Ask YC: Cars? - <AUTHOR> I know that most of the "Asks" that we get here are business and tech related; but I get the feeling that hackers tend to be car people as well (I know I am).
Anyways, I'm in the market for a new car. I had an embarrassing situation recently where I picked someone up from the airport in my 2-seater and couldn't fit their luggage in my (tiny) trunk.
So, I thought I'd solicit the hacker opinion - What do you guys drive? Do you like it? Is it fun?
I'd like to keep it under 50k, used is fine too, if it's something you'd recommend. If you know something that's definitely worth it, but more than 50k; I guess I'd like to hear about that too - I just have a hard time buying a car that costs more than the house I grew up in.
I live in a car town, so bicycles aren't an option! <comment><USER3> If you have to ask YC for an idea of what car you want to buy, don't spend $50k for a car. Buy a decent used car for $6 to $10k, or a new car for $15 to $20k (I bought a Honda Fit; it's nice), bank the rest of the money, and wait.

I won't say you shouldn't blow $50k on a car -- I have friends who drive autocross and are really into cars -- but if you don't already have a short list of performance cars that you lust for you should just drive a compact Honda or Toyota for a while and be done with it.

What's wrong with the two-seater, again? Can't you just rent or borrow a car when you have to pick people up at the airport? You can rent a lot of cars for $50k. ;)

<comment><AUTHOR> This may end up being the answer, to be honest. I am very into cars; but my tastes lean strongly towards the impractical (hence the two-seater).

<comment><USER3> Impractical, eh? My racing friend has a trailer that he tows behind his Honda S2000. Get one of those and your luggage problems will be over, in a gloriously impractical fashion.

Incidentally, the Miata and the S2000 seem to be pretty fun cars, although I'm too tall for one and too cheap for the other. When I lived in CA I owned a 1986 Toyota MR2; that was lots of fun too, and with a gloriously quirky mid-80s dated look. Bought it for like $6k, and it ran flawlessly, perhaps because it was a Toyota, but more likely because it had been cared for by an obsessive car person for a decade and a half. I salute that guy.

Gratify your tastes! To hell with mere practicality! Give a cabbie $100 and have _him_ to go pick up your friend at the airport! ;)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I drive a toyota tacoma. The Taliban and African warlords use them as lightweight tanks. They literally never die. My lifestyle takes me off road and in deep snow frequently and I would never get anything else. I've just kicked it's ass for 100k miles and I've done nothing but scheduled maintenance. If you need more than a car get a tacoma. If you don't, they are a complete pain in the city and you'll drive yourself nuts.

Whatever you do you should buy Japanese. I beat up a subaru wagon for 150k near flawless miles before selling it for a good price. They are great. My friends have also had great luck w/ honda's.

<comment><USER5> yeah Top Gear did an episode on the Tacoma...they dropped one from a 10 story building, drowned it in an Ocean, lit it on fire and they were able to start it afterwards w/o any new parts.

Here is the episode <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Uc4Ksz3nHM> \+ drop <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YfZDtC9kjVk>

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> You should decide on criteria - what is important to you?

When I have realized that over 40,000 people die every year in car accidents in US I have decided to reduce my chances and focus on safety first. This means a lot of air-bags, all-wheel-drive, stabiltiy, traction and abs. Also a powerful engine and agile steering so that I can steer out of trouble and ramp-up quickly when I need to. This has reduced my choice considerably.

Next criteria was larger trunk space, so I figured it will have to be a crossover or a station wagon.

Further, I wanted good reliability (better than what I had from my previous Olds) - my time is too valuable to mess with repairs.

Lastly, I wanted it to look good within my budget (<$40k).

This actually narrowed my choice to two vehicles: Subaru Legacy Turbo and Acura RDX. My girlfriend then broke the tie in favor of the better-looking vehicle (the RDX). So far I am very pleased with all core criteria. The only thing that gives me grief is trunk space - I want it to be bigger still. One (very rare) feauture that I still want is remote start so that I can into a warm car.

If I were to raise my budget by $10k it will begin to include Acura MDX, Infinity FX35 and maybe a couple of others. Another $10k and I would start looking at Porsche Cayenne.

<comment><USER7> If you are worried about getting in to car accidents, don't get a heavy truck or car with a high point of gravity.

If you drive somewhere where there's snow or ice, proper winter tires will give you more safety than all wheel drive.

Electronics can only mitigate the bad characteristics of an SUV, electronics can not break the laws of physics. A lighter car can brake more quickly. A proper car can turn faster without loosing traction or turning over. Accelerate faster, drive faster in general, drive further and use less gas than an SUV.

Of the vehicles mentioned, the Subaru sounds like the safest car. A Volvo V70 is an another wagon that's safe. If you are not going off road, why not get a station wagon instead of an SUV?

Another good safety feature is driver education. Knowing how to handle the car at the limits.

<comment><USER6> Rather than theorize about "trucks" or "high center of gravity" you should look at actual vehicles and their test results.

RDX, MDX and Legacy have the same safety ratings. Stopping distance difference is within 6%. Acuras are a lot closer to a performance sedan than to an F150 in terms of handling.

<comment><USER8> Smaller size alone makes avoiding an accident easier. There are simply more spaces lacking things to hit in to which the car will fit.

If you're a good driver, balanced handling beats electronic stability control. If you're average, by all means, get the computer safety-net to take over.

<comment><USER6> For one ting RDX is actually shorter than Legacy.

For another your claim about smaller size being safer is just a guess, which I can counter with another guess "larger size makes your easier to see and so less likey to get hit".

<comment><USER8> I was speaking generally - on paper, the RDX compares well to the Legacy in terms of handling, size, braking and acceleration. I haven't driven one, so I can't comment on its driving dynamics, though I suspect the Legacy would be easier to control under extreme conditions, as reviews I've read claim it's more neutral.

As for size, I'll stand by my claim. If it's a guess, it's an educated one. To provide an extreme example, imagine several scenarios where you've had to swerve to avoid a road hazard in your car. Now imagine that your car was the size of a bus, but with the same handling. Could you still have avoided the hazard?

<comment><USER6> You're tunneling on one particular example of a potential accident. Instead, you should look at overall probability of getting in trouble across all possible scenarious, not just one particular case. Smaller vehicle might be twice as likely to avoid a hazard, but it may have 4 times the chance of being overrun by a truck, so it may still come out as a net loser in the end.

Imagine all the cases when you did not get into an accident because other drivers knew to stay away from you.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Fifty thousand dollars is an extravagant amount to spend on basic transportation. You could later end up wishing you had that cash in hand.

You can get a decent, reliable, functional used Corolla or similar for $5,000 to $8,000. If you are confident enough in your mechanical skills at assessing the cheaper cars, you can go less than $3,000. If you are in the middle of starting up a business and don't have the time and need the reliability and trunk space, just buy a used Corolla or Chevy Prizm ( the Prizm is a Corolla with the price reduced due to the GM hood emblem ) and spend the rest of your money on things that matter.

I currently drive a 1988 VW Jetta with more than 200,000 miles, and my other cars have included a Volvo that I finally killed with 333,000 on the odometer. I have enough mechanical knowledge to fix minor things, and I drive slowly gingerly, so I am pretty good at beating the last 100,000 miles out of a car that the previous owner was about to take to the junkyard.

Don't be like me, it probably isn't worth it in the long run. Buy a reliable car less than 7 years old with less than 100,000 miles on it if possible, and spend around $5,000. Don't spend anywhere close to $50,000 on a motor vehicle for basic transportation -- the only things that would justify that would be sports cars, RVs, and possibly specialized work vehicles.

</comment><comment><USER10> I have the Mazdaspeed 3. It's basically a souped up version of the Mazda 3. It's less expensive than many of the other cars mentioned (which I also looked at) but is far and away the most fun car I've ever driven. Can do a sub 6 sec 0-60, is a hatchback so doesn't catch the eye of the police (side benefit is that it will fit your friends' bags), and gas milage is good.

Never thought I'd drive a hatch, but this thing is a _beast_ without looking super pretentious.

<comment><AUTHOR> Hmmm, this is an interesting one that I really hadn't thought about. My wife, brother, sister, and my carpool partner all drive Mazda 3s and _LOVE_ them.

I may be checking this one out. Thanks!

<comment><USER10> Glad you'll be checking out the Mazdas! I would just mention to make sure to check out the Mazda _speed_ line. Despite the similar sounding names, the Mazdaspeed 3 is far superior to the Mazda 3.

<comment><AUTHOR> I don't know if anyone reads the follow-ups to these, but I went out and test drove a MS3 yesterday, and I ended up buying one this morning!

Thanks again for the tip to check it out, I hadn't really thought about it; and it was the perfect solution to my problem - Still fast enough to be fun, but I can also put things in it if I need to pick someone up from the airport or go buy a chair or something.

I'll be out driving!

<comment><USER10> Ha! That's great! So glad to hear you found the right car for the job. Go Hacker News!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Buy an used 2008 -- I'm seeing loads of people dumping their new cars -- Honda or Toyota econobox and use the rest of that money for something else more important.

<comment><USER12> buying used is usually a very good option. the car will lose the most value in its first year. buying used tends to mean someone else is taking that hit for you.

<comment><USER13> Have to be careful you're not getting a lemon though. If you don't know the seller personally, take it to a mechanic you trust and have them fully inspect the car. Probably a good idea even if you do know the seller.

That's the reason I'm about to get a new car - I'm moving across the country, I don't know any of the possible sellers _or_ any of the area mechanics or dealerships, and I really don't want to deal with all the car maintenance stuff on top of all the other stuff that comes with living in a new area. Otherwise I'd buy used. And I run cars into the ground - I expect to get 10-15 years usage out of this one.

<comment><USER14> There are dealer-certified used cars, too, available from new-car dealerships. The best are the demo cars that they drive up to around 5,000, then sell. It's much cheaper than new, and you still can be confident it's not a lemon (possibly more so than with a new car).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> _What do you drive?_ Honda Fit. _Do you like it?_ We don't think about it, so that's great. _Is it fun?_ It's a car.

Had a super nice, super expensive, super luxury sedan before it.. I didn't like the attention and hassle.

Space-wise, heck, I like to touch my wife. Seriously, it's got plenty of space for me (6'4") and my family (4). I moved a large-ish desk in it last week, and airport runs go smoothly. It'd only be small if we got fat.

</comment><comment><USER16> Pretty big gearhead here. My most important requirements:

price < $20,000, weight < 3500 lbs, go > 200 hp / torque, rear or four wheel drive, fully independent suspension, limited slip differential, manual transmission available, four seats

The reasonable contenders:

2000-2004 Audi S4 (even though it's too heavy)

96-99 BMW M3

1999-2004 BMW 3-series (non M)

2002-2005 Lexus IS300

2005-2006 Saab 9-2X (WRX in disguise)

2002-2005 Subaru Impreza WRX

2004 Volkswagen Golf R32

2005-2006 Volvo S40 T5-AWD

Out of all of those, the old M3 is my personal favorite... followed closely by the IS300. For the price range, I can't recommend anything not on this list. My personal experience is relatively frequent hobbyist track racing & autocross, lots of test driving, and loads of greasemonkeying.

<comment><USER17> Worth noting that late model M3s hold their value particularly well.

<comment><USER18> A 99 'M3 (I own 1 now, and have owned 3) is not a late-model M3, and it hasn't held its value well.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Try a luggage rack.

<comment><USER20> This reminds me of the whole, "NASA spent $100k developing a pen for space and the Russians used pencils" story.

<comment><USER18> Which story, in addition to being apocryphal, was also debunked.

<comment><USER21> <http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/s/spacepen.htm>

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> A car is a simple utility. Find something cheap and reliable that you wouldn't feel bad about smashing up. I have a '99 Accord with nearly 100k miles on it that has never had an issue, despite being banged up pretty good.

</comment><comment><USER23> I'm not a car person, but I'm a luxury person, and I have an Rx350. I've had it for 2 years, moved cross country twice in it, and I still love it more every time I drive. The attention to every little detail is astounding. What makes you love it are the little things you wouldn't even think matter that much like the backup camera (I laughed at this and let me tell you, I couldn't live without it now), rain sensing wipers, automatic lights that turn on and off themselves and turn with you as you steer, ample cupholders including one by a vent so you can keep your drink warm in the winter, ability to save seat positions and revert to them with one button push, homelink garage door built in, variable temperature seat warmer, phenomenal traction control (I drove 9 hours home in a blizzard once, laughing at all of the cheaper cars swerving uncontrollably off the road), the suspension that makes railroad tracks nearly unnoticeable, seats so comfortable I'm trying to figure out how to get one for my office. I could go on and on.

And their GPS is unbeatable. Now when I rent a car, I get those Garmins and just end up pissed at how unusable they are. I test drove an Accura and the GPS crashed on me.

Despite being an SUV, it's fast enough that anything faster would just get me into trouble. I laugh at douchebags who have racing spoilers on their Civic, since me in my soccer mom car could smoke them off the line.

And you'll be able to fit luggage for 4 with ease. Buy that car, you won't regret it. The total cost of ownership is surprisingly low for the sticker price given Lexus's value retention and craftsmanship. I'm pretty sure mine was just under $50k fully loaded.

</comment><comment><USER24> You need to provide some context about what you like/want/need in a car.

Do you want horsepower, handling, interior luxury, technological doodads, room for a family, three dogs, do you drive in the snow, do you race, is gas milage a big deal, what kind of styling are you into, do you like doing your own maintenance, do you want to mod it, how reliable does it need to be, etc...

I moved from a modified '99 Mitsubishi Eclipse to a '00 Audi S4 (which I LOVE). My criteria were:

I didn't want to spend of $20k, I wanted something over 300hp (used a chip to achieve this), I wanted it to handle/perform very well but to be more comfy/quiet/solid than the Eclipse, I didn't care about gas milage, I wanted something that had understated looks and didn't draw cop-eyes or look like a penis-surrogate, I wanted something with a strong modification community and vendors, I wanted something with bigger back seats than the Eclipse, I need all-wheel drive for snow, I wanted something I could track a few times a year.

The S4 is perfect for me (my next move will be to a 2009-2010 S4, S6 or RS4).

</comment><comment><USER25> I never had much interest in cars. I want something safe and practical that will get me around. I'm about 6'3", and quite literally have a difficult time fitting comfortably into many modern sedan-like cars. (They seem to be getting smaller.) I occasionally need to transport some large-ish audio equipment around, so space is a plus.

To wit, I ended up with a Honda CR-V. It's roomy enough that I don't feel cramped, can hold most everything I need to carry on a semi-regular basis without being huge, and the top-of-the-line model costs around $25k (or, it did, when I got mine). Seems to have excellent safety ratings.

I've been very happy with it, but I'm sure car fans might fine my choice on the boring side...

</comment><comment><USER26> Audi A4 with Quattro.

<comment><USER27> Really? Everything I read about Audis when I was researching cars told me that:

A) they weren't very reliable. Not a huge deal with a good warranty, but an unreliable car is inconvenient as hell.

B) they have a high cost of repairs.

I think Audio and VW are good examples of marketing driven car brands.

If you want a reliably luxury car, a Lexus seems to be at the top.

Of course, the idea of buying a $50k car seems just plain ridiculous in this (or any) economy.

<comment><USER18> My dad drives a 4 year old Audi A6 and my friend drives an 8 year old A4; the A6 has had more maintenance issues than my (finicky) M3, but the A4 probably gets less than $200 of love a year and still runs fine.

If you drop $50k on a car, you don't get to complain how hard your startup is to fund. On the other hand, everything I hear says that now is a good time to buy silly cars, given the market.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> My experience with very nice cars is, it's fun to have a really nice car for the first 6-9 months. After that, you're still paying attention to cars --- you just dropped a shitload of money on one --- but you no longer have the best car for the money, because cars keep getting better. The year after I bought my car, they ported the euro manifold to the US model and boosted it by like 100hp. I never felt that kind of irritated when I was driving a Nissan Sentra.

There are probably better things in life to get hung up on than how awesome your car is going to be for a few months. Like, your retirement.

</comment><comment><USER28> I've got a Honda Accord, and really love it.

<comment><USER29> Honda Civic here. Works for me.

Though one day I'd like something with a little more power ;)

<comment><USER13> The newer-model Civics (post-2003) seem really underpowered to me. I had first a 92 and then a 99, and they would literally _jump_ out of an intersection, tires squealing. They had way too much power for the weight. The 03 Civic my parents just bought and the 04 my sister has seem downright sluggish on the highway. I dunno if it's because the car got a lot heavier, or if it's because of the automatic transmission (the older ones were stick-shifts, newer ones are not).

<comment><AUTHOR> My all-time favorite car was a 95 Civic Sedan. It was an awesome car; and never had a single problem for the 75,000 miles I drove it (I bought it used and it came with 30,000 miles). I liked it so much I kept it and still drove it while I had my BMW. I might actually still be driving that car today except for the fact that I turned it upside-down :(.

When I broke my old Civic (in 01), I went to go get a new one but they didn't feel the same at all.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Well you have a number of choices...you really didn't tell us what you like.

I'm guessing Luxury/Performance, so I'd recommend the following: For a little bit more than 50K you can get a bare bones M3 Sedan or a C63 AMG.

But if you want to save money, you can look at a 335i, and then after you buy it, spend about 1K on ECU mods. Straight-line performance you'll be a little bit quicker than an M3.

But you really need to tell us what you want you like, since pretty much the only thing you said it that it needs to have 4 seats and be under 50K.

<comment><USER30> Is this forum really so wealthy that a casual recommendation for a $50k car seems normal to most of you? Or is this just posturing? Serious question.

<comment><USER24> There's probably enough people on the forum for whom that's a reasonable number that it's worth asking about it here. And honestly, even if you can't afford it, lots of people (techy guys in particular) tend to know a TON about nice cars which are out of their current price ranges. I can tell you all about the R8, and Bugattis, etc... but I sure can't afford one (and even if I could I probably wouldn't spend that much money on a car).

I've never bought a new car and never spent over $20k. That said, I've had some pretty serious success with my latest company, and my next car will probably be in the 50-75k range.

<comment><USER18> Your latest company appears to be one of the larger Java web consultancies in the market; maybe the 50-75k would be better spent starting your own shop. The 50-75k car --- isn't that how they get ya? ;)

<comment><USER24> I think you must be confusing me with someone else or something. I do some consulting through ClearLogic consulting which is a very small consulting company, but I was actually referring to Spark::red, a company I founded with a couple of other guys. It's a niche managed hosting provider and is definitely my "own shop" :)

<comment><USER18> Was looking at your profile box; you should update it. =)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> I personally don't like cars very much and use them only for getting from place to place. Bicycles are way better on so many levels: exercise, a sense of freedom, a _beautifully_ efficient machine, something fun to do to get away from the computer, a quick means of getting from place to place over limited distances.

But I'm not a fanatic and cars are useful, so: whatever is functional and won't break down. Toyotas are pretty good that way, or at least those I've owned are.

<comment><AUTHOR> To be clear, I absolutely wish I could ride a bike everywhere; sitting around in traffic just isn't fun and driving never feels as interactive as biking. But the fact of the matter is that everything around here is measured in miles away from where I'm at so bicycling isn't really an option for me unfortunately.

<comment><USER31> Sure, that's understandable, but you could also make some adjustments:

* Live in a more bike friendly place. Admittedly, that might be a pretty major change though.

* Wherever you live, structure things so that at least one or two things can be done by bike. I.e. live near enough so that you can at least go to work or somewhere else 'important' by bike. Maybe not every day, maybe not in all seasons, but it's a start.

Speaking for myself though, I think cycling is the perfect hacker sport, and wouldn't live anywhere where I couldn't ride my bike in terms of transportation and for fun:-)

Incidentally, where do you live? You're one of the many who have zero information in their profiles:-(

<comment><AUTHOR> Sorry, I'm in metro Phoenix, AZ.

I carpool to work right now, and we have a light rail system that starts service tomorrow. I'm planning to start taking it to work to shave off 17 miles or so of my commute, but the nearest rail station is still 5 miles away.

I would say I drive by myself maybe 5% of the time I go anywhere; I almost always group errands together to minimize commute; but with all of that I still log over 200 miles a week.

Moving isn't an option for me right now, I'm in the middle of an enormous project that I'm very interested in seeing to completion.

<comment><USER32> If you're on a road bike going 12 miles an hour, 5 miles is a fantastic 25-minute cardio workout.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> Right now, a lot of car companies are getting reamed by the economy (obviously), stemming a lot from doling out leases and then seeing the values of the cars tanking with the economy, causing them to take large losses. As a result, it is difficult at some companies to get approved with favorable interest rates, whether you're buying or leasing, especially with the Big 3.

I'd start with seeing what kind of car you're compatible with by taking a look at <http://www.carzen.com>.

I recently bought a Volkswagen Jetta Wolfsburg Edition (same 2.0 turbocharged engine as the GTI and GLI but about $2500 less). Volkswagens retain their resale value (right up there with Mini), so they didn't lose much and are taking advantage of that by giving very favorable rates. Trust me, you can get a more expensive VW for less than other cars, just from the dramatic difference in interest rates. And their service is amazingly better than most other dealerships as well. Two of my roommates have since also gotten VW's.

I'm definitely a car person and autocross regularly. I've taken my Jetta to a track day at a race track we have nearby, and I'm completely satisfied with this thing.

</comment><comment><USER34> Given your price range and the fact you own a two seater, it seems you're looking for something sporty. I'd suggest:

Infiniti G35 or G37. The former can easily be gotten completely loaded for under $35k (and possibly out the door if you pay cash and go for an unsold 2008 model). The latter can be a little pricier, but not by much.

I've got a 2007 G35 Coupe. Fully-loaded (except for four wheel steering), stickshift. Intense amount of fun to drive.

Prior to that I've had a 2006 G35 Sedan (was rear-ended on US-101 and the car was totaled; which is why I couldn't wait for the G37 to come out, I needed something I could drive _soon_ ).

Simply put, this is the most fun with four seats (and the lack of insurance premium due to being a "sports car") you'll have for under $40,000. Rear-wheel drive (AWD available on the sedan), real stickshift available (unlike on the IS350), sporty suspension, limited slip differential (the BMW 335 - which is $10,000 more expensive doesn't include that).

The _big_ downside is fuel mileage (if I stay in fifth and sixth as possible as possible I can get a little over 26mpg, which is still dismal). This is slightly better in the newer models, but still - if you're looking for a fuel efficient car this isn't it. It also requires 91 octane (older models could take 89 and below if with an automatic, but that's not recommended).

Other downside is small trunk space on the 2007 coupe (the sedan is much better; not sure about the 2008 g37 coupe).

Also buy used, unless you're looking to build credit - which may not be the best time for it. When I got my first G35 (the sedan), I a) could get a certified deposit for a rate that is higher than what I am paying for the car b) was less than a year out of college, with no credit history.

</comment><comment><USER35> I'm in a market for a new/additional car also, in a similar price range.

Right now I'm leaning towards a 2-3ish year old Jaguar XJR (going price: low- mid 30's) and then putting about 8K into the drivetrain to just build the piss out of it.

I love the look of the XJR's inside and out, and I've always loved something about the thought of building a luxury "sleeper" sedan.

</comment><comment><USER17> I'm a fan of the small sedans - the Lexus IS, Audi A4, BMW 3 Series, Mercedes C Class and Infiniti G37. They range from $32,000-$65,000, depending on the various options.

They're all great cars, and with the exception of the Lexus, they've all been redesigned within the last two years. The BMW leads the pack in performance, the Infiniti in bang for your buck, the Lexus for comfort and reliability, the Audi for features, and the Mercedes for (interior) technology and design. Naturally, opinions may vary on these issues.

They're all reasonably fuel efficient, reliable, safe, and fast. Test drive them all. It's fun.

Spec out the car you want, then call all the dealers within a few hundred miles. Take the best quote to the salesman who you test drove with and give them the option to match it.

Tada! Great new car.

Edit: Forgot the Cadillac CTS. I've heard good things, but I'd be a little caution about buying from a company about to go bankrupt. Sorry American auto industry.

</comment><comment><USER36> i have a 2000 infiniti Q45 anniversary edition - insurance group coilovers, peak performance multilink, work euroline N in 19x9.5 ET8 19x10 ET-11. it's almost 6" lower than stock, and i'm running -7* camber. most car guys think i'm crazy for doing it, and i'm inclined to agree but it looks so cool! too bad it's so impractical: i got stuck on the driveway at in-n-out a few days ago, and i can't carry more than about 500lb in the car with me at any time (that includes passengers), otherwise i'll rub. the entire trip. or worse, pop the bead on the tires. oh well.

i'm thinking of selling it though and building a porsche 964, rauh-welt style:

[http://ll.speedhunters.com/u/f/eagames/NFS/speedhunters.com/...](http://ll.speedhunters.com/u/f/eagames/NFS/speedhunters.com/Images/Mike%20Garrett/Car%20Features/Nakai/IMG_9303.jpg)

forgive me though, i just enjoy blathering on aimlessly about cars :)

</comment><comment><USER21> the new Infiniti G35 sedan hands down, great value. Or if you want the coupe, I've driven a G37 coupe before and it is top notch as well.

I would recommend the BMW 335i but honestly it's too much for what you get, although the turbo 3L engine is beautiful and won an award recently for best engine of 2008 or some such.

<comment><USER37> the infiniti is definitely a fast car, and fun to drive, but the interior to me feels so much cheaper than the comprable Lexus (IS series) or BMW. At least the G35. I haven't been in the new G37.

<comment><USER38> Hmmm, definitely agree about the interior feeling cheaper than a Lexus but I'm not sure I agree about a BMW (3-series). Even the M3 feels wayyy too plastic for my tastes.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER39> I think 50k for a car is a bit ridiculous unless you're pulling in $150k+. For more modest salaries, a nice stylish car with some extras can be found with the VW Jetta, Saab 93, and Volvo S4. I drive a 93 and love it. It has, in my opinion, much better style than most American and Asian cars but is still cheaper than a German car. During GM employee price, I think the 93 started around 20k. I haven't looked at car prices during the auto market downfall, so I'm not sure where there at now.

The problem with any European car is upkeep. I can do my own brakes and other minor repairs, so I'm not so worried. If you don't have money to spare for repairs later on down the road, buy a Toyota or Honda. Parts and labor on European cars are a lot more than on more mass-produced cars.

</comment><comment><USER40> I drive a 2004 Nissan Maxima SE and love it - a very versatile vehicle. Plenty of room in the trunk for luggage/groceries, great family car (I have a wife and kid) but it will also get up and go when it needs to (it's classified as a sports car by many insurance companies).

Remarkably, insurance isn't that bad - 25 y/o male and a 23 y/o female, full coverage, about $70 per month.

Gas mileage is great, I get about 28 mpg and it only costs $40 or so to fill the tank.

The only downfall I have is the tires - expensive to replace due to the sports car quality of the vehicle. You can't go with the cheap tire - they aren't as rigid. High torque on take-off and highway speeds will make cheaper tires flare out giving you poor handling.

</comment><comment><USER41> The poster's profile suggests that he lives in Phoeniz, AZ, so snow isn't an issue unless he skiis. Heat, however, is.

For pure transportation, it's hard to beat the old model Scion xB. It's cheap, reliable, good on gas (I average 35 highway and city unless I drive 80), and has insane amounts of space. If you want more 50% power, get the newer model. (It's geared higher so you don't lose a lot of gas mileage.)

Yes, the old xB is fun to drive.

You can get the newer one new for well under $20. The older one used should be around $10k or maybe less.

So if you insist on spending $50k, you'll have $30-40k left to spend on a toy, your biz, a down-payment, etc.

</comment><comment><USER42> I hear that the best fuel-efficient/hybrids will be released in late 09 and early 10. And further there is a good chance that Obama will offer incentives to buy a fuel efficient car. Waiting 6-9 months may be worthwhile.

If you can't wait, then I suggest a Prius (have not driven it myself - but its hard to get away from the positive buzz about this car).

If you'd like to give Detroit a hand - check out the ConsumerReports list of best American cars of 2008 - [http://blogs.consumerreports.org/cars/2008/03/american- top-p...](http://blogs.consumerreports.org/cars/2008/03/american-top-pi.html)

<comment><USER35> _I hear that the best fuel-efficient/hybrids_

So will they finally become cost-effective? All the data I've seen, and run personally, on the common hybrid make the TCO no cheaper than just buying an average car of similar size.

The only incentive I can see for current-tech hybrids is the eco-angle.

<comment><USER43> Well, the Prius is also just a nice car for gadget-lovers. Keyless entry, start-button ignition, big LCD dashboard, Bluetooth, GPS...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> A WRX wagon and a Miata. You can get one of each for right around $50k - <USER2> if you buy used.

I have an old Miata. It sips gas, makes wonderful noises and is the second- best handling car I've ever driven. The best was a Formula V (that's an open- wheel race car made out of old VW parts - it's like a big go-kart with suspension and a transmission).

My roommates have a WRX. It's quick, handles pretty well and has plenty of room for luggage.

I also hear wonderful things about the Mazda RX-8. It's not so easy on gas, but it's supposed to handle like an oversized Miata. It can hold four real adults, and at least some of their stuff.

<comment><USER16> The RX-8 handles beautifully and is a lot of fun on the track... but it's woefully underpowered and very difficult to modify.

Very unfortunate, as it's such a great platform.

</comment></comment><comment><USER44> I'm a VW/Audi fan. So I'm going to recommend the GTI/Passat or an A3/A4.

For style/space I'd recommend the A3 (though the GTI isn't bad) or the Passat. I got a chance to drive my uncle's new passat (with hacked/tuned computer - squeezes like 65 more horses out of it) and thoroughly enjoyed it. Plenty of room inside the car which is important for me, I'm 6'7 and had no headroom/legroom problems. The GTI is pretty awesome as well.

All fall in your price range, pending options. But if you're going to be test driving some, check out the A3, Passat and GTI.

</comment><comment><USER45> I highly - highly - recommend the Cadillac CTS. You'd probably pay a tad more than $50K for the CTS-V, which does 0-60 in sub-5.0, but that's a great option if you're a torque freak (like me).

Small enough to parallel park, and the thing has a fantastic note when you go 10-60 up an on-ramp to the interstate. Caddy's new "Cut and Sew" interiors beat the pants off of the Japanese and are warmer than the interiors of the Germans. And the pop-up navigation impresses everyone. It won 2008 MT COY not for nothing.

</comment><comment><USER46> I really like cars but I'd find it hard to justify spending more than $35k on a new one unless it was a Porsche Carrera 4 or something like that. My winter ride is an Xterra which I love; the summer car is a 350Z which may have the same luggage problem you ran into :-)

I have seriously considered selling the Z and buying a Maxima -- need more room. I've owned three absolutely trouble free Nissans and I'd happily buy a used one that had been well cared for.

<comment><AUTHOR> I'm currently driving a 350Z, so yes; same problem ;)

</comment></comment><comment><USER47> I drive an 08 Volkswagen GTI, and I've been thrilled with it. It's a nearly perfect blend of performance, style, practicality, efficiency, etc. Has been a Car & Driver 10Best for the past few years. They got all the little things right on this car, and I've never had anything so fun on a daily basis. Also very inexpensive compared to many cars people are mentioning here.

</comment><comment><USER48> My '97 Chrysler Concorde just rolled over 100K a couple of days ago, and despite its 3.8L V6 it's still getting 27mpg highway. I'll second what someone said: It's just transportation. I get my fun outside of my car.

And give it a rest, cyclists. I am a HUGE leisure cyclist, but for many of us (me and OP, for example), replacing our car with a bike is simply impossible.

</comment><comment><USER49> Audi A6: Classy, roomy and high performance. It is more a car for your image.

Audi A4 Turbo: Sporty, fast and reliable. If it is more than 4 year old I would recommend 5 spd. At least you won't have to deal with tranny issues.

Volvo S60: Sporty but not as reliable as the A4.

Mini Cooper.

If your paper is long enough and you want to impress look for an X5 or a Range Rover (girls digg these) or an american muscle car.

</comment><comment><USER50> I absolutely love my Audi A6. I've had it for just over two years and am as happy with it now as they day I bought it. I highly recommend them. Get one fully loaded that's a year old to keep it in your price range. The A8 is an amazing car as well if you want to spend a bit more on it.

</comment><comment><USER51> Honda Element. Waterproof seats & bottom--hose it down if you want. Seats completely fold up (like a van) or down (like a bed). Has a bunch of useful add-ons like a tent, trailer hitch, etc. Good mileage (v4). Etc, etc...check it out.

<comment><USER41> Be careful - if you hose out early model Elements, you'll short out the engine computer (which isn't in a sealed container even though the floor looks hoseable).

</comment></comment><comment><USER52> Before leaving to go YC SFP 2008, I was working at Volkswagen, so I have a slight bias towards VWs and Audis. They're fun cars. I _might_ be able to still get some discounts, so PM me if you want, and I'll see if I can help you out.

</comment><comment><USER53> I was just wondering what the _Hacker Opinion_ on hair conditioners is? And maybe shoe polish? A lot of hackers seem to wear shoes, so _Inquiring Minds Want To Know_!

Uhm, can we please not have these threads here?

<comment><USER54> Not equivalent. As a "car guy" myself, I would be _very_ surprised if there wasn't a strong correlation between hackers and gearheads. These are people who see a complex system, viewed simply as a utilitarian tool by most of society, and take it upon themselves to learn how it works. Some do this to be able to use it more efficiently, while others try to maximize or extend its performance. Sound familiar?

Oh, and +1 for the MazdaSpeed3; it's a great little car.

<comment><USER55> I ride bicycles.

It was interesting to me that I fell into a cycling social scene that was primarily composed of tech types.

They share the same characteristics. A deceptively "simple" system with many variables and infinite hackability.

<comment><USER56> Lots of cycles at our startup as well

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER57> I drive a Pontiac Vibe which is really just a rebadged Toyota Matrix. I get ~30 mpg and have actually hauled a futon in it while moving. Lots of cargo space when the back seats are laid flat.

</comment><comment><USER58> You should get one of these <http://www.thinkgeek.com/gadgets/car/8426/> when you decide.

</comment><comment><USER59> why the impulse? do you often have to pick someone up?

after 3 years, the depreciation rate levels off for used cars so try 2005- cars

i have renault clio but don't use it often (once every quarter) ... not because i love the car, but because my basic transportation need is better covered with motorcycle (it's super crowded here with cars)

admittedly, clio was chosen because of the F1 double crown of renault+alonzo _shrug_ ... maybe that's a flawed logic

</comment><comment><USER60> No cars, public transport, unless local housing density can't sustain it (50 dwellings/hectare needed to support sufficient bus network)

</comment><comment><USER37> lexus is250 awd

You can pick one up for around $36k before tax. I have a rack for it and it's great in snow and for taking the mountain bike out. It has the best interior of any car that costs anywhere close to it IMHO. Definitely recommend it if you want something nice and are into outdoor stuff too.

<comment><USER16> Save yourself $20k and get an IS300 (previous version) instead. It's a much better car.

<comment><USER34> I pondered the IS350 (but went for a G35 instead, see comment). I tend to agree: IS300 is a high-end sport compact sedan, IS350 is an entry-level luxury car.

(Out of those two I'd go for the IS 300, but in general I'd go for the G35 again ;-)).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER61> Subaru STi (Hatch) or Mitsubishi Evo X (Sedan).

I went with the hatch for the extra space. Cheap (30k), Fun, and Fast.

</comment><comment><USER62> Most hackers tend to be male, but I am afraid you can't ask what razor to buy on this forum!

<comment><USER63> Because hackers have beards, or because it's off-topic?

</comment></comment><comment><USER64> check <http://searchautoreviews.com/> before you plunk down that 50k. And never buy the first generation of any model... at least wait for the 2nd one.

</comment><comment><USER65> I like the Honda Fit. Lots of really nice touches on that one.

</comment><comment><USER12> i got an 07 nissan altima, and i like it. its just an all-around solid vehicle, so far. good value for the money spent, on my part.

</comment><comment><USER66> I hear that Lambourghini's are pretty good but I'm 35 years old and I've never had a drivers license so I might not be the best person to ask.

</comment><comment><USER67> Lotus Elise or Mitsubishi Evo X?

<comment><USER17> The Elise is great but it has practically no storage - probably not viable as a day-to-day driver.

</comment></comment><comment><USER68> 2003 acura 3.2tl type-s w/ nav

</comment><comment><USER69> Hold out for the TOYOTA FTHS

</comment><comment><USER70> e46 m3

</comment><comment><USER71> I bought an 08 Nissan 350z Touring ed. and I LOVE IT! For winter and getting groceries I drive an old beater, 1994 Toyota Tercel. If I didn't have the Tercel, I'd probably rent a car or something if I needed to pick up friends, or buy furnature.

As for snow driving I find the 3 most important elements are as follows.

-Driving ability -Balance/Center of gravity of the vehicle -Tires

I had a Nissan NX2000 that did wonderful in the snow. Thats 200hp in the snow. I never got stuck or slid off the road. When I sold the NX, I took the wheels (and tires) off of it, and put them onto the Toyota Tercel and the thing does HORRIBLE in the snow. I believe this is because it is not as well balanced as a Nissan NX (sports car).

</comment><comment><USER72> taxi.

Compare _all_ costs, and you'll land there...</comment>


The Last Slice – Win 3 challenges from Microsoft and collect $10,000 - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/TheLastSliceGame/TheLastSliceGame <comment><USER2> Needed an additional 11GB of packages to install to build. No thanks.</comment>


Twelve Days in Xinjiang: How China's Surveillance State Overwhelms Daily Life - <AUTHOR> https://www.wsj.com/articles/twelve-days-in-xinjiang-how-chinas-surveillance-state-overwhelms-daily-life-1513700355 <comment><USER2> I think one of the few really, really good things we have left in the US is that I _feel_ that I am trusted to do the right thing.

I was in Singapore, a rich, orderly state for an internship a couple of years ago. There were cameras everywhere: Cameras on the sidewalks, cameras on the staircases, cameras in residential apartments, cameras in the subway, cameras at the workplace. There were very few places I feel not watched. I have to hunt for them. This is very contrasted with the US, where mostly I feel that I have my privacy and trusted to do the right thing. That's a very powerful feeling.

But that is going away with smartphone cameras and surveillance cameras. They are getting cheaper, and no one is here to be fighting against them. Maybe that's a one-way road, there is not much we can do about it. Maybe that's for the better, but somehow I feel life is much more boring that way.

<comment><USER3> Funny how these things work... I've lived in Singapore for close to 7 years, have permanent residence, and it is when I travel to the US that I feel slightly uncomfortable.

It starts with the immigration agent who sometimes feels the need to ask me questions for 20 minutes as if I were a criminal, there's the part where they get to look through all your social media accounts and hold you indefinitely, and then there's the thought of a traffic stop by a bored cop "degenerating"... it's tough to travel to countries like these when you're used to a polite government whose agents treat you, the foreigner, with consideration and like a customer.

For example, when I went to my PR interview, my medical checks had expired (and it was transparent I had hoped to get away with it); the lady very helpfully opened up a slot for me a few hours later and recommended me a range of clinics nearby to do the missing medical checks. A breath of fresh air after dealing with the French and other "first world" governments...

No CCTV in my street except for the hedge that borders the Istana 100m away. We do get the odd police car patrolling the perimeter, but since the President lives there and the Prime Minister works there, I can understand. As for the US, I've never been in a building with more than a couple storeys that did not have CCTV, so I'm curious about your frame of reference there (most of Singapore consists of 20+ storey buildings). I've never been in a US mall or office building without CCTV. The only reason my residential building in NYC did not have CCTV was because it was pre-war; it also didn't have working heating, and I'd rather have had both.

I do agree that Singapore is probably not the place to move if you enjoy a suburban lifestyle in a big house with a garden.

edit - here's something you can't do in the US: my friend and I bought a couple craft beers from a Japanese supermarket, then sat down on public benches in front of the Asian Civilisations Museum (opposite CBD and the Fullerton Hotel), cracked them open and sipped them slowly in front of the view.

<comment><USER2> All you said is true.

Forget to mention, aside from that, I love Singapore in general and I have no illusion that the US is getting more hostile by the day. I have been in the US as a foreigner for 10 years. Last time I came back, I was hassled and treated like a piece of shit by a customs official, too (and I love how they ask for social accounts now, I hope they don't ask for HN?). Recently I was extremely upset having so much difficulties getting my driver's license renewed. I think the new Trump thing made it so much worse too, but I'd rather not dig into the Trump thing. In Singapore? Government officials did treat me like a human, I absolutely loved that.

However, once you're in in the US, you have NYC, Chicago, SF and you also have Smallville or Lancesterville in the middle of nowhere. In those supposedly backward, homophobic X-villes, you can see part of why some people love the US so much. It's still the life we love in the 80s-90s movies like Back in the future or Groundhog day. They have no cameras, people greet you on the street, and you can go for miles and miles by car, bike, or on foot and you wouldn't see any other person.

Yeah, I get it, it's not legal drinking a beer in the public. I used to live in a rented house downtown with other graduate students in a relatively big town that houses the state's biggest college. During the summertime weekends, we often just drank and smoked and played the guitar (and flute, and banged on broken guitar) all night long on the front porch and watched the cops patrolled by. The other day in X-ville, we smoked our asses out one night. The next morning, I jumped on my friend's 70s truck and saw a 6-pack of beers, some new, some empty. I asked whether we should move it back, and I quote his answer, "Have some man, it's X-ville, no one actually gives a fuck." We blasted an FM channel full of country songs, cranked the window down, and I rode shotgun in a glorious sunrise.

<comment><USER4> Those villes are carcasses of society, they are small because nobody wants to live there

I'm glad you enjoy the choice

<comment><USER5> You don't sound glad about anything.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I'd really like to read more Chinese-from-China views on this kind of article.

Although the content of the article scares me personally, it would be interesting to have more of a discourse about more plausible reasons why this kind of surveillance is "good" from a genuine different perspective. One mistake the Chinese govt makes is never explaining themselves in a plausible way so it always comes across as Orwellian. Further, because no Chinese national is supposed to acknowledge the govt power, most nationals can't comment on it without getting themselves or their family in serious trouble.

I have a (non-Chinese-from-China) friend who works most of the year in China and he explained the surveillance state as "well, if you've got a nation of more than a billion people and a huge range of wealth levels and, culturally, you value stability of the nation more than individual liberty, yeah, you're going to go to extremes on security and surveillance. It's all about ensuring stability and adherence to 'normal' behavior. Yeah it's creepy but it's _safe_ if you stay in line."

I'm not saying I agree with the exchange of individual liberty vs surveillance but it would be refreshing to read more plausible takes on the "China has it right" viewpoint.

<comment><USER7> > I'd really like to read more Chinese-from-China views on this kind of > article.

Note that this level of surveillance is not pervasive throughout the rest of China; this is about a region populated by non-Han Chinese (Uyghurs, a who are Muslim and speak a Turkic language); most han residents are colonists. The Chinese language is the official one but is not spoken at home by most people there. The central government promotes Han migration/colonization of Xinjiang as they do with Tibet.

So I suspect you'd find most Chinese people outside Xinjiang _very_ supportive of this: the government and newspapers describe it as an integral part of China with a terrorist separatist movement no different from, for example, how the government of Spain used to describe ETA, or, without the violence, the Catalonian independence movement).

In addition, every time a western politician claims that "all muslims are evil terrorists" it gets printed in China as support for the narrative that these "security" measures are justified (Uyghur separatists have bombed Beijing and other han cities).

I expect this to be routine in OECD countries within the next 20 years. Hell, I remember dystopian movies always had bizarre, pointless "security" announcements as a way of showing how creepy the future had become and how the future didn't believe in people having time to think...and now that happens in every airport and train station in the world! ===

My second paragraph is simply the situation on the ground. The territory around Xinjiang has been under Chinese control for over 250 years; in the preceding millennia it sometimes has; at other times, as part of various Khanates it's been part of empires that controlled China (just as Tibet has at various times been independent; been under the control of China; and been in control of the emperor of China) So depending on what time point you pick you can justify an argument that Beijing's control of the area is "legitimate" or "illegitimate". I have zero connection to any side (not Chinese, not turkic, not muslim, buddhist, whatever).

<comment><USER8> |> I have zero connection to any side (not Chinese, not turkic, not muslim, buddhist, whatever).<|

But your information source is limited to English world, which favors separatists over the other side.

|> Note that this level of surveillance is not pervasive throughout the rest of China; this is about a region populated by non-Han Chinese (Uyghurs, a who are Muslim and speak a Turkic language); most han residents are colonists.<|

Hah? Xinjiang was founded after the extinction of Dzungar people who were mongolians. Most han and manchu residents in Xinjiang are desendants of military migrants of Qing dynasty. The Nothern half of Xinjiang had never been populated by Uyghurs and although the Uyghur population has been expanding much more rapidly than other ethinics in Xinjiang, they are NOT the owner of the entire Xinjiang. Please stop repeating these disgusting FAKE claims.

|> the government and newspapers describe it as an integral part of China with a terrorist separatist movement no different from, for example ...<|

They're terrorists. You're a terrorist defender. Pure and simple. Attacking innocent people to attain certain political influnce is the essense of terrorism. I've been fed up by your kind of takiyah and abuse of political correctness.

|> all muslims are evil terrorists <|

It's not true given the Hui muslim in China get many many privileges over Han and other ethnic minorities. One of the most important PRC founding fathers, Zhou Enlai, is a desendant of muslim as his niece recently disclosed. The PRC ethnic and religion policy framework was set up by Zhou Enlai. The Xinjiang problem was sparked by Zhou's wife Deng Yinchao in 1980s. The CCP censoring departments are established and controlled by Hui muslim CCP leaders according to the Criminal Law Act 250/251 (which was set up by a Hui imam in 1997).

In fact, many atheist and agnostic people are fearing the rapid islamization of China society, especially the legal/eductional sectors and the hatred the Hui CCP leaders showing towards Han and other secular ethinic groups.

In conclution, you know NOTHING about the REAL China. Han people don't have the proprotional ruling power and influence over the CCP elites with respect to the population scale. Keeping China as an integral nation is the responsibility of the PRC government, not the duty of common Han people. It's Hui wumaos who have been yelling to nuke Taiwan.

REPEAT AGAIN: Zhou Enlai was a Hui deceived as Han and set up a lot of laws against so called "Han chauvinism". This month alone there are two legal cases sentenced 2 Han people into jail for humiliating respectful historical ethnic figures.

Downvote me as you wish. Given the twisted information the English media keep spreading, I won't be surprised there'll be a civilization collision between West and East, beneficial to all muslims, if one day the Han people fight back the islamization led by those Hui CCP elites.

Great civilizations never fail to rising challengers but always fail to their own arrogance and ignorance.

<comment><USER7> > But your information source is limited to English world

Thanks for letting me know I only speak English; I'll be sure to tell my non- English-speaking relatives that I've been speaking to them in English all these years rather than their various languages.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I have a friend who's born in Xinjiang and she told me this kind of control goes far beyond just surveillance, physical control, ID checks and whatnot. In a very Orwellian way, it also extends to control of the mind. Schools, government agencies, and local companies have to have their students and employees routinely recite propaganda about "ethnic unity" and relevant official policies and conduct routine tests to make sure these things are memorized.

Big Brother isn't just watching you, it's also trying to sneak its way into your mind.

<comment><USER10> America is much better about this sort of thing. Aside from a few obvious holdover examples like the Pledge of Allegiance and the national anthem, the US doesn't bother with such ham-handed, last century techniques.

It's much easier to just coerce the media and get the public to consume the propaganda as entertainment.

[http://articles.latimes.com/2011/aug/21/entertainment/la- ca-...](http://articles.latimes.com/2011/aug/21/entertainment/la-ca-military- movies-20110821)

[https://medium.com/insurge-intelligence/exclusive- documents-...](https://medium.com/insurge-intelligence/exclusive-documents- expose-direct-us-military-intelligence-influence-on-1-800-movies-and-tv- shows-36433107c307)

<comment><USER11> And the native culture is thriving. All tribal languages are taught at school. No child is being sent to resident schools and getting sexually abused. The native population is has lower rates of suicide, substance abuse, obesity, poverty etc.

Sorry, I had to.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> The same thing is happening in the US. The difference is that the authorities here use much more subtle methods so it doesn't appear pervasive.

It is known that use and abuse of stingrays is rife in our cities and gag orders allow even wider silent collection of data we give up willingly to tech companies because we can't see what's done with it.

<comment><USER13> In the US, law enforcement is split among too many organizations to implement a Big Brother system competently. Every little police department has their own system, and private sector systems aren't integrated with government systems. Look at the mess in DC - their camera system was taken over by a botnet. Not even to use the camera data, just to mooch network resources.

There's an business opportunity here. There's an outsourced surveillance industry, but it's small.[1] One of the big players has only 9,000 cameras. Nobody has scaled this yet.

Amazon might. They've already convinced millions of people to put a microphone in every room, reporting to Amazon HQ. Now they're getting into cameras and door locks.

Google, probably not. Their Nest unit makes stuff that looks good, but doesn't work well.

[1] [http://stealthmonitoring.com/](http://stealthmonitoring.com/)

<comment><USER14> _" In the US, law enforcement is split among too many organizations to implement a Big Brother system competently."_

NSA begs your pardon..

<comment><USER15> As bad the NSA's current data collection activities are, I don't think it compares to China's Big Brother.

I seriously doubt in China, for instance, that the EFF that highlighted much of the NSA's surveillance activities would even be allowed to exist.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> I couldn't read the linked story but I did see a video of this on a different news site.

What I found chilling was the level of technology. Each camera has AI built into it, your gait is tracked, your gender is tracked, your relationships are tracked going back one week.

The person being interviewed I don't know if he was proud of it or trying to calm fears by what he said. The point of the system he said is to gather as much data as possible on everyone so they can predict crime, very Minority Report-like stuff. So to calm everyone his point was we will know everything you do all the time in such detail we'll know your daily patterns. Lord help you if you are a spontaneous mood one day.

</comment><comment><USER17> The idea of Bubba the local beat cop packet-sniffing my smartphone and arbitrarily detaining me "because encryption" is a mortifying thought. Hopefully it remains nothing more than a far-fetched concern here in the West, but I wouldn't count on it.

</comment><comment><USER18> [http://archive.is/pMV4U](http://archive.is/pMV4U)

</comment><comment><USER19> Fascinating, the subject orientation is what you see elsewhere with machine vision - it was a big part of F8 this last year. I don't really see a way out of surveillance besides legislation since processing power and storage increasingly becomes cheaper.

</comment><comment><USER20> I went to Urumqi about 10 years ago. It was nothing like this. It was actually an amazing place, full of diverse culture and awesome people.

In 2009, when these riots happened, I remember we lost complete contact with the factory there. The Chinese government simple cut all communication in and out of the region, till they had the situation under control.

</comment><comment><USER21> I was born in Xinjiang and lived there for more than 20 years. My parents still live there.

It's a complex thing and in my hometown, no one complain the surveillance generally.

</comment><comment><USER22> The video is available here: [https://youtu.be/OQ5LnY21Hgc](https://youtu.be/OQ5LnY21Hgc)

</comment><comment><USER23> link without paywall [https://t.co/EOOtSYkBRf](https://t.co/EOOtSYkBRf)

</comment><comment><USER24> Did you know how many people are killed each year in Xinjiang? Because of what western media called "understandable opposition from oppressed descendants of the CCP", where the killed are all just innocent people?

OK tell me, what the hell the local government should do to stop the terrorism attack?!

<comment><USER25> Allow more autonomy in traditionally autonomous regions. Allow the free practice of religion including fasting during ramadan: [http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/06/china-bans-ramadan- fas...](http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/06/china-bans-ramadan-fasting- muslim-region-150618070016245.html) Take more input from citizens who live there and allow them to have a stake in the governing proccess that includes future changes.

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> if you're behind a paywall: [http://archive.is/pMV4U](http://archive.is/pMV4U)

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Original WSJ article: "Twelve Days in Xinjiang: How China's Surveillance State Overwhelms Daily Life"

[https://www.wsj.com/articles/twelve-days-in-xinjiang-how- chi...](https://www.wsj.com/articles/twelve-days-in-xinjiang-how-chinas- surveillance-state-overwhelms-daily-life-1513700355)

If you don't have WSJ subscription, paste the title into FB's search bar, and open the link via search results to bypass the paywall.

<comment><USER27> Assuming "FB" means Facebook, what if one doesn't have a Facebook account?

<comment><USER28> Or manually use FB's redirect:

[https://l.facebook.com/l.php?u=https://www.wsj.com/articles/...](https://l.facebook.com/l.php?u=https://www.wsj.com/articles/twelve- days-in-xinjiang-how-chinas-surveillance-state-overwhelms-daily- life-1513700355)

<comment><USER27> Nope - paywall still present.

<comment><USER29> Worked for me, I use Facebook though (may not work if you do not have a Facebook account?)

<comment><USER30> Worked for me too, and I don't have an FB account.

mnw21cam, maybe you're blocking the Referer?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> I'd rather be watched by surveillance camera than killed by extremists.

How about you?

It is inevitable; before 911 there was almost no security check in airports. Boarding was not too much difference than shopping in Walmart.

This is one kind of insurance: most time accident is not happening, but when it happens it can be deadly.

Life consists of compromises. Some are unavoidable.

<comment><USER32> How many people killed by extremists in the US last year? Are you suggesting that US should increase their security to the same level as China (and implement a police state) to avoid more extremists death?

<comment><USER31> Have you ever been to China?

You can walk 24/7 in any city in China without worrying your safety.

Tell me you dare to walk midnight in downtown New York or LA or Chicago.

<comment><USER33> You can talk shit about your government, legitimately criticize them, read papers discussing news from different sides even they all biased but they still offer angles, express your opinion freely and perform your citizen duties in NY LA or Chicago. Tell me about all these in China.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


The Relation Between Adverse Childhood Experiences and Adult Health [pdf] - <AUTHOR> http://xnet.kp.org/permanentejournal/winter02/goldtolead.pdf

<comment><AUTHOR> For the hackerishly skeptical: Dr. Vincent Felitti's CV, c. 2001: <http://www.caipm.org/about/felittiresume.html>

Video: Dr. Felitti speaking at the Child Trauma Treatment Network of the Intermountain West September 2003 Snowbird Conference <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Me07G3Erbw8> [1.5 hr.]

Another short paper with a different angle: Felitti, et. al.: Obesity: Problem, Solution, or Both? <http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2912711/>

14 years of published research: Centers for Disease Control: Adverse Childhood Experiences [ACE] study <http://www.cdc.gov/ace/index.htm> [underway since 1995 with Kaiser Permanente, 17K+ participants]

</comment><comment><USER2> 18 states have also done their own ACE surveys, with similar results. Many organizations -- from courts to child welfare services -- are implementing trauma-informed practices. To follow developments in ACE- and trauma-informed related news, go to ACEsTooHigh.com.</comment>


Bad experience with Redux - <AUTHOR> https://yuanchuan.dev/2019/12/06/I-like-to-build-things-that-way.html <comment><USER2> > As you can see it becomes not that clean quickly.

This is my biggest gripe with my fellow developers. Why they see the need of abstracting everything?

I don't see any problem in this code:

``` const [count, setCount] = useState(0) const [name, setName] = useState('') const [school, setSchool] = useState('') const [weight, setWeight] = useState(0) const [height, setHeight] = useState(0) ```

but i see them in the proposed alternative:

``` function useFormState(initial) { const [fields, setFields] = useState(initial) const _setFields = (name, value) => { if (name in fields) { setFields({ ...fields, [name]: value }) } } return [ fields, _setFields ] } ```

this kind of hooks likely are going to be extended in the future, supporting edge-cases, new features and so. But are these kind of abstraction necessary? Userland pushes them to the extreme with big packages.

All because the developer initially was seeing a "repeating pattern" in the code that was readable and testable.</comment>


Keras and deep learning on the Raspberry Pi - <AUTHOR> https://www.pyimagesearch.com/2017/12/18/keras-deep-learning-raspberry-pi/ <comment><USER2> Cool tutorial! It's great to see examples of people building models that are designed to be run in real time on the Raspberry Pi.

This post reminds me that I really need to find time to update the RPi TensorFlow Github repo. The TensorFlow team is making progress on official support- check out their nightly binaries here:

Model 2/3 B:

Python 2.7: [http://ci.tensorflow.org/view/Nightly/job/nightly- pi/](http://ci.tensorflow.org/view/Nightly/job/nightly-pi/) Python 3.4: [http://ci.tensorflow.org/view/Nightly/job/nightly-pi- python3...](http://ci.tensorflow.org/view/Nightly/job/nightly-pi-python3/)

Pi Zero:

Python 2.7: [http://ci.tensorflow.org/view/Nightly/job/nightly-pi- zero/](http://ci.tensorflow.org/view/Nightly/job/nightly-pi-zero/) Python 3.4: [http://ci.tensorflow.org/view/Nightly/job/nightly-pi-zero- py...](http://ci.tensorflow.org/view/Nightly/job/nightly-pi-zero-python3/)

Github discussion: [https://github.com/tensorflow/tensorflow/issues/5729](https://github.com/tensorflow/tensorflow/issues/5729) Pete Warden's blog post on cross-compiling: [https://petewarden.com/2017/08/20/cross-compiling- tensorflow...](https://petewarden.com/2017/08/20/cross-compiling-tensorflow- for-the-raspberry-pi/)

</comment><comment><USER3> Check out donkeycar.com for another fun application of Keras on a raspberry pi 3!

<comment><USER4> [http://donkeycar.com](http://donkeycar.com) is "an opensource DIY self driving platform for small scale cars" (e. g. RC cars).

The page claims all necessary parts can be bought for about $ 200 on amazon. It looks fun.</comment></comment>


Show HN: Twiggy – Git branch management for Vim - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/sodapopcan/vim-twiggy <comment><AUTHOR> Inspired by item?id=16114907 I figured I'd try my first Show HN with a vim plugin I released almost four years ago and didn't really promote.

The idea was mostly to get a quick view of branches in vim and sort by MRU. It of course has a smattering of other features (like checkout, fetch, delete, etc.)

This is the first and biggest vim plugin I ever wrote so obviously am a little embarrassed of the code. While I haven't updated it in three years, I still use it every day. Obviously this means I haven't updated it to add backgrounding-support but it does work with dispatch.vim.

Looking for feedback, contributions, and the motivation to improve it.

</comment><comment><USER2> looks neat. I'll have to give it a try on neovim.</comment>


Mechanical Turk vs oDesk - <AUTHOR> http://www.behind-the-enemy-lines.com/2012/02/mturk-vs-odesk-my-experiences.html

<comment><USER2> This article is an excellent summary of all the frustrations I've encountered using both oDesk and Mechanical Turk.

I'll add one more issue with MTurk: binary decisions. Some of my tasks can't easily be broken down into accept/reject, or sometimes a worker gets something _close_ but not all the way there. I want to be able to say "hey, you did pretty well, but please make these small changes and we'll accept it."

But that's not possible right now. You get the HIT and it's accepted or rejected. The result is that we have to sometimes reject workers who are making an honest effort but didn't sufficiently complete the task or we have to accept sub-par answers so as to not have to deal with worker blowback.

<comment><AUTHOR> Let me suggest one solution for such cases: Use iterative tasks, in the spirit introduced by TurkIt.

For example, you want to create a caption for an image. You let a user create a caption. Then you take this caption and give it to another user, asking the user to improve it. Take the two versions and ask other workers, "which of the two versions is better?". Iterate until no improvement is possible.

Not a trivial setup, but gets around the binary accept/reject decisions problem and generates results of significantly superior quality.

<comment><USER3> Good idea. I've also thought about this for data entry/analysis type tasks. It is fully expected that a worker on any level won't be perfect, especially on these types of services. An approach I've considered is to have have 3 workers do the same task then compare results and take the majority answer which should be close to if not 100% accurate. Overtime you could even rate workers for accuracy and recruit/pay more if possible.

<comment><AUTHOR> On a very selfish note, take a look at these:

<http://qmturk.appspot.com/> <http://code.google.com/p/get-another-label/>

You may find the code useful for what you are trying to do.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> To get any sort of work done you need to give good instructions to good workers, all within a good process. If any of these aren't in place it is hard to get quality results.

(Disclaimer: I am the founder of CloudFactory, a next generation mTurk working to get the right mix of solutions, process and workers.)

Panos has been using mTurk for years and knows how to break work down and give clear instructions to workers (plus validate to catch spammers and lazy workers). Most people need to fail a bunch of times in learning how to create tasks well before becoming good "factor owners" as Panos described it. We have a team of crowd solution developers that design workflows, create killer task forms, analyze data and improve everything so others don't have to go through the painful ramp up.

We have sent many thousands of tasks through mTurk while we build up our own workforce from scratch. Anonymous workers that sign up online in 2 minutes with fake info have no accountability or ownership in their work. This is just never going to work. You end up with anarchy in the marketplace, both workers and requesters get ripped off. CloudFactory is taking a totally different approach to building up our workforce to ensure that workers have accountability, are matched to the right tasks and in general are motivated and enjoy their work. Happy workers are good workers and we don't see any technology making up for this.

That said, a process is required and this is where technology is important. Quality control techniques are essential to catch mistakes even when the best workers are given clear instructions. We take a factory, mass production approach to this type of work and our platform offers tools to give real-time control and transparency to your work done in the cloud.

So when the screwdriver (mturk) isn't working properly, don't get a hammer (odesk) ... just get a better screwdriver!

</comment><comment><USER5> If you're having trouble getting your HITs done or ensuring quality work on Turk, MobileWorks (YC S'11) is essentially a better version of Turk that takes care of these things for you. (Disclaimer: I'm an engineer at MobileWorks.) Your experiment with oDesk is interesting, but I can't help but feel that this sort of microtask work is not was oDesk was built for.

We're crowd researchers who spend our time working on methods for routing tasks to qualified workers and QAing work. We aren't a wrapper on top of Turk -- we're our own platform and we employ our own workers. You just push HITs to our API and we take care of quality control and worker management for you.

If you're interested, email me at lionel @ (my company) .com and I can help you get started.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for the offer. I have a decently long experience with MTurk to know how to get things done.

My point is that microtask work is not necessarily the optimal setting for tasks that are expected to last for longer periods of time. It is often beneficial to train and give people meaningful pieces of work instead of converting real work into micro-work and assume that workers are not intelligent enough to get things done properly.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> How soon will it be possible to pick-off Mechanical Turk tasks using computers - assuming it is not being done already? Is this a real opportunity or is the big money going to be made in helping businesses design their work so it can be automated this way (assuming the problems don't degenerate into just another parallel programming task).

<comment><USER7> What does "pick-off Mechanical Turk tasks using computers" mean?

<comment><USER8> I think he means "complete", as in automate the tasks. "Pick off" is usually used as in: "The sniper was in the bell-tower, picking the enemy soldiers off one by one" (if you're a grammar geek, it's an optionally separable phrasal verb). It can also be used to refer to completing tasks.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I think Crowdflower (<http://crowdflower.com/> ) would be useful in this situation. I've used them before because I'm UK based and MTurk wouldn't let me create HITS (not sure if that's still true?) but they also add some stuff to MTurk like a HIT designer (a form designer) and, more interestingly here, an interface to have people complete your HITS outside of MTurk.

</comment><comment><USER10> What's a typical percentage rejection rate for your tasks?

I find that for some classification tasks my rejection rate is around a third (this includes careless/sloppy answers, so the rejection rate of honest answers is lower).

Even though there is always a right answer, some answers are almost correct, but they get rejected and the worker's stats are affected.</comment>


ZTE of China to Pay $1B Fine in Deal to End U.S. Sanctions - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/07/business/us-china-zte-deal.html <comment><USER2> You'd be naive to think if ZTE were to go under will be at America's best interest. U.S. semiconductor industry as a whole will be impacted as ZTE is one of the largest mobile handset and networking equipment manufacturer.

<comment><USER3> Right, because when a supplier for anything that has a massive market goes out of business, no one has ever come in to serve that market...

<comment><USER4> Agreed. Their 3% market share would be arbsorded into Xiaomi, Samsung, and Huawei within months.

<comment><USER5> Imagine assets that could be bought at a discount.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I love how we are slapping sanctions on our allies and letting our adversaries in the backdoor. All the while complaining about IP theft from China. Sad!

<comment><USER7> Exactly this. It's insane that the US is threatening EU companies for (currently, legally) doing business in Iran, while at the same time letting ZTE get away with, well, having done the same thing (except illegally, when the sanctions were still in place). And all of that to save "many jobs"... in China.

<comment><USER8> ZTE didn't get away with anything. The US action against them nearly destroyed the company and they've been fined $2.2 billion.

As of right now, if all the US has done is threaten sanctions on EU companies, then it's ZTE that has received the dramatically worse outcome.

<comment><USER7> ZTE objectively got punished with _a lot less_ than what was meant. They got away with a lot, while the US chickened out. And EU companies will lose _a lot more_ than a billion (caused by the US breaking an international treaty).

<comment><USER9> The US did not break an international treaty. It was a "deal" from Obama, which he never put in front of the Senate to actually become an international treaty... Likely because the Senate would not have confirmed it as it was.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Meanwhile, a Chinese state investment puts $500 million dollars towards an Indonesian project heavily involving Trump properties, golf courses and branding.

[https://www.nationalreview.com/news/china- contributing-500-m...](https://www.nationalreview.com/news/china- contributing-500-million-trump-linked-project-indonesia/)

Peddling influence and using government for personal profit seems par for the course in this administration.

[https://www.salon.com/2018/05/16/trumps-bizarre-zte- tweets-p...](https://www.salon.com/2018/05/16/trumps-bizarre-zte-tweets- payback-for-a-huge-real-estate-deal-in-indonesia/)

<comment><USER11> China knows how to play the game. They know that their investment won't stay under wraps... so I don't see how this would benefit Trump. Could the trump organization have rejected China's investment into the Indonesian state project if they wanted to stay clean? Or would that require dropping out of the entire project completely, and what would the contract violation terms have entailed if they were as major a part of that project as it seems? Would the contract violation agreement result in greater than 500M losses? There are very interesting political games afoot.

<comment><USER12> All of your questions demonstrate why the President should never be in that situation in the first place. That Trump wasn't instantaneously impeached for enormous ongoing conflicts of interest is a stain on Congressional leadership.

<comment><USER11> Very true, could you imagine the political implications if the Trump organization DID reject the Chinese investment into an Indonesian state project? If acceptance of money is, ipso facto, a sign of political corruption, then would blocking the exchange of money between 2 sovereign nations be considered meddling in foreign economies? What intentions could be read from an act of rejection? How much of the invested money would have actually reached the Trump organization? The Trump organization is far too tied to the Trump presidency for comfort. But this has been true of the Clinton foundation during Bill and Barack's terms as well.

As an aside, the president should first and foremost, represent the nation's best interests. But I can't determine what Trump holds in higher regard, the office of the president, or himself. I imagine most people think being president of the US would be the highest position in the world. For any politician at least, US or foreign, the top of their food chain is the US President. But how does a billionaire like Bezos, with a business and news- media empire, view being president? Does someone like that look down or up? What I mean is, would and should a billionaire 'play' president the same way a politician would 'play' president? My imagination is that a billionaire would want to become president in order to use the office to accomplish political goals not possible simply with money, versus a career politician who might simply see the US Presidency as a goal in itself. At the end of the day, both want to see their desired outcomes come to fruition, both want to be in a position of governmental power to make their wants happen. Which one is better for the nation?

<comment><USER12> I don't understand what you're saying about what Clinton Foundation. It wasn't formed until after Bill left office and as far as I know Obama wasn't involved. The worst Obama did was have a book people could buy.

<comment><USER11> I had to look it up since I didn't know enough about it, but it looks like the Clinton Foundation was set up in 1997, at the beginning of Bill's 2nd term. As for mentioning Obama's term, what I meant by that was that since Hillary was Secretary of State at the time, there's definite potential for conflict of interest. I used wikipedia for my info.

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

<comment><USER12> From that article: "The origins of the foundation go back to 1997, when then- president Bill Clinton was focused mostly on fundraising for the future Clinton Presidential Center in Little Rock, Arkansas. He founded the William J. Clinton Foundation in 2001 following the completion of his presidency."

<comment><USER11> Whether its a charity/fundraiser/guest-lecture/business-deal, I imagine it still works the same way, regardless of the stated focus or purpose of said thing: Money goes in, Influence comes out (or Favor_B in exchange for Favor_A). I have neither money nor influence, and the favors I can grant are minuscule, so I can't tell you what ratio of Money:Influence works for powerful people, but I can at least say that they are not inversely proportional. The more you give, the higher your surface area becomes to receive something and the more offended you can act if you don't receive something quid pro quo.

<comment><USER13> Here's one thing the public purse gave to the Clinton foundation:

[https://nypost.com/2016/10/02/bill-clintons-executive- suite-...](https://nypost.com/2016/10/02/bill-clintons-executive-suite-is-a- private-pad-above-165m-library/)

(Of course the real power behind money isn't the money itself, the ownership, but the power to use it. So for taxpayer's money, the power comes from the mayor, governor or president and to a lesser extent congress/senate and their lower level equivalents. For companies the power behind the money is management/directors/CEO, and to a (much) lesser extent shareholders. So one should always make the distinction between ownership and the ability to control something. The control is much better than ownership, for one thing, control is not taxed)

And before you say "but that's the president". Well we know about Bill Clinton, don't we. He's the sort of man that forces people in his employ to service him sexually. So clearly, he's the sort of guy that takes "one service for another" pretty damn (in fact illegally) far.

Now you can say "but Bush, and Obama (and even Trump) are better than that". Perhaps, but first, not likely, and secondly even if it's just the one, the results will be similar, perhaps a bit more limited in time at best.

One wonders just what level of favor that buys, but it must have been ... well let's say at least $20 million worth of favor. If you can put a price on it at all, as this is a property that doesn't get taxed, even gets maintained and serviced by the government for free and normally wouldn't be available at all. So that price is the cost price of this thing, actually buying this as a private individual would have been at the very least 10 times that.

<comment><USER12> What do you mean, "the public purse"? That was funded entirely with donations.

<comment><USER13> [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinton_Presidential_Center](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinton_Presidential_Center)

So $165 million, firstly $11.5 million directly from the local government, > 10% from foreign governments, and several high 6 figure "donations" from people he pardoned (on top of those people paying "consultation fees" to close family members of the Clintons).

I probably should have said "by the public purse, among others".

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Trump's flipping around shouldn't be that surprising, but the wholesale abandonment or banishment of any independent thought from the Republican party is quite a (terrible) thing to behold.

They claimed they were for "law and order" but the stand firm behind a criminal and want to take down the FBI and other agencies.

They were for standing up to tinpot dictators, but are now fighting over who can suck up to Kim the best.

They claimed they were for free trade and smooth business, but are now working hard to wreck the Western alliance.

And let's not even try to get into the whole "family values" scam...

<comment><USER15> I suppose one man's successful negotiation is another man's reason to launch into a digressive rant.

<comment><USER14> And I suppose one man's "successful negotiation" is another man's "fragile egomaniac taken advantage of again".

Much like his inaugural Carrier "negotiation", these things tend to fluff his ego, benefit the other party and somehow leave everyone else worse off.

<comment><USER16> Ever notice how Republican presidents are always portrayed by partisan liberals as blithering idiots (Bush II as a religious fundamentalist warmonger dunce; Trump as an narcissistic ADD loose cannon dunce)?

And how Democrat presidents are always portrayed by partisan conservatives as morally corrupt degenerates (Clinton as a murdering, philandering drug kingpin; Obama as a Kenyan-born Muslim homosexual on globalist puppet strings)?

Usually I just assume this is confirmation bias + partisans being partisan.

But sometimes I like to wonder, "What if it's all true?"

<comment><USER17> Trump has confirmed himself that he does not read. Not books, not the news. It is widely reported by his own cabinet the man does not pay attention or have the depth of understanding of well, anything.

The thing about Obama being a muslim homosexual is fucking stupid and not worth responding to.

<comment><USER18> What about 5 years pushing the racist lie that was birtherism? That his supporters didn't care, or they liked it?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> "Too many jobs in China lost" - Xi's waterboy and president of the USA

<comment><USER20> 1.4 Billion in penalties. I don't see any other President of the USA doing that. Its a WIN for us.

<comment><USER21> ... the US armed forces are spending roughly 2b every day (~590b in 2015, proposed ~680b in 2019). That penalty is a drop on a hot stone. That's not a "WIN".

<comment><USER22> Why is the budget of the US armed forces the point of comparison here?

<comment><USER23> Because ZTE is a prime instrument of PRC hegemonic ambitions, and $1B is a bargain to put such an asset back on line.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> So the outcome here is:

\- All key leadership and board memebers are to be fired and replaced within 30 days

\- US picked compliance team embedded in ZTE that the commerce department is reimbursed for by ZTE

\- $1B fine and $400M in escrow

\- Qualcomm / NXP deal seems likely to be approved, helping US jobs

In the past we've seen other countries deal with Iran while under sanctions, and we've gotten nothing out of them other than speeches at the U.N.

I kinda think I like this better.

 _oblig disclaimer - I didn 't vote for Trump, and I don't knee-jerk defend his actions..._

<comment><USER25> > In the past we've seen other countries deal with Iran while under sanctions, > and we've gotten nothing out of them other than speeches at the U.N.

> I kinda think I like this better.

I think this is immensely unfair - you cite one deal that got a lot of press due to a series of unexpected about-faces in the US position. There's no reason to believe that agreements of this nature are made but not publicized.

Also, I'm not sure I understand how this action relates to the sanctions placed on Iran. What is your reasoning?

<comment><USER24> I used the term sanctions in the broad sense when I could have used a more specific term, but I was referring to the trade and technology transfer restrictions (which fall under the generic umbrella of sanctions) that ZTE violated.</comment></comment></comment>


Prescription-only video game EndeavorRx approved by FDA for kids with ADHD - <AUTHOR> https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-permits-marketing-first-game-based-digital-therapeutic-improve-attention-function-children-adhd <comment><USER2> This kind of software exists in an interesting space. It's effectively a medicine that can be distributed and administered at no cost. If we had a physical drug with those properties, access would be ubiquitous. Instead, the controlling company will likely use DRM and otherwise do everything in its power to prevent access. IP law is supposed to ultimately maximize public good by gaurenteeing a return on investment, but denying someone medical treatment that costs nothing just feels wrong.

<comment><AUTHOR> I don't disagree with this principle but I'm not sure it's actually different than physical drugs. While a new drug is still patented the manufacturer is able to price it however they want.

In fact this video game seems to have gone through a reduced scrutiny process and I'm hoping they wouldn't somehow be given any sort of patent for how simple this game appears to be. So if it were actually effective and became popular it might end up being easy for competitors to make a substantially similar "generic" version. That's just pure speculation from me though.

Regardless I feel it's irrelevant for now since the claim that this game could actually help kids with ADHD seems baseless to me.

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> After reading one[1] of the studies(the FDA release says there are multiple studies but provides no links) that supposedly supports the claim that this game could be beneficial, my opinion is that this is entirely bogus.

The issue is that the only metric that this game improved was performance on a TOVA assessment[2]. TOVA is itself essentially just an absurdly boring video game: You press a button when the correct target appears, and don't press when incorrect targets appear. I have personal objections to idea that TOVA can really be a reliable indicator of ADHD, but it is approved as one.

The "therapeutic" video game is described in the study as game where half of the gameplay is "a perceptual discrimination targeting task in which users respond to the instructed stimulus targets and ignore the stimulus distractors". Meaning this game is almost literally just the TOVA test but with better graphics. The control game appears to have been a word game along the lines of scrabble. Unsurprisingly, kids who played the first game had more improvement on the TOVA test.

They just developed a game that taught to the test. Of course the results improved.

[1] [https://www.thelancet.com/journals/landig/article/PIIS2589-7...](https://www.thelancet.com/journals/landig/article/PIIS2589-7500%2820%2930017-0/fulltext)

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

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Additional news articles:

[https://www.statnews.com/2020/06/15/fda-akili-adhd- endeavorr...](https://www.statnews.com/2020/06/15/fda-akili-adhd-endeavorrx/)

[https://www.theverge.com/2020/6/15/21292267/fda-adhd- video-g...](https://www.theverge.com/2020/6/15/21292267/fda-adhd-video-game- prescription-endeavor-rx-akl-t01-project-evo)

Related study:

[https://www.thelancet.com/journals/landig/article/PIIS2589-7...](https://www.thelancet.com/journals/landig/article/PIIS2589-7500%2820%2930017-0/fulltext)

</comment><comment><USER3> Why in the world is this prescription-only?</comment>


Ask HN: CV Feedback - <AUTHOR> As someone how just wrote his first non German CV I would appreciate a little feedback on it.
Is it ok to include a list of projects in the CV? What is then the preferred page count? My German CV is 6 pages with 3 of them project descriptions.<p>https://drive.google.com/a/lukaseichler.de/file/d/0BxVoAY5VrINfV0prdk94eWtlMVU/view?usp=sharing <comment><USER2> Are you missing a word on your first bullet? Consulting "for?" Clients? What does that consulting involve? Advice or actual implementation?

I'd be a little more specific with what technologies you're using. I see Containers/Kubernetes for your current position but I have no idea what technology the applications themselves are built on.

I'd also try to quantify/specify how you added value. Right now, i get a general idea of things you did but no sense of value other than "did my job". Shoot for some benefits along with your "features"

What did you do as a lead? Arch stuff? Code Reviews? Initial Design?

Good luck!

</comment><comment><USER3> Seems to require a Google account, so I won't be offering any advice.

<comment><AUTHOR> Sorry, the sharing settings were wrong. Now it can be viewed without an Google account.</comment></comment>


Need developers to create projects for programming education - <AUTHOR>

I am looking for JavaScript developers to create educational coding projects for a JavaScript course. These projects will be used to teach beginners how to program in JavaScript. I have a list of project ideas and some sample projects, and I need people who can build it out on a per project basis. It is for a good cause. You would need skills in JS, HTML, and CSS. <comment><USER2> I can help you, I was always interested in promoting education online. this is my email id: email@example.com

</comment><comment><USER3> try APPYnote (www.appynote.com)...it is a Javascript APP platform that is well suited for education.</comment>