><USER35> it's not about the stickers, people

it's the idea that people love their macbooks air so much, they adorn them with flair to personalize them, to incorporate the laptop into their own personality

<comment><USER36> It has little to do with macbook airs. People will put stickers on anything. Years ago, my college gave out lenovo think pads, and people stickered the crap out of em.

<comment><USER37> Well it's _different_ with Apple. I guess people who don't own one won't understand. /s

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> I didn't really like the way the laptop judders slightly (especially in the opening 10 seconds or so) because the images don't quite line up. I'm not sure whether it was a conscious decision to do it that way - obviously taking identical pictures is hard, but not impossible, though doing the whole thing digitally would probably be easier. Odd choice, if you ask me.

<comment><USER39> This is a keen observation that make a surprising conclusion. I made the same observation but had a completely different reaction.

The stuttering was actually a motif to show this are pictures of different laptops of real people. It also completely tied into the music which was of a stuttery and impactful tone. It was obviously an intentional technique. You will notice that the laptops were also scuffed and looked used.

The whole ad was about how personal a macbook is to its owner. I think apple have been concerned mac's are now so 'mainstream' they want to encourage the view that you are your macbook.

<comment><USER38> I take your point. I think I would have preferred it had the jumping around been just a tiny bit more pronounced so it was _very_ obviously intentional.

I'll take it over Apple's increasingly mawkish TV spots any day, though.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER40> You wouldn't see it on the Apple web site, but are there any good stickers that take advantage of the fact that an apple (often with a bite taken out of it) is the universal symbol for sex store in many countries? It's a reference to the biblical story of Adam and Eve, of course.

<comment><USER41> Which countries?

<comment><USER42> In the UK, Ann Summers has an apple in their logo,and this is the biggest "sex" store I can think of.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER43> As a big fan of Minions, this is my MacBook Air: [http://puu.sh/amhxR/56166054af.JPG](http://puu.sh/amhxR/56166054af.JPG)

</comment><comment><USER44> I liked the cute flashing of the old rainbow-colored Apple logo at the end, almost as if they were sort of going back to that kind of colorful style with the stickers.

</comment><comment><USER45> So I don't get it. Are they for sale? How much?

<comment><USER46> [https://www.etsy.com/search?q=macbook%20decal](https://www.etsy.com/search?q=macbook%20decal)

<comment><USER47> Also check out [http://www.decalgirl.com/](http://www.decalgirl.com/) .

I made this for my mbp: [https://twitter.com/hamidp/status/463408033670774785/photo/1](https://twitter.com/hamidp/status/463408033670774785/photo/1)

<comment><USER48> Society6 has a fun collection: [http://society6.com/laptop- skins](http://society6.com/laptop-skins)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER49> Tux available here: [http://idiffer.de/de/product/Tux](http://idiffer.de/de/product/Tux)

<comment><USER42> I love linux but for some reason I would find this really off putting. Like writing down your political beliefs on your bumper .

<comment><USER50> A significant portion of the population finds it completely acceptable to plaster their political beliefs on their bumper, both via stickers or their license plate itself. You might find it distasteful, but it's hardly rare.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER51> I can hear the screams from Etsy merchants.

</comment><comment><USER52> Does anyone know what song that is?

<comment><USER53> Chimes by Hudson Mohawke

<comment><USER54> TNGHT (Hudson Mohawke + Lunice)

You probably won't ever get that version as rapper Future bought the beat. Last time something similar happened, it was Kanye West buying TNGHT - R U Ready which ended up being the beat for Blood On The Leaves

edit: I actually am completely wrong. Chimes actually from HudMo only and not TNGHT and it can be purchased on iTunes right now. Big surprise, really thought it would never come out (it's been at least two years since it's been played for the first time). [https://itunes.apple.com/us/album/chimes- ep/id900521487](https://itunes.apple.com/us/album/chimes-ep/id900521487)

<comment><USER55> Thanks dude! Just bought the song :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER56> A lot of the designs on that page would look better if they covered the logo.

</comment><comment><USER57> Somehow for me it feels for me that the choreography from the Apple trailer is "copied" from an Inception trailer.

Compare 0:10 of Apple's ad with [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=66TuSJo4dZM#t=34](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=66TuSJo4dZM#t=34)

</comment><comment><USER58> I enjoyed the music. Was that original music made for this film?

<comment> why-el Yes, they mixed two songs together, one of which is not out (the beat part), but it is acquired by a rapper and might someday come out as a fully fleshed song.

</comment></comment><comment><USER59> I really want the pixelated rainbow apple... Good memories.

</comment><comment><USER60> <meta property="og:title" content="Apple - MacBook Air - Stickers" /> <meta property="og:description" content="Lorem ipsum" />

<comment><USER17> The "og" series of meta property tags are for FaceBook's Open Graph [1]. I believe that FaceBook uses that data to determine what to post if you post that link.

[1] [http://ogp.me/](http://ogp.me/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER61> Goes well with the iPhone 5C branding.

</comment><comment><USER62> I have one "sticker" on my Mac. A piece of gaffer's tape over the glowing logo.

</comment><comment><USER63> Still waiting for that 11" with Retina display, Tim.

<comment><USER64> Won't happen for now. The 13" has retina. The battery is twice as big as the 13" air. Techspecs for the rest are identical. Batterylife is the same.

So unless they can extend batterylife 100%, it will not happen

<comment><USER63> It's not about the battery, it's about the portability and the display. A 13" laptop is too big to lug around for me, and the retina display would enhance readability for me (I tend to read a _lot_ on screen, but an iPad is simply not an option for the rest of my activities).

<comment><USER65> Have you looked at the Surface Pro 3? 12", 2160x1440, lots of nice reviews.

<comment><USER63> Yes, and I'm sorely tempted even though I've only used Macs for five years now. (edited to add:) The keyboard's not very nice, though.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER66> "Film"? I was expecting some kind of documentary about the culture of Mac stickers or something. I got an ad with no commentary.

</comment><comment><USER67> I'm just a little bit angry, they didn't use any of my [http://stickerlicio.us](http://stickerlicio.us) stickers ;)

</comment><comment><USER68> Perfect fit to the #laptopstickers collection: [http://www.pinterest.com/pin/200410252143300149/](http://www.pinterest.com/pin/200410252143300149/)

</comment><comment><USER69> Thus apple invented stickers..

</comment><comment><USER70> The lack of this [1] Legend of Zelda decal hurts me a little...just a little.

[1] [http://ecx.images- amazon.com/images/I/51X%2Bx1P7f3L._SL1500_...](http://ecx.images- amazon.com/images/I/51X%2Bx1P7f3L._SL1500_.jpg)

</comment><comment><USER71> I am amused that they offer sticker of Walther White (Breaking Bad series), character known for his aspiration of becoming a drug lord, producing meth and murdering people. Does not quite align with Apple's family-friendly brand image.

<comment><USER72> AFAIK they are not offering these stickers for sale. They are presenting examples of stickers that people have made.

</comment></comment><comment><USER73> I got a Macbook Air from work. Stuck Ubuntu on it, and a big kayak sticker over the Apple logo. They aren't getting free adverting from me. (One fanboy looked noticeably upset when he saw it running Ubuntu).

<comment><USER3> I like how someone who uses the same hardware as you but a different OS is a 'fanboy', but at the same time you are completely exempt of this moniker even though you take part of your identity from the fact that you cover up a logo and run Ubuntu; feeling proud enough to tell us about it here.

Fanboy-ing aside the benefit of OS X over Ubuntu (et al.), to me at least, is that it is more stable, still unix and there is much more software available for it that doesn't require debugging/building/re-building, etc. Ubuntu is fun for playing with, but when I need to get work done it tends get in the way eventually.

<comment><USER62> Agreed. Ubuntu people are just as crazy as Mac zealots.

<comment><USER73> It would have been a different version Linux, but Ubuntu is the easiest to install with the bootloader nonsense.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER74> > With up to 12 hours of battery life, an incredibly thin and light design, > and fast all-flash storage, what's not to love?

The price for European pockets.

</comment><comment><USER75> Steve Jobs: One more thing... we've got a huge user base that love STICKERS!@!@!@! WoOt!!! We got nothing technically new, but you should know that people love us and like to put stickers all over our stuff because, well people have to do that when there's a bunch of the same product in a group... like in schools and stuff.

People put stickers on their things for purposes which generally don't sync up with Apple's brand aesthetic. I'm confused that this happens when Ive has MORE control in this realm.

This, along with the Beats acquisition, seems to point towards a shift from delivering innovation and more towards marketing to kids - which is a valid business proposition. Sticker bombs and colorful headphones are middle school. Apple has to balance it's aspiring Bauhausian creative class against its next generation of buyers.

In a large, case-control study of Apple product owners, it was shown that professional creatives were less likely to put stickers all over their tools of production since they were trying to get things done and carry a message of precisely and cleanly delivered works of inspiration.

If the message is, "I <3 APPLE! like everybody else!" the play is heavily tilted towards emotional ties and peer pressure. These aren't messages of productivity, social connectedness, innovation, etc. They are about your personal connection to a product.

In teaming with IBM, I guess they'll have Big Blue carry their boring productivity message and Apple can focus on OMG FUN! stuff.

<comment><USER76> Why did this get down voted?

<comment><USER75> Not only that, but a few are digging into older posts to put those down as well. I just don't know what I'll do with my diminishing pool of anonymous internet cred.</comment></comment></comment>


Show HN: Mood Tracker App - <AUTHOR> https://moodistory.com <comment><AUTHOR> Founder here. Happy to answer any questions you might have. Moodistory is a mood tracker that you can use to find out dependencies between events/activities and your mood. I'm personally using it to track my work happiness. Based on the feedback I get, I'm adding new features continuously. App is currently iOS only. Since I'm using a paid model for it, and I want to show it to you, I'm giving away 3 promo codes. Just send an email to email@example.com and I'll reply with a promo code. I'll update this post to indicate whether there are still promo codes left. Looking forward to any comments! :)</comment>


The Death of Richard Dawkins: A short story by Steve Yegge - <AUTHOR> http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2009/05/programmers-view-of-universe-part-3.html <comment><AUTHOR> If anyone has worked out what his point is, please let us know.

<comment><USER2> It is the Christ story darkly recast as a parable of mankind's urge towards hierarchy and domination, realized through the fetishes of capitalism, religion, and technocracy.

The poor and dispossessed brothers represent mankind's thirst for freedom, for opposition and resistance. They symbolically kill Darwin, the story's central power figure and the main avatar of the hegemonic singularity. Yet they do so in an attempt to erase the boundaries between themselves and that oppressive structure. Darwin, whose domination of humanity has rendered him godlike, grants them their wish and transforms them into the insipid tourist children they wish to become. In the end, their struggle for justice and self- determination has come to nothing, and they go, indistinguishable from the other siblings, for ice cream.

You should also consider its similarity to the 1975 short story 'Let's go to Golgotha'

<comment><USER3> Well, lesbianmonad, that's an interesting take I guess, but it's even more obscure than the story itself. I can't figure out whether you actually intended to refer to Charles Darwin or whether you were just smoking too much weed to remember the name of the main character.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Steve, please continue blogging. Nobody's figured it out yet, or if they have, we probably have few ways to confirm their correctness.

</comment><comment><USER5> Why does this have 23 points?

<comment><USER6> Because it's a short bit of worth-reading hard sci-fi written by someone known to much of the HN community who's not known for writing engaging fiction, but clearly capable of it.

So, it's interesting on few levels, but probably divisive in terms of audience (i.e., you're either going to like it or hate it).

The story is part of a bigger narrative, so it's here because it's part of the thread he's been tugging on for a few months. Feel free to ignore.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Anyone able to help with these questions:

What are external events?

What is going on with Dawkins being out-of-body and able to influence the world?

How did Dawkins get from the date of his death to a simulation in the future? Is it because he was at the moment they've copied in their time bubble?

</comment><comment><USER8> I think External Event is What We Are All Afraid Of: when the system must be rebooted, softly or hardly.

The cache and temp data is lost, the heavily imprinted / written data persists, and the function remains the same but probably some bugs fixed.

</comment><comment><USER9> I'm willing to bet that the "neat programming language" he's referring to is clojure.

<comment><USER4> More likely, the "programming language" is going to be about programming the universe. Here's some inspiration:

 _And then there's the weirdness beyond M31: According to the more conservative cosmologists, an alien superpower – maybe a collective of Kardashev Type Three galaxy-spanning civilizations – is running a timing channel attack on the computational ultrastructure of space-time itself, trying to break through to whatever's underneath._

\- "Accelerando" by Charlie Stross

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> I think there was a South Park episode on this ..</comment>


EFF Asks Supreme Court to Reverse Dangerous Rulings About API Copyright/Fair Use - <AUTHOR> https://www.eff.org/press/releases/eff-asks-supreme-court-reverse-dangerous-rulings-about-api-copyrightability-and-fair <comment><USER2> Read this brief.</comment>


The Key to Success Nobody Wants to Talk About - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/personal-growth/the-key-to-success-nobody-wants-to-talk-about-dafb26e0c097 <comment><USER2> > It's the journey that provides real fulfillment.

Sounds derivative of Tony Robbins.

Why Success Without Fulfillment Is the Ultimate Failure > [https://www.inc.com/bill-carmody/tony-robbins-success- withou...](https://www.inc.com/bill-carmody/tony-robbins-success-without- fulfillment-is-the-ultimate-failure.html)

</comment><comment><USER3> I define success along two axis: personal success and financial success. Personal success is what will make you happy. Financial success is what will make you feel in control.</comment>


Google + (-Me) - <AUTHOR> http://brooksreview.net/2011/06/goog-me/ <comment><USER2> > it must not only beat out Facebook, but Twitter too.

Ah, yes, just like Facebook had to beat out Twitter in order to... wait a second...</comment>


UK to award £1 million for world's biggest problem solution - <AUTHOR> http://bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-22892443

<comment><USER2> Anyone capable of making the "next penicillin" or "a carbon-free plane" is going to do so without the need for a £1m prize. The implementation would make them hundreds of times more.

£1m is 0.00014% of the UK government's annual budget. This sort of "motivation" is nothing more than a ridiculous platitude that enables the government to pretend they're supporting technology and innovation with practically no cost to them. Frankly, it's an insult to anyone remotely entrepreneurial. 100 prizes of £10,000 would very likely do _a lot_ more for industry, encourage people to get behind something imaginative, and perhaps would be enough of a start to someone who could eventually solve one of these problems.

<comment><USER3> It's the capitalist mindset - capitalism is based upon the idea that money is a universal motivator. The idea that people can be productive for other reasons, such as pride, passion, joy, or compassion, is incompatible and would lead to the idea that systems other than capitalism could be successful on a grand scale.

<comment><USER4> The point (as I read it) isn't that money is not a good motivator. However, if you are talking about something like the next penicillin, then your potential to monetize dwarfs the million dollar reward. That money would be better spent to incentive things that would not otherwise make the person rich.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> In my opinion, the "biggest problem of our time" is oversized government and excessive lobbying of politicians to serve corporate interests rather than the needs of the people. Unfortunately the powers that be are not going to reward that which undermines their own reason for existing...

<comment><USER3> Surely if you look at the root causes, the biggest issue is the failings of capitalism in that it creates a artificial scarcity on a grand scale in order to make people in other countries desperate enough to make things for us for pittance?

<comment><USER6> That! sir, is insightful.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Let's hope that the modern day Harrison isn't forced to personally petition HM The Queen to force Parliament to actually pay out who then has to personally threaten to appear in parliament only to have Harrison die three years later: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Harrison#Harrison.27s_Fir...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Harrison#Harrison.27s_First_Marine_Watch)

<comment><USER8> I see the Harrison clock as a brilliant vindication of X-prize development, but I do not think we will solve the big problems through X-Prizes. What we will do is get the equivalent of bi-metallic strips and other engineering enhancements. My totally unscientific view is X-prizes allow unusual approaches to actually leave drawing board and get tried out - I suspect in a manner similar to war.

PS - yes he was "cheated" for decades out of a prize he had won. And given current Prince Charles' public letter campaigns on architecture and farming, I seriously doubt that parliament would be moved by that threat anymore !

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> It took me a little while to even _get_ what this _is_. I understand the public votes on "the biggest problem" and then whoever "solves it" (or, I assume, makes significant progress on it) receives £1 million.

The best case is a carefully constructed short list for voting and the whole thing being essentially an orchestrated PR stunt with a winner (probably a known strong candidate even at this announcement stage). The worst case is this quietly fading out until no-one remembers it and there aren't even many real records of it ever having been a thing.

Or perhaps I've got "best" and "worst" the wrong way around there.

<comment><USER10> We already know what the biggest problem is. Finding a non-polluting energy source.

...and a million pounds isn't going to solve it.

<comment><USER11> I somewhat disagree. It will disrupt a single complex that's been perpetuated, and yes, it will create and allow for a lot of innovation - however producing product and developing resources into buildings, and other systems, cause tons of pollution and non-renewable destruction of our lands. It will actually be bad IMHO in certain circumstances if non-polluting energy comes too soon to us.

<comment><USER9> If I follow correctly, you believe that non-polluting energy would loosen constraints on production and the acceleration of growth this would cause would have a net negative environmental effect because the increase in non- energy-creation-related pollution would more than counter balance the savings from non-polluting energy. Is that an accurate summary?

<comment><USER11> Assuming rules / laws / regulations weren't put in place to counter this, yes. We all know how fast government is to act ... which is why there should be concern.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I had to double check if today was April 1st. I try to avoid "middlebrow dismissal" comments but come on, do they really think £1 million is going to motivate anyone in solving the world's biggest problem? This is borderline insulting.

<comment><USER13> The X Prize was only for $10m dollars:

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X_Prize_Foundation](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X_Prize_Foundation)

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> This is wrong on so many levels. Among other things:

\- The solution isn't hard, it is the implementation of the solution that is hard. Hey, we have electric cars. But getting people to use them requires having electric cars succeed on the open market (which Tesla and others will eventually do, I think). Overpopulation is the problem; educating people to a higher level results in more well-off people having fewer kids. And so on.

The solution is easy! How the hell do we actually get there, as messy, lazy, corrupt humans? That is what the prize should be for.

<comment><USER8> I agree, apart from the over-population thing which is best explained by Hans Rosling - [http://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_on_global_population_g...](http://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_on_global_population_growth.html)

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> If we're talking about engineering problems, it isn't enough money.

By modern standards, the R&D problem that John Harrison tackled was low- hanging fruit. Our modern R&D infrastructure, while far from perfect, would not have left such a (relatively) easy and important problem unsolved for so long. These days, lone geniuses of Harrison's calibre have to content themselves with more minor problems like designing the bagless vacuum cleaner.

If you really want good things to happen, you need larger teams and larger prizes. At least £10 million. Think "X-prize".

I'd like to be wrong about this. Can anyone show me that I've missed something important?

</comment><comment><USER16> The obvious choice is creating Ai, that would solve all solvable problems thereafter.

<comment><USER17> Solve all problems for x, where we hope x is the comfort and continued meaningful existence of humanity and not, say, the maximisation of paperclips.

<comment><USER18> link for those who didn't get the reference ([http://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Paperclip_maximizer](http://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Paperclip_maximizer))

"The AI does not hate you, nor does it love you, but you are made out of atoms which it can use for something else."

—Eliezer Yudkowsky

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> This seems like something of a PR stunt, I would much prefer a serious re- investment in science and acknowledgement that the UK economy could be driven by a knowledge economy. Good recap here: [http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/occams- corner/2013/mar/11/...](http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/occams- corner/2013/mar/11/1)

</comment><comment><USER20> Compare that to the £500m the UK councils have spent on mass-surevilance with CCTVs, to understand the UK government's priorities.

</comment><comment><USER21> Although I appreciate this motivational gesture from the Prime Minister, I have reservations as to how much this would be effective. Better would be to foster an environment where people are motivated by inspiration to find solutions to tough problems. Believe it or not, the U.S. is a good example of how to do it.

</comment><comment><USER22> That sounds like a lot, but it's really nothing.

</comment><comment><USER6> A million pounds would go far toward advocating Edward Snowden to win the Nobel peace prize?

</comment><comment><USER8> What bugs the hell out of me is that we know how to solve the biggest problems of the world _today_. We just don't want to do it. Lets hit three:

1\. CO2 emissions.

2\. Water scarcity

3\. Trade imbalances

(2) Is an agricultural problem. Drip-feed everywhere. (1) has a agricultural solution - stop using livestock in agriculture. (3) Well, this has lots of issues, but start with the easiest. End completely the use of agricultural subsidies in the developed world.

Three things, all pretty much the same solution, all uncosted and not backed up with references, which can be done with no technological inventions, and will drop the big issues of the day by a ridiculous amount.

<comment><USER23> Stop using livestock in agriculture? What do you mean?

<comment><USER8> Tyrannosaurs is basically right - get rid of cattle sheep and pigs (plus assoc others) from our food chain. India has hundreds of millions of people living like this today so it's a viable cultural and agricultural option

It's also more or less guaranteed to slash co2 to the bone, fix enourmous run- on problems and help trade

And frankly will never happen until after we live on mars on a vegan diet and so make it cool and desirable

<comment><USER23> Basically mandatory vegetarianism?

<comment><USER8> You will be forced to live on a low cost healthy diet that will extend your lifespan by an average of ten years while at the same time saving the planet from ecological meltdown and the consequent loss of millions of lives.

The Nanny State. It's crap isn't it :-)

<comment><USER23> I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic, but I've been a vegetarian and absolutely hated every minute of it. I love eating meat too much and its substitutes aren't comparable! If I had to cut dairy out too (no butter?!) I'd just stop enjoying food.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Distressed Denim: Levi's Tries to Adapt to the Yoga Pants Era - <AUTHOR> http://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2015-levi-strauss-confronts-the-yoga-pant/

<comment><USER2> So much distraction. How about being able to order two pair of the same model and size, and have them arrive as two pair of the exact same size? I think the olive hunters took over Levis long ago.

[http://www.ndtv.com/world-news/american-airlines-crash- landi...](http://www.ndtv.com/world-news/american-airlines-crash-landing-of- something-special-in-the-air-566605)</comment>


ISBN numbers and electronic distribution: What IS an eBook, anyway? - <AUTHOR> http://go-to-hellman.blogspot.com/2010/07/what-is-ebook-anyway.html

<comment><USER2> One of these days I intend to write a short piece of fiction in which all the usual solecisms occur _but are, in context, perfectly correct_. So, for instance, there would be a machine for making those cash-withdrawal devices: an "ATM machine". There would be a criminal gang with a big numbered list of identifying numbers and the accounts they apply for, hence lots of "PIN numbers". Perhaps someone would be doing statistics on the rate at which books are published, as measured by the rate of ISBN allocation, so their figures would be "ISBN numbers". And so forth.

(The actual article is about the question: when you have a bunch of very closely related things, such as "the same" e-book in different formats, should they get different ISBNs?. The author says that the answer is: they should get different ISBNs if and only if "the supply chain" needs to distinguish between them, and that there are some awkward edge cases for this criterion when dealing with e-books. For what it's worth, I didn't find it enormously interesting.)

<comment><AUTHOR> That was an error in my rewriting of the article title on submission, not of the article author. I must pay more attention in future.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Tech Managers, how do you keep up with the latest tech? - <AUTHOR> You're busy managing/leading your team during work hours. How do you find the time to keep up with the latest tech? Do you code in your spare time? <comment><USER2> I question the premise. What does it mean to "keep up with the latest tech"? People trying to "keep up" and get the latest buzzword as a feather in their cap has caused a roaring avalanche of stupidity in this industry over the last decade.

Ultimately the corporate entities hiring these buzzword-happy pretenders end up paying the price. If a manager cares about using reliable tools to do a good job for his employer, how does "keeping up with the latest tech" serve that end?

</comment><comment><USER3> My managers use Hype to figure out what's latest. That's the only thing they know, chasing the hype is what they call it.

</comment><comment><USER4> It's actually a lot easier to keep up with tech as a leader than developer. Devs are deep in tech and usually only have time to improve on what they know instead of picking up a new framework.

Managers don't have the space to focus on something, but their job is to simply be available to communicate and handle the overhead. They can even justify experimenting with new tech as part of the job.

</comment><comment><USER5> Simple trick: you are a manager and probably spend > 50% of your time in meetings. Schedule yourself some meetings to spend time keeping up with tech.

I also found when I was a manager that there are some natural downtimes that occur when a lot of PM's or your peers are out, take advantage of those intervals since you'll have less meetings.

Also also, tech doesn't change that quickly. You can probably get to a level of understanding of some new tech by just reading up on it. This is just to understand if it is applicable to your area w/o having to go through the download/config/install/frustration loop.

</comment><comment><USER6> I still try to spend some time coding during the week on work related items (small tasks with time set aside once a week) and code in my spare time on my own projects. I don't know if I'm able to "keep up" with the latest, but I am able to dive into areas of interest.

</comment><comment><USER7> You mean busy going to meetings? Yeah it takes most of my time. Leading the team is an on-demand thing... Though I don't code anymore, I simply keep up with the latest technologies without coding. Simply read tech forums, news, etc. I think architects can teach us a lot more on that. They keep up with the latest tech and they don't code anything.

</comment><comment><USER8> Prioritize time carefully, read, and stay in tech. Use agendas to control and limit meeting time. Work with tech at a high level involving architecture and directions, then hand off sub-projects to your direct reports.</comment>


Ask a Venture Capitalist - <AUTHOR> http://betabeat.com/2012/09/vcs-dave-tisch-adam-ludwin-and-others-are-live-and-ready-to-take-your-questions/

<comment><AUTHOR> Direct Link <http://vyou.com/group/p/85>

</comment><comment><USER2> this is extremely informative. thank you for sharing!</comment>


Why aren't there more women in tech? Wrong question - <AUTHOR> http://news.cnet.com/8301-33617_3-57402766-276/why-arent-there-more-women-in-tech-wrong-question/

<comment><USER2> Maybe because women aren't as interested??? It seems like that gets missed.</comment>


Ask HN: Virtual PBX for startup? - <AUTHOR>

Can anyone recommend a good virtual PBX service for a startup?  We don't have an office, everyone works from home or satellite offices.  Our current 1-800 number just rings up one of our staff at their location.
I'm looking into services like:

    Phone.com
    RingCentral
    Grasshopper
    My1Voice
    VirtualPBX
    eVoice Receptionist
    Onebox
 I've heard bad reviews of RingCentral and I'm looking seriously at Phone.com.  Anyone here make any recommendations?  Also wondering what other small companies are doing for phone services?
(If it matters, we're a Canadian company but the vast majority of our customers are American.)
Thanks! <comment><USER2> Toktumi.com is another service. I had much better luck with them than Grasshopper, FWIW. We eventually moved on to our own platform (based on Asterisk initially, then FreeSwitch) for more flexibility and control. RingCentral _should_ be avoided.

[We also frequently hire FreeSwitch and Asterisk consultants, if anyone on HN wants to be added to our vendor list.]

<comment><USER3> Please elaborate on why RingCentral should be avoided. I've never had any serious problems, although I'm wondering if I'm missing something.

<comment><USER2> Sure. Several features didn't work as advertised, or only worked intermittently. They always fixed the issues eventually (and apologized), but we were losing customer calls and faxes in the meantime. Sometimes the service didn't work at all...outages and transfer issues led me to their customer service, which sucked. It was infuriating to be paying for advertisements that featured the 800#, only to have the incoming calls/faxes be lost or misdirected. When you have offers for a home lost in the ether, you want decent customer service. Unfortunately, their entire customer service staff seemed to be on their forum - monitoring and rapidly deleting any complaints or negative comments. At one point, they banned one of my employees from their forum because she was trying to resolve an issue. It drew too much attention to the problem.

I believe they've taken in additional funding since I used them (?), so they may have improved. I've not had problems with any of the (dozens of) other 800# or virtual PBX providers I've ever used though, so I was left with a fairly bad opinion of RingCentral.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I use kall8(<http://www.kall8.com/index.php>), because they are cheap. $2 setup fee and $2 per month plus $0.06 per minute.

37 Signals is using grashopper ([http://37signals.com/svn/posts/1973-announcing-ceo-office- ho...](http://37signals.com/svn/posts/1973-announcing-ceo-office-hours))

</comment><comment><USER3> I've used Kall8 and RingCentral. While I'd generally recommend RingCentral (especially if you use a lot of minutes), it depends on your requirements.

Kall8's advantages over RingCentral:

\- Recorded calls

\- Can get the name of the caller through caller ID (RingCentral only offers the phone number)

RingCentral's advantages:

\- Much, much cheaper. RingCentral Office gives you unlimited minutes (well, realistically it's about $20 for 5000 minutes because they have "fair usage limits", so you have to buy more lines if you use more)

\- Allows for simultaneous dialing. This is critical if you want your 800 number to be answered immediately.

I've never used Kall8 or RingCentral for digital lines, by the way, so I'm not sure how well they work in that case.

</comment><comment><USER5> Use Virtual PBX. They've been around the longest (1997) and started the hosted phone service craze. They use their own service as well. I haven't found another hosted phone service that actually uses their own stuff. That's telling.

</comment><comment><USER6> I setup my own PBX with Freeswitch, and we use Flowroute for Origination and Termination. Works great and I just host it on a small Rackspace cloud instance for $10 a month.</comment>


What's the third most common element? - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/starts-with-a-bang/what-s-the-third-most-common-element-e31790e3638 <comment><USER2> What caught my eye was the oscillation in the abundancy graph, there is a tendency for even atomic number elements to be more abundant than odd atomic number elements. Looking at the original Wikipedia article leads to the Oddo- Harkins rule [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oddo%E2%80%93Harkins_rule](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oddo%E2%80%93Harkins_rule). There is more discussion on the stability of even vs odd atomic number elements here: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Even_and_odd_atomic_nuclei](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Even_and_odd_atomic_nuclei). From the latter link, roughly 60% of stable nuclei have an even number of protons and an even number of neutrons. Only 2% have an odd number of protons and an odd number of neutrons.

It would be nice if someone could explain any of the exceptions to the Oddo- Harkins rule, such as the dip at atomic number 44, Ruthenium.

<comment><USER3> when you roll 2 dice, you get a lot more evens than odds.

i imagine the same principle holds. if an odd (Hydrogen) forms with another odd, you get even. Hydrogen+helium=odd, but helium + helium = even. as the evens outnumber the odds, even more evens are forming with evens.

<comment><USER4> No, you don't 1+3+5+5+3+1 = 2+4+6+4+2

(1/36 probability of a sum of 2, 3/36 of a sum of 4, etc)

<comment><USER3> oh yeah your right

<comment><USER3> not sure why i was down voted for admitting I was wrong, assholes.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> What are the six most common elements in the universe?

H, He, C, N, O, Ne

What are the four most common elements in living cells?

H, C, N, O

(We invited the noble gasses to play, too, but they said something along the lines of, "Go away you peasants you'll mess up our perfect orbitals.")

</comment><comment><USER6> What's the third most common element (in the universe)?

tl;dr: Oxygen

But it's worth reading the article to learn why.

<comment><USER7> Note that the very interesting graph near the end of the article actually displays element abundance in the _solar system,_ not in the universe. (Found that out when looking it up in Wikipedia.) The article misrepresents this!

<comment><USER8> I also searched it up on Wiki. They have a larger version of the image, and a data source.

Link: [http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Nucleosynthesis_perio...](http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Nucleosynthesis_periodic_table.svg)

<comment><USER7> And the one that I actually meant: [https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:SolarSystemAbundance...](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:SolarSystemAbundances.png)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> As for lithium (the third-most abundant element after the Big Bang, at 0.00000001% of nuclei), it so happens I was just reading the James S. A. Corey novel _Cibola Burn_ where it plays a role:

"People used to think gold was worth fightin' over, and that shit gets made by every supernova, which means pretty much every planet around a G2 star will have some. Stars burn through lithium as fast as they make it. All the available ore got made at the big bang, and we're not doin' another one of those. Now _that 's_ scarcity, friend."

<comment><USER10> Naw, or at least according to what I've been reading lately we get lithium and a number of other light elements from cosmic ray spallation: ([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_ray_spallation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_ray_spallation) so it's happening all the time.

<comment><USER11> Reminded me how crazy it is that we're in a time where we've legitimized the fabled goal of alchemic transmutation - we can turn mercury to gold. Turns out the philosopher's stone was a particle accelerator.

<comment><USER10> Don't forget about the incomplete specification problem:

 _You wanted non-radioactive gold for your jewlery and dental fillings? Oops, sorry about that...._

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

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Nice read, and pretty neat periodic table.

PS: People might also like "Atomic Physics and Human Knowledge"[0] by Niels Bohr. It's a quick read (less than 60 pages).

[0]: [https://archive.org/details/AtomicPhysicsHumanKnowledge](https://archive.org/details/AtomicPhysicsHumanKnowledge)

</comment><comment><USER13> I would say `p`, right after `div` and `span`

<comment><USER14> Wouldn't <html>, <head>, and <body> be the three most common?

<comment><USER15> but they occur only once per page

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Is big bang necessary for this or does any amount of photons of insanely high energy crystallize in matter in those proportions?

<comment><USER17> The Hydrogen-Helium ratio is very related to the details of the Big Bang. From [http://hyperphysics.phy- astr.gsu.edu/hbase/astro/hydhel.html](http://hyperphysics.phy- astr.gsu.edu/hbase/astro/hydhel.html)

> _Basically, the hydrogen-helium abundance helps us to model the expansion > rate of the early universe. If it had been faster, there would be more > neutrons and more helium. If it had been slower, more of the free neutrons > would have decayed before the deuterium stability point and there would be > less helium._

<comment><USER16> > If it had been faster ... > If it had been slower ...

Isn't the inflation conceived to be as fast and long as necessary so that inputs to baryogenesis give result with hydrogen to helium ratios that are in line with experimental data?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Tell me more about the creation of the elements that "come from cosmic rays".

</comment><comment><USER19> The graph at the bottom of the post would greatly profit from horizontal gridlines.

<comment><USER20> Here you go,

[https://i.imgur.com/Bgttnqh.png](https://i.imgur.com/Bgttnqh.png)

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> I've always wondered how elements produced in past stars end up in our solar system. I wouldn't think the whole universe is getting remixed all the time. It seems like areas stay pretty isolated.

<comment><USER22> At the universal scale, we can observer several galaxies in various stages of colliding with each other (1). In fact our galaxy and Andromeda are on course to collide with each other in about 4 billion years (2).

Massive stars end their lifecycle in a supernova explosion, which blasts much of their mass off into space. the remaining stellar core either forms a neutron star or a black hole. The mass that is blated off contains many heavy elements formed in the star by nuclear fusion, and contributes to nebula formation. These nebulas coalesce to form new stars and their associated planetary systems. We can actualy see this happening in various places throughout our galaxy, with nebulas in various stages of coalescing and with multiple stars forming within them. Absorbtion spectra tell us about the materials these nebulae are composed of.

There is some speculation that heavy elements such as iron are also produced and scattered about in nutron star collisions.

(1) [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galaxy_collision](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galaxy_collision) (2) [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andromeda_galaxy#Future_collisi...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andromeda_galaxy#Future_collision_with_the_Milky_Way)

<comment><USER21> Interesting. So where did our sun come from? Are you saying it started from a multilight year wide cloud?

Why is it 4+ light years from any other stars? Did our sun pull everything out of that radius when it was forming leaving a whole bunch of empty interstellar space?

<comment><USER22> Bear in mind the galaxy is continuously rotating, our sun is orbiting the galactic nucleus, as are the other stars around it. Right now the nearest star is 4 lightyears away, but that's not always the case and it's quite likely other stars have passed ours by much closer than that during it's lifetime. In fact our sun has orbited the galactic core many times; it does so roughly every 250 million years.

The sun would have accumulated material from the nebula it formed in as it drifted though it. The stars near us now are not the ones our sun was near when it formed though (except by extemely unlikely co-incidence), as each star is on a slightly different course round the galaxy, like water droplets in a very slowly rotating cyclone.

If another star were to pass by very close, it could be disastrous for us as it could severely disrupt the planetary orbits in our system, but that's fairly unlikely and there's no prospect of that happening for many millions of years at least. The space between stars is vast, even by comparrison to the size of stars themselves and their solar systems.

EDIT - on that last point, 4 ly is ~250,000 AU (the distance from the earth to the sun). If we asume out solar system is 100 AU across, that's still only 1/2500 the distance to the next star.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> (Maybe it was XKCD that gave me the idea?) But I remember thinking it interesting that humans are the chemical/physical process that creates those highest elements.

</comment><comment><USER23> Did anybody else click on this expecting a DOM element? I was guessing <p>

</comment><comment><USER24> the "a" element (after div and span)

<comment><USER25> It says "it starts with a bang" so I was thinking <!doctype> after <html> and <body> :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> Surprise?

<comment><USER7> Well, yeah. I thought it was carbon, and I thought it was way ahead of the others. But instead there are actually a bunch of elements vying pretty closely for third position: oxygen, carbon, neon, nitrogen, magnesium, silicium, iron, sulphur. (Although one should keep in mind that the graph is logarithmic.)

Note that the graph actually shows the estimated abundance of elements in the _solar system_ (found that on Wikipedia), not the universe or the Milky Way. The article misrepresents that!

<comment><USER27> I thought he was making a Terry Pratchett reference.

> The world is made up of four elements: Earth, Air, Fire and Water. This is a > fact well known even to Corporal Nobbs. It's also wrong. There's a fifth > element, and generally it's called Surprise.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> Love it!!! great share!

<comment><USER7> Please just upvote the post instead.

<comment><USER29> Please just downvote the comment instead. ;)

<comment><USER30> I think in cases where the original comment appears to be made in good faith, it's OK to explain what's wrong with it/what to do instead. That's how people learn.

(Obvious spam/flames/etc. should just be downvoted, ofcourse.)

<comment><USER31> Yup.

It seems like about half of _ilovefood_ 's comments are of the "wow! great article!" type. I'm not sure whether this indicates that comments saying "don't do that" are likely to be helpful or not...

(If it were 100%, I'd conclude that it's a would-be spammer's account, building up a bit of history before starting to try to fill HN with spam. But I don't think that's what's going on here.)</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Top 5 Reasons Why You Should Invest in Customer Support for Your New Business - <AUTHOR> http://blog.reamaze.com/2016/05/17/top-5-reasons-why-you-should-invest-in-customer-support-for-your-new-business/ <comment><USER2> "Because your brand starts from day 1 and customer service is part of your brand."

Preach</comment>


Binary ANSI Art in the Terminal - <AUTHOR> http://jasonchen.me/binary-ansi-art-terminal

<comment><USER2> I built this and it looks proper in the terminal... but when I ssh to localhost its just the ansi characters... its garbled and there is no color. Same in iTerm and Terminal. I can cat the file and its fine. Somehow the ssh login breaks it?

<comment><USER3> Looks like this (as in, display of ANSI escape-sequences in login banners) was disabled in OpenSSH as of v5.1p1: [http://www.mail- email@example.com/ms...](http://www.mail- email@example.com/msg02813.html)

Edit: I should add that it does work fine if you place the generated output into /etc/motd instead. The article argues that might not be the best place for it, I'll leave that for you to decide however.

<comment><AUTHOR> I'll update the article to use /etc/motd then. Thanks for the input!

<comment><USER2> If you want the change to be permanent, on Ubuntu its /etc/motd.tail

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I love ANSI art and I think this is a great way to introduce people to it!

</comment><comment><USER5> libcaca: [http://caca.zoy.org/wiki/libcaca](http://caca.zoy.org/wiki/libcaca)</comment>


Kevin Rose wants to buy Delicious and make... Digg - <AUTHOR> http://twitter.com/#!/kevinrose/status/15929352877248512 <comment><USER2> i can't tell if he's being serious or sarcastic.

<comment><AUTHOR> I was really hoping he was speaking tongue-in-cheek, but I fear he's serious...

<comment><USER3> Until he sees all the o.O going on around him, in which case he will be o_O "ha! Guys, I was just kidding! .... Guys?"

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I think he is serious</comment>


Donald Trump tells NRA gun lobby he's withdrawing from UN arms trade treaty - <AUTHOR> https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-04-27/donald-trump-tells-nra-hes-withdrawing-from-un-arms-treaty/11051182 <comment><AUTHOR> I don't know if the U.S. has any soft power left. Backing out of a UN Arms Trade Treaty makes the arrest and extradition of the Huawei executive seem even more transparently political (as if it wasn't already).

Maybe I'm joining these two things together unfairly or illogically, but the way I see it: The Huawei issue was over selling US-manufactured technology to Iran, with whom the US has trade sanctions. This declaration by Trump means that the US wants to be able to sell arms to countries that are on a UN- sanctioned list. In terms of crimes against humanity, selling arms pretty much outranks anything else.

I think this is potentially a method to cut-off or at least minimize a revenue stream for Russia and China (since neither are signatories to the UN Arms Trade Treaty), but this race to the bottom feels as if it's getting very close to the end.

And then when I read articles like the following, they just feel brutally and trivially sarcastic: [https://torrentfreak.com/us-govt-identifies-top-pirate- sites...](https://torrentfreak.com/us-govt-identifies-top-pirate-sites-and- other-notorious-markets-190426/)

"We want to sell weapons to any country we please. These websites are allowing people to download movies and computer games for free, we need to put political pressure on their respective countries to shut them down!"

It's an odd sense of perspective. Pure trade; capitalism over and above any other... anything.</comment>


Twitter SMS shutdown explained - <AUTHOR> http://thenextweb.org/2008/08/14/what-made-twitter-do-it-the-essential-difference-between-sms-handling-in-europe-and-us/

<comment><USER2> I use Twitterrific on the iPhone _and_ SMS. I like SMS's because they're pushed to the phone, so I know straight away when somebody tweets. I read/tweet from Twitterrific. If (when?) Twitterrific can do push notification i'll be fine with losing SMS, but until then i'll just have to check for new tweets myself. I'm from Australia, one of the countries that just lost SMS's.

</comment><comment><USER3> Using email instead of SMS is not a terrible idea. I wonder how many twitter users (overseas) know how to check email from their phones.

<comment><USER4> Looks like they are finding out. TwitterMail added a lot of new users in the last few hours: <http://twittermail.com/>

<comment><USER5> _"TwitterMail added a lot of new users in the last few hours"_

So many users that all _I_ get to see at that URL is an orange rectangle on a white background?

<comment><USER4> Hmm no, what kind of browser do you use? Send me a screenshot, if possible, at firstname.lastname@example.com

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> When will SMS die, can you imagine if your ISP charged you for IMing but let you surf the web (and do everything else) under your data plan?</comment>


What Google should make instead of their OpenPGP extension - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/@octskyward/email-is-like-a-fine-wine-2f362dc5b6e0 <comment><USER2> I stopped reading this when I couldn't tell if the author understands that Google doesn't encrypt your incoming GPG email, the sender does.</comment>


Pro Forma After a SAFE Round - <AUTHOR> Our client did a SAFE round using the earlier, pre-money forms of SAFE from YC. I'm now trying to model a pro forma for a Series A financing, but struggling with the calculations. Specifically, under the SAFE, the post-money equity plan increase counts as outstanding for purposes of applying the cap in the SAFE. However, when I try to allot for that feature, I seem to get a circular calculation in excel whether the Series A uses a fixed pre-money or a fixed post-money. Can someone walk me through this or provide a sample pro forma in excel that accounts for converting SAFEs using the cap (not the discount) feature? Thanks. <comment><USER2> Try Angelcalc:

[https://angelcalc.com/](https://angelcalc.com/)</comment>


Fearing More Violence, Sri Lanka Silences Social Media - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/21/world/asia/sri-lanka-social-media.html <comment><AUTHOR> _Sri Lanka's action "is a damning indictment" of companies that once portrayed the platforms as vehicles for liberation...

Last year, the government briefly blocked social networks after viral rumors and calls to violence, circulating largely on Facebook, appeared to provoke a wave of anti-Muslim riots and lynchings.

Government officials had repeatedly warned Facebook, which also owns Instagram and WhatsApp, that the posts could lead to violence.

Company officials largely failed to respond until the government shut down access, after which they promised to hire more moderators and improve communication._

And from [https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/21/world/asia/sri-lanka- expl...](https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/21/world/asia/sri-lanka- explosion.html)

 _Rather than trusting in Facebook and other companies to police their networks for hate speech or incitement that could arise as a result of Sunday's attacks, the government was treating the platforms as too dangerous to remain online._

</comment><comment><USER2> Wow, are we know so scared of mob mentality that we don't condemn brazen free speech interference?

I know social media platforms can create mobs, but since when are we all scared that:

> That digital rights and press freedom advocates might now sympathize, if not > agree, with Sri Lanka's action.

This seems questionable to me, and problematic for people trying to find each other.

<comment><USER3> I'm a firm believer in free speech and think this is a bad move.

However, there's a vast difference between targeted censorship of forbidden topics and a temporary blanket ban on certain forms of communication. This isn't _good_ , but it's pretty mild. Temporary limits on fundamental freedoms during an emergency are pretty common, even in the good old USA.

<comment><USER4> Free speech is about the right to __articulate__ opinions and ideas. To articulate ideas and opinions, you have to think and formulate your thoughts.

What Facebook enables and optimizes for can hardly be called free speech. Articulation is not encouraged, merely the spreading of thoughts (both good and bad). Engagement has been optimized for advertising purposes. It led to banal agreement in the form of likes and reshares. There is hardly any discourse, people get silo-ed in echo chambers, and the extreme ends of the spectrum get magnified. Confirmation bias rules, and bad ideas aren't defeated by good ideas because they hardly come into contact.

So no, Facebook isn't enabling free speech, as much as they'd like to claim they are. At best they are a communication tool, nothing more.

<comment><USER5> Free speech is not only about articulation. It's also about the ability to share, disseminate, and influence others.

<comment><USER4> Speech without thought isn't free speech. It's just people and sometimes mobs saying things.

Freedom of information flow isn't the same thing. Democracy works best with an informed electorate. Information flow without discourse is just indoctrination. And that's what Facebook (unintendedly) optimizes for.

<comment><USER6> Speech even without thought is still free speech. You would hope that the most thoughtful speech would be easily recognized and followed in place of its opposite. However, free speech does not exist in a world where only one group decides what is thoughtful speech.

<comment><USER7> The only speech without thought is tourettes.

<comment><USER8> And glossolalia, and sleeptalking. Oh, and recitation from memory. Probably some other things.

Depending on your definition of "thought".

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I've been travelling in foreign countries where it felt like political tensions could be cut with a knife.

And in those moments, " _everyone_ " is heads down into their smartphones. Just thumb scrolling and looking for anything that reinforces their beliefs.

<comment><USER10> Sounds like you just accurately described the United States in 2019, as well. Any country undergoing political turmoil is in a similar boat, and sadly probably always will be. The technological means will just continue to evolve.

<comment><USER11> Or 2016...

<comment><USER12> Or just about any year of your choosing. Today it's phones, before then it was newspapers, before then it was the town square, before then it was the village crier, before then it was the guy that talked to spirits/gods/sky, and so on...

This is not a new thing.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> This seems like a bad move for both moral and practical reasons.

Morally, free communication is a basic human right.

Practically, having a bunch of churches/hotels attacked by an easily- identifiable group, followed by shutting off communications tools, would probably turn people from "death squad curious" into hardcore whatever the local version of hacking your enemies apart with a machete is (parang?). A reasonable but scared person might assume the attacks are of a larger scale, or supported or condoned by the government, or otherwise an ongoing event, rather than a tragic event which happened and is now over and could be left to policy solutions. I know if 9/11 or something like that had happened and then the USG had immediately tried to institute a communications blackout (except for state controlled broadcast media), a lot of people I know would be very on-edge.

<comment><AUTHOR> Sri Lanka has a history of Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp amplifying racial hatred, riots and lynchings.

They don't trust that Facebook has effectively neutralized a force that is tearing their civilization apart.

If Facebook created a monster that they can no longer control, what else should governments do to protect their citizens?

<comment><USER14> The monster exists in their people, not Facebook. I'm no fan of the company but it's not reasonable to say it's something wrong they've done.

Who the hell advocatea violence? Let alone in such large numbers?! Sri Lanka has a deeper problem.

<comment><AUTHOR> Facebook's signature feature is that it's viral. It amplifies ideas and emotions.

And it's most effective at amplifying negative ideas and emotions like rumor, gossip, fear and hate.

Of course the root cause is people. But before Facebook, the bad stuff was slow to spread, and geographically localized.

Facebook released an accelerant, a catalyst into the world. And Facebook has lost control of the monster it created.

<comment><USER15> Human beings can't be trusted with the power to communicate among themselves?

<comment><AUTHOR> _> Human beings can't be trusted with ..._

Very few items could fill in this blank to make a true statement:

"Every human should be trusted with _unrestricted and amplified_ _____________."

If you create a superhuman thing and release it into the world, you damn well better control it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> I'm happy to defer to others with more relevant regional cultural ground truth.

But it's my understanding that social media, specifically WhatsApp, has been accused of amplifying fake news and violence in India, resulting in reduced sharing limits to mitigate against malignant virility.

14 months ago there were anti Muslim riots in Sri Lanka and more recently major Bangladesh/Myanmar Muslim refugee crisis.

If I was running security in Sri Lanka I would also consider a temporary shut down or throttling of social media to mitigate the amplification of sectarian violence.

This is a real tragedy, especially when looked at in perspective with the incredibly violent, costly, and lengthy Sri Lankan Civil War.

When looked at thru the lens of having followed the Sri Lankan Civil War at a distance, the extreme violence(suicide bomber was "invented there) and urban terrorism was a near constant.

This is a horrible tragedy that I hope Sri Lankan can contain and prevent viral escalation.

<comment><USER17> If you are following the Indian election I found an interesting article yesterday about how bots are being deployed on social media to influence that contest.

[https://medium.com/dfrlab/electionwatch-bots-on-both- sides-i...](https://medium.com/dfrlab/electionwatch-bots-on-both-sides-in- india-c87c84040229)

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> Unfortunately, Sri Lanka has a long history of violence even before the age of social media: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sri_Lankan_Civil_War](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sri_Lankan_Civil_War)

<comment><USER19> And sporadic community-based strife prior to that, beginning certainly no later than the first millennium AD.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> I read all so far comments, I don't think that blocking social media is to silence voices and block freedom of speech. I strongly believe (from a crowd- control/security standpoint) that eliminating social media, whatsapp, signal, etc, the hidden communication channels are removed.

So if the government knows that e.g. Henry Bemis is a known trouble-maker, it is easier to monitor his phonecalls, emails, SMS and find out what are his next steps of this bomber/terrorist/whatever. If Henry Bemis is using Signal, WhatsApp, Twitter DMs, Facebook messages, etc. it is easier to coordinate the next steps of an attack, awaken sleepers etc. without the government's security forces to be able to react equally fast.

Typical counter-terrorism stuff (or I just have a wild imagination).

<comment><USER21> This might apply to "traditional" terrorism, that is centrally organized and coordinated. This is however not how most terrorism seems to work these days. Instead, we have something that's been called "stochastic terrorism". Messages calling for violence are spread by people, perhaps deliberately in the hope of someone acting upon them. Given a large enough reach of the message and enough people willing to commit these acts, this quickly becomes something incredibly hard to fight. I'm not sure about it's efficacy, but turning off social media is certainly not a completely invalid way to attempt to prevent more of that happening.

<comment> identity-haver If preventing "stochastic terrorism" was the reason they turned off social media, shouldn't they have done it before the bombs exploded, possibly even before any of the terrorists used it, and not afterwards?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> >A growing body of research has linked social media to religious and racial violence.

>Social media platforms build their businesses on sophisticated algorithms that serve up content that will keep users engaged. This favors posts that tap into negative, primal emotions like anger and fear, studies suggest.

I think governments, and researchers, are going to find that censoring social media doesn't have as large an effect as they imagine. Most of it is noise anyway. Buzz buzz.

<comment><USER23> It is noise, but the noise is fuel on a fire sometimes.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> It just goes to show that governments are going to censor when they feel like it. If your only contact with someone is through social media then you'd have no way to contact them to find out if they're okay.

On the other hand, I can understand short term temporary shutdowns to try to stop further violence, but that's not what Sri Lanka is doing in this case.

<comment><USER25> "Last year, the government briefly blocked social networks after viral rumors and calls to violence, circulating largely on Facebook, appeared to provoke a wave of anti-Muslim riots and lynchings.

Government officials had repeatedly warned Facebook, which also owns Instagram and WhatsApp, that the posts could lead to violence."

Sri Lanka isn't trying prevent people from communicating with each other or censorship. Sounds like they've been bitten by social media-driven violence in the past, which wouldn't be the first country to see this phenomenon (Myanmar).

It's so easy to assume a corrupt government motive here, but we've seen ethnic violence perpetuated on social media in the past. What's a government supposed to do when that happens?

<comment><USER24> > _What 's a government supposed to do when that happens?_

If people perpetuate ethnic violence through cell phones, does the government ban phones? If people perpetuate ethnic violence through speaking, will the government ban speaking?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> I wonder what would happen if they went back to a strictly chronological feed, instead of one optimized for "engagement"? Sure, it wouldn't eliminate any of the hate, but it also wouldn't deliberately concentrate it at the top of the page. People would still see "KILL THEM ALL," but the selfies and cat memes mixed in might put things in perspective.

</comment><comment><USER27> How does the block work on a technical level?

Did they just nicely ask Facebook to geo-IP block their whole country, and Facebook agreed voluntarily?

Is there some legal process, where Facebook's under threat of having money/property in the country seized and/or employees in the country arrested if they don't comply?

Or are they doing it without Facebook's assistance? Do they have government- controlled routers that can blackhole specific DNS queries or IP address ranges? Or put their ISP's under threat of some legal process to implement the same?

How do we make the Internet more robust against the specific attack launched by the government? Or should governments always be able to shut down sites they don't like, when they judge it necessary?

</comment><comment> identity-haver One part of me hopes that governments keep doing this every time there's as much as a bad mugging, so that people will stop relying on the ability of their government-controlled ISP and a US-controlled cloud platform to communicate with each other and maybe try some new P2P technology, or possibly just talk to each other in person instead.

Then again, this is wishful thinking. The only reason the Sri Lankan government has to resort to such a drastic and ham-fisted measure is that they don't yet have the clout or connection to call their friends at Google, Facebook, & Twitter and say "immediately shadowban this set of keywords" like the US and EU can.

</comment><comment><USER28> Disappointing to see that this is one of the first tools a government reaches for in a crisis. It's one of the worst possible responses because of how well censorship plays into the hands of skilled extremists.

</comment><comment><USER29> While they're at it, they might want to ban whatever the people who committed the acts of violence against the churches were using.

</comment><comment><USER30> I just wish people used this flash-mob-forming capability for good more often than evil. :-/

I don't think it's hardly exploited enough!

</comment><comment> village-idiot It says a lot about Facebook's low standing that a lot of people, myself included, are generally OK with it being blocked during emergencies.

</comment><comment><USER31> "The extraordinary step reflects growing global concern, particularly among governments, about the capacity of American-owned networks to spin up violence."

"Officials blocked the platforms, he said, out of fear that misinformation about the attacks and hate speech could spread, provoking more violence."

Good, a step in the right direction and finally officials are connecting the dots on this. I know HN hates to hear this but this is long overdue. It's my view that the executives in charge of these social networks should face criminal prosecution for their supreme negligence and wildly irresponsible behavior, allowing extremism to spread and hateful ideologies to flourish in the name of increasing quarterly engagement metrics. Free speech has little to do with this.

Social media is a fertile breeding ground for hate and a powerful recruitment tool for extremists. I doubt we're able to sort through all the FUD and misinformation, concerted and successful efforts to dictate public opinion and change narratives to suit whatever special interests or political agendas. We're truly in the post-truth era, with the power in the hands of a few SV elite and billionaire aristocrats. From everything I've seen I don't see mankind sorting this out before it's too late for all of us. Social media is the great filter.</comment>


Getting started with iOS development on Heroku - <AUTHOR> http://devcenter.heroku.com/articles/getting-started-ios-development-sinatra-cedar <comment><USER2> That's fine and dandy, and I love Heroku, but recently I've been falling in love with Parse(.com) for iOS development.

True, Heroku gives me more control over how I want to handle requests, but Parse has so much more built in and is simpler to integrate.

What I've been doing with iOS & parse is hook a heroku app to Parse's REST API whenever I want to manipulate the data that is sent beyond what parse allows.

<comment><USER3> What feature can Parse build for you so that you don't need to hook up with Heroku just to manipulate data? Perhaps a way for you to author data manipulation macros in the data browser and the ability to run these macros based on events?

<comment><USER2> That would be a good thing, yeah. Maybe let me write these macros with javascript (which they could interpret on the server side) or any popular scripting language that fits the bill.

<comment><USER3> Cool. I work there and I have been thinking about server side scripting for a while now. Would love to talk to you more about it; shoot me at my first name at Parse.com

-Andrew

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Sinatra seems like a natural choice to write a simple web service API for an iOS app. Anyone know where I find a deeper resource that might assist "Sinatra for iOS" development?

<comment><USER5> Not a Sinatra app but you may want to have a look at this:

[https://github.com/lottadot/lottadot-restkit-ios- rails3-1-ad...](https://github.com/lottadot/lottadot-restkit-ios- rails3-1-advanced)

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> This "Getting Started" post is only likely to actually get you started if you're already familiar with Ruby, Heroku deployment basics, and Sinatra's dependencies.

There is nothing in this guide that lays out all of the components in the tool chain and explains which problems each tool is designed to solve.

Okay, so I should go to the component level to glean that, right? Well on the Sinatra site, there is nothing that explains the specific problems that Sinatra itself is designed to solve. The very first line of the Getting Started section of the Readme page says "Sinatra is a [some three letter acronym]"...with no indication of what that is or why I should want one.

The problem with that is I gain no insight whatsoever into whether the simple examples will translate to something I'd actually want to build. Without that, it literally makes no difference how great the toolchain might be. Exploring it is 100% opportunity cost vs. some shittier solution that actually explains itself more fully up front.

</comment><comment><USER7> Grape (<https://github.com/intridea/grape>) is another great option for building APIs in Ruby.

</comment><comment><USER8> Is it safe to have MacRuby as dependency on your iOS apps?

<comment><USER5> Just starting to read but my understanding is that CocoaPods relies on MacRuby, not your XCode project.

<comment><USER9> You are correct. CocoaPods uses MacRuby to read/write Xcode project files.

<comment><USER10> And soon it won't even need MacRuby, just the Ruby that ships with OSX.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


New Boom Reshapes Oil World, Rocks North Dakota - <AUTHOR> http://www.npr.org/2011/09/25/140784004/new-boom-reshapes-oil-world-rocks-north-dakota

<comment><USER2> Is there any other energy-extraction process so mind-numbingly primitive and destructive? After doing a little research on fracking recently I honestly can't think of any.

Pumping millions of gallons of chemical-laced water under high pressure to fracture geological formations and extract gas is akin to fishing with dynamite, but the long-term environmental implications are far, far worse.

Because once the underground aquifers which form part of the groundwater table are disrupted / damaged they can't be fixed. The water table becomes contaminated with fracking chemicals and the gas the process is meant to extract. What does contamination of a region's water table look like over generations?

Apart from the risk to fresh water, there's also (unsurprisingly) concern over geological instability from the process. A few months ago a fracking company operating in the UK (Cuadrilla Resources) was forced to stop after two mini- earthquakes were linked to their activities: [http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/jun/01/blackpool- earthquak...](http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/jun/01/blackpool-earthquake- tremors-gas-drilling)

In France the practice is banned, and in Australia a national coalition of farmers, scientists, environmental and community groups ( <http://lockthegate.org.au/> ) has formed to oppose the spread of gas wells through prime agricultural land.

The big story with fracking is the long-term economic downside. So it's disappointing that the NPR article almost solely focuses on the short-term economic upside.

<comment><USER3> First thing, I like the false comparisons. They really add to your point. It also goes to drive home that point you made in the second sentence, you know, a little research.

Now, hydraulic fracturing may be primitive sounding. But compared to what? Most modern oil and gas recovery is startlingly similar. Drilling muds frequently cause some hydraulic fracture because you cannot balance all borehole pressures along the entire length of a borehole simultaneously with a single drilling mud weight. Granted these muds contain a different set of chemicals than what is used for purposefully fracturing horizontal wells.

Which brings up another point which even a 'little' research should have lead you to realize. The depths where these wells are drilled are well below drinking water aquifers. In fact, all pore fluids at these depths are quite concentrated brines. You're looking at 1 km + below ground surface. There is a density barrier between these brines and the fresh, drinking water aquifers which we frequently use for tap water and farming. At the flow rates you are dealing with (cm/day to cm/year) no mixing can really take place due to the extremely low Reynold's numbers. I won't say that contamination cannot migrate, since I cannot know that, only that it is exceedingly unlikely.

Furthermore, if fluids could flow freely in these formations, would we need to fracture them at all? The answer is obviously no. That would be what is known as a conventional reservoir. Hydraulic fracturing generally takes place in gas shales. These have hydraulic conductivities on the order of 10^-12 cm/s. Unless the fracture reaches a more conductive body, that fluid isn't going anywhere.

Would the fluid reach a more conductive body? Its possible. It would be undesirable, since you would lose any production from that particular well. Chances are any loses would be trapped by a different aquitard (a layer with very low hydraulic conductivity). Hydraulic fractures tend to deflect when they reach such a phase interface, though. The stresses tend to not be the same on both sides of the interface. A useful analogy would be activation energy in chemistry.

The gas itself is methane. Methane is produced in the subsurface naturally (which is why its called natural gas). It is concievable that greater amounts might be present in the subsurface due to hydraulic fracturing of gas shales, but this would be undesirable for everyone involved since that gas would be lost from production. Which isn't to say that leaks cannot happen, but I am aware of no such cases (and yes, I looked, this is my area of study).

As for earthquakes, you have to first understand what causes earthquakes. Earthquakes are caused when the crust of the earth yields. This means that the stresses become greater than the rock's ability to withstand them. Hydraulic fracture also yields rock. There was research done in California to determine if such yielding could be used to control stresses on the San Andreas fault. It came to nothing because, presently, we are not able to drill deep enough and pump enough fluid to reduce effective stresses to sufficient levels to induce controlled yield. Furthermore, any deep mining city experiences rock bursts. These are also caused when stresses in the rock lead to yield. These feel like small earthquakes, and are picked up on seismographs just like earthquakes, but they cause no damage.

I do believe we need to better understand what goes on during hydraulic fracture. It is exceedingly complex. It is not, however, akin to fishing with dynamite. Open pit mining may be a fair comparison to that, although even there your analogy falls short. I am glad you have an interest in this field, however. It is an important one with a lot of potential. Further study on your part may not change your mind, but will help you make sounder arguments.

Good Luck

<comment><USER4> Be warned...

The above account was created 3 hours ago and is most likely to be from a public relations org for the gas/oil industry.

On another note, if you turn on your TV you'll notice this industry is spending a considerable amount of money right now on commercials, trying to prove to the US public that fracking is the new green. And giving ad money to CNN, Fox, etc, virtually guarantees the buyer that no news that makes them look bad will ever be shown.

<comment><USER5> Actually he seems legit.

<comment><USER6> Surely a PR agency would try to make astroturf posts "seem legit"?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> It is a little unreal driving in western ND. The roads are full of trucks (worse traffic than the last time I was in Chicago). McDonalds is starting at $15/hr, Wal-Mart cannot hire enough people to stock the shelves, and rent on a one bedroom is around $2100 if you can get it. Counties are now trying to figure out what to do about sewage treatment, and the projects in Devils Lake ND (eastern ND) to mitigate the flooding are slowed by years because of lack of trucks to hire.

The amount of oil being produced is expected to double on the conservative estimate and it looks like ND will go from #4 to #2 state in the next year.

</comment><comment><USER8> "Two years ago, America was importing about two thirds of its oil. Today, according to the Energy Information Administration, it imports less than half."

This theory does not appear to be borne out by the figures - the interested reader is invited to consult this week's EIA petroleum balance sheet:

[http://22.214.171.124/pub/oil_gas/petroleum/data_publication...](http://22.214.171.124/pub/oil_gas/petroleum/data_publications/weekly_petroleum_status_report/current/pdf/table1.pdf)

Domestic production is about 10% higher than in 2007, but rows 14, 4 and 1 in the Petroleum Supply table nevertheless suggest that America continues to import roughly two thirds (or maybe it is more like ten twenty-sevenths?) of the oil used.

<comment><USER9> You need to add in the Natural Gas Liquids (oil that is dissolved in hot natural gas and liquifies on cooling) and other fuels from lines 15-20.

America is burning about 18 million barrels per day (mbpd), down from about 21 mbpd in 2005-2006, and producing about 9 mbpd with conventional oil production declining (even including North Dakota's Bakken) and off-shore and deep off- shore compensating.

America is one of the world's largest producers with Russia and Saudi Arabia also in the 9 mbpd range. Together the top three account for almost a third of world capacity. The next largest producers are significantly smaller. Of course, Russia and Saudi Arabia are exporters.

America's per capita usage and per dollar of income usage is absurdly high compared to the rest of the world. If America wants to invest in efficiency, it could be a net exporter again with current technology and a 10-20 year investment in more efficient machines and better quality infrastructure. Unfortunately, American government seems to have chosen to drive head-on at 100mph into a worldwide peak production crisis.

<comment><USER10> > America is burning about 18 million barrels per day (mbpd), down from about > 21 mbpd in 2005-2006

Interesting. What accounts for the decline?

<comment><USER11> cash for clunkers got a statistically signification number of poor milage cars off the road, that also helped with our nations oil consumption.

<comment><USER12> But caused a significantly greater demand for energy to make new cars.

If it was worth it to trade your guzzler for a new car people would do it on their own without incentives. But a new car uses more energy than it saves for many many years. It's only worth it when the old car dies.

<comment><USER13> I have a hard time believing this. Let's take an environmentally attractive car, like the TDi Jetta. How many barrel-of-oil equivalents would you estimate it takes to produce a car like this, in mass quantity?

<comment><USER12> About 200 to 300 barrel of oil. Or about 20 - depending on who you ask.

Basically how far down and across the manufacturing chain do you count the energy. Most places use the second number since it's direct energy for that car. I prefer the first since it also includes things like overhead for the sales team, the engineering, building the manufacturing plant and everything else it takes to actually make a car.

<comment><USER13> Whoa. For reference, 300 barrels of at today's prices is over $24k.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Remember the choice isn't between dirty oil/gas and a wonderful future of clean/green fuel and no damage to the environment. Transitioning to alternative energy sources is incredibly expensive - it will be a major drain on the economy to do so because alt fuels are still struggling to hit grid parity and we still don't have a serious way to reduce oil consumption for gasoline.

So the choice is really between 1) Oil and gas extraction using new technologies with all the attendant risks (and there many) 2) Forget the new technologies and continue to rely more and more on unstable oppressive regimes (Middle East, Russia, etc) 3) Take a major hit to economic growth and aggressively push alternative fuels.

I would recommend (1). Option (2) leads to greater geopolitical instability and very significant long-term risks. Option (3) will undermine economic growth at a time when there is consensus that growth is a priority.

Obviously, this is grossly simplified, but my general point is that we have a limited option set and in truth, none are very attractive. Three rotten apples, we're starving and we must eat one, let's pick the least rotten one.

</comment><comment><USER15> I'm concerned what will happen when they run out of wells to drill. The area has seen an oil boom before, but nothing like this. 5 years ago the town of Stanley had about 1,500 residents. Today it has over 10,000, many of those in temporary housing. Williston has put a moratorium on any further expansion because they simply can't handle any more people.

There's a lot of jobs and money around, but it's a mixed blessing for sure. When the oil dries up, and it will someday, a lot of these towns are going to get hit really hard.

<comment><USER7> People will move on and hopefully the cities will bank the money. Farming will go back to its #1 position. If they conserve their cash, the towns will be fine. If they spend like a drunken sailor, or worse, borrow heavy, then there will be problems.

<comment><USER16> I'm not sure the towns will be fine even if they conserve their cash. When the oil jobs decline, there will be no reason for that many people to live there, so the population will likely decline precipitously (as with any boom town), which tends to produce social problems and a general feeling of malaise (not to mention abandoned buildings).

<comment><USER7> It's the second time around for most of these towns and there is another industry. A lot of the people will move on, but I think the folks in that area are pretty resilient.

That all said, it will probably be a number of years before it goes away.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Enjoyed the article, I couldn't help be reminded that the same thing (but at 10x scale) has been going on in Canada (the tar sands) for at least a decade.

</comment><comment><USER18> Does anybody know of jobs for computational scientists, programmers, and techies in these industries for people over here who wouldn't mind moving to ND for a few years?

<comment><USER19> No. I live near Grand Forks and ND is definitely not a hot spot for programmers. Fargo always has jobs for people skilled with Microsoft tech as Great Plains was started there and turned into a Microsoft campus. There are scattered embedded systems and IT style jobs throughout the state. I've never seen anything advertised out by Williston. Outside of Fargo, the pay for programming jobs is very low, even by North Dakotan standards.

<comment><USER18> I guess they would use some embedded systems/instrumentation stuff to run the equipment.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> I am surprised there is no mention of environmental impact of fracking and that some countries are planning to ban it.

<comment><USER21> In the comments a user mentioned the documentary that covers this _impact_ called Gasland: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gasland>

I recommend it higly to my fellow HNers.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> Huge list of resources by 4 Corners on Fracking related to Australia. <http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/content/2011/s3144681.htm></comment>


Ballmer peak is real, studies say - <AUTHOR> http://betabeat.com/2012/04/bottoms-up-the-ballmer-peak-is-real-study-says/

<comment><USER2> People who drink also make more money.</comment>