Show HN: Wit – Natural language for your app - <AUTHOR> https://wit.ai <comment><USER3> It was so confusing figuring out what this service is supposed to do. Had to look up the documentation. In summary, from what I can gather

1\. It doesn't do any speech recognition (speech -> text), so not sure why they put Siri in the title. It is also not clear how they can 'hijack' the text from Siri to do this analysis. The ASR engines they talk about (CMU, OpenEars) have pretty horrible accuracy (compared to Siri or google voice).

2\. Looks like they do some form of text normalization/correction, again not clear how they do it.

3\. The actual service they provide is a form of named entity recognition (confusing named intent which clashes with the android intent mechanism in their examples).

4\. Also they let you define your own entities to match. You can train them using a drop –down menu. Not sure how you can train hundreds of examples using point and click.

This different from alchemy (or many others) because this is open source(?) [http://www.alchemyapi.com/products/features/entity- extractio...](http://www.alchemyapi.com/products/features/entity-extraction/)

Given this service was for developers with an interest in NLP, it would have been good if they didn't hide behind a snow job title like "Siri as a service".

<comment><AUTHOR> _> 1\. It doesn't do any speech recognition (speech -> text), so not sure why they put Siri in the title. It is also not clear how they can 'hijack' the text from Siri to do this analysis. The ASR engines they talk about (CMU, OpenEars) have pretty horrible accuracy (compared to Siri or google voice)._

Currently most Wit users use Google or Nuance with great success. You can even use Android's offline speech rec.

That being said, CMU and OpenEars work well, as long as you provide them with good language models (which you can't do if you hack a quick project). Our plan is for Wit to automatically generate the right language models from your instance configuration.

 _> 2\. Looks like they do some form of text normalization/correction, again not clear how they do it. 3\. The actual service they provide is a form of named entity recognition (confusing named intent which clashes with the android intent mechanism in their examples)._

We abstract the full NLP stack for the developer. How we do it is not really what matters to our developers, as long as it works :) Actually we use a combination of many different NLP and machine learning techniques.

 _> 4\. Also they let you define your own entities to match. You can train them using a drop –down menu. Not sure how you can train hundreds of examples using point and click._

You don't need to train hundreds of examples. Plus, our users are not NLP/ML experts and they prefer a graphical UI. But that's true it could be still more efficient, we have good features in the roadmap for that :)

 _> This different from alchemy (or many others) because this is open source(?) [http://www.alchemyapi.com/products/features/entity- extractio...](http://www.alchemyapi.com/products/features/entity-extractio..). _

Alchemy is great as a set of NLP tools, some of them quite academical, but it's not designed from scratch to solve the problem we're trying to solve: enable the masses of developers to easily add a natural language interface to their app.

<comment><USER4> > How we do it is not really what matters to our developers, as long as it > works :)

How you do it is _most certainly_ what matters to developers, as soon as it doesn't work as expected :)

<comment><AUTHOR> Fair enough.

 _Theory is when you know everything but nothing works.

Practice is everything works but no one knows why.

Here, theory and practice are combined: nothing works and no one knows why_

:)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Is there any way to view this page with the effects turned off? With all the text constantly appearing and disappearing, I haven't yet made it to the end of a sentence, and therefore can't form an opinion about it.

I think there was a picture of a robot on the screen for a few seconds, but that's all I remember.

Would disabling javascript do the trick?

<comment><USER6> Hi, fixed it! Thanks for that first feedback!

EDIT: All animations (except "What we do") should be disabled. Please, email me at email@example.com if you still have issues.

<comment><USER5> Better, but it still seems to have lots of things happening on timers. So I still have things I'm trying to read disappearing out from under me.

I imagine as the developer you don't notice it. But as somebody trying to read a page, it's really jarring to have that happen. Enough so that I give up trying because I just want it to stop doing that to my eyes.

Any chance you could turn it off completely and just put some arrow icons on there?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> That looks really interesting.

You should make it clearer that you don't actually handle voice recognition. When I read: "Developers use Wit to easily build a voice interface for their app." I expect you to handle things from start to finish.

Also, let me try it! It's frustrating because the UI looks like you can experiment but it's only an animated demo (or am I missing something??) In particular the mic logo is used to record on Google and here it doesn't seem to do anything?

<comment><AUTHOR> > You should make it clearer that you don't actually handle voice recognition.

You're right, we'll make it more clear on the landing page. A full out-of-the- box integration with some voice recognition engines (we love CMU Sphinx, open source) is in our roadmap.

> Also, let me try it!

We purposely didn't provide a "end-user" demo (something that would look like chatting with Siri) because we want to focus first on the developer experience, when they configure Wit to understand their very own end-users intents. You can require an invite and try this in less than 5 minutes.

<comment><USER7> > You can require an invite and try this in less than 5 minutes.

Fair enough, but then you should make it clear: "Want to try it out? require an invite and try this in less than 5 minutes!"

You usually have to wait several days when you apply for a beta like this.

<comment><AUTHOR> I just accepted your invite :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> The word "Siri" doesn't belong in the title or the article, unless a Trabant advertisement has the right to mention Mercedes-Benz in its promotional text. The project does a primitive kind of voice recognition, but it doesn't use Siri.

On this topic, I invite people to try out my non-prototype, non-project _toy_ that uses Google's support for HTML5 speech recognition. It's pretty funny how wrong things go when you try to say something even a bit out of the ordinary:

[http://arachnoid.com/speech_to_text](http://arachnoid.com/speech_to_text)

If I say, "Now is the time for all good men to come to the aid of their country," an old teletype test sentence, the Google recognizer always nails it. If I say, "I hit an uncharted rock and my boat is being repaired," things go hilariously wrong, and every time differently.

<comment><USER9> I also found it going very well or very, very badly.

For instance: "In most cases, before beginning to listen, the browser will ask permission to monitor your microphone."

Came out as: "In Las Cruces, f __ __ __listen, permission to monitor your microphone. "

<comment><USER8> I think in the future, when computers are 100 times more intelligent than they are, we'll laugh at these examples. But no one should doubt the difficulty of interpreting continuous speech without prior training for a given speaker. It's no wonder that speech interpretation on telephones tend to be limited to understanding a handful of possible responses: "Yes", "No", "Let me speak to a human!"

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I like the concept a lot. I'm going to have to read more about it. One thing that I'm unclear about is if this does voice->text, or if the developer does that and Wit handles translation of that into actions.

Just a heads up, but Get Started on the pricing page does nothing. It's natural progression for me to go home page->pricing->OK, looks good, let's get started.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for the feedback.

Wit takes the output of the voice recognition engine as input. It's quite robust to voice recognition errors. Most devs use Google's engine or the open source CMU Sphinx engine.

Fixed the Get Started link, thanks!

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> This is amazingly timely for me, I've been building my own version of jarvis using speakeasy-nlp (a node NLP library) and Chrome's builtin support for HTML5 webkitSpeechRecognition:

[https://github.com/dpaola2/jarvis](https://github.com/dpaola2/jarvis) (work in progress)

I absolutely would love a better NLP api. Please let me in!

<comment><AUTHOR> Jarvis-like systems are a great use case.

You should be able to sign up now.

<comment><USER11> You rock

</comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Hey everyone. Wit guy here. We've been working on Wit the past few months and we think it's time to get your feedback. I'm happy to answer any questions you have.

Bringing Natural Language Understanding to the masses of developers is hard and we still have a lot of work ahead of us. Please don't hesitate to reach out to us!

<comment><USER12> Is Siri required? Is there an option for Android devices? I admit I didn't dive too deep into the website because I was looking at all the eye candy.

<comment><AUTHOR> No, Siri is not required.

Here is a tutorial for quick Android integration: [https://wit.ai/docs/android-tutorial](https://wit.ai/docs/android-tutorial)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Nice concept, I just came back on here to let you know that I don't know what is happening on that page but I left it open about 45 minutes ago and noticed my fan kicked in a lot. It was that page I left open. Ended up taking 25% CPU, you didn't work on the iTunes software did you??

Only messing, it was taking a lot of CPU though.

<comment><USER6> Haha, sorry about that.. I guess we are better at Clojure than Angular.js!

Working on a fix now.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> The .ai extension is cute :-)

I don't know if people will remember it and be receptive to this touch but I like it.

</comment><comment><USER14> Interesting! Nothing happened after I registered with my Github account though using Opera. I also wonder how this compares to [http://www.maluuba.com/](http://www.maluuba.com/) ?

<comment><AUTHOR> > how this compares to [http://www.maluuba.com](http://www.maluuba.com)

Wit is 100% open and flexible, you can create any intent you need for your app, you're not limited to a static set of domains/actions.

EDIT: @ragebol we are very interested in ROS and robotics, don't hesitate to get in touch with me arthur at wit dot ai. In the future we would like to provide an off-the-shelf human/robot communication module for developers.

<comment><USER14> Awesome! I made a wrapper around Maluuba for ROS before ([https://github.com/yol/maluuba_ros](https://github.com/yol/maluuba_ros)) and maybe I get to a Wit-wrapper for ROS as well.

With Maluuba, we can't make a command like "Introduce yourself" or "Grab that can for me" because of the limited set of categories. Wit should be able to handle those as well, from the looks of it.

<comment><USER15> We (Maluuba) are actually working on improving nAPI and now have the ability to define your own domains and actions. It's not public yet, but we're planning on releasing it mid November.

<comment><USER14> Nice! I'll check back on Maluuba in November.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Your message isn't clear. AFAIK there is no official way to interact with Siri or Google voice rec.

It seems like WIT will take the text that has already been translated from a user's voice to text and make it easily accessible to my application but how does WIT access the text generated from a Siri request in the first place for example? Does WIT have some other way of getting at this data that has already been converted from voice to text by Siri or Google or some other speech-to- text engine?

<comment><AUTHOR> > AFAIK there is no official way to interact with Siri or Google voice rec.

Actually there are ways. On Android devices, voice rec is available to devs (even offline if the user enabled it!). We have a simple tutorial about how to integrate on Android [https://wit.ai/docs/android- tutorial](https://wit.ai/docs/android-tutorial)

Right now on iOS you have two options (none of them involves Siri, which is kept closed by Apple):

1/ Do the voice rec server-side (Siri does that)

2/ Use OpenEars to do it client-side

Server-side, you have many voice rec options, including open source CMU Sphinx.

Providing a fully-integrated solution with speech rec out of the box is in our roadmap.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> You could read witai as "witaj" in Polish, which means "hello" in slightly official manner.

</comment><comment><USER18> Sounds like they are trying to be this, [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ko-r4gpM3Rc](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ko-r4gpM3Rc)

Except Stremor has a Query Language so you don't have to do anywhere near as much heavy lifting.

<comment><AUTHOR> Hi Stremor! :)

Looks like you focus on search, summary, entity and sentiment extraction with a rule-based approach.

Wit's focus is to power human/machine interfaces, and our priority is to provide developers with a 100% configurable solution, with no prior assumption on their domain. And we don't believe in rules, we chose a machine learning approach.

<comment><USER18> No, PleaseAPI is converting Natural Language to Database like structures/commands with no need to have a human come up with every way you could say something because the vocabulary is built in.

Unlike Wit it also offers the option to use the API's that are already integrated or Bring Your Own Backend so that you can have a mix of info/responses from your own system, or leverage what is already there.

<comment><USER19> Where can I sign up for that?

<comment><USER18> It will be on Mashape shortly, the Natural Language Part of Speech Tagger just went live Friday. Documentation takes time after we write code and is less fun to write. :-)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Hi guys, here you can find the full API Documentation: [https://www.mashape.com/lxbrun/nlp-and-voice-interface- for-a...](https://www.mashape.com/lxbrun/nlp-and-voice-interface-for- apps#!documentation)

</comment><comment><USER21> This would be great for open source projects, but I feel like I would trip over a very large pile of patents if I tried to build a product around it. I don't have any relevant experience myself though, so it's just a feeling.

</comment><comment><USER22> The pricing model doesn't scale realistically and would require a subscription service for users. An app with 1M+ installs could do 1M+ calls _per day_ making this service $24k / month.

<comment><AUTHOR> That's why at the bottom of the pricing page we encourage you to contact us if you have more than 1M calls per month.

Meanwhile you can decide to share your configuration data and get Wit for free (à la Github) :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> I'm interested to use it in combination with a robot (NAO). Could you provide a tutorial for it. Not sure if ROS on NAO will be necessary or not.

</comment><comment><USER24> This looks neat, I will definitely keep it in mind.

I would be weary of using the Github Octocat mascot though. I believe Octocat is protected under copyright.

<comment><USER25> The landing page looks like a minefield of legal issues. Marketing everything explicitly with the references to Siri is asking for a law suit from Apple.

<comment><AUTHOR> Fucking sue me :)

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6366912](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6366912)

<comment><USER25> :) I just wanted to say that it looks like a really cool project, so I would not want some troll to come and stomp it out.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> How does this compare and contrast to [http://www.ask- ziggy.com/](http://www.ask-ziggy.com/) ?

<comment><AUTHOR> We share the same vision that voice becomes the key human/machine interface, especially for the upcoming generation of wearable devices, home automation, etc.

I don't know if Ask Ziggy is 100% self-service for the developers. That's a key requirement for us.

<comment><USER27> At Ask Ziggy, we are also 100% self-service.

<comment><USER19> Is there a pricing page?

<comment><USER27> Not at this point. Feel free to sign up for the beta on our site and take it for a spin, I'll make sure to get you your credentials quickly. PS: by the way, big fan of historio.us...

<comment><USER19> Already did, thanks! It looks pretty nice, I'd like to implement it in a few of my apps for an easier UI. I'm glad you like historious, thanks!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> hah! My startup is doing a similar platform in a little bigger scale. I realized I did pretty bad on the hackathon :( [http://on.aol.com/video/jarvis-2-0-demo-at-hackathon- sf-2013...](http://on.aol.com/video/jarvis-2-0-demo-at-hackathon- sf-2013-517925607)

<comment><AUTHOR> I'd love to see the full video of your demo, it looks cool!

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> This looks really promising - can't wait to see where it is in a year with community additions.

</comment><comment><USER7> This "fade-in as you scroll" thing is annoying. Get-rid-of-it-right-now kind of annoying.

<comment><USER6> Just removed it, thanks :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> How do you compare to Ask Ziggy? It seems you have created an interface similar to theirs

<comment><AUTHOR> Actually I think the developer UX is quite different... but you should try both and make your own opinion.

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> what about languages other then English ?

<comment><AUTHOR> French + English available now. Which language would you like to get?

<comment><USER32>
      - Spanish (Mexican, Castellano, others?)
      - Chinese (Mandarin, Cantonese)
      - <USER2>

These would be logical next steps with some important commonalities: broad base of native speakers, high importance in the US market (maybe less so for Hindi), and very important dialect differences. Mandarin, Cantonese, Hindi, and Russian could also force the issue of non-Romanized character sets.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> As a Service? Why not go open source?

<comment><USER7> How would you make money with that? honest question.

<comment><USER34> How to sell free software

[http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html](http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html)

<comment><USER35> It's obvious to most people (regardless of whether you think that free software is in important principle) that the techniques described in that section will result in you making MUCH LESS money, at least in the current context of these people selling their API.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> Great job on this. Are there any plans for Ruby or javascript tutorials, or am I being too optimistic?

<comment><AUTHOR> Here is a node.js tutorial: [https://wit.ai/docs/nodejs- tutorial](https://wit.ai/docs/nodejs-tutorial)

We'll release a Ruby tutorial soon!

<comment><USER36> Love you guys already. Thank you!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> Looks great. Will this work with web apps too, or only mobile apps?

<comment><USER37> I wonder how easy it would be to get it working on the desktop, like Palaver does on linux.</comment></comment>


Despite revoked CA's, StartCom and WoSign continue to sell certificates - <AUTHOR> https://ma.ttias.be/despite-revoked-cas-startcom-wosign-continue-sell-certificates/ <comment><USER2> Author of the article here: I learned in the meanwhile that the situation is less bad than it sounds. It's not a link-bait article, but keep in mind that they now _resell_ other CA's certificates, they're not selling their own anymore.

There will however be a brief period where they _did_ sell their own certificates, signed by their own CA, that are now being blocked.

<comment><USER3> Should we trust them as a reseller? If/when they mess up again, are they nearly so easy to revoke? Does the cert contain their name still?

<comment><USER4> Certificate resellers are only taking money in exchange for the cert. They are not doing any validation.

This is true even in cases like Gandi.net where some of the certs they sell come from a custom-branded intermediate certificate. The root CA is Comodo and they are doing the validation, controlling the private key's of the certs that handle issuance, etc. Its just a branding thing.

There are a few cases with Sub-CAs/Registration Authorities where a third- party company is handling some/all of the certificate validation. Symantec is currently in trouble for the bad actions of CrossCert, a Korean company that was licensed to be a Sub-CA. But WoSign/StartCom would not be able to participate in any sort of arrangement like this without being immediately banned again.

So there is no inherent problem with a banned CA continuing to sell certificates that another CA is validating. However, in the investigation of WoSign it was found that the company is deeply dishonest, incompetent, and even a little bit malicious. So anything that puts money in their pocket should be avoided.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> I think we can expect to see more questions like this on StackExchange in the near future: [http://webmasters.stackexchange.com/questions/103405/install...](http://webmasters.stackexchange.com/questions/103405/installing- startssl-certificate-under-apache-gives-sec-error-revoked-certificate)

<comment><USER5> Looks like all the browsers need to do a better job communicating that error. Firefox and Safari are the only two that provide any clue as to the problem, however Safari seems to jump to conclusions a bit.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> This is the ideal time to switch to Let's Encrypt, and be done with certificate issues once and for all.

[https://letsencrypt.org/](https://letsencrypt.org/)

[https://certbot.eff.org/](https://certbot.eff.org/)

You no longer have to ask year after year for a new certificate. It will be renewed automatically for as long as your webserver lives. And everything is backed by good protocols, a strong community and a trustworthy organization (EFF).

<comment><USER7> > You no longer have to ask year after year for a new certificate.

Now you have to ask every three months.

<comment><USER6> _> Now you have to ask every three months._

No, you have a script running that updates your certificate automatically, and you _never_ ever have do that that manually again. Or, you don't need that script because your webserver (e.g. Caddy) does that for you.

Oh, and just in case one of the intermediate certificates of Let's Encrypt had to be revoked for some reason: The very same mechanism would provide you with a new, working certificate as soon as possible. This, again, is fully automatic without any headache on your side.

Do you know any other CA where get this level of comfort?

<comment><USER8> Nice in theory, but just when I think I have it figured out something changes and the script quits working. Specifically with 3rd-party hosting like NearlyFreeSpeech, not my own, but still a PITA.

<comment><USER6> That sounds like an integration issue of 3rd-party hosters, not like an issue with Let's Encrypt itself.

I have a running system with Let's Encrypt certificates for webserver (HTTPS) as well as mail server (SMTPS, IMAPS, POP3S), based on nginx, exim4 and dovecot, using certbot.

Setting up Let's Encrypt literally consists of just 3 steps:

1\. In the webserver for all domains on HTTP, add alias /.well-known/acme- challenge to /var/www/letsencrypt/.well-known/acme-challenge

2\. Run "certbot certonly" once for every domain

3\. Add cronjob for "certbot renew" with a post-hook that restarts your webserver and mailservers.

Well, to be honest, there is one more step, but that one is specific to my own setup, and also just a one-time effort:

3a. Add a post-hook command that fixes a permission issue with Debian-exim. Note that this is only needed if you want to use the certificates for SMTPS and use exim under Debian.

If you add a new domain later on, this is just a single step, no need to touch the cronjob:

1\. Run "certbot certonly" once for that domain

So yes! Once you have the setup running, setting up a new SSL/TLS domain is actually easier with Let's Encrypt than with any other CA.

(Of course, you'll also have to add the domain to your webserver configuration, but that's always needed, whether you use Let's Encrypt or not.)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Unfortunately, StartSSL appear to be claiming that the SSL certificates themselves are free, and that they are only charging for the validation process - and while validation is potentially valuable, if you are unable to issue an SSL certificate that can make use of it, it seems limited.

To say this is "shady practice" is putting it nicely; I daresay few but the keenest observers would pick up the problem.

<comment><USER10> Well, the "we charge for the validation, not the certificates" approach is how they've done things for ages.

Prior to the clusterf __k of becoming untrusted by Mozilla (etc), it was really useful.

Once verified you could generate many certificates (subdomains, etc) without forking over cash each time.

Compared to the general (scam-like?) model of other providers, it seems like a sane alternative.

Now they're untrusted though, it's kind of moot. :(

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> Did anybody notice that the Opera browser company and Wosign are both owned by Qihoo? [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qihoo_360](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qihoo_360)

What is the status of Wosign/Startcom certificates in the Opera browser? And in the Qihoo ("360 secure") browser?

</comment><comment><USER12> Is this why I had problems with my new free certificate from StartSSL about 2 weeks ago? It wasn't obvious, I ended up using Let's Encrypt.

</comment><comment><USER13> Google can use its monopoly to accomplish almost anything!

<comment><USER14> My understanding is the issue with WoSign and discovery of their purchase of StartCom (which violated trusted CA process by not informing anyone that they were sold) was originally done by Mozilla, which was also the first to act to remove them from trust stores.

[https://blog.mozilla.org/security/2016/10/24/distrusting- new...](https://blog.mozilla.org/security/2016/10/24/distrusting-new-wosign- and-startcom-certificates/)</comment></comment>


Hydrogen Fuel-Cell Powered Electric Aviation Powertrain - <AUTHOR> https://www.zeroavia.com/ <comment><USER2> Hydrogen fuel cells make sense for electric flight scenarios primarily because they have 1/200 the specific weight of lithium ion batteries and 10x the specific energy, which means a lot less weight to pick up of the ground. The challenge of course is safely carrying that volume of compressed hydrogen, and producing it at scale without fossil fuels.

For making the hydrogen, if fossil fuels are being used, the process has to be more efficient than the propulsive efficiency of current aircraft engines:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_economy_in_aircraft#/medi...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_economy_in_aircraft#/media/File:Gas_turbine_efficiency.png)

Electrolysis itself is 80% efficient, and a combined cycle gas plant is 60% efficient, so that production efficiency is only 48%, which doesn't beat the 80% peak propulsive efficiency of a fuel powered turboprop. Steam reforming of natural gas to make hydrogen is only 75% efficient.

Therefore renewable electricity based hydrogen production is essential for this to work.

<comment><USER3> Re safety: I was pointed out that the dangers of hydrogen are often exaggerated. Hydrogen is flammable, not explosive. It is an oxygen-hydrogen mix that is explosive. It is probably slightly safer than fuel due to the fact that while fuel would tend to leak and accumulate on the ground, hydrogen flies into the atmosphere.

The great thing about electrolysis is that it combines really well with intermittent sources like solar panels or wind turbines. When too much energy than necessary is being produce, store it in hydrogen. That's free fuel for you (free as in "marginal cost of zero").

If we had efficient electrolysis capacities and a market for hydrogen, that would make the case for intermittent renewables much, much stronger.

<comment><USER4> What industries are competing for platinum group metals? Mike Strizki is my reference for platinum electrode electrolysis. Also CodysLab YouTube channel had an episode harvesting very small amounts of platinum from dust along an interstate (catalytic converter decay over time)

<comment><USER5> Catalytic converters are the main users I know - back in the 00s landyacht tailpipes were regularly sawn off by thieves since the approach to pass emissions involved stacking a ton of catalytic converters apparently.

<comment><USER4> Cash-for-clunkers occurred just as the Roadster was being sold in small batch production. Now that Tesla is setting up shop in multiple hemispheres with production continuing to increase output twelve years later - I wonder if the imminent federal administration reconfiguration would intervene similarly and grant EV vouchers instead of cash. Demand is still much higher than supply - slashing the price in this way may boost wait times.

Sure, these trade-ins could be resold, but that's a lot of platinum ( 1-3g per car, 12-15g for trucks, assuming semi?). If converter removed, then not emission compliant. Bodies could be re-purposed for EV? I wouldn't mind driving around a retrofitted ICE body using the diminished capacity and power of batteries removed from a high mileage Tesla. I don't need to go 0-60mph in 3 seconds - I just want it to be emissionless, electric (<90% energy converted to locomotion instead of heat), and quiet.

Mechanics in subsidized retrofit shops would standardize the process of removing the old engine block from the well-understood drive-train. Known fuel tank dimensions, and space taken up by the traditional combustion engine block would provide exact specifications for 3D printed battery casings. But by now Tesla has their battery housings standardized for the low center of gravity modular undercarriage block. This may be far to complex to perform, especially at scale even with tax-funded resources. I'm thinking an auto-body shell with its existing seats, windows, axles, tires, could be a usable resource for the renewables transition period. But the average engine compartment post-ICE may not be spacious enough to accommodate the amount of batteries at the current energy density/volume ratio. Maybe if battery packs got smaller and more modular with a similarly modular coolant plumbing interfacing method, we could snake tubes and install more packs in vacant undercarriage space? Jehu Garcia seems to have pulled it off on his VW.

Distribute all that platinum for use in renewable energy components like fuel cells and electrolysis electrodes?

<comment><USER4> * >90%

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Hydrogen can be generated by dissociation powered directly by sunlight, with no side trip through electricity, yielding much higher efficiency.

Nobody has found a use for the oxygen that would be released at the same time, although it might be usable for purification, if it could be delivered as h2o2. Then again, concentrated h2o2 is usable directly as rocket fuel.

</comment><comment><USER7> I wonder how similar the technology is to that used by Toyota Mirai. Having enough power density (fuel cell) and energy density (compressed H2), the aircraft application seem logical... but there surely are lots of details.

<comment><USER8> The Mirai seems to have had a huge cost problem that the fuel cell cost a lot more than Toyota thought it would be by the time the car shipped. So they used a small one with poor peak performance, and it's a much less exciting car than an electric car, but still costs extra and has annoying refueling.

Planes need a lot of peak power for takeoff.

<comment><USER9> There is a new Mirai planned for 2021. Also, Bosch and BMW seem to be recently looking into fuel cell technology.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I smell a scam. If they've got something that works, surely they would have at least applied for a patent by now, yet my searches so far have turned up nothing. (Please correct me if I'm mistaken.)

<comment><USER7> LinkedIn profile smells differently. [https://www.linkedin.com/in/vmiftakhov](https://www.linkedin.com/in/vmiftakhov)

Patents

        MODULAR, CUSTOMIZABLE AND SCALABLE MECHANICAL DESIGN FOR THE ELECTRIC CAR ASSEMBLY BASED ON THE EXISTING VEHICLE CHASSIS
        Issued November 1, 2014United States

<comment><USER10> This patent has nothing to do with a hydrogen-powered engine.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Don't know why they can't just drop an empty battery w/ a parachute once the plane gets to a high enough altitude.

<comment><USER12> At this point they could as well use an electric cable that detaches once the plane has reached a certain altitude/distance from the airport.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> This would work for cars.

<comment><USER2> All fuel cell cars are also electric cars in that they use batteries and electric drivetrains in addition to the hydrogen fuel cell itself. The result is more complexity and hence cost, which is one big reason fuel cell cars haven't taken off.

The other reason is the lack of sufficient hydrogen distribution infrastructure. Cars need a dense network of refueling points for convenience. For EVs, this already exists in the form of the existing electric grid and local distribution network (yes, I know it's harder for apartment dwellers right now). A similarly dense hydrogen distribution network doesn't exist, and would have to built from scratch.

Airplanes, on the other hand, have far fewer refueling points (they're all at airports), so it's a lot easier to build those.

In the future, as the cost and size of fuel cell tech drops, one can maybe see them being use for range extending applications for rapid refueling in long distance drives, but then again, rapid charging and high range EVs are making even that advantage somewhat moot.

<comment><USER14> > A similarly dense hydrogen distribution network doesn't exist, and would > have to built from scratch.

Or we can add hydrogen to the existing fuels on traditional petrol stations.

<comment><USER2> Sure, but those stations would still need a invasive and expensive retrofit, adding new underground tanks. You'd also need a new fleet of hydrogen delivery tankers to parallel existing fleet of fuel delivery tankers.

And remember that compressed hydrogen's energy density is 5x lower than gasoline [1], so to store the same amount of energy as gasoline, you need 5x the amount of storage volume on site to store the same amount of energy. Fuel cell drivetrains are about double the efficiency of typical gas engines, so that might bring the storage needs down to 2.5x the storage needs for gasoline, but then you also need special equipment to keep the hydrogen contained (it's harder to contain than liquid fuel). You also need 2.5x the number of hydrogen tankers to move that fuel to the stations, or 2.5x the frequency of tanker trips.

Compare that to the relatively minimal cost of attaching an EV charging station to an existing building's power supply, and there's not much comparison. At most, you need to upgrade transformers and the local power substations to handle potentially higher demand at peak charging hours, but even that can be done incrementally based on demand profile changes, and mitigated substantially with smart coordinated charging during off-peak hours.

1\. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_density#/media/File:Ene...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_density#/media/File:Energy_density.svg)

<comment><USER14> Oh absolutely, the technology will require plenty of updating. But in a typical distribution system the logistics is usually a much more complex and difficult issue. And hydrogen has enough similarities with the existing fuel (unlike electricity) to require barely any changes in the logistics.

<comment><USER2> > And hydrogen has enough similarities with the existing fuel (unlike > electricity)

Electricity already has a regional and local distribution network. It is an "existing fuel" by definition.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: What is Overhead? - <AUTHOR>

I do understand what overhead is in a traditional widget businesses.  What would be considered overhead in a company like, say, Zaarly.com or TaskRabbit.com or perhaps an accountant or lawyer?
In other words, if the high-level classic definition of "overhead" is that it is anything that does not go into making the widgets you ship --the costs necessary simply to exist as a business-- how does one calculate it for these kinds of companies?
On first inspection it would seem that the answer is that nearly everything is overhead for these types of businesses, from salaries to rent, etc.
Perhaps past a certain level one can identify server and other variable costs that scale with user count and exclude those costs from the calculation of "overhead".
To lend further context to this, my question came out of a question I heard at a recent pitch event.  One of the judges asked:  "How much of the capital you are raising is going to be spent on overhead?".  The presenter didn't really have an answer for that.
It made me think about the situation of a pure "virtual" (no physical products made or shipped) 'net-based startup with, say, two or three developers, rent, computers, a few servers and the usual embryonic startup-level infrastructure.  My feeling is that pretty much every dime they spend is overhead: marketing, salaries, servers, everything.
The above-referenced presenter should have probably answered "100%".  I am not sure what the judge was actually looking for and how any answer, from "100%" to whatever might have been interpreted.
Thoughts? <comment><USER2> Overhead is what would it cost for the business to exist, but to create nothing and ship nothing.

One approach is to make a table or Venn diagrams using various rules about overhead, and to stack them up and see which components most frequently appear in the overhead area. You end up with a spectrum rather than a hard division, but that's a start.

Costs other than creating shipped products? Costs not variable with number/amount of products (physical or virtual) shipped?

Another way to look at this is that the question: " _How much of the capital you are raising is going to be spent on overhead?_ " might be an indirect way of asking "how much of the capital will NOT go to create value for the investors?" or "how well have you planned to spend what you hope to raise in this round?"

<comment><AUTHOR> > Overhead is what would it cost for the business to exist, but to create > nothing and ship nothing.

OK, taken to an extreme this means a few hundred dollars a year to simply exist as an LLC. I know that's not what you meant.

> "how much of the capital will NOT go to create value for the investors?"

In the case of a typical minimal startup one could easily argue that nearly every dime you spend is going to go towards creating value for investors. In other words, if you need to rent a small space for three people to work together than create the software, well, that's creating value for the investors.

Now, if you decided to spend money buying fancy desks, printing unnecessary business cards prematurely, installing a large flat-screen TV in the office and more along those lines clearly there would be a number of line items that are not directly involved in generating investor value. I guess I am arguing that this is not the case for the vast majority of startups. In fact, most of them do (and should) not spend a dime on anything that is not directly related to what is needed to launch the product.

Not trying to be obtuse. I am actually trying to figure out if there's a reasonably objective way to define this for a web/software startup. So far everything I've been able to dig up is nebulous and non-conclusive.

Maybe the "proper" analysis is in phases. On the assumption of responsible management, during the pre-launch and launch phase every dime spent is spent to build the software product. Overhead, in this case, might be limited to rent, utilities, capex (?), marketing and a few other things. Once the site is launched you could easily argue that a portion of developer cost as well as infrastructure (server) cost could be allocated at a per-user rate to the cost of "making" the product. In other words, that would be excluded from overhead. If you lost users you'd need half the servers, therefore anything past one minimal server just to have a website falls outside of the definition of overhead.

Perhaps the judges wanted to learn something akin to your other comment: "how well have you planned to spend what you hope to raise in this round?" Or, during pre-launch and initial launch, are you going to spend any money on anything outside creating direct value for users and investors alike.

I am somewhat surprised that such a simple question can have so many tentacles.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> In management accounting theory there are 3 main categories of expenses:

1) Direct Materials 2) Direct Labour And 3) Overhead - basically what doesn't fit in materials and labour that is not tied directly to the company's product or services.

Examples of overhead include:

electricity, property taxes, advertising, accounting, janitors, cleaning supplies, distribution costs, legal fees, interest on money loaned, human resources department

</comment><comment><USER4> I don't think developer time is considered overhead for a software outfit. I believe overhead is anything that does not directly contribute to the bottom line. At a software company a dev contributes to the bottom line in the form of shipping code.</comment>


Ford Pilots New Exoskeleton to Help Lessen Chance of Worker Fatigue, Injury - <AUTHOR> https://media.ford.com/content/fordmedia/fna/us/en/news/2017/11/09/ford-exoskeleton-technology-pilot.html <comment><USER2> > Between 2005 and 2016, the most recent full year of data, the company saw an > 83 percent decrease in the number of incidents that resulted in days away, > work restrictions or job transfers – to an all-time low of 1.55 incidents > per 100 full-time North American employees.

I find it incredibly impressive for a manufacturer to achieve something like this.

<comment><USER3> I'm not sure how much to congratulate them, since 2005 is almost exactly when the cost of programmable robotic arms became far cheaper than the cost of worker injuries.

I've been working for automotive suppliers since 2006 and I've never seen a factory worker doing anything remotely strenuous or dangerous. Programmed robotic arms do almost literally anything involving lifting, and almost anything involving a dangerous tool or machine. Additionally, every workcenter is outfitted with lots of sensor-laden safety systems that all but ensure the operator is far away from anything that could hurt them. 99% of the accidents I see on reports involve ladders, box cutters, hi lo carts, etc.

<comment><USER4> It was an incredible contrast to tour the BMW factory in Munich in August, then the Tesla factory in Fremont in October. The BMW factory was _highly_ automated, and the assembly line did so much for the humans -- positioning the cars in just the right ergonomic locations for humans to work on them. Meanwhile, over at Tesla, forklift drivers are crashing into things, dragging chunks of wood under their wheels, so much more manual labor, etc. I don't expect Tesla to be up the level of BMW; the volume isn't there to justify it. It's just really interesting.

I'm trying to think of when I would have seen BMW factory employees working overhead, and I just can't think of it. I wonder why Ford would even have tasks that require this rather than just rotate the assemblies being worked on.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> So like a torque reaction arm[1], mounted on your back, that uses your own arm? In addition to the OP sidebar video, there are these[2]. They also make an "anchor it to something nearby" portable arm.

[1] [https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=torque+reaction...](https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=torque+reaction+arm) [2] [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HpYhY5-cVyk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HpYhY5-cVyk) [https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=4&v=sn7qETycSUs](https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=4&v=sn7qETycSUs)

<comment><USER6> On the page there are photos with worker doing other things like putting things in place, where torque reaction arm is fairly useless.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> They need these for nurses. Patients are heavier than ever and nurses keep getting more patients assigned.

<comment><USER8> I think in general the role of orderlies has been to help with these kinds of tasks.

There also cranes to help get heavy patients around, but even getting them strapped in can take quite a bit of work.

EDIT: but I agree, getting these for nurses would be a good idea.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> Quick question: how about exercise and prevention? Not saying the exoskeleton could be replaced by exercise, but simple scapular and general mobility exercises will do wonders to prevent this type of injury/fatigue/pain.

Example video: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cgxr6xAB5ZM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cgxr6xAB5ZM)

<comment><USER10> Because solving problems is seen as better. Fixing the root cause is less sexy and hard to motivate people. In this example getting people to do physical therapy or even daily exercise is not something that'll get you a press release. I could be a bit biased tho. I'm a big proponent of doing Pilates or any whole body exercise regime

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> At this point I can't help but let my imagination loose. I assume it would be rather academic discussion, but anyway... Would that be possible, at current state of technology, to replace entire factory plant with robots? If so why no one is doing it? If not, what are we missing? What could be the implication of such work force shift?

<comment><USER12> It's more often a question of whether it's worth using a robot instead of humans. I'm pretty sure it's already possible to automate much more than what's already automated in a car production line. Sometimes, for a given task, it's way simpler to use a human worker than to design a state of the art robot for this one task.

<comment><USER4> What I found is that, in high volume auto plans, humans are used for tasks like pulling wiring harnesses into the vehicle (through grommets, etc), plugging in connectors, things like that. The major body work and positioning/lifting/welding/painting is done by robots, and often there are human-guided robots for difficult tasks such as lifting 100+lb seats into place in the chassis. The robot handles the weight, the human just guides the seat into place.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> It looks like they should get workers belay glasses as well.

<comment><USER14> I was looking at the pictures thinking it would be a lot easier to turn the car on its side, so the bottom of the car is at a good working height directly in front of the worker and without the neck strain.

<comment><USER15> What do you do about the torque exerted through all the fasteners connecting the large masses mounted to the car that are designed to have the force directed vertically through the bottom of the car?

Turning the car on its side sounds like a good idea until you realized that, e.g., the seats can now twist the bottom of the body pan.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> If I were working in a factory, I would probably consider it _less_ safe to strap myself to a powerful piece of machinery that may (or may not) be under my control. That said, I'm sure they are taking safety very seriously.

<comment><USER17> The vest isn't powered. Rather, its goal is to absorb some of the force exerted on the wearer and transmit it to the ground (instead of the person's body).

A few months ago, I built a rudimentary unpowered exoskeleton similar to the Ekso models, and it did help with carrying heavy loads once I got past the initial awkwardness of wearing it.

<comment><USER18> _A few months ago, I built a rudimentary unpowered exoskeleton_

HN is truly sui generis.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> So will the workers be getting raises for the increase in productivity?

<comment><USER20> I don't know...how much of the increase of productivity is a result of the workers themselves intrinsically increasing their productivity, versus some outside party increasing it through research and capital investment?

Let's say I own a lawn care business, and you gladly accept work raking lawns for $10/hr@8 hr days, and you can rake 2 acres per day(or, $40 per acre). If I decide to plunk down a bunch of money and buy a turbine leaf blower, and you can now do the same job on 6 acres per day, except using the leaf blower for 6 acres is much less physically exhausting than raking 2 acres of leaves, how much money should I as the business owner owe to you for my own investment into increasing your productivity?

<comment><USER21> Capital is usually what makes human labor more productive; we aren't getting smarter, faster, or stronger.

For example, if you work in IT you benefit from massive capital investments that researched, developed, and deployed every bit of technology you use, from 18th century research on electricity (and probably earlier research) to every component in your PC to C to the Internet to AI, to the technology used in the global supply chain that makes it all (to much, much more) ... Should you be paid as if you were utilizing no capital, and you were working in a cave by firelight with carbonized wood on the wall?

Almost all of anyone's productivity, I expect, is due to capital investment that they didn't make.

<comment><USER22> Yet the benefits primarily go to the rich, who also didn't make that capital investment

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> I hope this will be available to, like, regular humans who need it for medical reasons, not just Ford workers.

</comment><comment><USER24> Side point: and understand if I get trashed here as maybe I am doing what I am about to criticise.... is it just me or are HN comments increasingly glib, political and of little informational value? This post is interesitng information with great potential for interesting discussion but the comments so far seem dominated by a style I would not normally expect on HN, something that has been happening over time but seems sharply more common these days.

When I came to HN, I did so because it was not Reddit. It was dominated by 2 things; information that I didn't understand (too technical) or 2) something that improved my knowledge about the world and business, the discussions often more so than the post.

From this I wonder (assuming people agree...) what can we do to hold the values of old HN discussion/posts, or is this the anthem of progress/popularity I have to accept?

<comment><USER25> This supposed separation between the technical and the social/political is illusory, and shows a very blinkered and sheltered view of the world.

In actuality the technical and the social are deeply enmeshed, the society we live in shapes the tools we have, and the tools we have shape the society we live in. In this case we see a technology being developed and deployed to serve the interests of one group of people with little regard for how it affects the livelihoods of the other group. This is an ideological act, and (contrary to the whinging of so many technological determinists) an ideological deployment of technology.

If you've detected a change in the tone around here it's possible that more and more techies are waking up to the fact that politics is more than just dinner-party conversation and affiliation signalling.

For more on the topic I'd recommend picking up some Andrew Feenberg, his book "Transforming Technology" in particular.

<comment><USER26> I believe that politics is a cancer. It demands attention, refuses to relinquish control of conversations it becomes a part of, and only very rarely does it contribute anything beyond a lot of yelling back and forth. Once you have brought up Politics, you can rest assured that friends will become enemies, and the conversation will never turn back to the topic at hand.

I understand the urge to bring politics in; the world around us seems to be falling apart because of political schemes. I simply do not _care_. If you really want to throw fits about capitalism and communism, or throw up a pithy quip about Trump et al., do so in a separate thread, possibly an Ask HN ("Who's your favorite liar?"). I'm going to go enjoy the fact that someone's working on mass-producing a powered exoskeleton.

<comment><USER27> Unfortunately, if you don't discuss politics, then politics comes to you.

The social power structure of the USA implies that politics is in the hands of the people. At very least, that's the aspiration of the US Political system (even if its got some issues in practice). So convincing other people on a day-to-day basis is one of the more effective ways of causing political change.

If politics is ignored, then you begin to lose in politics. Not only do people affect laws, but laws also affect people. Ignoring this fact will cause the laws to potentially shift away from your favor.

<comment><USER26> One of the other reasons I hate politics is the mentality that the only _losing_ move is not to play...which is often followed by "vote for me". It's a cheap, underhanded tactic that tales advantage of First Past The Post's greatest weakness as a voting system, and it is the reason why we have to put up with the "lesser" of two evils instead of a decent human being at the reins.

To quote the old song: "I won't be fooled again".

<comment><USER27> The reason why we put up with the "lesser of two evils" is because the 3rd and 4th evils are the Libertarian Party and Green party respectively.

Which I don't believe represent the people's interest in the slightest. Anti- vax and "What is Aleppo" stain those two.

Its more legitimate to attempt to usurp the parties from within (ie: Trump / Bernie) to represent another option. And lo and behold: 16 of the 17 "standard" Republicans were defeated by Trump.

Now, I don't like Trump myself, but the last election was not standard by any stretch of the imagination. Clinton narrowly defeated Bernie in the primaries (but Bernie did far better than expected), and Trump of course beat all standard Republicans.

In any case, if you want a "3rd option", participate in the primaries. There were 17 Republicans to support (with ~5 very serious contenders: Bush, Kasich, Rubio, Cruz, and Trump) and something like 4 Democrats to support (with ~2 very serious contenders: Bernie and Clinton, although I was partial to Jim Webb).

I personally managed to find someone in both parties that spoke to my viewpoints: Both Bush and Kasich from the Republicans, and Jim Webb in the Democrats. Lawrence Lessig didn't seem to be running a serious Democrat campaign, but if he were more serious I probably would have supported him. Its a shame that "The Wire" was so popular, because it stained Martin O'Malley (who otherwise looked like a solid candidate).

There was a lot of choice actually.

<comment><USER26> > The reason why we put up with the "lesser of two evils" is because the 3rd > and 4th evils are the Libertarian Party and Green party respectively.

> Which I don't believe represent the people's interest in the slightest. > Anti-vax and "What is Aleppo" stain those two.

This isn't the reason we put up with the lesser of two evils; it's simply a symptom. The _real_ reason is that, time and time again, the majority votes for a loud extremist instead of picking a quiet and reasonable candidate, and the majority has shown time and time again that once they have chosen a political stance they will happily overlook _anything_ their candidate does, because their candidate is the lesser evil.

> Its more legitimate to attempt to usurp the parties from within (ie: Trump / > Bernie) to represent another option. And lo and behold: 16 of the 17 > "standard" Republicans were defeated by Trump.

Theoretically correct. It's theoretically easier to convince a majority to vote for me as a "Republican" or a "Democrat" than it is to convince everyone to stop voting for the lesser of two evils, or to implement an alternative vote. However, all three of these options would require that I dedicate my life to a topic which infuriates me, instead of going about my own business.

> In any case, if you want a "3rd option", participate in the primaries. There > were 17 Republicans to support (with ~5 very serious contenders: Bush, > Kasich, Rubio, Cruz, and Trump) and something like 4 Democrats to support > (with ~2 very serious contenders: Bernie and Clinton, although I was partial > to Jim Webb).

But again, the issue of the majority comes up--because the vast majority of people would rather vote for the lesser of two evils, and guarantee a tyrant they agree with, instead of voting for a decent leader, and risking a tyrant they _don 't_ agree with getting voted in by people who think _that_ tyrant is the lesser of two evils.

> I personally managed to find someone in both parties that spoke to my > viewpoints: Both Bush and Kasich from the Republicans, and Jim Webb in the > Democrats. Lawrence Lessig didn't seem to be running a serious Democrat > campaign, but if he were more serious I probably would have supported him. > Its a shame that "The Wire" was so popular, because it stained Martin > O'Malley (who otherwise looked like a solid candidate).

It also doesn't help that 90% of the coverage of an election is focused on the two most questionable candidates. It _really_ doesn't help that most people are expected to vote even if their only understanding of the political climate is from flawed news.

> There was a lot of choice actually.

There was a lot of choice, but as of right now, none of these choices are going to end well. I am stuck in a Prisoner's Dilemma in which I know the other party is always choosing A. I am now choosing not to play, because I am frustrated and have better things to do with my time than play a game of Prisoner's Dilemma every four years.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> Welcome to late stage capitalism, folks.

<comment><USER29> If this is what that is, I feel pretty welcome!

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> Collect data; build robot.

</comment><comment><USER31> For a second, I thought Ford had reintroduced the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Pilot](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Pilot) with an interesting new design/safety features.

</comment><comment><USER32> The picture reminds me of the scene in _Iron Man 2_ where the Hammer Industries attempts to copy the suit and a test video shows the suit twisting the test pilot's top half all the way 'round.

[https://youtu.be/r2JFqC1Nvzg?t=3m9s](https://youtu.be/r2JFqC1Nvzg?t=3m9s)

</comment><comment><USER33> s/fatigue/incident rate of workers compensation/

whole lot of weasel words in here. "time away from the job" "lessen the chance of fatigue " "reduce the physical toll on employees"

Its workplace injury, or "injury, illness and fatality" as defined by OSHA.

If the goal really is to protect workers, then bravo. If its to push the envelope on OSHA regulations and skirt safe work environments because joe six pack climbed into a robocop costume, then no. So far the Ekso company mostly works in rehabilitative technology.</comment>


Inventors who didn't get rich from their inventions - <AUTHOR> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-23179103

<comment><USER2> "Hey Mr Nugget, you the bomb." -D'Angelo [http://youtu.be/kGknlEWjxZc](http://youtu.be/kGknlEWjxZc)</comment>


Show HN: Word of the Hour – a language learning app sharing one word every hour - <AUTHOR> Available on these platforms
- Web: https://wordofthehour.org
- Android: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=org.wordoftheh...
- iOS: https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/word-of-the-hour/id144023899...
- Slack: https://wordofthehour.slack.com/apps/ACM9MT5EU-wordofthehour
- Electron: https://electronjs.org/apps/wordofthehour
Available on social media
- Reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/Word_of_The_Hour/
- Twitter: https://twitter.com/dictionaryfeed
- Tumblr: https://wordofthehour.tumblr.com/
- Plurk: https://www.plurk.com/wordofthehour
- Mastodon: https://botsin.space/@wordofthehour
- Gab: https://gab.ai/sharewithme
Available as an extension for
- Chrome: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/word-of-the-hour/j...
- Firefox: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/word-of-the-h...
- Opera: https://addons.opera.com/en/extensions/details/word-of-the-h...
Thank you for taking a look at my side project! <comment><USER2> This would be more attractive if it had controls to select only the language(s) that I am learning and control the frequency and maybe even allow for spaced repetition.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thank you very much for the comment and helpful feedback. :)

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Note: This is a free app and I do not profit from it. Over 16,000 translations are crowdsourced from users.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> I tried posting several months ago, but a lovely HN user encouraged me to post again with a different title / format. Thank you!</comment>


Ask HN: Any Example of a Good TUI (Text User Interface) You Would Recommend? - <AUTHOR> Every now and then I question the value of text user interfaces over web user interfaces over native user interfaces. To fuel this neverending quest for the perfect UI, I'm wondering what great TUI others have encountered and would recommend, and why.<p>So, what's your favorite TUI? <comment><USER2> Also interested to hear this. I'll start with my admittedly limited perspective:

I started with a Win 95 computer so I cannot claim to have loads of experience with with TUIs even though I love the idea of text-focused UIs that can be memorized. The idea of say an IBM POS terminal where workers can key items at a blistering rate without even looking at the screen (or the Bloomberg Terminal recently discussed in a recent HN entry).

I can say, things like DOS's EDIT mode, Deskmate ([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DeskMate](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DeskMate)), or the old LCARS 24 clock/shell were always a pleasure to learn and made keyboard function keys, erm, "great again".

I now try to design my own little helper applications to conform to a keyboard-first role, where the mouse is a fully supported sidecar but not a required feature. I'm happy when I can get an application to be as easy to use with memorized keyboard shortcuts or sequences as with Mouse Keys.

</comment><comment><USER3> Borland's Turbo Vision was very nice: [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turbo_Vision](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turbo_Vision)</comment>


Bazaart gets a massive update - <AUTHOR> http://www.myapplepodcast.com/7/post/2013/07/bazaart-gets-a-massive-update.html

<comment><USER2> "Bazaart is arguably the most fun and exciting way to create art and to share your work online with others."

nice!

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks Stas!

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> This is MASSIVE! great job!

<comment><AUTHOR> Thank you! Appreciate it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Looks awesome, good luck!

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks Yaniv!!!

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> very nice!

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for your kind comment.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Why is there a black bar on HN header today? - <AUTHOR> Ask HN: Why is there a black bar on HN header today? I've searched today's news but somehow i'm not seeing anything major. Anyone here can explain? Thanks <comment><USER2> [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17716098](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17716098)</comment>


What should I learn for a good career?  - <AUTHOR>

The title says it all. I am currently a Sophomore studying CS at middle of the line university. Sometimes I feel like I don't know anything compared to some of the upper class men, including the ones that are only a year more along than me. So my question is what do should I focus on to ensure I will be relevant to the work force before and after graduation? <comment><USER2> I was in the same position as you a year ago. I kept trying to find my niche but to no avail. Eventually, I took a microprocessors course and wanted to continue working with C, so I learned iOS development from various tutorials on the web. I learned more coding my first few apps than I did in all of my classes. If you are interested in web design, learn javascript and python/django. If you are familiar with java, look into writing android apps. Bottom line is to find something you love and practice every day. You will be surprised at how quickly you will learn and be much better off when looking for jobs at graduation

</comment><comment><USER3> Do searches on indeed.com for various kinds of engineers and see what's up. Web developer, software engineer, mobile engineer, mobile developer, data scientist, data engineer, data analyst, front-end engineer, front-end web developer.

You'll quickly get an idea of what kinds of languages companies use / care about! Also, make sure to keep learning, the smartest engineers not only continue learning about what other languages, tools, etc are out there but also keep their idea muscle fresh. Keep coming up with ideas on how to make what you're doing + the world better.

<comment><AUTHOR> unfortunately where i am most people tend to want people that have been coding for well over 5 years. we even get job offers through our academic adviser with some companies looking for people with 8 years exp and other things like that. like they're going to find that in an undergraduate program

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Apart from actual coding the one skill I would recommend you focus on, which might be equal to coding skills in the jobmarket is : People skills. Learn to talk to people, how to act confident, practice speaking in front of small audiences.

Learn how to get your point across.

The trend has been moving away from having programmers work seperately to people working in teams for the past few years.

It might not be the easiest skill to learn. But if you cultivate it you will be a much more effective team member than the silent, sits in a corner working on his own, programmer type.

</comment><comment><USER5> The best way to figure out what is relevant in "real world" jobs is to apply to the jobs you want and figure out what your weak points are.

(Same thing with products -- try to sell a product and see why people reject you. Your product here is yourself.)

So try to get an internship in Silicon Valley -- or even apply for jobs, with the cover story that 'I'm ready to jump into something more real-world than the classes I'm taking.'

</comment><comment><USER6> Master C and C++. Both are still relevant today and most other languages are simply derivatives of it (which means you will pick them up easily).

Defining mastery is the tough part though... If you think of it the way I do, you will find a good career for the rest of your life, although I don't think coding for 40 years is a life well-lived (especially on 70-hour workweeks).

<comment><AUTHOR> i have dabbled with C and a C++, at our school most of our classes are in java, aside from some of the other classes like compilers and etc. if possible i do what i need to be done on Python but im learning perl this semester also. I haven't messed with c++ a whole lot do to its similarity with java. I feel like if i sat down and needed to do something i'd be familiar enough to be able to do it.

<comment><USER6> Python is a great language. Python and Java are actually both great work-ready languages that can get you hired.

I'm not too sure about Perl though.

Just add some web background to your 2 languages and you'll definitely get a job over the next 5 years, just remember to improve your skills all the time though.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Okay so other than being able to actually write code.

Testing!!

So long as you can test well you will be able to write code that works.

You will quickly learn in industry that quality code does not really matter. What matters is code that works; the way you get code that works is by being able to write tests.

</comment><comment><USER8> Learn to write clearly. Learn to read code that you haven't written.

Peter Norvig's essay "Teach Yourself Programming in Ten Years" is worth a look: [http://norvig.com/21-days.html](http://norvig.com/21-days.html)

<comment><AUTHOR> awesome checking it out now

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> i have a student site up on our university site, its nothing fancy. I just bootstrapped it out to have something there. [http://students.cis.uab.edu/stucky3](http://students.cis.uab.edu/stucky3)

</comment><comment><USER9> Have you ever built a website? Serious question.

<comment><AUTHOR> i have a student site up on our university site, its nothing fancy. I just bootstrapped it out to have something there. [http://students.cis.uab.edu/stucky3](http://students.cis.uab.edu/stucky3)</comment></comment>


Agbogbloshie: the world's largest e-waste dump – in pictures - <AUTHOR> https://www.theguardian.com/environment/gallery/2014/feb/27/agbogbloshie-worlds-largest-e-waste-dump-in-pictures <comment><USER2> Ugh. That was depressing.

This is why I dislike the naivete of pursuing "market-based" solutions to manage problems which were created by markets in the first place. The problem I'm referencing here is that the actual cost of something through its total lifecycle is not captured by just the cost of producing it, selling it, and consuming it. The cost model is constructed as a chain of discrete myopic segments, which just moves the problem around like a shell game.

Of course it would be nearly impossible to measure and know the full-lifecycle cost of something, which presents a pricing problem to any market-based solution. It's going to be subject to the same myopic pitfalls.

</comment><comment><USER3> It's indeed a fucked up world when we can sip soy latte from the comfort of our heated luxury cars meanwhile 9 year olds have to work in this dump selling whatever possible to make a living.</comment>


EWG study analyzed 1,268 mobile cell phones radiation emissions. Find yours... - <AUTHOR> http://www.ewg.org/cellphone-radiation/

<comment><AUTHOR> Apple iPhone, 3G, 3G S are mid to high.

      Top 10 make model with least radiation:
      1.Samsung Impression (SGH-a877) [AT&T]
      2.Motorola RAZR V8 [CellularONE]
      3.Samsung SGH-t229 [T-Mobile]
      4.Samsung Rugby (SGH-a837) [AT&T]
      5.Samsung Propel Pro (SGH-i627) [AT&T]
      6.Samsung Gravity (SGH-t459) [CellularONE, T-Mobile]
      7.T-Mobile Sidekick [T-Mobile]
      8.LG Xenon (GR500) [AT&T]
      9.Motorola Karma QA1 [AT&T]
      10.Sanyo Katana II [Kajeet]

</comment><comment> onreact-com "Data source: manufacturer"

Also the models seem pretty old. I'm from Europe so I guess some of them are US only but not all.</comment>


Curve of Forgetting helps you memorize text by heart - <AUTHOR> https://gurov.github.io/curve-of-forgetting/ <comment><AUTHOR> It adds events to your Google Calendar in a special order to memorize text with a minimum number of repetitions.

I just could not learn the English word "kind". Every time I had to learn its meaning again, so I solved the problem as a programmer - I wrote a program for memorization.

Based on [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forgetting_curve](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forgetting_curve)</comment>


Student Victims Seek to Become Creditors in ITT Bankruptcy - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/06/business/student-victims-seek-to-become-creditors-in-itt-bankruptcy.html?em_pos=small&emc=edit_dk_20170106&nl=dealbook&nl_art=11&nlid=65508833&ref=headline&te=1 <comment><USER2> >It seems only right that victims of predatory for-profit education companies should have their student loans forgiven.

Not to me. If I lend someone money and they squander it or get swindled it doesn't have any effect on their obligation to pay me back.

The students are doing the right thing in this case. ITT, or what's left of it, owes them their money back.</comment>


How Apple got widgets right on iOS - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/@nayan/how-apple-got-widgets-right-on-ios-b32e5564bc4a

<comment><USER2> This is a major release with extensions being the secret sauce. Waiting to see all the magic that developers would create. Apple has done its part, now its up to the app developers :)

</comment><comment><USER3> >> Apple made it so easy that all your widgets are just a swipe away from anywhere even if you are inside an app.

This, to me, is the best part.</comment>


Alan Kay Did Not Invent Objects - <AUTHOR> https://www.hillelwayne.com/post/alan-kay/ <comment><USER2> I think more interesting than 'who made X first' is 'what did X mean to A vs B'. So irrespective of whether Simula had objects first or Smalltalk did, the debate should be how Kay's perspective of objects was different than Simula's.

E.g. Kay wrote:

> Simula can't be praised too highly, and it was a huge influence. But if you > take the care to check, you will find out that what I termed "Object > Oriented" was quite different from Simula in (what I thought were) important > ways. And if you are looking for the earliest inventions of ideas like > these, there are several that predate Simula (take a look at that HOPL II > chapter mentioned above)

(via [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15580308](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15580308))

Some of the context is covered in the write-up, but there's more. E.g. one thing I hear from Kay is that objects are some kind of replacement for thinking about computing as procedures + data structures. And perhaps that we're still exploring the objects idea stuck into the old context (of procedures) rather than a new context of objects-only.

</comment><comment><USER3> This article seems to imply without coming out and saying it that Alan has inflated his own historical importance or claimed to invent things he didn't. But anyone familiar with even a small portion of his writing and speaking knows how eagerly and thoroughly he gives credit to others, including Nygaard and Dahl. A couple out-of-context quotes picked out of 50+ years of work don't count for much when the overall record is obvious and clear. Therefore, what a silly molehill. There's no controversy here, why create it?

<comment><USER4> > There's no controversy here

Maybe you missed it. A lot of controversy over what Kay said, when he said it, how much "jurisdiction" he has over the use of the word "Object" by others, how often he gets to amend the definition of OOP, etc, etc... was on display recently. I understood the post by Wayne as a reaction to this recent outbreak of an ongoing controversy.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> I've been seeing this meme recently that object-oriented programming is not what we think it is, but rather that it's some other ethereal quality which does not exist as a paradigm in modern languages. Isn't it fair to say that object-oriented programming is what the huge amount of C++/Java/C#/etc programmers perceive it to be, rather than some ideal envisioned by dead languages like Smalltalk and Simula?

<comment><USER6> The reason folks are concerned about the use of the term is that earlier systems that were described as OOP (like Smalltalk) are blamed for the sins of later systems that were also described as OOP and became more popular (like Java).

This coincides with other problems. Smalltalk is actually a better language for iterative development than Java, and a big part of that is the focus on messages rather than more fragile forms of code-reuse like inheritance. Java's popularity is based on heavy marketing & manipulation of school accreditation committees by Sun, rather than by its actual applicability to any real programming task, & Smalltalk fans justifiably feel persecuted (and, less justifiably, want to take back control over a term that they feel has been abused by its application to Java).

It's not a matter of ideals versus reality. Smalltalk actually exists, people actually write code in it, and Smalltalk-style object orientation is a real, consistent, well-documented approach. This is a matter of spin: in recent memory (the late 80s), object orientation became trendy because of Smalltalk (the same way that functional programming is trendy now because of Haskell), and the response is that big companies (IBM, Microsoft, and Sun) through their weight behind trying to redefine it so that they could apply it to already- existing or already-under-development products in marketing materials without making substantial changes. These products would not have been considered object oriented to people at the time without a concerted effort to dilute the meaning of the term (in much the same way that people are busy trying to redefine 'blockchain' and apply it to everything in order to scam people who are willing to invest in anything vaguely associated with bitcoin).

Smalltalk users have pushed against this redefinition since it began, & I think a lot of Kay's later emphasis on messages is because C++-style object orientation (as adopted by Java and C#) doesn't support messages & as a result lacks the most characteristic features of Smalltalk-like OO systems.

(There's another issue: Smalltalk-style OO systems are actually easier to implement, and so the number of languages with this kind of OO system is actually much bigger than the number with C++ or Java style OO systems. These languages tend to be small & obscure -- objective c and smalltalk being most popular of the bunch -- and many more people code in C++ or Java because that's what the AP CS tests are required to use, leading to newbies thinking C++ style object orientation is representative, and leading them to go on to prefer languages that are actually worse for their productivity.)

Wayne here brings up an important point: that object orientation under simula doesn't look much like object orientation under smalltalk, & neither looks like C++. What seems like an argument over terminology is actually an argument over best practices by two crowds who are both emotionally attached to the same term, but use them to describe two different things. (Nobody is emotionally attached to Simula's idea of OO. Unlike Smalltalk, Simula actually _is_ dead.) If we reframe it as an argument over best practices, then Kay's crowd wins hands-down, as anyone who has written a medium-to-large project in Java or C++ can attest.

<comment><USER6> Also, note:

One way to interpret Kay saying "I invented objects" is that he is claiming to have invented the first conception of objects that anybody gave a damn about (which is absolutely true).

Even though C++ doesn't have anything Kay would call an object, the reason C++ exists is that C programmers were jealous of Smalltalk. (Again, while C++ is more popular, objective C actually looks & acts sort of like Smalltalk & provides some of the benefits -- C++ is something basically unrelated that appropriated the ad copy in order to cash in on the hype, though only actual Smalltalk users would have been able to call Stroustrop's bluff in the 80s.)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Kay's 1993 writeup on Smalltalk history is a worthwhile read, if you're into OO, PL, or computing in general. He gets into his 1966 exposure to Simula.

[http://worrydream.com/EarlyHistoryOfSmalltalk/](http://worrydream.com/EarlyHistoryOfSmalltalk/)

</comment><comment><USER8> But did invent the term "Object-Oriented Programming"

<comment><USER9> The article covers this. Unfortunately the title is trolling click-bait.</comment></comment>