The Durian King - <AUTHOR> https://www.latimes.com/world/asia/la-fg-col1-malaysia-durians-china-20190704-htmlstory.html <comment><USER2> I live in Malaysia. We are right in the middle of durian season (May to August).

Musang King costs Ringgit Malaysia(RM)48 per kg. That is around USD12/kg or (USD5.45/pound). So a single Musang King durian will cost around RM60 per fruit (USD14.50/fruit). I usually buy slightly lesser quality durian at RM38/kg. The seller will help to choose a fruit that is ripe and creamy but not overripe. You can take home the partially opened fruit or just transfer it to a styrofoam container that you put in the fridge when you get home.

Musang King has smaller seeds and is creamier than what I usually buy. But the less expensive fruit is good enough for me since I buy durian pretty often. If you had a durian orchard why would you grow fruit that does not taste good? If I were a durian farmer I certainly would not. The difference in quality between Musang King and the others is not that noticeable.

My friends from India who visit me just hate the smell because it (sorry to be so graphic!) smells like fruity poo and refuse to taste it or taste it with a cringing expression. I'm sure that other people have the same reaction. But if you do visit Malaysia (or another durian country such as Singapore or Thailand -- both remarkable countries for food as well), you should partake. It is the closest you will come to eating palkova from a tree.

<comment><USER3> I might visit KL soon, which place would you recommend to try out eating Durian? And which place to get it to bring it back home? I am hoping they take care of packing etc.

<comment><USER4> You'll want to head out to the suburbs. There's an area called SS2 that is where most of the locals go to have their durians.

I'd recommend against taking it out because even for locals many of us can't bear the smell, and it's considered impolite.

On a side note, are you coming here for NG MY conference?

<comment><USER3> Thank you. I had to look up "NG MY" conference, so, no not coming for Angular conference.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> My grandparents had a durian plantation in Sibu, a small town in East Malaysia. During the season we would camp out there for days, waiting for the sound of a fruit dropping and then running out to retrieve it. We had to sell it after my grandfather passed.

Interestingly, they say the best durians (from Malaysia) can hardly be found in Malaysia as they are all brought to Singapore where they fetch a much higher price.

I wrote a love song to durians which I released a few weeks back: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ylX- HLGgI8E&list=PLB5PnPqPHu...](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ylX- HLGgI8E&list=PLB5PnPqPHuGXScyA0UDMIoxGscESWZhNY)

</comment><comment><USER6> I can't believe nobody commented on the theft:

> The fruit came from a nearby orchard. Tan asked whether he could have a > branch to graft onto one of his trees, but the woman shooed away the idea. > So that evening he returned with a villager armed with a rifle. At Tan's > instructions, and for pay, the man pruned a footlong branch with a well- > placed shot.

<comment><AUTHOR> The ending to the story, describing the younger Tans' paranoia of rivals poisoning and stealing his durian trees, suggests that maybe sometime in the future, we might get an epic story akin to "The Orchid Thief", but about durian thievery and conflict:

> _On the cusp of the peak durian harvest, which starts each June, he often > sleeps in a hammock on the family plantations, guarding ripening fruits from > thieves. Durian farming is a cutthroat business. Rivals are suspected of > poisoning some of his experimental durian trees. His biggest fear, however, > is that someone steals a branch from one of his new hybrid trees, just like > his father did so many years earlier._

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> I once worked somewhere where a coworker declared "if the bug is in my code I'll eat a durian"

We made him do it outside

</comment><comment><USER8> > China's massive unmet demand for durian is the prime reason the Hong Kong > consulting firm Plantations International predicts that the global market > for raw durian will reach $25 billion by 2030 — up from $15 billion in 2016.

It's amazing how much wealth China is generating in all of the smaller surrounding Asian countries.

</comment><comment><USER9> If you live in San Francisco, the restaurant China Live has Durian ice cream that actually is rather delicious. Only good tasting Durian dish I've ever had. I absolutely hate the smell of the fruit and don't particularly like the slimey texture either.

</comment><comment><USER10> I wish Malaysians substitute palm oil monoculture with this. It's a tall local species, which is a lot more accommodating to wildlife.

<comment><USER11> No one really likes Durian outside of the region, it's not popular.

Should they plant canola instead? It will require 4x the land.

Will the EU (who are some of the biggest exporters of palm oil alternatives) replant the extensive forests they tore down for agriculture in the last century or is it a _kick the ladder down_ type situation?

I'm a big conservationist and active in SEA, the current attitude of the EU is absurdly unproductive and has gotten most of the population offside, Malaysia needs uncut tracts of rainforest and guaranteed protected regions, this is possible to do, dickheads with moustaches in Belgium aren't helping the situation.

Another alternative is avoiding monoculture plantations altogether, but that doesn't seem to work anywhere on Earth.

<comment><USER10> I'm a Malaysian who in the past managed two agriculture private equity funds. I've engaged with dozens of local farmers of over the years.

The problem with palm oil monoculture is that it is so easy that it makes its practitioners complacent. The value chains are established, the prices are commoditized (there is a local futures market) and there is ample government backing for international lobbying. Unfortunately, this means that the value- add (and margins) at each step of the value chain is now really thin. Unless you are vertically integrated and operate at enormous scale, you won't make much.

Short, high-value, local-farm-to-plate, gourmet-ingredient agriculture is what I dream of, sort of like what the Japanese have. It doesn't always have to devolve into mega-agribusiness.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> While it's nicknamed the King of Fruits, I can't say I have ever liked that much the taste of Durians (While I eat and enjoy pretty much all exotic fruits). I wonder if one needs to have tasted Durian during childhood or something in order to have the tongue for it?

<comment><USER13> People in the west like coconut water having been exposed to it only recently. And yet there are vast areas of the east where coconut water is meant to taste like death and rot. Bizarre

<comment><USER14> Not bizarre.

De gustibus ...

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

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Has anyone gotten it to fruit in America? I'd consider taking a trip to a durian farm if I could get freshly fallen Durian.

Jackfruit is another one of my favorites in the tropical fruit world.

<comment><USER16> Yes, I eat them all the time.

The easiest way to get them is frozen at an Asian super market. It's already taken out of it's shell and put in an air seal bag then in a plastic box. Some Asian super market have the whole fruit frozen. There are specialized places that import just exotic fruits we have one here in Alhambra near Pasadena iirc.

My parent just bought a jackfruit awhile ago from the specialty fruit importer store. We had to wait for a few days for it to ripe before eating.

<comment><USER17> The question asked whether it _grows_ in America.

<comment><USER16> Thank you for the clarification. I didn't realize fruit means grows.

<comment><USER17> It is quite rare to use it as a verb to be honest.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> In Thailand (only) they now have durian pizza. Which disturbs me a lot more than I think it should. [https://coconuts.co/bangkok/news/ooh-eww-pizza- company-thail...](https://coconuts.co/bangkok/news/ooh-eww-pizza-company- thailand-now-serves-durian-pizza/)

<comment><USER19> Durian pizza is relatively common in China if you know where to look.

<comment><USER20> By "know where to look", one usually just has to go to any Pizza Hut (必胜客), which are very common in larger cities. I've tried the durian pizza before, and it's actually quite good, even though I'm not a big fan of durian itself. Something about cheese and durian together works for my palate.

(Pizza Hut in China, it must be said, barely resembles it's American counterpart; in China, it's a moderately upscale Italian family restaurant which happens to specialize in pizza and pasta.)

<comment><USER21> I think it's because durian has a somewhat onion like taste and so I could see how it pairs well with cheese.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> > "The Musang King is my favorite," said Teh Bin Tean, a Singaporean > researcher who has studied the durian genome. "Don't try it first because > the rest is all downhill."

I wouldn't say the rest would be all downhill, there are many types of durian and each has its own unique taste (I personally like the sweet & bitter one).

</comment><comment><USER23> Before I knew what durian was, I and a close friend were served some by his Honduran wife. I having a dumpster stomach, and have been known to eat anything, took the biggest piece and popped it in my mouth and started chewing. That's when I got hit by a number of flavors. The flavors were not powerful, all of them just teasing. But I got them none the less. Rancid sock. Sweetness. Turpentine. Death.

After the experience, I felt that the fruit was not largely available, not local, not my cup of tea. Goodbye durian.

</comment><comment><USER24> "If it doesn't stink, it's not durian."

\- Tan Eow Chong

</comment><comment><USER25> [http://archive.is/6PmVL](http://archive.is/6PmVL)

</comment><comment><USER26> Are there other fruits that look like durian but are different inside? I once ate an odd fruit which grew on a Caribbean island. It had black seeds and creamy white flesh surrounding the seeds, was very sweet and not tart.

<comment><USER27> Soursop?

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

<comment><USER26> Thanks. That could be it, too. The description fits what I had.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> Before I ate Durian, it always smelled really bad to me. Now, it just smells strong.

The problem with buying it in the US is that the good ones cost $10/lb.</comment>


TPB AFK: Watch and Download The Pirate Bay Documentary - <AUTHOR> http://torrentfreak.com/tbp-afk-watch-and-download-the-pirate-bay-documentary-now-130208/ <comment><USER2> For all the people arguing this is glorifying breaking the law, it's worth keeping in mind all the people that stood up against segregation in the southern US states, or Apartheid in South Africa, or any number of laws that were considered "immutable" and carried severe penalties.

Yes, these actions are against current laws, but at citizens of the world we have a responsibility to stand up and make our voices heard if we ever hope to change anything. Many people will go to jail and pay big fines in the near future, but that is the way it has always been to influence great change.

<comment><USER3> Equating piracy laws with state run human rights abuse is a bit of a stretch.

<comment><USER2> I didn't equate the laws themselves, I equated the people struggling to change them.

You could apply it to any law in history that has been changed through the action of a few people.

<comment><USER4> Not to get too meta, but you did both. Consider this:

For all the people arguing this is glorifying breaking the law, it's worth keeping in mind all the people that stood up against _raising the speed limit to 65_ in the southern US states, or _requiring seat belts in cars_ , or any number of laws that were considered "immutable" and carried severe penalties.

Yes, these actions are against current laws, but at citizens of the world we have a responsibility to stand up and make our voices heard if we ever hope to change anything. Many people will go to jail and pay big fines in the near future, but that is the way it has always been to influence great change.

\---

That extra _oomph_ that's missing is you equating the apartheid and segregation laws (and their egregious nature) to copyright law. While I agree with your underlying point, the solution isn't to blow things out of proportion and compare them to some heinous human rights laws. It's a short hop from there to Nazis, a la Godwin's Law.

 _edited for clarity_

<comment><USER5> People going to jail for copyright infringement, which should really be a civil offense at best is pretty heinous in my books.

It's not apartheid but I find it (the punishment) really odd that it's acceptable in today's world.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I thought the arguments about how the market should evolve to handle piracy were very interesting.

With that, I truly appreciate Gabe Newell's perspective on the issue: "Our goal is to create greater service value than pirates, and this has been successful enough for us that piracy is basically a non-issue for our company... prior to entering the Russian market, we were told that Russia was a waste of time because everyone would pirate our products. Russia is now about to become our largest market in Europe." [1]

Valve's solution: Create an altogether better service. Be more convenient than piracy.

It's a challenge for many industries to replicate what Valve has done, but I know for a fact that I buy games on Steam I could easily pirate because the quality of service is so great.

[http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2011-11-28-valve- piracy-a-...](http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2011-11-28-valve-piracy-a-non- issue-for-steam)

</comment><comment><USER7> If you enjoy this movie you should also watch <http://www.stealthisfilm.com/>

</comment><comment><USER8> Why doesn't Youtube have better font support for subtitles? Or is this the fault of the people uploading them? I almost always find subtitles on Youtube too small and hard to read from more than 1m distance.

</comment><comment><USER9> Wow. What a tremendously strong and difficult gesture, surrendering the less than impressive nature of their internal struggles and personal character flaws to the public through a documentary like this. Much respect to all of those involved, including the film maker. With examples like this we can look ahead with the hopes of a better world.

</comment><comment><USER10> May anyone offer a good synopsis of the movie? If you know of a good blog post about it you may post it too. Thank you.

</comment><comment><USER11> Is anyone else getting a terrible download speed for this? I'm on the 720p torrent and getting 65kps despite there being thousands of seeds.

<comment><USER12> I was getting around 500 KiB/s for the 1080p version just a few minutes into the download.

You could also just rip the 1080p version from YouTube with "Easy YouTube Video Downloader" browser add-on, or a similar add-on (there are tons of these). The YouTube servers typically support downloads of around 1-1.5 MiB/s which is better than torrents in most cases (on residential Internet lines).

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> At 1:02:30 you can probably figure out his laptop password.

</comment><comment><USER14> People aren't arguing the same things here.

One side argues that piracy is a misnomer; that there are no true claims to digital property and that sharing is allowed at no cost for everyone. They highlight the injustices of the entertainment industry and "big business" poisoning both artists and consumers.

The other side argues that piracy is stealing with no room for moral relativism, and that people measurably suffer as a result of it.

We need to condense these and actually argue against the same things. First, let's examine what qualifies as fair use for sharing. It is true that the internet allows people to share media and idea in an unprecedented way, and that we are allowed access to things as a basic right, no matter where in the world we are. Sharing and public access to material is virtually universal, this is something that is agreeable.

Now let's examine property rights and intellectual ownership. Property is anything that can be owned, although one could introduce semantics and change the definition to anything which is of value, or a resource. In either case, patents, copyrights and trademarks are all viable forms of property in the same way land is property. That it is easier to steal a virtual form of property than it is to steal a house does not diminish the fact that media is a valuable resource which can be represented by a medium of exchange (e.g. money, currency).

In other words, when you pirate something, you are stealing media which is property. Property can be leased, bought, gifted and sold. It can also be partitioned and divided into smaller units. This brings us to a feasible view of property that can preside over both land _and_ virtual media - property is the archetype itself, and property represents the _greatest whole unit_ \- under this definition, an album is a whole unit which could be worth hundreds of millions of dollars. Similarly, a movie could be worth a billion dollars. But they are sold in much smaller units which are mirror forms of the original, albeit in single form.

And this represents property for the same reason that selling an acre of a much larger form represents property - you are still selling a portion of a greater whole.

We have thus eliminated one of the biggest arguments against virtual media representing property, and being ineligible for protection from forms of stealing.

So we can now come to a reasonable agreement that piracy represents taking a form of property without paying for it, be it leasing or purchasing. And thus, piracy is equivalent to stealing.

The only remaining point is whether or not stealing is justified in light of the often unethical business practices the entertainment industry subjects its incumbents to, most notably the artists.

This is a much greater discussion to have, but I am of the opinion that it is not fair to those who produce or create the media to steal it. You do not know how much money they will lose, and you also do not know how much you would really "stick it to the man" to steal.

Is it worth depriving a farmer of his grain to send a message to the government? The answer must agree with your answer to whether or not it is fair and justified to steal from an artist to send a message to the industry supporting him.

So, now I bring my point full circle. Is sharing a universal right? Yes. But you do not share your property at no cost. Are people given the right of access? Yes, but that access is limited to surveying and browsing property. You are not allowed to squat on a home, and neither are you allowed to steal media. But you are given basic access to both of these things and presented with a choice to buy them or turn them down. These are the two options implicit in access. The problem is that people believe there are other options implicit in the right to access, and they act accordingly.

What further confuses the issue is ideological baggage associated with the "warez" culture. Adding a label to your identity is a handy antidote to guilt and ethical considerations, but it does not hold up to raw logical examination.

<comment><USER15> Copyright is not property, its a privilege given by the state to the author. Its a state enforced monopoly, given under a perceived limited timed.

Privileges aren't properties. You can not own it, only be given it by someone in power to enforce it. No matter of semantics, you can't turn a privilege it into a property. State enforced monopolies are not properties. Copyright is not property, Patent is not property, trademark is not property. I can't make it clearer than that.

If you believe that the land is owned by the state and that the individual is given state privilege to use it, then it too is not a property owned by the individual. If however you believe that the state do not own the land, then the land is a property of the individual that work it, builds on it, lives on it.

Its an illusion to think that just because one can barter with privileges, it suddenly become a property and all the economics regarding property will suddenly make it all right. Its false. You can't turn privileges given by the state into something it isn't and what it isn't is a property owned by the individual.

<comment><USER14> Fair enough. How do we deal with any variety of intellectual property rights then? Do you recommend changing patent laws as well?

<comment><USER15> I can see several nice changes to patent law, but intellectual property is just a make-belief nickname for a group of laws, all with different aspects and goals. The only common denominator in each law, is that they are tools of the state and that they are indistinguishable from industry regulations.

Copyright is a state granted monopoly on _information_ , intended to encourage more works but to the cost of an increase unit sale price. It was a barging between the producers of creative works and society. Sadly, this law has not been updated with that goal in hundred of years, but rather taken off in the belief that any cost-benefit for society is simply not necessary.

Patent law is a state granted monopoly on _production_ , in the belief that it would encourage disclosure of secret information regarding how to produce new products. It was a barging between the producers and society. Sadly, this law has also not been updated with that goal in hundred of years, but rather taken off in the belief that any cost-benefit for society is simply not necessary.

Trademark is a consumer protection law, intended to protect a consumer rights to get what he pays for. Trademark scope is sometimes abused with the intent to prevent competition. This is wrong, and should be illegal but is rarely punished. The state gives some privilege to the target producer that a trademark contain, but the purpose of the law is clear.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Peter Sunde is all about freedom and "sharing". Yet, his site "Flattr" charges a higher service fee than any other service of its kind.

Here is from the flattr site:

"On incoming revenue you keep 90%. When you add money to give to others or withdraw money you earned you only pay a fee to the payment provider you choose."

So, they charge 10%. Paypal doesn't even charge you anything close to this. I also like how they tried to make it sound like it's not that bad, by talking about how much you actually get to keep rather than the fee itself.

I guess you need to make a profit/pay for server/infrastructure costs...so do artists, movie makers, and software developers.

It's so easy to take the hard work of others and in most cases, against the wishes of the original content creator, and just give it out for free. Anybody can buy a couple of servers, index a bunch of content, and put it up in a foreign country.

TPB isn't fighting for your freedom. They are helping in the demise of independent artists. Sure, you will always have a few people that play for free because it's fun, but because of the current state of the Internet (the new generation feels like they are entitled to music and anything else online, for free), it's going to be very difficult to actually make a living unless you are signed to a major label.

<comment><USER17> Indeed, it's disheartening to see people try to defend what is most certainly a crime. No matter what you call it, the artists are not getting paid for their content when they have the right to require payment. That is not right, no matter how you slice it.

I'm tired of people saying "but look how evil the artists/labels/companies are!" I don't care, it's no excuse. You're _correct_ that they're shady, but just because you're correct doesn't make your actions _right_.

<comment><USER15> If you are talking about morality, I would stay away from those that want to deny peoples access to general useful information. To quote professor Eben Moglen:

      The great moral question of the twenty-first century is
      this: if all knowing, all culture, all art, all useful
      information can be costlessly given to everyone at the
      same price that it is given to anyone; if everyone can
      have everything, anywhere, all the time, why is it ever
      moral to exclude anyone?

<comment><USER16> So a movie is information now? A song is information? Even the dictionary doesn't agree with your definition:

<http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/information?s=t>

How about your name, address, ssn, CC number, and bank account information. Information wants to be free, right?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Ugh, the color-grading puts me off immediately...

</comment><comment><USER19> Rather than glorifying the act of piracy, this movie does a wonderful job of exposing the founders.

One of them is an Alcoholic right-wing racist, another a drug addict.

Peter Sunde seems to be the only person who who seems vaguely normal.

I wish teenagers, children and other "pirates" realize that there is no glory in associating themselves with these sociopaths.

<comment><USER20> By right-wing racist, are you talking about Fredrik whose children are mixed- race (note the clips where he got married in Laos) or Carl who's married to a jewish woman?

<comment><USER19> You do realize that there are other races as well right? How would you explain the "dirty immigrants" quote?

<comment><USER20> It's a mistranslation, and you are ignoring the context.

He points out that every time he has been beaten up or robbed the assailants have been immigrants. And by immigrants, he clarifies, he is not talking about 7th generation Finns but about "turkblattejävlar". The phrase he uses can't be directly translated. It's a generalized racial slur of moderate intensity with a clear subtext of social class.

In the context, and when contrasted with "7th generation Finns", he is using the phrase to refer to a certain demographic: young males of low socioeconomic status, most likely originating from the Middle-east or North Africa. In polite conversation this is the subset of the population that you would euphemistically refer to as "ungdomsgäng" or "youths".

But, as you can see, he is not in a polite conversation: he's in a pub, he's drunk, and he has just called brokep "a fucking vegetarian leftist bitch ass bastard" who's driven by "ideological pussy-inflicted instincts". In that setting and with that tone the phrase was at most a less than appropriate way of referring to his attackers — hardly an exhibit of "right wing racism".

<comment><USER21> How can you believe something like that? You don't say stuff like that. It's the most obvious racism there is.

You are absurd. And, as clearly evidenced by your detailed explanation, there is apparently no mistranslation.

Not that it matters much, but defending racism?! Wow.

<comment><USER22> I don't see any "racism" here. Since it's "obvious", would you please pin- point it?

<comment><USER21> Really?!

<comment><USER22> I was hoping for something better of HN thread, than emotional exclamations. Oh, well. "You can't always get what you want".</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Fxpay: Mozilla's JavaScript library for in-app payments - <AUTHOR> https://hacks.mozilla.org/2015/04/easier-in-app-payments-with-fxpay/

<comment><USER2> TL;DR:

For developers building web applications on Firefox OS or Firefox Desktop, supporting payments is easy with Mozilla's fxpay library. In addition to accepting credit cards, it also supports billing to a cell phone #

<comment><USER3> Is Firefox Desktop the web browser on pc etc and does that mean ordinary websites can bill to cell phones etc through this?

<comment><USER4> Firefox Desktop is indeed the web browser on PC.

It sounds to me like you can definitely use fxpay to bill to credit cards on desktop. I'm not sure about the cell phone bill thing, though.

<comment><AUTHOR> Actually you can [theoretically] put a charge on your phone bill from desktop but there are some open bugs around this and it's not a high priority use case for us. The main case for desktop is credit card processing.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Anything special about Firefox OS or Firefox Desktop apps that prevents the use of companies whose full-time business model is payments processing? Or is the special thing about fxpay the ability to pay with your phone bill?

<comment><AUTHOR> The main reason Mozilla built a payments service and offered a custom library for developers vs. recommending Stripe (etc.) is because no one supported the direct operator billing we needed in our Firefox OS launch countries with a developer friendly interface.

<comment><USER6> Damn it, now i really want to see a FFOS powered flip phone on sale in the Nordics.</comment></comment></comment>


Copperhead OS: The startup that wants to solve Android's woeful security - <AUTHOR> http://arstechnica.co.uk/security/2016/08/copperhead-os-fix-android-security/ <comment><USER2> The work done by Daniel Micay and CopperheadOS really is something we all could use on our devices.

The fact that Google seems pretty much uninterested in having the security of their devices be a priority is appalling.</comment>


PHP Short Syntax for Arrays: developers say no. - <AUTHOR> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/shortsyntaxforarrays <comment><USER2> This does not seem reasonable. I mean that literally -- this feels more like a choice driven by culture than by reason.

The cons seem nowhere near strong enough to counter the fact that the overwhelming majority of users want this syntax, and have been asking for it for _years._

<comment><USER3> It's like they don't even _want_ to fix the language.

<comment><USER2> I catch myself feeling that way, too, but it is uncharitable and inaccurate. They do work a lot of work on developing the language. The issue is that sometimes their idea of what is should be differs from the idea that most people have.

<comment><USER4> I don't think it's possible to be too uncharitable about the developers of PHP. Courtesy demands that we give them the benefit of the doubt; but by this stage there is very little doubt left, so very little benefit as well.

<comment><USER2> If courtesy means giving undeserved benefit of the doubt, I'm all for discourtesy. This is about rational discourse.

The statement that "It's like they don't even _want_ to fix the language" is inaccurate. It does not relate to the state of things in the real world.

Accusing the developers of some warped intent to keep it in a broken state is an understandable expression of frustration, but it does nothing to advance our discussion and contributes to a misunderstanding of the situation.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> _Few_ people asked for, or even _wanted_ GOTO, yet that seemed to make it through with flying colors. When people would argue against it, the rationale was "well, _you_ don't have to use it!"

Why does the same criteria not apply to short array syntax? If you don't want to use it, don't use it, but hundreds of thousands of other people likely _do_ want it.

FWIW, I first remember hearing about this in 2003/2004, and at that time I was against it for most of the same reasons I've read in opposition to adding it. Working outside of PHP for some time, I've come to realize the shortsightedness I labored under, and would fully love to have this.

I'm not 100% sure the votes on that page are from May 2011 - it's hard to tell for sure.

<comment><USER6> The votes are old. The discussion has been raised again for 5.4 ( <http://markmail.org/message/fx3brcm4ekh645se> )

goto is a limited goto, and the reasoning for it's inclusion makes sense when you consider the other forms of limited goto already in place (breaks, cases, try/catches). It's not an unlimited goto.

<comment><USER5> The wiki page would have diffused this entire post if it had the dates of the votes on it :)

I understand GOTO, but the reaction to people who thought it was a bad idea was "don't use it!", ignoring the fact that whether we use it or not, we have to deal with other peoples' code that _do_ use it.

<comment><USER6> Yeah, but even the few people who do use it, it's implementation is limited, solving problems that would otherwise require excess code.

The people shouting "don't use it!" are thinking of a limitless goto. It's a shame, but not surprising really.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I think the "vote" recorded in the link is from a long time ago. Looking at the php.internals mailing list from today, this is what Rasmus is saying:

"Other than a couple of grumpy old-timers, I think we are in agreement that we should add a short array syntax. Whether we should extend that to also add a short object syntax is a secondary question." (<http://news.php.net/php.internals/52597>)

</comment><comment><USER8>
      Contra
        ...
        Not searchable through search engines

That's a ridiculous argument.

<comment><USER9> Not when you consider how a large number of PHP programmers "program" on a day-to-day basis.

<comment><USER4> Can you imagine what PHP would be like if the developers insisted on pandering to the lowest common denominator like that?

Oh, wait...

<comment><USER10> Oh no.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> This is why I stopped reading the dev mailing list. It was too frustrating to see (IMO) awesome features and suggestions constantly swatted down for (again, IMO) stupid reasons. Not searchable through search engines? Give me a break! I didn't know I was supposed to be writing code for Google. There are _so many_ higher priorities.

I think PHP is going to remain all but stagnant until there is a sea change in the core developers. I'm not sure what their true motives are... laziness? underlying dislike for the language? Whatever it is, all they seem to do is swat down every request, even when (as is the case here) the users are _begging_ for it.

It's like if they can come up with any reason at all not to do it, then they don't. "We already use square brackets for other stuff." Give me a f--king break.

</comment><comment><USER12> I've been wanting this for a long time, seems like a no brainer to me. It'd be nice to add some of the nice syntactic sugar that other languages have.

Kinda strange that they have both readable and unreadable listed as both pro and con...

<comment><USER13> I don't think that a concise method of working with arrays should be thought of as syntactic sugar, not if you mean it in a pejorative way.

I found array_map, array_filter, array_key_exists, array_this, array_that painful to write, but never felt that I was gaining any sort of readability for it.

<comment><USER12> No I meant "syntactic sugar" in a good way, i didnt realise it was a pejorative.

I mean it as per the definition on wikipedia:

      Syntactic sugar is a computer science term that refers to syntax within a programming language that is designed to make things easier to read or to express, while alternative ways of expressing them exist.

<comment><USER14> It is not generally perjorative. Some people interpret it as automatically perjorative, feeling that any syntactic sugar must necessarily carry costs in excess of benefits, but they are in the minority. Sizable minority, but minority.

Concentrations of people who dislike all syntax sugar can be found in the Forth community and concatenative languages in general, Lisp, and to a lesser extent, in the Haskell community. People who think syntax sugar is the answer to everything can be found in the Perl 5 community, and Perl 6 is arguably syntax sugar spun into cotton candy, hardened, and used to build a glorious gossamer castle in the sky, which they are currently working on landing. I have taken this metaphor too far.

<comment><USER15> FTFY: pejorative

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16>
        $a1 = [1, 2, 3];
        $b1 = ['foo': 'orange', 'bar': 'apple', 'baz': 'lemon'];
        $b2 = ['foo' => 'orange', 'bar' => 'apple', 'baz' => 'lemon'];

        $a1 = array(1, 2, 3);
        $b1 = array('foo' => 'orange', 'bar' => 'apple', 'baz' => 'lemon');

It would be a nice change to have, but the syntax isn't -that- much better. A compromise might be:

        $b1 = array('foo': 'orange', 'bar': 'apple', 'baz': 'lemon');

But even then, you only save two characters per key:value.

<comment><USER17> The less visual noise the better.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> Strange that the legendary PHP developers taste for good design did not won this time...

It's a shame that PHP does not get better as a language, as from the point of view of deployment and "get things done now" is great.

</comment><comment><USER19> Whenever I stop coding PHP for a while and return to it, the lack of short array syntax always blows up in my face. I waste a lot of time debugging to just find that arrays need to be initialised with array().

</comment><comment><USER20> Anyone else getting an untrusted SSL Cert error from the link?

<comment><USER21> Yep, but just remove the 's' from the protocol.

<comment><USER22> Or install the cacert root certificate:

<http://www.cacert.org/index.php?id=3>

<comment><USER23> Do you trust CACert enough?

<comment><USER22> Moreso than some of the CAs that are trusted by default, yes.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> I'm of the opinion you should be writing your PHP in a readable fashion similar to this:

       $foo = array(
          'bar' => TRUE,
          'baz' => 'socks'
       )

(pretend you also have proper tabs as well)

<comment><USER17> Sure but this seems better:

        $foo = [
          'bar': TRUE,
          'baz': 'socks'
        ]

<comment><USER25> It's kind of JSON-wish, so this would make more sense:

        $bar = [1, 2, 3];

        $foo = {
          'bar': TRUE,
          'baz': 'socks'
        };

<comment><USER26> For being JSONish it should be

$foo = { bar: TRUE, baz: 'socks' };

where keys are unquoted. The less typing the better.

<comment><USER27> However, PHP allows me to do this:

$keyName = "bar"; $array = array($keyName => "baz");

So in that instance it makes sense to force people to quote their keys. Also, bar or baz could be constants.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> I've wanted this for soo long. It's little things like this that make PHP feel so much clunkier than other scripting languages...

</comment><comment><USER29> Rasmus voted for it!

</comment><comment><USER30> Another fun fact: We're talking about 1 line in zend_language_parser ;-) The patch is not just complicated.

</comment><comment><USER31> I would give up hope for the ability to have a short syntax for arrays (or lots of other syntactical pleasantries) if the core team would please finally implement named arguments.

<comment><USER32> Could you explain what you mean by this?

edit: ahh, found it. Knew what it was, but not what it was called: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keyword_argument>

Would definitely be a solution to PHP's ridiculous argument ordering inconsistencies.

<comment><USER31> Yeah, keyword arguments/named parameters.

The most common way that we get to implement (hack) it now is by using an associative array, which then hides parameters in the implementation of the method as opposed to exposing it in the interface which helps both with reading someone elses code as well as provides for parameter initialization and type hinting (which assoc arrays remove).

I agree with you about argument inconsistencies, and named parameters would help with that, but it even goes beyond that, e.g. how many times have you seen this:

      function foo($bar = true, $baz = 5, $qux = "change me"){ ... }

      foo(true,5,"this is what i wanted to change");

when all you should have to do is:

      foo(qux="this is what i wanted to change");

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> Why try to make PHP more readable? Just use another language.

PHP, like C++, is a big industry dinosaur that can't and won't change.

In my opinion, the best think you could do is create a new language which compiles to PHP. I.e. A coffeescript for PHP. You don't have to "vote" and get stupid arguments against; you don't have to be backward compatible; and you only have great programmers in that project since crappy ones will just continue to use their 1500 lines unmaintainable functions anyway.

<comment><USER2> But why not make it more readable? The patch exists - all it would take is for it to be accepted.

And there are a _ton_ of people who can't justify the switching costs of moving to a different language. And true, a lot of us aren't great programmers. So?

Better tools help. And it's perfectly okay to build and improve tools that regular people will use. Even if they won't be creating the Mona Webapp. ;)

<comment><USER34> _And it's perfectly okay to build and improve tools that regular people will use._

It is, unfortunately PHP resists changes that most of the rest of us consider improvements. I think at this point we might be better served by putting our efforts in to replacing PHP rather than improving it. The replacement need not be the ultimate web language, but should try to be a _good_ language while maintaining a low barrier to entry.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> It was me who wrote that proposal 3y ago. Everyone who is still doing PHP, do whatever you want. Everyone who had left for Ruby or JS - let them - they just don't want.

</comment><comment><USER22> Note that the feature is under discussion for 5.4 and not rejected. Chances are actually extremely good that it will be in 5.4 in some form.

<comment><USER35> i gathered the opposite from the conclusion, unless it somehow leaves a window for another patch

<comment><USER6> <http://markmail.org/message/fx3brcm4ekh645se>

It's being brought forth again for 5.4, and really pushed. Their is a lot of momentum from the community, and even those who voted against it before are changing their mind.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> I've just spent a while reading the most recent of the discussion threads linked from there, and they're just further examples of the hostile and insular communities that form around far too many open source projects. Frustrating to read, painful to participate in.

<http://markmail.org/message/4brot4f6kthjfzse>

</comment><comment><USER37> I'm not sure this is entirely accurate, last time it was voted on the dev list it was narrowly defeated.

The topic was then resurrected about implementing in the 5.4 release and the objections didn't seem to be as strong this time around.

So the rejected status doesn't mean that it won't happen in 5.4 just that that was the previous status of the changes.

</comment><comment><USER6> The vote was in 2008. It's being brought up again for 5.4.

<comment><USER10> The 'goto' statement was apparently much more urgent.

</comment></comment><comment><USER38> Limited goto good, short syntax for arrays bad? What the hell is happening....?

</comment><comment><USER39> Pros: Readable

Cons: Unreadable

What does that even mean?

</comment><comment><USER40> This is a vote for consistency. Reasonable array syntax would be out of place in PHP.

</comment><comment><USER41> Re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.

</comment><comment><USER42> $confusion = ['pro' : 'readable', 'contra' : 'unreadable']

-edit- beaten to the punch on that one!</comment>


Writing a Sencha Touch MVC Application - <AUTHOR> http://miamicoder.com/2011/writing-a-sencha-touch-mvc-application/ <comment><USER2> Really good introduction to Sencha Touch. Highly recommended as there are many shared features with Ext JS 4.x so making the jump to Ext JS is easier.

<comment><AUTHOR> All credits to Jorge for a neat introduction!</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Those who moved careers from the US to India, what's your experience? - <AUTHOR> Specifically asking for Indian folks who came to US, worked for a while and went back (due to VISA issues or otherwise). How has been your experience back in the homeland in terms of money and life? <comment><USER2> I left california went back to India after staying in US for 11 years and stayed for 6 months, did nothing. If you have some money, say 50k rupees a month. Life is easy. You need to get used to seeing a lot of people and bad infrastructure. That shock will go away in a couple weeks. If you have money you can do the same stuff you do in US. You can travel to thailand if you want good beaches.

In those 6 months, I received Canadian PR. Now I am in Vancouver. I think Vancouver is a better place to be than Santa Clara( i was there). But I think so cal is still the best place on the planet. I lived in orange county and would go back to so cal if i ever recieve a green card.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for sharing your experience! A couple of questions:

1\. What was the reason for leaving US? I'm guessing you must be on EB1/EB2 track to the Green Card?

2\. How was the process like for the Canadian PR? Had you already secured a job in Canada before leaving US and then applied for the PR from India (Express-entry program)?

<comment><USER2> 1\. I had the urge and wanted to experience how life in India would be. I applied for Canadian PR as a back up. Also, i have i-140 so i can go back to US. 2\. I am in canada just to try it out and see how it goes. I did not have a job but got a job immediately. For process go online. If you are a software engineer you will get a job.

I don't endlessly do pro and cons. I just try things out.

"For all of the most important things, the timing always sucks. Waiting for a good time to quit your job? The stars will never align and the traffic lights of life will never all be green at the same time. The universe doesn't conspire against you, but it doesn't go out of its way to line up the pins either. Conditions are never perfect. "Someday" is a disease that will take your dreams to the grave with you. Pro and con lists are just as bad. If it's important to you and you want to do it "eventually," just do it and correct course along the way." ― Timothy Ferriss, The 4-Hour Workweek

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> After about 1.5 years of working in the US, I moved back to India for a year and made some mobile apps at home and also travelled south east asia. It was obvious that H1B was a waste of my time.

Then moved to the Netherlands and worked freelance and some regular jobs there for 5 years to get EU permanent residency.

Now moving to Spain and working as a remote freelancer in Barcelona for iOS/Android apps.

<comment><AUTHOR> Sounds very impressive, would love to get in touch if possible.

<comment><USER3> Sure feel free to email me at <myusername>@gmail.com :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Had a friend who went back recently. Life outside work is good. Closer to family, all daily chores are taken care of by maids and servants. But w.r.t work, you don't get enough number of quality people. They still need hand holding or "push". Most people are smart but do not know how to deliver end to end.

<comment><AUTHOR> I think it really takes truck-loads of courage in going back, taking that massive salary-cut. But if one's a family-oriented person, then it makes sense.

<comment><USER4> No pay cut really. He went at director level in a fortune 500 company.</comment></comment></comment>


Show HN: Add confetti to your website with just 1 element - <AUTHOR> https://www.webcomponents.org/element/lit-confetti <comment><USER2> Great build!</comment>


Show HN: Pakible – Create custom packaging in 3D (built with Three.js) - <AUTHOR> http://www.pakible.com/

<comment><AUTHOR> Stack is just Three.js/Angular/PHP (Laravel)

Tried about 3 other methods for doing 3D in the browser, including 2 other plugins and just CSS3D. Three.js ended up being the best way because it can render WebGL & Canvas depending on browser version.

Works on mobile too.

[http://threejs.org/docs/](http://threejs.org/docs/)</comment>


MPAA Boss: If The Chinese Censor The Internet, Why Can't The US? - <AUTHOR> http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111208/14521817014/mpaa-boss-if-chinese-censor-internet-without-problem-why-cant-us.shtml <comment><USER2> Not to harp on a horrible metaphor, however I would say Google is more like a metro or subway than a getaway car driver (or car manufacturer).

Yes, you took it to the bank robbery -- however it also took lots of people to other places, and didn't know nor care where you were going or why. Nobody would accuse a bus or train of being an accessory.

<comment><USER3> Just wait until one of Google's self-driving cars is used for a heist.

<comment><USER4> You just made me realize how self-driving cars can be (ab)used by police or higher organisations to track citizens, and stop a crime.

Knowing what they are currently trying to do with the Internet, them wanting to have some control over the self-driving cars wouldn't surprise me.

To some people it may seem clear how much of a benefit this would be. "Wow, the police are actually able to lock down a getaway car and arrest people who have just committed a bank robbery?".

But, there's a reason I wrote "(ab)used" up there, you probably understand the implications already.

<comment><USER3> I believe OnStar vehicles already have a remote kill-switch the owner or law- enforcement can throw. (Plus, of course, GPS tracking.)

<comment><USER5> While we're at it, OnStar can also be used to record the conversations of people inside the vehicle.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> The MPAA goons have long passed the line of "we give a frak what anyone says about us" and will happily stay there as long as politicians take their money and vote as desired. And look who said this: Chris Dodd, a former senator.

<comment><USER7> I was driving and listening to NPR the other day. Some story was on about the MPAA and the new SOPA bill. I hadn't yet heard that Dodd was the new MPAA chairman (chief lobbyist).

I was almost physically sick when that came across the air. I'm a long-time Democrat but I'll be damned if that didn't make me want to never vote for anyone ever again. Our two political parties are really two sides of the same coin and they are all working for corporations.

<comment><USER8> "In America, you have a choice! The capitalist party, or the other capitalist party!" – Dmitri Orlov, Russian emigre

<comment><USER9> I often say the Middle Class is still around right now because the two main parties can't agree on how to wipe it out.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Just because the Chinese limit people to one child per couple why can't the US?

I don't think justification to do something that someone else does no matter that it is an oppressive regime.

EDIT: fixed person to child

<comment><USER11> One person per child?

<comment><USER12> Teen pregnancy is rampant over there.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> How nice. Instead of USA spreading American values to the Chinese people, China is spreading its "values" to USA. Also MPAA's "analogies" to theft are becoming increasingly more ridiculous.

</comment><comment><USER14> I generally don't like the use of a metaphor as an argument since it often misses the point. Watching a movie without paying is not the same as stealing. I cannot give it to someone else what I have watched, I can't sell it, etc. But even if we accept that comparison, adding a second level of comparison by saying that a search engine is an accessory to stealing/robbery is just plain ridiculous.

For some reason, I don't really worry too much about all of these regulations. They will create speedbumps along the way, but the world will move on and come up with more innovative ways to get what they want. If they don't change with times, they will be uprooted eventually.

What Steve Jobs did was bring great technology and experience to masses faster than most other people. All of this would have been created/invented anyway, but it just would have taken a bit longer. All of these people only slow down the progress (which is still pretty bad), but they won't be able to stop it.

<comment><USER15> """I generally don't like the use of a metaphor as an argument since it often misses the point. Watching a movie without paying is not the same as stealing. I cannot give it to someone else what I have watched, I can't sell it, etc."""

That same holds for stealing a pie and eating it. You cannot give it to someone else or sell it.

You just decided on a specific, narrow, interpretation of "stealing".

<comment><USER16> You are right in that example, but saying that downloading a file illegaly is stealing is still wrong. It is an broad and overreaching definition of "stealing".

Stealing is the substraction of an object. If I steal something from you, you don't have it anymore. You lose it. If I pirate Avatar, you can still sell it to someone else. If steal your car, its gone unless you get it back from me.

<comment><USER15> I hear that argument a lot, but it's not consistent with how we actually use "stealing". I think it's just a feel-good argument to justify that "no harm was done" with downloading a file illegally.

For example, we say that "he stole the answers to the exam" --in this case, too, the answers are still there, nobody lost them.

Here's what dictionary.com gives for steal:

1\. to take (the property of another or others) without permission or right, especially secretly or by force: A pickpocket stole his watch. 2\. to appropriate (ideas, credit, words, etc.) without right or acknowledgment. 3\. to take, get, or win insidiously, surreptitiously, subtly, or by chance: He stole my girlfriend.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Let me check if I got this, just because they're ripping money off the film industry and they must come up with results to justify the money they get into their pockets, the country is supposed to give up on all freedoms and throw the constitution to the trash?

I generally don't like violence or encourage it, but people who back things like SOPA and PIPA really deserve a good beating.

We all saw how good the "great wall of China" proved to be. Protesters vanish without a trace, people who dare to say anything online sometimes go to jail or just vanish.

<comment><USER18> > Protesters vanish without a trace

Didn't that just pass the Senate?

<comment><USER19> Nope, that's an urban myth. The law explicitly contains language saying that it doesn't override any previous laws on detention.

Don't trust things you see reblogged on tumblr, especially if they don't cite sources.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> "When the Chinese told Google that they had to block sites or they couldn't do [business] in their country, they managed to figure out how to block sites."

And then they decided it was such a bad idea that they were going to _leave the country_. Carrying this to the logical extension, if implemented, Google would pack up and leave us for Canada.

Canada is already on the MPAA's naughty list, so....

<comment><USER20> I thought the Google leaving China thing was about government sponsored attempts to hack them, not about blocking?

<comment><USER5> There was that, too, but who knows which straw broke the camel's back?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> The US seems to be taking the expressway already to becoming more like China in terms of how the government relates to and deals with its citizens. This is just the tip of the iceberg considering a lot of whats gone on in the last decade in this country.

</comment><comment><USER22> I really hate how companies like the MPAA and RIAA exist. They care about nothing but precious profit. Yeah, let's forget constitutional rights and free speech, and censor the Internet to protect our product that can survive without us. China's doing it! We have the technology!

<comment><USER12> They exist so that their member companies can say unpopular things that aren't directly attributed to them. It's like money laundering, but for speech.

<comment><USER23> Exactly, I think the media should recognize that the MPAA/RIAA consists of companies, and actually attribute things said to the companies that participate in the MPAA/RIAA. That way the people can see what these companies really think about the world.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> MPAA, led by former Senator Chris Dodd

</comment><comment><USER25> _Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt._

</comment><comment><USER26> Looks like Chris Dodd finally took Bono's advice:

"We're the post office, they tell us; who knows what's in the brown-paper packages? But we know from America's noble effort to stop child pornography, not to mention China's ignoble effort to suppress online dissent, that it's perfectly possible to track content. Perhaps movie moguls will succeed where musicians and their moguls have failed so far, and rally America to defend the most creative economy in the world, where music, film, TV and video games help to account for nearly 4 percent of gross domestic product."

[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/03/opinion/03bono.html?hp=...](http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/03/opinion/03bono.html?hp=&pagewanted=all)

</comment><comment> buff-a _It's this sort of ridiculousness that makes it so difficult to take Dodd and the MPAA seriously in these discussions._

Only if you are educated and rational. We, here, are _not_ the audience for his remarks.

</comment><comment><USER27> I think it's great that he is making comments like this. It is such bad P.R. that it only makes it easier to do away with SOPA. I hope he continues to make these statements.

<comment><USER28> Carefully what you wish for. Get the right rep with the right amount of pull in congress and they'll get a ton of support from the rest of our reps no matter how asinine their statements are.

<comment><USER9> The GP is right though. Get the right rep with the right amount of pull in Congress, and it will happen regardless of what is said. However I think the statements being asinine make it easier to fight back and more costly for reps to go along with it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> This is so far into WTF that I can't help being deeply suspicious that it's a deliberate ploy of some sort. I just can't figure out what it would be expected to accomplish.

</comment><comment><USER30> If lemmings can jump off cliffs, why can't the MPAA Boss?

</comment><comment><USER31> Does anyone have a good explanation of the mentality of these media organisations? There are good examples of how relaxing DRM and making it easy to purchase content makes you shed loads of money. E.g iTunes Music Store.

Why aren't they just concentrating on how to make more money? Are these actions really more productive than acquiring more customers?

</comment><comment><USER13> This kind of flies in the face of what Hillary Clinton was saying today.

</comment><comment><USER28> The problem is that we have ten thousand year old representatives. They probably still do accounting using an abacus (or demand that their account use one).

All joking aside, we're talking about people who can barely use a computer debating laws governing the use of the very technology they haven't slightest clue about. As long as our representatives continue thinking that the Internet is a series of tubes we'll continue to hear this sort of thing from them.

</comment><comment><USER32> "If the Chinese censor the Internet, why can't the US?"

Because we have constitutionally guaranteed liberties, which are ingrained into our culture. Ever heard of the first amendment, moron?

<comment><USER33> Your government is a government just like the one in China. There are cultural differences, of course, but both governments are run by human beings.

It's not that the US government _couldn't_ behave like China's - so far they've just chosen not to go quite that far. They seem to be on their way though.

<comment><USER28> This whole discussion of the US in general has got me thinking but your comment specifically really stood out to me. I know that these measures suck and all but is the US government _really_ becoming as evil as people say?

If you at things historically you'll find people worrying that the US government is/was becoming tyrannical since the year our constitution was adopted. While I agree that the current Internet censorship debate should be taken seriously and I don't want any of these proposed laws to pass, if you take the long view you'll find that the history of the US is all about a series of battles for freedom. Some we win, some we lose but overall we've been heading in the right direction for a long time. It sounds silly but this can be likened to the posts that pop up on HN from time to time about how it's getting diluted and becoming lame. Some days trolls and idiots rule the day, others the smart folks take control and in general the community and their contributions have remained high quality since its inception.

So let's fight the good fight but maybe not go down the whole "this country is becoming the next [insert unpopular regime here]" road. Yesterday always seems like it was better than today, hindsight is 20/20, the grass is always greener, and all that.

<comment><USER13> I don't know - the nullification of the 4th Amendment thanks to the Patriot Act, and the recently voted 93-7 NDAA law that allows US military to arrest American citizens indefinitely without due process, is a pretty good start for totalitarianism don't you think?

And please don't use the argument "but if you didn't do anything wrong, then you have nothing to fear" because that completely misses the point.

<comment><USER28> No, I would never use the "if you didn't do anything wrong" argument. I'm not defending these messed up laws at all. I think they're awful like everyone else. All I'm saying is that if you take the long view you kind of see a pattern. People always feel like the past was better despite evidence to the contrary if you look at it. What I'm against is hyperbole. The country _always_ seems to be going to hell but is it really? Things have gotten better overall. Women's rights, abolishment of slavery, civil rights movement. There are always these restrictive laws that come about and awful circumstances but in the end things get better. We had a terrible financial collapse and out of that was born Occupy Wall St. Maybe that movement will be the one that helps us move forward on the economic front just as those of us who are against internet censorship may, in the end, save freedom online. I just don't believe things are as bad as many would have us believe.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> If the MPAA boss is a retard, why don't we isolate him in a mental institution?

<comment><USER15> You really think your comment is above retard level?</comment></comment>


How Google's Autocomplete Was ... Created / Invented / Born - <AUTHOR> http://m.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/08/how-googles-autocomplete-was-created-invented-born/278991/

<comment> isla-de-encanta autocomplete is good for google as it tends to limit the search terms people use. instead of expressing your search needs you pick from a predefined list. less terms used = better search caching and less SEO effects.</comment>


Groklaw legal site shuts over fears of NSA email snooping - <AUTHOR> http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/aug/20/groklaw-shuts-nsa-surveillance <comment><USER2> I hope those who treated me with scorn for suggesting the politicians and business people are effectively blackmailed by the mere existence of NSA type spying can now see it for real.

No direct threat, not conversation, no deals. Just the fear of the knowledge that one is being comprehensively watched, and what "they" might have. This fear is enough to alter behavior, to conform.

Again, at what stage can we describe the US and UK, and their co-conspirators as fascist, police state, oppressive, and so on?

Or, do we have micro targeted oppression? Is that the modern way?

<comment><USER3> While the NSA stuff is really bad, what Groklaw is doing is absurd and should be called such.HN seems happy to point out that more people die from furniture than terrorism, but yet unwilling to correct people with similarly misguided opinions when it comes to this.

1)Groklaw doesnt' depend on anonymous tips. The site could simply put up a huge disclosure statement on a web form that THE NSA might get what you say. Or not accept tips except via public comments but still operate.

2)Most of the people Groklaw corresponds with don't need anonymity either. Those that do presumably know it and hence, will not correspond with them absent secure means (once made aware of the need for them)

3) Groklaw isn't an email service provider, it's a legal blog/online magazine. As such, likely none of the NSA's mechanisms for getting information from email providers apply. Compelling individuals to hand over their own correspondence is, as far as we know, hard. It can get worse with freedom of the press issues.

So post a PGP key and say, if you really want anonymity, use this.(Edit) and use a mixnet or Pond, or something to send the message. PGP encrypted email from a new account just deals with the NSA's email intercept capability. If you are worried about their other abilities, you need something stronger then Tor since it fails for global passive adversary.

Of course, that wouldn't get them publicity

<comment><USER4> > __ _HN seems happy to point out that more people die from furniture than > terrorism, but yet unwilling to correct people with similarly misguided > opinions when it comes to this._ __

This logic is broken.

While more people may ___die_ __from furniture than terrorism, what the NSA is doing is ensure that __ _ZERO_ __people are free. Period. You are not __ _free_ __when you simpl cannot communicate with another human being via electronic means without the government 's ability to actually be party to that comm.

While I cannot comment on any of these decisions to shut down their businesses - the fact that they are doing so shows that we are in a really really REALLY bad place with respect to any level of trust in the government.

America is dead.

So where do we live? Every single thing that the US stood for has literally been murdered in the last 13 years.

We are not the land of the free. We are not a home for the brave. We have zero moral standing on any issue. We are 100% completely corrupt and destroyed as any nation we were raised to believe in.

I believe this all leads to one place. A world war - but not between nations. Between humans and their governments.

The systems of control will be stamping out any resistance to their control in the next few years. It doesnt get better from here.

<comment><USER5> > You are not free when you simpl cannot communicate with another human being > via electronic means without the government's ability to actually be party > to that comm.

That's reading a whole lot into the definition of "free." Were people "free" in 1950? If so, how do they become "not free" by introducing a new form of communication (created by the military, mind you) that is monitored more heavily than the ones they used to use?

<comment><USER6> Warrantless surveillance certainly happened in 1950, but there did not exist the means by which data about almost everyone could be vacuumed up and correlated. It's entirely feasible to have an intelligence file on the majority of US citizens. In 1950, you would have to be in some way exceptional to have a file with the FBI.

Aside from the technology aspect, there was no Patriot Act and it would at the very least be difficult to detain citizens long term without charges. Sounds less free to me.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> This is a tragedy.

We need to reboot email. Encrypt everything, including metadata -- given current hardware, the client can easily bruteforce it from a list of known keys. Build some sort of easy key distribution tool (connecting via p2p, dns, whatever, just build a goddamn UI). Ask existing transports to relax their restrictions enough to let fully-encrypted mail through, and build some intelligent webmail interface for this (Mailpile, currently being kickstarted, is trying to do smt like that).

We've been dicking around with PGP since the 90s without making any real progress, we've traded security for convenience (GMail, Facebook), it's time somebody reverts the trend.

<comment><USER8> I disagree. This is a political fight. Technical means can drag the resistance longer, which is helpful, but the political system needs to be put in checks and balances against becoming a police state. There is no substitute of "taking roads and doing peaceful protests" as out of comfort zone they might be.

We sometimes fall in love with our methods because that is what _we_ are good at, not what is necessarily the best course of action.

Again, I am not discounting the importance of improving technical measures, I am just cautioning against losing the sight of the forest for a tree.

I repeat, This is a political fight!

Edit - Added explanation.

<comment><USER9> The two fights don't conflict. In fact, they complement each other.

When all email is getting stored in plaintext on NSA computers, it's going to be hard to get the government to give up all that juicy data. Reduce the value of the data they're getting, and it's easier to reach a point where the political heat just isn't worth it to them.

At the same time, the political effort helps prevent new laws that make the technical solutions more difficult. And it helps encourage people to actually use our fancy technical solutions. If ever there were a time when we can get people on board with using crypto, it's now.

<comment><USER10> I think it's not the value of data should be reduced, it's the cost of access to the data should be increased. If it would be too expensive to watch everyone, they would naturally stop doing that.

<comment><USER11> They would just find more contractors eager to bill the increased expenses.

<comment><USER12> Or they would force even more backdoors into proprietary hardware than they do already. For all we know Intel and AMD could have microcode to sabotage RNG and they can already decrypt anything with ease using a skeleton key to predict the randomness.

<comment><USER11> I've always (probably very naively) hoped that competition keeps chip makers honest. If anyone does something naughty then their competitors would probably discover it while reverse engineering the other's product.

Now that I say that, it sounds even more naive than I previously thought. All bets are probably off.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> We are at an interesting juncture of history. It seems like Snowden has accomplished what he set out do to: raise awareness of government abuse and bring about positive change. Initial fears after the NSA leaks seemed to be that the public would become outraged and then forget about it. Clearly, this is not happening. A more secure Internet is needed, and instances like this highlight that necessity.

<comment><USER14> The public by and large has forgotten it, hell the public hardly became outraged before they forgot it. This and Lavabit and basically preaching to the choir.

The only difference between this and me saying I'm going to stop using email and drop off the internet would be that my statement won't generate several threads on HN. It would, however, have the same effect. Those that already know will ask why, and the rest of the world will go on oblivious.

<comment><USER15> Considering that Snowden's first revelation was just this June, I think a lot has happened in a few short months. Public opinion takes time to build. This is not a one-time event to be forgotten. This is a crack in the very foundation of our er... society, or whatever. The bill to reign in the NSA almost passed remember? That's just after a few months from the initial revelation. I will bet that by this time next year, things will look very different.

<comment><USER14> > I will bet that by this time next year, things will look very different.

I'll take you up on that bet, assuming you believe it's going to get better. I believe the only way you'll win it is if you mean looking very different to include worse instead of the implied better you wrote.

The majority don't care. Of the minority that even pay attention to it, most of them support it to catch the evil terrorists.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Huh? I just don't follow. Groklaw is not a site that depends on anonymous tips. The last few stories posted on Groklaw were on Apple vs Samsung and did not appear to require privileged confidential information.

How is it that other groups that do directly go against the government, such as the ACLU and the EFF, continue to do so without a paralyzingly fear that they can't keep their communications secret? The logical implication from Pamela's opinion is that these groups, by continuing to operate, are little more than a honeypot to be used against their clients.

That seems a bit overboard in defeatism.

<comment><USER17> It doesn't depend on anonymous tips, but encourages them.

PJ is basically saying she wants to prevent folks from sending her honest questions about things they have done or are involved from admitting guilt to law enforcement who can read everything.

<comment><USER16> Make sense, but I still think it's an overreaction. My original question still stands (is it irresponsible for the EFF/ACLU/etc to continue to operate with an online mailbox?), and I would also argue that PJ could mitigate this by simply removing any contact form or information from her site. Yes, people who know her email can still contact her anyway but obviously, _that means they can already do that after the site is shut down_. Groklaw could continue to operate as an outspoken advocate for legal freedom...perhaps Glenn Greenwald will find himself in a similar position, in which all communication to him is expected to be compromised, but I'd still think he'd continue to do his reporting and writing even if his sourcing was scarce.

<comment><USER7> _> is it irresponsible for the EFF/ACLU/etc to continue to operate with an online mailbox?_

It's actually fairly dangerous, knowing what we know now.

There is a reason the powers that be are so rattled by these revelations: the tactical advantage they're currently enjoying is huge.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Why not use DeadDrop[0] for leads/sources? The New Yorker[1] seems to be the only notable publication using it.

PJ has shutdown before, I'm sure she'll be back again.

[0] [https://github.com/deaddrop/deaddrop](https://github.com/deaddrop/deaddrop) [1] [http://www.newyorker.com/strongbox/](http://www.newyorker.com/strongbox/)

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> PJ's (final) entry explaining why:

[http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20130818120421175](http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20130818120421175)

EDIT: Turns out there's another thread here:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6242569](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6242569)

</comment><comment><USER19> This is kind of silly. Just move the site offshore, and if you really have to get rid of email, have an SSL message form. Although I think there are good solutions for PGP and whatnot with email that encrypts it client side anyway.

I think this person is just technically illiterate and doesn't understand. Pretty strange. I have a wife from China who hates tech, but she knows very well how to use an encrypted VPN to protect her communications and says it is common knowledge there.

This person seems to be lacking even US level common knowledge about protecting your information.

<comment><USER20> You seem to have missed the point. One shouldn't have to do those things to protect themselves from their own government.

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> Something to keep in mind:

 _Privacy International criticised the climate that had led to Jones 's decision. "The closing of Groklaw demonstrates how central the right to privacy is to free expression. The mere threat of surveillance is enough to [make people] self-censor", it said in a statement._

</comment><comment><USER22> Now more than ever is when we need sites like this. This all plays right into the government's hands. They may as well keep it up because people are self- censoring and that makes their jobs easier.

<comment><USER23> If one person does it, it's self-censorship. If a group of people do it's a non-violent collective action protest.

<comment><USER24> These are in no way a "protest". Once a site shuts down, that's it, there is no message / discussion / fight, and it just blends into the background radiation a day later.

Continuing the site would benefit the "protest" infinitely more. And the operators probably know this on some level.

And that's the real story here -

These sites are shutting down because 1) it was unprofitable, 2) it was a time-sink, and 3) now there is an excuse to get out and move on with their lives and businesses.

*I'm not blaming them - and I'm not saying it's anything above the subconscious level. I'd probably do the same.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> I have a counter-current question (and I feel that this should be a legitimate site for asking such questions, because we are all hackers here).

Were lavabit, groklaw profitable and/or widely popular?

Is it possible that these are sites that are not profitable and would have been shutdown anyway but which are now using privacy as an excuse for shutting down?

This does not excuse the misuse of governmental powers, but if it is true, it is a distraction (and a cynical manipulation of our views).

<comment><USER26> Groklaw was widely popular a few years ago; this is the most attention they've got in years. Since they've basically never covered anything secret in their entire existence, and PJ has apparently done ethically questionable things in the past to keep attention on herself, pardon me if I'm a bit suspicious about this. (For example, she supposedly shadowbanned not just commenters who disagreed with her, but supporters who were becoming popular and effective enough to compete with her, along with anyone who mentioned this.)

<comment><USER27> While I'm not a fan of the recent direction of Groklaw (probably irrelevant now), I think it is a stretch to claim that PJ has done ethically questionable things without some citations. What things?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> I call bullshit.

It's almost impossible to argue that the public benefit of Groklaw is outweighed by the risk of the site receiving emails that will be exposed. Using the same position, every site on the internet should should shut down, people should stop sending all postal mail, using phones, and we should all go live in caves. This is really signaling surrender to the anti-freedom terrorists who occupy our national security department, and I think it's counterproductive.

If I'd had to guess, Pamela was ready to stop publishing Groklaw and wanted to go out making a big statement about a major threat to our future. I can thank her for that, though I think the message is somewhat muddied by the grandstanding defeatism.

</comment><comment><USER29> One of the Internet's very best :( At this point I hope more follow. If anything that's one way to make a stand. We just need one country/countries to make a stand and allow security friendly regulation and start-ups will flock. Unfortunately it seems no country at this point could guarantee it and be strong enough to not succumb to pressure.

</comment><comment><USER30> I just want to say that everytime a site like Groklaw -- whose main work was revealing how broken the _status quo_ is (mostly with regard to tech IP law, in Groklaw's case) and thereby creating pressure or exchange among interested parties to fix it -- shuts down, for whatever reason, the powers-that-be win.

<comment><USER31> Groklaw's main work wasn't revealing how broken tech IP law was, it was revealing how stupid one company was for trying to manipulate the system. In the SCO vs. IBM case, I'd say that the system worked pretty well. Coverage of which didn't really include much (any?) help from confidential sources.

<comment><USER30> > Groklaw's main work wasn't revealing how broken tech IP law was, it was > revealing how stupid one company was for trying to manipulate the system.

That was its founding purpose, to be sure, but its main work had moved on from the "how stupid one company was" thing for quite some time.

> Coverage of which didn't really include much (any?) help from confidential > sources.

I'm not sure why this is in your response to my comment, since it is completely irrelevant to it.

<comment><USER31> I haven't visited Groklaw in a long time, and I suspect that many other have the same habits. After SCO, I wonder what their readership numbers have been. They will always be associated with that trial.

The reason why their lack of confidential sources is relevant is that closing up Groklaw because of the NSA doesn't make sense. Their sources were largely from law filings and (very good) analysis. Closing up shop because their email could be snooped just doesn't make sense.

There could be other, valid, reasons, but this just doesn't make sense to me. Perhaps PJ wants to get off the Internet because of the NSA, and I'd buy that. But it just didn't seem like protecting the email of confidential sources was that central to their operation.

Also, it doesn't seem like the NYT or other major newspapers are closing up shop. There are other ways to get confidential information other than email, if you are truly concerned by the NSA.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> well, if this keeps up, the NSA won't have much internet to snoop. I think that these politicians need to stop taking months off and get some shit done.

<comment><USER33> The masses will always use the internet, and they're the real targets. Google, Facebook, Apple, and Twitter won't be shutting down anytime soon.

</comment></comment><comment><USER34> Given the current furore I think it not unlikely that pj is under a national security letter and dare not talk about it for fear of arrest.

She is probably gambling that they will not threaten to arrest her for closing her site if she makes no statement.

She always seemed pretty ballsy and I think she still is.

Or maybe she just doesn't want to be a journalist in America any more.

What do whistleblowers seek ? A journalist to leak to.

Imagine receiving a leak in America right now.

It would certainly be a BIG commitment and having received it, it might be too late to undo that action.

At the very least this is pre-emptive censorship - a chilling effect, but important in the Manufacturing of Consent.

What do you think would happern to Glen Greenwald if he were to step into a transit lounge right now ?

Nice of the White House to deny it.

Consent for what ? Well one might wonder...

</comment><comment><USER35> I am very sad about Groklaw closing, but I understand perfectly how pj feels.

This is a sad day.

</comment><comment><USER36> Hmm. A lot of people supposedly operated under the belief that an omnipotent, judgmental entity was watching their every move, in its own interests, to decide their eternal fate.

Turns out, a nearly omnipotent judgmental entity is watching a big handful of things, working in your interest, only looking for terrorism and national threats.

Suddenly faced with this kind of thing as a _reality_ instead of just paying lip service to the idea, a lot of people... don't like it.

</comment><comment><USER37> Here is a simple idea. Make it known that our top election issue is removing the NSA's (and others) tentacles from our daily lives. In addition we, the tech elite, will freely help candidates who share point of view and refuse to work with those that don't.

The last election showed how important IT systems are. And while it may take a few election cycles we can certainly use that to our advantage.

Thoughts?

</comment><comment><USER38> The chilling effects of the surveillance state.

</comment><comment><USER39> So how we we achieve political change? As Charlie Stross points out, some very wrong has hijacked our political system:

[http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog- static/2010/12/invaders...](http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog- static/2010/12/invaders-from-mars.html)

</comment><comment><USER40> I think this might be part of a long term legal strategy to gain standing in order to sue. I'm sure a bright lawyer will be able to raise 1st and 4th Amendment issues and maybe even some takings claims. Lavabit and Groklaw would make great plaintiffs in a federal court case. Here's hoping.

</comment><comment><USER41> will this also lead to a mass exodus in HN users? given the ferocious posting in these threads will all those now also go offline?

will yc now only finance startups that deal with encryption and freedom rather than the next social/local/sticker thing? will elon musk create the hyperloop for freedom?

</comment><comment><USER42> We need a whistleblower law.

A good one, like one that is embedded in the consitution that protects people from speaking out.

<comment><USER43> It would never work. No whistleblower was ever thanked or benefitted from their actions.

The only way to survive as a whistleblower is to be anonymous, cover your tracks, leave the organisation, leak credible information with evidence to the right people who will do the right thing with it. Protect your identity at all times.

</comment></comment><comment><USER44> Fear. Shame. Doubt. These are the means by which the few control the many.

<comment><USER44> To be truly free, one first shed fear and shame. To free yourself from the powers of the few, you first have to step away from the social control of the many. This social control comes from peers ratting each other out. It's conditioning designed into modern, industrial education. Since the many are busy watching each other, the few can step back, secure in knowing that the web of social fear and shame will keep people in line. (This web of fear and shame is what we're building our "social networks" out of).

So the first step is free yourself from your own fears and shame.

You free yourself from fear by accepting the possibility of what you fear. Then you tune into the experience of fear itself, and let it go. People stay afraid because they don't want to tune into the specific emotion of fear. Where are you experiencing fear in your body? Is it tension in your chest? Is something sharp in your gut? Is it a tremor on your back? If it feels uncomfortable, then you're on the right track. Truth is hidden within the things we don't want to see.

You free yourself from shame by letting go of pride. When you have no pride, you have no shame. When you have no shame, then you can act impeccably. This is also called acting with integrity.

It's only when you let go of fear and shame that compassion can open up. Most people's notion of compassion are really driven by fear, shame, and guilt. That's not compassion, merely co-dependency. I appease your fear, and you don't mention my shame, and we'll get along just fine. We'll even call it being "nice."

If you want to change the world, first change yourself. Instead of fighting for power, own the power over yourself.

Do you own your fears, or do your fears own you?

</comment></comment><comment><USER45> Why can't Groklaw use GPG?

I understand that it's too complicated for my grandparents, but this is exactly the community that'd be willing to put up with a slight inconvenience to gain security.

</comment><comment><USER46> It makes you wonder what people like Qmail's D. J. Bernstein, make of all this, a self confessed cryptography expert with a hand in a widely used mail transfer agent.

</comment><comment><USER47> Does that Groklaw logo on the Guardian have a CafePress watermark in the background?

</comment><comment><USER48> This is not surprising since "pj" guards his privacy and anonymity. Two things the surveillance state doesn't want you to have.

<comment><USER49> > This is not surprising since "pj" guards his privacy and anonymity.

"Her". Pamela is a woman.

<comment><USER50> On wikipedia there is a quote, "I chose PJ, because it could be anyone, either sex, any nationality, anyone and no one in particular." Pointing out her sex, you're just being a jackass and for what?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER51> Just out of curiosity: What interest could the NSA possibly have in Groklaw mails?

<comment><USER52> [http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon- valley/technology/316445-d...](http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon- valley/technology/316445-doj-memo-argues-all-phone-calls-are-relevant-to- terrorism)

The Justice Department on Friday released its legal rationale for why all U.S. phone calls are "relevant" to terrorism investigations.

Same applies to emails. You may not know it, but USDOJ thinks your emails - all of them, including github commit notifications - are relevant for terrorism investigations. Because they can. Remember - "yes, we can!"? You've been warned. Did you listen?</comment></comment>


Typebase.css: Simplified typography for the web - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/devinhunt/typebase.css <comment><USER2> It's a good start, but the solution is based on the default behavior of HTML/CSS, that is to position text in the middle of the leading. Text should _sit_ on the baseline. There's a sass library that solves this problem nicely: [https://github.com/designbyjake/sassline](https://github.com/designbyjake/sassline)

Works even better with Tim Brown's modular scale library: [http://www.modularscale.com/](http://www.modularscale.com/)

<comment><USER3> Now THAT is how you do it. I have been looking for something like this for a while now, thanks for sharing.

Here's the demo of sassline's sexiness: [https://demo.sassline.com/](https://demo.sassline.com/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> What is the purpose of the specimen sheet? Is that the same thing as a demo? It looks like a huge typographical mess to me [http://devinhunt.github.io/typebase.css/demo/specimen.html](http://devinhunt.github.io/typebase.css/demo/specimen.html), but maybe it has another technical purpose?

<comment><USER5> Yes it is basically a demo. Specimen and Specimen Sheet are common terms in typography. The author is trying to display how type looks in a grid on this page, though I agree the horizontal grid looks messy.

<comment><USER6> The whole specimen is a mess. I get what he's aiming for, but a specimen should be clear and concise. This one isn't, and makes figuring out what you're looking at a lot more jarring than it should be.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thats why its open source. you can fork a copy improve on it and then send a pull request.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I realize H5 and H6 aren't used that much, but the sizes for these elements are absurdly small for me. I cannot even read them. Perhaps consider a minimum font size as the size of paragraph text and stop going with smaller text and consider some other way of styling (e.g. replace bold with italics or regular weight).

</comment><comment><USER8> That demo is a really bad representation of whatever this is:

[http://i.imgur.com/6tUIx5U.png](http://i.imgur.com/6tUIx5U.png) (Chrome, Windows)

Those gridlines make a mess of the page and those headings at h5 and h6 look horrible.

It's even worse in a test env (PhantomJS, Linux):

[http://i.imgur.com/7n3nOKz.png](http://i.imgur.com/7n3nOKz.png)

</comment><comment><USER9> If you want to truly customize the way you use preprocessors for typography in your web projects, here's another approach: [https://scotch.io/tutorials/aesthetic-sass-3-typography- and-...](https://scotch.io/tutorials/aesthetic-sass-3-typography-and-vertical- rhythm)

</comment><comment><USER10> Interesting that the demo page is using one of those super thin fonts my eyes have trouble focusing on and reading.

[http://devinhunt.github.io/typebase.css/](http://devinhunt.github.io/typebase.css/)

PS: I'm on a retina MBP in 1680 mode so your results (and eyes) will vary

<comment><USER11> There was a time in the 19th century where thin, spindly fonts where in vogue for printed books. They were later criticized by typographers and general readers for making books harder to read [1].

The web is experiencing a similar scenario where thin typefaces are being used for body type as it looks modern even though it's making body text less easy on the eyes. In small paragraphs I personally don't mind it, but many sites are now using it for long articles where it's not ideal.

[1] Daniel Updike's 'Printing Types, Their History, Forms, And Use; A Study In Survivals' is a great read.

Volume 1: [https://archive.org/details/printingtypesthe01updi](https://archive.org/details/printingtypesthe01updi) Volume 2: [https://archive.org/details/printingtypesthe02updi](https://archive.org/details/printingtypesthe02updi)

<comment><USER12> Everything old is modern again. Cool links. I spent weeks fighting (and mostly losing) to a designer that wanted every website to use no more than a 300 font weight and no italics or other differentiating typography, all because it was "modern and light and airy". Wish I could have been like "Nope, here's people in the 19th century complaining about it" back at that point.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Cool, typography on the web can always be improved. Another cool one to check out is [https://github.com/corysimmons/typographic](https://github.com/corysimmons/typographic).

<comment><USER14> Just looked up typographic and the author made this come by at the end:

"If you like this project then I encourage you to check out a few of my other projects that go well with Typographic.

Lost Grid - Quite simply the best grid out there in every comparison available. Simple yet incredibly powerful."

Following a quick read LOST Grid seems very comprehensive, anyone have experience using this?

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> Here's another typography generation tool I wrote. Highly configurable. [http://kyleamathews.github.io/typography.js/#/](http://kyleamathews.github.io/typography.js/#/)

You can see a number of pre-built configurations in this issue [https://github.com/KyleAMathews/typography.js/issues/10](https://github.com/KyleAMathews/typography.js/issues/10)

<comment><USER16> This is really well done. Very useful for my future projects.

Are you also considering adding a simple grid system to the generated css (maybe bootstrap grid)? That what this generates a complete framework that looks like I configure it. Cheers

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> I've been using this as the basis for my typographic styles for maybe a year now. My only problem with it has been the spacing between paragraphs and headings. I find myself using the .hug class a lot.

<comment><AUTHOR> what of [https://github.com/corysimmons/typographic](https://github.com/corysimmons/typographic) have u used it?

<comment><USER17> Haven't tried it. I don't think I would as its a SASS project and I prefer LESS. My initial thought just upon glancing the readme was that it seems a bit bloated. Starts out with some great options then it looks like they've defined variables for every system don't imaginable. I like typebase because it's a very complete base that you can customize and build on without having to tear apart. Typographic seems more framework-y which is a turnoff for me.

But that's just a first impression and my needs and preferences aren't everyone else's.</comment></comment></comment>


HP buys big into Windows 8 touch devices  - <AUTHOR> http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2012/08/hp-buys-big-into-windows-8-touch-devices/ <comment><USER2> Frankly who cares what HP does at this point!

They gave up so farking quickly on webOS - and I have not seen a client buy their servers in a few years, as well as not having spec'd them in a long ass time... HP is DEAD aside from printers, in my professional opion.

(YES they will always have customers - but not from me)

I have several HP servers DL3 and 5 series sitting next to me right now - servers whom have had no power in 3 years (385 and 585 series with many gigs of ram, just sitting in my garage for years)...

I used to be able to disassemble HP servers with my eyes closed - but no longer. I never interact with them.

If HP were smart they would build a holistic server deployment system with the following: (disclaimer I design and deploy very loarge corporate networks and datacenters - but the following is my personal opinion):

Build an open compute server platform with includes:

* chassis-less servers

* integration with BLine/Panduit products to support the previous bullet

* data center infrastucture as a commodity - drop the chassis wrap and adhere to open compute standards

* many other things - sorry too tired to type at this point....

HP has done nothing right in the last few years....

They should have tried to get Marissa rather than let he go to yahoo... I mean even though Yahoo appears to be a lost cause... HP is in the same boat...

There is so much opportunity for HP - but they have not a single person with real vision...

/rant (sorry)</comment>