Detroit by Air - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/12/07/opinion/sunday/exposures-detroit-by-air-alex-maclean.html <comment><USER2> Detroiter who works at a tech startup here in the city: great bit of photography and a really interesting message, but there is one notable absence in the contrast between the haves and have-nots is in the city of Detroit. There's a huge wealth gap between Detroit and the surrounding suburbs, but there's a pretty big one in the city as well.

There's plenty of investment and activity happening in the "Downtown Development District" than the surrounding neighborhoods, which were hit the hardest from population decline. There's plenty of money and attention that goes to typically young and white tech startups that have recently located (myself included) while other (typically minority) entrepreneurs are left out of the narrative of the "rebirth" of Detroit. It's a lot about race, politics, and access to capital, but it's going to be readily apparent in a few years which areas have been given preferential treatment from state oversight (and tax-write-offs) and local investment.

<comment><USER3> _It 's a lot about race_

You just made it about race, but really it's talent pool and demographics and education/skill levels. If a software group moves to downtown Detroit, it seems destructive to hold that as a _negative_ , as if having some bright spots is somehow a negative because that software group doesn't hire the pipe fitter with the a grade 7 education.

<comment><USER4> No. The story of Detroit's decline and it's comeback has been about race for _decades_. Talent pool, education, demographics, and skill levels in Detroit are a function of race, which dylanbox has experienced first hand and shared.

[http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Detroit#Race_and_ethnicity](http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Detroit#Race_and_ethnicity)

<comment><USER3> The context of this discussion is the "rebirth" of Detroit, not race riots or the 1950s. If Detroit's rebirth is a high-skill, high-tech industry, the exclusion of many Detroit residents has everything to do with skills and education, and absolutely nothing to do with race.

<comment><USER4> Quoting Wikipedia: "Detroit remains one of the most racially segregated cities in the United States."

This is about today, not about the 1950s. The rebirth of Detroit depends in part on the racial conditions that led to today, and the racial conditions we have today.

"De facto educational segregation in Detroit (and by extension elsewhere) was legally permitted by the U.S. Supreme Court in Milliken v. Bradley, 418 U.S. 717 (1974).[42]"

How do you expect skills and education to have nothing to do with race when Detroit's education system is bounded and defined by race?

<comment><USER3> This is an absurd extrapolation. By this definition we can say that literally _everything_ is "a lot to do with race". Is that useful?

<comment><USER5> If true, then yes, it's useful to note, and to say.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> My younger brother recently graduated from college and got a software development job in Detroit. It's nice to see pictures that provide a feel for what Detroit currently looks like.

From what I've heard, there is a trend for bootstrapped startups to move to Detroit to take advantage of the low cost of living. Unfortunately the lack of public services in some places is scary, but it seems like things are improving post-bankruptcy.

<comment><USER7> Off topic question - i've seen the phrase "bootstrapped startup" at lot, but am unsure of it's meaning. I'm familiar with the web-template 'bootstrap', but not sure how it sets one startup apart from another. Does it mean that they are they funded and out of "stealth mode", or that they specifically use the bootstrap template (meaning low cost, potentially unfunded)?

<comment><USER8> Refers to a startup that is funded by the founders and from reinvesting the profits of the startup, rather than funding from angels and VCs. It comes from the term bootstrap used in computing.

<comment><USER9> I think it may actually be from the idiom "to pull yourself up by the bootstraps" meaning to succeed depending solely on yourself: [http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/pull_oneself_up_by_one%27s_boo...](http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/pull_oneself_up_by_one%27s_bootstraps)

<comment><USER10> That is precisely where the term comes from in computing. A computer that is booting up is starting itself up.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Detroit seems to be turning the corner at the bottom of a decades-long economic slide, but there are also some interesting long-term environmental trends that I think bode well for it and many smaller rust belt towns. Most pressingly, a lot of those towns are directly on arterial waterways and receive copious amounts of rain. So you get extremely cheap transportation of goods, and you also just have a water supply in general.

There may have been a great migration to the Southwest over the last 40-50 years, but it's hard to picture a scenario where that area's ecological budgetary chickens don't come home to roost at some point. Then, Detroit and other communities like it become significantly more attractive.

<comment><USER12> One major issue for Detroit, assuming it can emerge from bankruptcy and state management, is how to provide reasonable levels of services to a vastly- reduced population density. Other Michigan cities (like Flint) are facing similar issues.

Check out [https://motorcitymapping.org](https://motorcitymapping.org) and [http://report.timetoendblight.org/](http://report.timetoendblight.org/) \- good ways to see the scope of the problem.

<comment><USER13> > _" assuming it can emerge from bankruptcy and state management"_

Assuming? [http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/12/05/detroit...](http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/12/05/detroit- bankruptcy-manager-resigns/19961603/)

Edit: I'm downvoted for pointing out that the exit is all but finalized and thus "assuming" is an unnecessary qualifier?

<comment><USER12> I didn't downvote you, and your point is valid. Relevant: [http://www.mlive.com/news/detroit/index.ssf/2014/12/governor...](http://www.mlive.com/news/detroit/index.ssf/2014/12/governor_approves_end_of_emerg.html)

So some good news!

I haven't read much on plans for restructuring the city and the various city services once all the vacant structures are removed. Anyone else?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Those blocks with one or two houses are so weird. Looks like sim-city.

</comment><comment><USER15> The Packard Plant caught my interest so I looked it up [1]. Most of the plant is structurally sound: Renovations started in October to turn it into a mixed use art / manufacturing facility [2].

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

[2] [http://www.wxyz.com/news/region/detroit/demolition-and- rehab...](http://www.wxyz.com/news/region/detroit/demolition-and-rehab-begins- at-the-packard-plant)

<comment><USER16> You might find this interesting:

[http://vimeo.com/39346092](http://vimeo.com/39346092)

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> Detroit was hit very hard by the 2008 real estate collapse. Here's a blog showing pictures before and after. You can see a stretch of houses that were occupied and doing fine in say 2006 and just a bare stretch of ground five years later.

[http://goobingdetroit.tumblr.com/](http://goobingdetroit.tumblr.com/)

<comment><USER18> The city of Detroit was in a financial crisis back to _at least_ 2004\. I believe that it was the 2004 Census that put the city below 1M people, which lost them a lot of Federal dollars.

<comment><USER19> It's reasonable to look as far back as the 1970s/1980s when the net population of Wayne+Oakland counties stopped increasing:

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wayne_County,_Michigan#Demograp...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wayne_County,_Michigan#Demographics)

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oakland_County,_Michigan#Demogr...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oakland_County,_Michigan#Demographics)

The decline didn't quite start then, but the drop in population is certainly one of the big contributing factors.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> A few random thoughts reading this as a St. Louisan. Similar views can be had here:

[https://firstname.lastname@example.com,-90.2105613,1547a,20...](https://firstname.lastname@example.com,-90.2105613,1547a,20y,41.29t/data=!3m1!1e3)

That same neighborhood from the ground:

[http://instagram.com/p/qZ9CXbhAXu/](http://instagram.com/p/qZ9CXbhAXu/)

Also, noticed some tags that are present here, too. For example, the REFT in that shot of the Eastern Market District. Here's one from St. Louis:

[http://instagram.com/p/vMiNSnhAT-/](http://instagram.com/p/vMiNSnhAT-/)

</comment><comment><USER21> As a local, it is encouraging that what the pilot sees from the air, I also see from the ground:

> _From the air today, the decline appears to be slowing. The spaces once > covered in rubble are cleared and mowed. Open green spaces, along with new > community gardens and orchards, look almost bucolic against the downtown > skyline. From my plane, I sense the potential for resurgence in these > areas._

> _I think that the inner ring of Detroit will win out in the long run, as > cities are and will continue to be the greenest places to live on a per- > capita basis._

It is really, really hard to bring a city back from this, but it is happening here.

</comment><comment><USER22> As I live in Australia, to see a city like this in such a state is saddening. Of course, everyone has heard stories of Detroit's issues but to see them so starkly pictured is pretty confronting. What's the current economic state of Detroit? Is it still in decline or is there reason to be optimistic?

<comment><USER23> The city government is just beginning to emerge from bankruptcy, so there is some hope there. But they still have a chicken and egg problem: the city has to provide a reasonable level of services to attract businesses and their workers, but they need the tax base to provide those services. What the solution to that will end up being is anyone's guess.

<comment><USER24> And the double-problem is that given the pictures, they clearly have 5-10 times more streets, sewers, electric poles, to maintain than they would have with a compact city.

<comment><USER25> That is definitely a huge problem. If the city had money, I wonder if it would be efficient in some areas to try to buy out the remaining residents so that they could essentially "shut off" entire neigborhoods.

<comment><USER26> > so that they could essentially "shut off" entire neigborhoods.

Just to add to the complications: they'd almost have to–due to either social pressure or environmental pressure–demolish the streets/poles/etc as well, else they still pose a maintenance requirement and an eyesore.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> I was born there. It's sad, but hopeful.

The "Renaissance Center" (celebrating the rebirth of the city) was built in 1980. The last 34 years, I've heard stories of the "inevitable rebirth" of the city.

It's just so sad. For 34 years, a few people are hopeful while the city still declines.

Detroit has so many good things going for it: An international border. A water trade route to the Atlantic. More fresh water resources than any other state. Rail lines that are well connected to Chicago and the East Coast.

What's really sad for me, personally, is the realization that for so many other challenges, like the CA drought, Global Climate Change, etc, we need tons of capital and work. But IMO, for Detroit to get "fixed", we just need a change of MIND (which can be more difficult than getting sustainable energy, but seriously, could change in 1 day, for free, if we had MLK Jr. type people on the ground).

So, in short, it's people's minds that are killing Detroit. We desperately need to change minds there. In Silicon Valley, all races collaborate, live & work together, and we thrive. Please let's try to export that culture to Detroit soon.

<comment><USER28> _" Detroit has so many good things going for it: An international border. A water trade route to the Atlantic. More fresh water resources than any other state. Rail lines that are well connected to Chicago and the East Coast."_

TIL Detroit would be an awesome capitol city in Civ V.

But...how much do those things matter in a modern world?

I think I agree with the basics of your assertion about racism playing a role in what's wrong with Detroit. But, I think you have rose-colored glasses about Silicon Valley. There is class warfare happening in the Bay area, just like in every major city, and poor people of color are coming out with the short end of the stick.

<comment><USER27> In SV, it's less about color, and more about education. Yes, that's IMO, not fact, OK? But, seriously, I've worked with 1,000+ people in Silicon Valley, and >50% of them are not white. So, Indian, Chinese, and other "colors" can be extremely prosperous here. The market doesn't care about "color", as much as their education, passion, and collaboration. To raise people out of poverty, it is more about attitude than physics. The attitudes in Detroit are far more toxic than the minor class warfare in SV.

<comment><USER29> So, what about hispanic and african americans?

There's a world of difference between the kids brought up to choose between pre-med and pre-law, and kids brought up to stay away from the cops.

<comment><USER30> Those two ideas aren't mutually exclusive. Education is the way out of poverty. America provides more opportunities than most other countries.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> Detroit is the perfect microcosm of the US wealth polarity trend. Only a few miles from the "ruin porn" live suburbs like Bloomfield Hills - which has the fourth highest income out of any suburb in the US (1).

I'm hopeful that the Retroit movement (2) finds traction with young entrepeneurs. There's certainly a cachet that the city has within the popular imagination. Just look at what foreign vodka companies are doing to cash in on Detroit's "authenticity" (3).

(1) [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_highest- income_places_i...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_highest- income_places_i..).

(2) [https://re-urbanization.squarespace.com/](https://re- urbanization.squarespace.com/)

(3) [http://www.mlive.com/business/detroit/index.ssf/2014/08/ourv...](http://www.mlive.com/business/detroit/index.ssf/2014/08/ourv..).

<comment><USER32> > Detroit is the perfect microcosm of the US wealth polarity trend.

 _Au contraire_ , Detroit is a perfect microcosm of absolutely abominable government and culture. Sure, this has led to wealth disparity, as anyone with the means to get out, has. But the root cause is awful governance.

<comment><USER33> So you realize that "anyone with the means to get out" of Detroit started doing so 1968ish after the riots, and it in fact is what caused the population and economic decline of Detroit?

One really did come before the other, and it was the exodus of white people (followed by the auto companies) before it was the collapse of the city or any accusations of 'abominable government' (and 'culture', what?).

It's kind of just what happened.

<comment><USER34> They only left when the politicians forgot their job and instead served to stir up resentment and worse. They served themselves instead of the people, Detroit like many similar cities is an example of where politicians and government employee unions put themselves first before the citizens. However unlike cities like New York the money ran out.

Politicians have learned to use diversity to drive a wedge to keep and gain more political power. The divide us, hyphenate us, and make victims, all so they can keep their power.

<comment><USER30> I'm not from Detroit so would it be possible for someone to provide references to any claims? People are just offering opinions. Having watched the news all my life, all I saw was that Detroit followed the auto industry, which did well when big cars did well.

<comment><USER33> There were riots in Detroit in 1967, as in many American cities in the late 60s (Detroit's was actually one of the first of that trend). [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1967_Detroit_riot](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1967_Detroit_riot)

A white exodus from Detroit immediately followed. You can see in the wikipedia decade-by-decade population statistics that Detroit's population loss began between 1960 and 1970, and continued -- and further, with the racial breakdown, that the population loss was almost exclusively white people, with the black population actually continuing to rise through 1990. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographic_history_of_Detroit](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographic_history_of_Detroit)

Although, in fact, you can see in the figures above that white (but not black) population of Detroit had actually already started to drop between 1950 and 1960, it accelerated significantly, and amazingly quickly, after 1967.

Here's a good popular article on the history of race relations -- and white disinvestment and abandonment -- in Detroit, blaming white abandonment for Detroit's current distress. [http://www.epi.org/blog/detroits-bankruptcy- reflects-history...](http://www.epi.org/blog/detroits-bankruptcy-reflects- history-racism/) I strongly recommend this short readable article.

Coleman Young, the first African-American mayor of Detroit, served as mayor from 1974 to 1994. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coleman_Young](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coleman_Young)

As that wikipedia article says, "Young's tenure as mayor has been blamed in part for the city's ills, especially the exodus of middle class taxpayers to the suburbs, the emergence of powerful drug-dealing gangs, and the rising crime rate." The accusations you see in this thread of 'government mismanagement' began with Young's long tenure. Whether they are right or wrong (I'm not a huge fan of Young myself), in fact white flight (which is the entire nature of Detroit's population decline, as the wikipedia demographic statistics show -- black population continued to rise for decades as Detroit's overall population plummeted) began _long before_ Young's election, so can't be a response to any mismanagement from Young's administration.

Shivetya's claim that "They only left when the politicians forgot their job and instead served to stir up resentment and worse," is typical (and is typical in being about race while avoiding using racial words; 'abominable culture', oh? Sadly, I don't think he means an abominable culture of white supremacy. 'stir up resentment', eh? Gee, what could black people in Detroit have had to be resentful about, unless it was artificially 'stirred up'? I suspect people saying such things feel similarly about Ferguson) -- but gets the order of history of wrong. I suppose you could blame Young (or subsequent black mayors) for not managing to reverse the disinvestment trend (although, then, the U.S. auto industry started shrinking and what was left leaving municipal Detroit, which was going to be a problem no matter what; although the fact that the auto industry too increasingly moved to the suburbs is actually part of the 'white flight' story) -- but it's simply a historical fact that the disinvestment trend pre-dated black control.

If the people in this thread blaming bad municipal government really mean pre-1967 white municipal government they should say so and explain what they mean -- but generally the people making these arguments (with barely coded racial terms) mean the post-1974 Coleman Young administration -- but by the time Young took power, the white exodus was already massive, which is what led to his election in fact.

Nobody's gonna read this tldr post in deeply nested not highly rated part of this comment thread, but you asked, so I give you what you ask for, cause this shit pisses me off.

<comment><USER35> Well I read it. The situation in Detroit sounds remarkably similar to the situation in Memphis. Instead of race riots sparking massive white flight, we had desegregation and busing. Immediately, there was a huge exodus to the suburbs. Within 5 years of busing, Memphis had the largest private school system in the country. .

Interestingly, Briarcrest, which is the private school in Memphis that "The Blindside" is based on, is a Southern Baptist school founded immediately after busing. Its legacy is one of overt racism, which I thought was nicely whitewashed in the movie's narrative of white saviours rescuing Michael Orr.

Additionally, Memphis' first black mayor, Willie Herenton was mayor from 1991 to 2009 and has had much of the city's slide blamed on him. The extent of his influence on that is arguable, but there was certainly a great deal of mismanagement that happened under his watch. We've had some reinvestment in our downtown, but we've still got lots of problems.

<comment><USER33> Yep, it is a common situation in the U.S.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> A lot of it actually looks really nice, almost like it's in the country or a very small town. If they can keep tearing down the completely blighted areas, it seems like they can actually turn it into something quite pleasant.

<comment><USER37> I was also struck in the same manner by the green spaces. They seem like a plus, but the tax base resulting from such a low density population does lend itself well to running city services.

<comment><USER38> They seem like a plus, until you see the remaining houses up close. They are usually in terrible shape, and decent ones are targets for crime in a city where emergency service response is often measured in hours.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER39> A recent Jim Jarmusch & Tilda Swinton film, Only Lovers Left Alive, was set partially in a decaying Detroit mansion as the perfect home and city for ancient vampires wanting a quiet home. I found it an interesting commentary on Detroit.

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

</comment><comment><USER40> I saw Alex MacLean (the photographer) give a talk about his aerial photography in at the lincoln library last century. It was great, not only are the images great, but he takes time to explain why they are significant. From the air is an interesting way to analyze.

He's got more on his website:

[http://www.alexmaclean.com](http://www.alexmaclean.com)

</comment><comment><USER41> We see a lot of the most blighted areas, but out of curiosity: what's the best neighborhood inside Detroit city limits?

<comment><USER17> There are probably seven or eight nice neighborhoods in Detroit. If I was to pick two it would be Indian Village or Palmer Park which both have their own private security 24 hours a day. Big well kept houses with narrow streets.

A few more better than average would be downtown, Corktown, N. Rosedale, S. Rosedale (where I grew up)and Sherwood Forest. I tell people to think of Detroit not as a big monolith but as a series of villages, some are OK to visit and others are to be avoided at all costs.

<comment><USER42> Midtown is doing well now as well. Lived there for three years and just visited again for the first time in 6 months or so for Noel Night. I saw a handful of businesses there that had all been established since the time I moved out. Lots of stuff to do, and it's pretty safe. Response time from the WSUPD is just a couple minutes, and they take calls for a few mile radius outside WSU's campus. [http://www.livemidtown.org/](http://www.livemidtown.org/) is a decent marketing site with more info on it.

<comment><USER41> It's interesting that Indian Village, Palmer Park, and Midtown all benefit from a police force alternative to Detroit PD. I wonder if there are other services like this? I would assume private schooling would be common, but what about things like public works?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER43> Have there been proposals following this bankruptcy to split Detroit out into sub-"cities?" The actual definition of a city is somewhat arbitrary. In Australia for example, the official "city" unit that manages municipal services is actually not Melbourne or Sydney it's smaller units usually encompassing a population of 100k or so.

The division of responsibilities between federal, state and city is different but I think the takeaway is that while "Detroit" is a geographical and cultural unit, it doesn't mean it has to be a municipal one.

Maybe such a change of paradigm would be helpful here. The thought of rehabilitating a new entity comprised of suburbs, but not the downtown (or via versa) might be a less daunting task. It;s easier to move the needle.

Bankruptcy seems a good time to do something like this.

<comment><USER19> I tried to understand the law on this a bit during a previous discussion. In Michigan, cities are established by a municipal charter. That charter can more or less only be amended by a vote of the people living in the city.

I think would be very difficult to make such a proposal that did not end up drawing economic lines (in some sense, such lines are natural). People on one side of such a line would be strongly incentivized to oppose it. So it's likely to be impossible politically.

</comment></comment><comment><USER43> For any radical community building idea (like a cult or a commune) Detroit poses some interesting possibilities.

It seems like an urban acreage with a bunch of houses or other buildings could be bought for the price of an average house. I'm imagining some sort of new age Amish colonizers.

<comment><USER43> EDIT - This was kind of a joke. But after writing it, I actually think it's it's an interesting idea for some sort of kibutz-ish urban village project.

<comment><USER44> You may be interested in reading Bolo'Bolo by P.M. or [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Widmer](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Widmer)

I've taken a lot of inspiration from this for future plans.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER45> I was just talking about the potential reinvigoration of Detroit this morning, because of this NYT article from yesterday:

[http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/08/arts/galapagos-art- space-w...](http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/08/arts/galapagos-art-space-will- make-detroit-its-home.html)

This is a really unique, innovative venue for the arts that has been operating in Brooklyn for almost 20 years. A long time for a venue to exist in NY, and a testament to their founder.

They are headed to Detroit because of how high rent has become. If Galapagos can recreate what they had done in NY, it's a real win for the area that they are moving into.

</comment><comment><USER46> Brush Park features in a lot of those photos (just up from Ford Field and Comerica Park).

There are beautiful historic buildings with great swaths of vacant land. It's a designated historical district, so the city is making it tough for a layperson to buy a lot. For example, all available tax foreclosed lots in the area were removed from the treasurer's auction.

I suppose they're trying to prevent ugly condos being built, but then you get a situation like this where an area very close to downtown is so sparse.

</comment><comment><USER47> I can see cars, buildings,greenery but I could not see a single person in any photo. Why is that? Why there are no people on roads?

</comment><comment><USER48> Is this the new model of urban decay? There is a large trend towards urbanism, but not every city is a winner.

<comment><USER49> The Economist recently published a contrarian article claiming that suburbs are the real winner on a global scale.

<comment><USER48> Interesting. Link? I see some suburbs winning and some losing but don't have an aggregate view.

<comment><USER49> [http://www.economist.com/suburbs](http://www.economist.com/suburbs)

<comment><USER48> Of course - how obvious. :-)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment> Paul-ish Who mows the lawns on the empty lots?

</comment><comment><USER50> No paywall: [https://archive.today/nbdzT](https://archive.today/nbdzT)</comment>


Ask HN: Why isn't there an anonymous communications platform on the blockchain? - <AUTHOR> It seems like there is a great need in the world for an anonymous message board (like reddit, HN, etc.) build on a blockchain that prevents it from being shut down. A sort of communications protocol for people to use without fear of moderation or limitation of free speech, other than the downvotes of the other users. <comment><USER2> There's Steemit:

[https://cointelegraph.com/news/blockchain-social-platform- st...](https://cointelegraph.com/news/blockchain-social-platform-steemit- takes-advantage-of-reddits-heavy-censorship)

Though I didn't try it yet as they closed registration for a while (there was a hack).

</comment><comment><USER3> Is blockchain really necessary? Isn't [http://voat.co](http://voat.co) trying to be the much more libertarian alternative to reddit?</comment>


97% of Airports Fail at Cybersecurity - <AUTHOR> https://www.softwaretestingnews.co.uk/97-of-airports-fail-at-cybersecurity/ <comment><USER2> Security is also an attitude and habit. So, failing at _cybersecurity_ means they likely fail at other aspects as well. See also: security theatre.</comment>


A tool/webapp to recommend/share links with different groups of people? - <AUTHOR>

I would like to share or recommend links to different groups of people. I know, there's delicious but it isn't quite what I'm looking for, I think, because everything you share is visible to everybody following your shares.
I've just checked out Friendfeed and it neither seems to be what I look for, for it simply aggregates anything you share and feeds it to everybody, doesn't it?
What I'd like to do is share, or rather, recommend a link to only a subset of the people I know.
For example, one link might only be of interest to my co-workers, while another might only be interesting for my friends.
Ideally, I'd simply click a button while being at the URL to share, pick the group to share with and -bam- it's shared.
The different groups would follow my shares via RSS or something similar. <comment><USER2> You actually could use delicious, with a tag for each group. If you really don't want different groups to see your other links you could use different usernames.

e.g. if your username was JustAGeek you could have any links for your friends tagged with 'friends', and the URL for those links would be <http://delicious.com/justageek/friends>.

For work you could have the username 'justageekwork'.

Delicious generates an RSS feed for any tag as well, just visit that URL and it gives you an RSS feed URL for that list of links.

Use the delicious firefox plugin for the one button click sharing functionality.

<comment><AUTHOR> Hm, yes, that could work.

Though it is still a bit too complicated because quite a lot of interaction is needed to do that, even with the delicious Firefox addon. You probably have to manually enter the group name as a tag, for example.

Ideally, I'd only have to click one button displaying a popup with all groups I've set up.

But well, sounds like the way to go - unless somebody can point me to something else.

So, thanks for your answer! :)

<comment><USER3> I have also been looking for something similar to what you are mentioning, but have yet to find anything. Having the ability to choose between groups to share with seems easy enough.

The delicious method described above would work, but I believe you are right - there should be something a little easier.

Hopefully we'll find it today!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> You can do something like this with FriendFeed. We use it for a programming user group. The feature is called 'FriendFeed Rooms' (<http://friendfeed.com/rooms/overview>). You can create a room for each group (public or private). Use the bookmarklet (<http://friendfeed.com/share/bookmarklet>) to post links to any room, as well as add your own comments to the link. Users can get their FriendFeed mailed to them, if they wish. Or, you can make the room public, and they can visit it at their leisure, without signing up.

I recommend giving FriendFeed a second chance as an app, in any case. Every once in a while I come across another feature that I wish FriendFeed did that it does, indeed, already do. It does a ton, and it does it well.

EDIT: I missed one of your needs: Yes, one can subscribe to a FriendFeed Room's feed in a feed reader (that reads Atom-formatted feeds). It can also be read via Facebook.

<comment><AUTHOR> Ah, looks like I misunderstood the name "Rooms" I was under the impression it was some sort of discussion forum and thus didn't even followed that link. Will check if it's that's what I need, thanks!

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Twitter the link with #groupname? It's instant, it's easy, there's a client on every platform, they can go to the group page (<http://search.twitter.com/search?q=%23groupname>) and subscribe to the group feed (<http://search.twitter.com/search.atom?q=%23groupname>). It's simple, has 100% of the functionality you're looking for, and it works.

<comment><USER6> Only caveat is you have to get your friends to join #groupname... you can't arbitrarily say your friend Joe is a member of both #coworkers and #friends... he has to join those groups.

That may be really obvious, but getting everyone you know to self-categorize for your convenience can be a challenge. Being able to label someone for your own purposes is much easier.

<comment><USER5> If you explicitly had that need, I feel like a mailing list could serve the same purpose. That being said, I feel like you could set up something to email-blast a group of people with your latest links from twitter for that group.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> We use Mail2FF (<http://friendfeed.com/share/mail>) to post links and photos to a private FriendFeed Room (<http://friendfeed.com/rooms/>). It works great and you can even get a daily or weekly digest by email (<https://friendfeed.com/account/> > Email Settings) reducing the "interface" to plain email.

EDIT:

Instead of emailing to the room you can also add a delicious tag's RSS feed to it (e.g. ff:myroom => <http://feeds.delicious.com/v2/rss/yourname/ff%3Amyroom>) to cross-post from delicious using your favorite browser bookmarklet.

EDIT:

And as mileszs said (<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=465772>): you can add the room's RSS to a reader (even if it's a private room).

</comment><comment><USER8> I created a tool for exactly this purpose. <http://www.peerviewr.com>. It is very early and very rough, but the goal is to solve the problem you mention. It allows you to post links, youtube links, upload files and pictures, and create blog posts. You can share within your group only or it can be made public. It is basically a combination between Google Groups and Wordpress. I would love to make it grow with your feedback. I call it Glogger, but the only domain I had available was at: <http://www.peerviewr.com> Again pls let me know what you think I believe it is useful and would be fun to make it grow.

If you have any feedback feel free to email me at: email@example.com or just post here to HN.

<comment><AUTHOR> Great will check it out, thanks!

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> We are building something like this at my startup. <http://www.clikball.com> .. It is closed invite right now since we are still rapidly building it out, but if you want to try it out and see if it fits email me - firstname.lastname@example.com

We have private groups for sending to multiple people, sending to only to a single user. You can share publicly as well then anyone who follows you can see it (the twitter permissions model).

We had the same wish :)

Right now it is only usable via a Firefox 3 / Flock extension, but support for more browsers is coming.

<comment><AUTHOR> Cool, I'll contact you soon, thanks!

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> My old company koollage.com can do something pretty close to this (if not exactly what you want). It never started up due to the usual list of reasons, but it's still running on a server. Check out the tour (<http://www.koollage.com/tour.html#share>), there should be info on groups.

If you have some questions or want more info, PM me or reply to this post.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks, that indeed seems to be what I need - except that I couldn't quite understand whether the people I want to share with also have to register at koollage.com or they could simply subscribe to a RSS feed.

And then, it's of course a bit risky to use that service when it might be shut down any moment.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> I'v been doing exactly that with delicious for the last three or four years. Use a specific tag (or combination of tags, is you like versatility and modularity) and then give to the people/group the url of the delicious page (or feed) for that tag. You can also use Feedburner (or Feedblitz) and make it available as a email newsletter.

Nicola D'Agostino

</comment><comment><USER12> <http://github.com/alx/pressmark/tree/master>

This is a wordpress installation I made, with a delicious-like fonctionnality: add and list bokmarks.

You could easily change the input form to include a group feature, like a pre- defined tag like recommanded by ahpeeyem.

<comment><AUTHOR> Ah, cool, will check it out later!

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> I'm working on something like this on my spare time, since I also wanted something with this functionality, amongst other things.

If you want to talk about it or want me to send you word when/if I finish it, let me know how can I contact you :)

<comment><AUTHOR> You can send me an email to kiltec{a t}gmx.de

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> I think identi.ca has better way of handling groups. Just check it out <http://identi.ca> .

<comment><AUTHOR> Totally forgot identi.ca! Will probably be one of the things to consider when deciding for a final solution!

Thanks!

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> Magnolia was great, well, until it crashed. You could start groups and share each link with the group(s) you wanted to.

<comment><AUTHOR> Well, I guess I'll bookmark it and testdrive it once it's back.

Thanks! :D

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> I don't have the time to confirm it for sure right now, unfortunately, but I think <http://sqworl.com> could be used for something along those lines.

<comment><AUTHOR> Hm, hard to tell from their homepage and they don't offer a tour or something. But it looks more like a tool to somehow create personalized homepages.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> can't you use google reader for this? Just make up some unguessable name for each group. No one could find the shared links unless they know the tagname. (Pretty sure, not 100%).

You can get anything into google reader. For instance you see something shareable online, then just use google notebook to save it to the appropriate tag.

</comment><comment><USER18> I wish that everyone would just use IRC. I find it the most easiest and discreet way to share things and ideas among a group.

</comment><comment><USER19> Maybe <http://SocialBrowse.com>

<comment><AUTHOR> That comes pretty close - if only had the possibility to group followers. During my test drive with that addon I couldn't find such a feature. :(</comment></comment>


Help us with a Netflix survey for determining the Life time Value - <AUTHOR> https://docs.google.com/forms/d/16SVpscGh8Gr8muHEf5c4QWjrEoQadOBhecmnZVTF4ko/viewform Results will be posted November 1st. <comment><AUTHOR> Results are visible after completion.</comment>


Ask HN: Should Apple build its own search engine? - <AUTHOR> <comment> atom-x Oh god, no. Apple should very much stay out of the SAAS business and stick with their hardware and OS expertise.

<comment><USER2> It's a bit late for that. Services were 22% of total sales in Apple's last quarter (13 billion vs 58 billion) and almost 40% of their gross margin (13348-4622)/(58313-35943) = 39%)

([https://s2.q4cdn.com/470004039/files/doc_financials/2020/q2/...](https://s2.q4cdn.com/470004039/files/doc_financials/2020/q2/_10-Q-Q2-2020-\(As- Filed\).pdf))

Edit: that requires interpreting "SAAS" fairly wide, but I think that's warranted in the context of "writing their own search engine".</comment></comment>


Five Myths About India - <AUTHOR> http://www.businessweek.com/print/globalbiz/content/dec2009/gb20091224_238332.htm <comment><USER2> 78% of Indians live on less than Rs 20 ($0.43)a day

[http://business.rediff.com/column/2009/dec/21/guest-how- skew...](http://business.rediff.com/column/2009/dec/21/guest-how-skewed-is- data-on-indias-poverty.htm)</comment>


Websites offering pirated papers are shaking up science - <AUTHOR> http://www.economist.com/news/science-and-technology/21724381-musicians-and-moviemakers-are-not-only-ones-suffer-internet?fsrc=scn%2Ftw%2Fte%2Fbl%2Fed%2Fwebsitesofferingpiratedpapersareshakingupscience <comment><USER2> I dont get it, how is it shaking up science.

The heading is illogical. The article starts with how the film industry is being affected by piracy. Then it says that a court has granted a publishing platform damages from sci hub. Then in the next few paragraphs it lists the countries with the most users of the sci hub websites. Then it ends with how the creator of sci hub will be awarded a Disobedience award by MIT, which she likely wont attend...

I was expecting a detailed analysis of how something like sci hub affects research and science, not the middleman companies that earns from the research.

<comment><USER3> >An analysis of Sci-Hub's server logs, published in Science in 2016, found its biggest users were people in Iran, India and China. Such middle-income countries do not qualify for the subsidies big publishers provide to users in the poorest nations, but their universities nevertheless may not be able to afford subscriptions.

That alone could potentially have far reaching consequences. I agree that the article is a bit light on details though.

<comment><USER4> Yeah, that may be true.. But Scihub is an onion site. That means there's not much in the way of "who", but in the way of last hop before hitting the onionsite.

And I would daresay that one should probably not trust logs when going through Tor.

<comment><USER5> I expect _very_ few people visit scihub on Tor. The logs may be for scihub.cc, then?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Elsevier and others represent a massive and punishing private tax on the basic operation of science and academia. It's a scam but it's so ingrained in academic culture that very few groups of scholars seem willing or able to break away from it. They basically steal copyright from the authors of these papers, they don't compensate the authors or the peer reviewers, but they collect outrageous prices from libraries and individuals for access to already-publically-subsidized research. It's utterly depressing that they continue to exist.

<comment><USER7> > they don't compensate the authors or the peer reviewers,

I suffered reading peer reviewed articles on Elsevier or IEEE with unremarkable results at best, irreproducible results at worst.

The title goes "Novel Way of Breaking a Glass", an abstract that describes the methodology as "dropping a file cabinet on it", and the _talent_ (yes, talent) to come to the conclusion that "file cabinets could prove useful in breaking trees or pierce underground bunkers in the future". Are you kidding me, Dr Bozo et al?

I've had to wade through hundreds of insipid articles which made my feeling of being stupid more bearable but diminished my respect for many things shrouded with a veneer that come at $35 a pop.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Not many people would mind a company making a small profit from tax-funded research, if they are offering a value-added service, but the scale of Elsevier profits is ludicrous. It is one of the most profitable large companies on the planet.

Clearly Elsevier are profiting from their near monopoly in this area and something really needs to be done about them.

[https://www.theguardian.com/science/2017/jun/27/profitable-b...](https://www.theguardian.com/science/2017/jun/27/profitable- business-scientific-publishing-bad-for-science)

</comment><comment><USER9> "Thomas Jefferson, the third president of the United States, described knowl- edge in the following way: "he who receives an idea from me,receives instruc- tion himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me". In doing so, Jefferson anticipated the modern concept of a public good. Today we recognize that knowledge is not only a public good but also a global or international public good.We have also come to recognize that knowledge is central to successful development. The international community,through institutions like the World Bank, has a collective responsibility for the creation and dissemination of one global public good—knowledge for development."

Joseph Stiglitz, "Knowledge as a Public Good"

[http://s1.downloadmienphi.net/file/downloadfile6/151/1384343...](http://s1.downloadmienphi.net/file/downloadfile6/151/1384343.pdf)

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

</comment><comment><USER10> > Elsevier argues that there is more to publishing than simply shovelling > papers online and that work such as editing and arranging for reviews has to > be paid for.

It's funny how _arranging_ for reviews _has_ to be paid for, but the work of reviewing doesn't.

<comment><USER11> That really infuriates me.

In the fields where I worked, I've had to read dozens of papers by teams from Turkey, China, the Slavic countries, and other places. People whose command of their field was far ahead of their command of English. People who submitted to Elsevier. And whose papers received no amount of copy-editing whatsoever. It was so bad, you could tell the authors' nationality by their grammar errors. Slavs would drop the definite and indefinite articles. Turks would refer to people as "it." Chinese authors would mix plural and singular inappropriately.

If they just spent a minimum on copy editing, I would pay the fees on every paper I needed. But they didn't even have the decency to do that.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> There was a good article on the vast money charged by these journals in the Guardian last week. Although the publishers business does seem pretty robust, there are at least winds of change from universities and governments who fund this research that are finally saying enough is enough...

[https://www.theguardian.com/science/2017/jun/27/profitable-b...](https://www.theguardian.com/science/2017/jun/27/profitable- business-scientific-publishing-bad-for-science)

<comment><USER13> Hopefully something charges this time. Last time (i.e. around 2010) the publicity campaign failed. Back then university librarians managed to create some awareness about the extortionate price of journal subscriptions, but that's all they did, prices didn't decrease.

The trouble is, there are certain core journals that are really needed and many crap journals. Subscriptions come in packages, i.e. a library can't choose to keep _Cell_ and get rid of _Bioorganic and Medicinal Chemistry_ , they can only cancel Elsevier altogether. That's why the campaign failed last time, there wasn't a critical mass ready to unsubscribe from everything to convince the publishers to get their act together. Maybe this time, with Scihub, things improve.

I predict that Elsevier & friends are going to use their influence on Congress to implement internet filtering at universities to keep Scihub out. It worked for the music/film industry.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> Super misleading Economist headline and subheading: "Websites offering pirated papers are shaking up science: Musicians and moviemakers are not the only ones to suffer from internet piracy"

If you come to this topic from an essentially blank slate, the headline and subheading would make you think that /science/ and /scientists/ are suffering from piracy (in analogy to the claim that musicians and moviemakers are).

Except very likely the opposite is true: this piracy offers much greater exposure to scientific literature and enables access to otherwise-inaccessible scientific knowledge for scientists in poorer nations.

Unlike musicians and moviemakers, scientists make ZERO money from publication royalties of journal articles but they (or their institutions) have to /pay/ for access to these journals. The only ones making money are the publishers.

<comment><USER15> Well, in deference to the dramatic title, there are also negative consequences and not only those positive ones.

For instance: It seems logical that the average quality of science goes down when peer-reviewing is optional. Likewise, corrections and redactions are not guaranteed to take place.

The real game change will be if/when pirate publishers force traditional publishers to drop their profit models, and the best of both worlds can be achieved.

<comment><USER16> You also need to show that current peer review is happening and is effective at identifying bad science, and that corrections and redactions are currently guaranteed to take place.

Both of those are questionable.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Send them bitcoin if you wish to support them:

SciHub: 1K4t2vSBSS2xFjZ6PofYnbgZewjeqbG1TM LibGen: 1Gz3SZniRo8isQzgPiuovr11n3s75zecg2

<comment><USER18> > 1K4t2vSBSS2xFjZ6PofYnbgZewjeqbG1TM

I don't know where you got that, but it's not the actual bitcoin address of SciHub. [http://www.sci-hub.cc/donate](http://www.sci-hub.cc/donate)

edit: It's the one on their home page: [http://sci-hub.cc/](http://sci- hub.cc/)

<comment><USER17> Looks like they have two? On the front page, when you scroll down "support the project" they display the one I pasted.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> I don't universally support this kind of thing but in this case I do. Nearly all of this research is directly or indirectly taxpayer funded. All taxpayer funded research should be freely available to us since we paid for it.

That and these gatekeepers are just bridge trolls that add zero value. It made sense back when journals were physically printed but today the distribution cost is zero.

<comment><USER20> That most of this research taxpayer funded is indeed a good argument.

Beyond that, people criticized other disrupted industries for continuing to provide poor customer service -- seemingly unable to fight back after decades of treating customers as captive audiences, and taking them for granted. Well if you think the music industry was bad at that, the academic publishing industry is way worse. These guys typically provide no significant value add, yet they want large economic rewards. Meanwhile, journal after journal has been shown incompetent to keep garbage papers -- even papers generated by Markov chains -- out.

My impression is that they also discriminate heavily against individual researchers, many of whom cannot afford exorbitant per-per paper fees, while large (typically subsidized) institutions get much better deals when they are able to afford bulk access.

<comment><USER21> > many of whom cannot afford exorbitant per-per paper fees

Whilst the publishers are certainly not pulling their weight, I don't think the biggest offenders have per-paper fees. The biggest offender is probably Elsevier, and as far as I know they make their money from selling subscriptions to research institutions and universities.

<comment><USER20> I don't have any real data on this... my comment was based on my own experience of not being able to afford per-paper fees and certainly not being able to afford subscriptions, whilst observing that the academic institutions seem to have no trouble maintaining access. No idea what the per paper fees would actually work out to for universities (say, the ones actually downloaded/accessed).

As someone who reads a fair number of papers, I definitely feel like the publishers' days are numbered, and not just because of Sci-Hub and LibGen. More and more often now, I can find papers that I want, legally, on the first try. Even more encouraging, I find that when I can't find a paper I often just have to wait a few months and try again to find an open Internet source.

Case in point: a few months ago I wanted this paper -- [http://bit.ly/2tE4O4K](http://bit.ly/2tE4O4K) \-- but all the CiteSeerX links were broken and apparently had been for a long while. About two months later it's back. This is just one example, but I find this increasingly works with many papers.

There is also ResearchGate, which is a social network to get papers from an authors, which is legal if they are alive. But their sign-up process is also much harder for independent researchers. You have to "prove you are a researcher," as though attempting to get access to research papers weren't _prima facie_ evidence of that.

In CS the worst paywaller is consistently the ACM.

<comment><USER21> Ah, my bad I understood you wrong. I thought you meant per-paper fees for people submitting papers. Indeed many journals still have a paywall for papers.

<comment><USER20> Lol they charge to receive the papers, too?

<comment><USER21> Some very sleazy open papers do.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> I think the big publishers are not behaving rationally here, trying to fight a library based in Russia via American courts.

A much cheaper and effective alternative would be to simply bribe some Russian officials. If the bribe is big enough the websites will be gone in a week, owners arrested.

<comment><USER23> I'm pretty sure that is criminal.

<comment><USER24> Of course you would do it secretly.

<comment><USER23> Still, i would never recommend a big institucion to engage in criminal activities for its own benefit :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> Economist paywalls are easily circumvented: a) Delete the element covering the content b) Disable or delete cookies

<comment><USER26> Economist also lets you a few articles per week for free. If you find yourself bumping against their paywall with any regularity, perhaps you should actually pay for the content? Or, would you like to live on an internet where the only content that can pay for itself is clickbait?

<comment><USER27> Economist only lets US citizen read a few articles per week for free.

I get on the first visit with a clean browser already that message.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> University research is funded by the state in germany. Research results should thus live in the public domain.

I have no pity for those artificial paywall companies, benefiting from research funded with tax money. This model needs to change - fast. And the change should be supported by legislation.

<comment><USER29> This. A lot of long term research worldwide is publicly funded and the status quo of the scientific journals (that once had their place in a world with high communication barriers and costs) needs to be seriously shaken up. That plus the huge business around scientific conferences with most speakers having to pay to be able to present their findings.

But I guess the whole model in the scientific community might need rethinking. Most people are only worried publishing because that is the only measure that matters at the moment...

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> The irony of this article being behind a paywall.

<comment><USER31> Pastebin (or one of the many variants) should be put to use with anything like this.

</comment></comment><comment> ezequiel-garzon I can't access the article, but in any event I wonder: doesn't it feel like this is actually being allowed? We're talking about hosted content, not torrents. Of course, many (including me) feel that this sharing of information can only advance society, but I'm surprised to sense that the establishment agrees.

<comment><USER32> The society as a whole has to accept small violations of laws. Otherwise, it would be very difficult to improve laws. IMHO, it is a temporary tolerance because the correct final stance is not obvious.

</comment></comment><comment><USER33> > An analysis of Sci-Hub's server logs, published in Science in 2016, found > its biggest users were people in Iran, India and China. Such middle-income > countries do not qualify for the subsidies big publishers provide to users > in the poorest nations, but their universities nevertheless may not be able > to afford subscriptions. Not every downloader was cash-strapped, though. > Americans were the fifth-biggest users.

Let's be frank here, the people pirating these papers are capable of understanding them (to some extent or another), and being educated to the point of understanding new-ish papers necessarily implies that a relatively large amount of money is being spent on their education. This isn't entirely/primarily about money.

If the main users of this site are using it to get around sanctions placed against their country, the site becomes far less sympathetic in my eyes.

<comment><USER34> > If the main users of this site are using it to get around sanctions placed > against their country, the site becomes far less sympathetic in my eyes.

I struggle with this. An opposing perspective is that there's a bunch of students who are trying to do their research and push science forward, but a country (or group of) half-way around the world has decided that they'd rather the student not have access to the world's body of research. I can see merits in both angles...</comment></comment>


Why is CDC storing crucial flu data in a private database? - <AUTHOR> http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevensalzberg/2011/10/02/is-the-government-hiding-something-about-swine-flu

<comment><USER2> Not sure in this specific case, but generally my experience is that many researchers in the biological sciences want to sit on data for a long time. The often given excuse is that they want to be absolutely certain they can extract all publishable results themselves. They're terrified someone else might find something they missed.</comment>


Show HN: Songsp.in - a curated daily indie music newsletter - <AUTHOR> http://songsp.in/

<comment><AUTHOR> They say build something you would use, and I felt there was a need for this. It's really aimed at people who love new music but are either too busy to scour the web looking for it, or don't know where to start. Subscribers get an email each day telling them about a new band with links to a player and places they can download the song. We only cover indie/unsigned bands and all the links are to tracks the band or label has posted to the web for free. I'd love to hear ideas and feedback and especially suggestions on how to improve the site and our conversions. Right now we have about 4 subscribers after a few weeks.

</comment><comment><USER2> I would have signed up for this service, except music discovery isn't worth $5 a month for me. A track a day, five days a week? Not bad, but I'm not sure I would find it worthwhile.

However, the design of your landing page is great - I almost signed up just for that.

Good luck!</comment>