Missing: Working Class Founders - <AUTHOR> https://sifted.eu/articles/secret-founder-working-class-founders-socio-economic-diversity-startups-investors/ <comment><USER2> 'Working class' people start plenty of businesses, but maybe not many tech businesses.

Having enough personal savings to afford to work on a project without pay for some time does not directly relate to background unless you have never work before and rely in mum and dad... It relates to your capacity to save, i.e. your previous job, which in turns usually relates to you education level/degree (which also impacts what type of business you are likely to start).

So, again, it boils down to investing in education for all. Meritocracy, not class background.

<comment><USER3> This is more specifically talking about the startup scene with VCs and angel investors.

"unless you have never work before"

What?! Consider these quotes "You'll need two years of savings" and "I want to see you put £500,000 from your own pocket, friends and family — and then I'd tag along".

You think most people can manage to live for 2 years on savings?

I can, but that's because we've been saving up for years to buy a house, and we would have to draw from that nest eggs.

And ... £500,000? Who's more likely to have friends and family which can afford that - working class, or professional class?

I come from a working class family - farmers and machinists, a reporter; and pastors and missionaries, who also aren't known for their wealth. I was the first on either side of my family to be in a PhD program.

There's no way I could ever have raised £500,000. For that matter, I went to an in-state state school because my parents couldn't even afford extra money for a better out-of-state college that I was accepted to, even with a 50% tuition waver.

Meritocracy my ass.

<comment><USER2> You do not _have_ to take everything you're told seriously or as being representative.

£500k means you already have made your money, perhaps through a previous business or a career. It's not an amount that 99% of people have in cash at the bank, even if they are well off, even if they ask family. This is not representative and does not inform on any debate on 'diversity'.

Now, if you do have access to that kind of money from your personal wealth or family and friends then use it and delay getting VC money.

To live 1-2 years on savings is quite different and one can do it with £30k (minimum wage in the UK is about £15k pa), which is an amount you can save in a few years if you have a job in tech/well paid job in general (we're back to your study and degree). Personally I had close to EUR100k cash savings within 5 years of graduating with an engineering master degree without help from anyone (who couldn't help anyway).

All that being said, it is quite reasonable for an investor to want you to have skin in the game and to ensure you can live with little to no pay for some time.

<comment><USER3> "have skin in the game" is code for "don't want to work with poor people."

Tell me, who has more skin in the game in the following scenario: B and C both get into the same school. B comes from a family with two parents making $150K/year each. C comes from a family with two parents, one making $50K/year and the other staying at home to raise the kids.

Both get into the same school, take the same classes, and pass with the same grades. (Set aside that B is more likely to have had test prep help, college admissions help, etc. than C - I stipulate they are of equal merit.)

The main difference is that C graduates with $35K [1] in debt, while B has no debt because B's parents could pay for college.

Both B and C have equally good ideas, and look for angel funding.

B can come in with $150K of F&F funding. And if the venture doesn't work out, the family has a other money saved up. C can get $50K of F&F, but is still $35K in debt, accruing interest, and that $50K is about all the F&F can afford; cutting expenses to the bone. They are really hoping for C to make it big.

The angel 'D' decides to fund each for $250,000. D's stocks alone make $1M/year and D is angel investing partly as a hobby after taking early retirement.

So, who has more skin in the game: 'C' who's all-in committed, 'B' who can chalk up a failure to a learning experience, ... or 'D', who has the most money but for which losing even $500K won't have a big impact?

I argue that the concept of "skin in the game" = "money" is a rich person's way to prioritize money over _real_ skin-in-the game; the limited time we have on this planet, and the chance to enjoy it.

Why would you choose 'B', who might flake out on you and lose focus or direction because failure is not that big of a deal, instead of 'C', for whom financial success is a much more serious matter?

[1] $35K is roughly the US average - [https://www.cnbc.com/2018/02/15/heres- how-much-the-average-s...](https://www.cnbc.com/2018/02/15/heres-how-much-the- average-student-loan-borrower-owes-when-they-graduate.html) \- the UK is different, but I'm from the US so that's what I know. Given the numbers you listed, it would have taken you about 2 years to pay off that debt, giving "B" an extra couple of years experience over "C" in the startup scene.

[2] On a more personal note, my father had a stroke when I was 25 and in grad school. He was on disability for the rest of his life. Once I started making industry money, some of that money went to my parents, like to buy a car that didn't leak oil and break down often (a family friend owned a garage so we get free labor, which helped), and pay for new siding for their house. "B" likely wouldn't have had to worry about needing to support family anything like "C" would.

Meritocracy my ass.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: What comes after we hit the 16nm barrier? - <AUTHOR> For the last fifty years, we have lived in the world of Moore's Law - with truly astounding results.
However, within the next decade we will be approaching fundamental physical limits of the transistor (e.g., http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/16_nanometer).
What do you think comes next? Will hardware plateau while software catches up? How will this affect the computing future we've been promised (atom-level simulations of complex systems, the singularity, etc.)? <comment><USER2> Moore's Law isn't going to die. It's going to be extended, (or supplanted) by further developments, like Einstein's gravitation extended Newton's.

There are many, _many_ successor technologies to CMOS out there: nanotubes, nanowires, magnetic switching, molecular switching, photonic switching. I'm sure more have been proposed in the five years since I stopped paying attention.

The situation for semiconductor researchers and manufacturers is a lot like the one Edison faced with the light bulb. We know what we want, and there's a huge field of options open in front of us. Now we just have to spend some time on basic research to figure out what scales and what doesn't. This might take some time, but a delay will only make the next doubling more lucrative when it becomes feasible.

And if you're comfortable with (only slightly) more far-out ideas, the wall is being written right now:

[http://metamodern.com/2009/05/22/a-third-revolution-in- dna-n...](http://metamodern.com/2009/05/22/a-third-revolution-in-dna- nanotechnology/)

It so happens that this development has been anticipated here:

<http://e-drexler.com/d/07/00/1204TechnologyRoadmap.html>

</comment><comment><USER3> I think two obvious ways forward are

* Increasing the die size (feasable by reducing substrate costs)

* Stacking transistors (3D CPU's)

<comment><USER4> Hopefully they'll (re)invent blood vessels along the way--a.k.a. an effective heat removal system like our brains have.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> We've been living with Moore's law so long that young people seem to think it's similar to an actual law like gravity.

Fact is, computing has benefitted from some core technologies (ex. lithography) that have lended themselves to order-of-magnitude increases in things like number of transistors per square cm. It's been a happy coincidence, but, inevitably, that ship has about finished its trip and is heading back to the dock.

Here's what will happen (and is happening) when hardware hits that limit: pretty much nothing. People will still use computers for email, browsing the web, watching videos, numerically solving partial differental equations, etc. There will be no clamour to make faster computers because computers are pretty much fast enough for what we want them to do. If they're not fast enough, then tasks can be spread out and handled in a distributed manner.

Oh, also, computer hardware companies will find that they can't get you to upgrade every few years to get the latest and greatest. This is great news, btw, for, say, schools; since they'll be able to invest in computers and expect to keep them long enough to be worth the investment.

</comment><comment><USER6> According to wikipedia, 16nm will be succeeded by 11 nanometer. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/11_nanometer>

</comment><comment><USER7> Massive parallelism. Of course we need parallel algorithms as well and deal with all the concurrency issues. I think there's one or two paradigm shifts in the cards as we transition towards this massive parallelism.

<comment><USER8> have you heard of amdahl's law (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amdahl's_law) before? The push towards parallelism and multicore is a ploy for processor sales. Most applications can't benefit from a parallelism on more than 4-8 cores. There are applications such as computer graphics and servers that benefit, but your average user only uses one core right now. The problem that processors are facing is that clock speed can't be increased. The heat can't be dissipated fast enough and they would melt if run faster.

<comment><USER9> _Most applications can't benefit from a parallelism on more than 4-8 cores._

But since the vast majority of people do not run one or two applications per computer, that doesn't matter that much. I'll go out on a limb and predict that the day is coming when no one ever closes an application. Actually, my parents are already there on their Mac Mini -- they only close windows, never applications, until a software update requires a reboot.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> It's already difficult for hardware designers to keep up with the underlying technology. It's incredibly difficult to manage the complexity of design, hence the massive growth in EDA tools over the last 10 years.

The productivity gap between the underlying hardware and the capabilities of the designers is probably a more immediate threat than reaching the fundamental physical limits.

</comment><comment><USER11> Personally I don't care that much. Current processors are plenty fast as it is. I mean, it's always nice to have faster ones and I don't think there will ever be a point where everyone is satisfied and we stop improving them, but I'm just not CRAVING for more speed so much.

However, what I'd LOVE to have is ubiquitous availability of very fast persistent storage. It's really a pain to deal with the relative slowness of hard disks.

Something like memristors would be a solution. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memristor>

</comment><comment><USER12> I think this question has already been answered -- Moore's Law has been out of play (for processor speed) for some time now. Microprocessor companies are now banking on massive parallelism.

One of the most promising new technologies (imo) relies on probabilistic transistors -- which occurs as they get smaller and more current leakage occurs. A perfect example is video decompression, which does not have to be exact. You can get drastic power reduction by doing it probabilistically (for some applications), which is great for mobile devices.

<comment><USER13> Moore's law doesn't have to do with processor speed. It has to do with the number of transistors that can be placed on a chip.

From <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore%27s_law>

_Moore's law describes a long-term trend in the history of computing hardware. Since the invention of the integrated circuit in 1958, the number of transistors that can be placed inexpensively on an integrated circuit has increased exponentially, doubling approximately every two years._

Speed gains have been a side effect of this.

<comment><USER12> Yes, I was referring to the fact that Moore's law is still applicable in terms of computer memory, but not microprocessors ... In any regard, I listened to talks four years ago that convincingly stated that it was no longer applicable, so it seems that we've already seen what happens once Moore's Law is no longer accurate.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/11_nanometer>

It goes to 11.

My personal belief is that non-semiconductor technologies will come around, at least for specialized tasks. I imagine I'll be using similar technologies we have now for some time longer when it comes to day-to-day operations.

</comment><comment><USER15> We software developers will have to actually start paying attention to code bloat and performance. We won't be able to count on beefier hardware to run our next round of sloppy hacks!

</comment><comment><USER16> Optical computing would be pretty cool.

<comment><USER17> Wouldn't pure functional programming fit _that_ specific bill perfectly?</comment></comment>


Incuriosity Will Kill Your Infrastructure - <AUTHOR> http://yellerapp.com/posts/2015-03-16-incuriosity-killed-the-infrastructure.html <comment><USER2> Embedded software medical device developer here.

I once worked with a hardware engineer that would verbalize his thought process very explicitly, as we worked in the lab.

He would say things like: "Ok, I'm about to let the target out of reset. I expect to see the I2C bus controller initiate a master read of address 0x80."

Then he would do it, and look at the oscope, and see if his expectation was confirmed.

If it wasn't, or was fishy in any way, he'd say something like "OK, I have a mystery. I expected to see <X>, but I saw <Y> instead. I'm investigating this before I go further."

So, you get the drift.

For this guy, the rule was "NO MYSTERIES."

Working with him was a fantastic and valuable experience.

<comment><USER3> This is exactly my though process as a software developer. I work remotely so I dont speak out loud (most of time), but i think it helps too. It is similar to when you have been debugging something for hours and you figure the solution right away when you start explaining the problem to a coworker.

<comment><USER4> Pre-emptive rubber ducking. I'd like to try it, but I'm afraid it might be a nuisance for others.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Not just your infrastructure, your code base too. I've seen a lot of developers practice what I call "debugging by superstition," where they make random changes until it appears to work. I prefer to keep digging until I understand. Sometimes I make a hypothesis and test it, which superficially resembles debugging by superstition but is different.

One benefit of experience is that you gain a better intuition about your hypotheses, and you know how to more quickly devise "experiments" to test them. Also if you know more things in depth (because of prior digging) you don't have so many rabbit holes to explore.

Another benefit of waiting until you understand is that you don't make bull- in-a-china-closet edits to unfamiliar code. As a freelancer I have a strong bias towards adopting the style/patterns/architecture of whatever code base I'm working in. I wish more people did this! More often programmers skim through some code and start making changes, without trying to learn why the code is how it is or what other parts of the system need it that way.

Since this is the Internet I feel compelled to add: of course moderation in all things.

<comment><USER6> >Sometimes I make a hypothesis and test it, which superficially resembles debugging by superstition but is different.

As Adam Savage [1] says, "The only difference between science and screwing around is writing it down."

I don't follow this process for every problem I encounter, but when I have a really intractable issue, where nothing I've thought of seems to work, I start a "lab notebook" (usually a few sheets of printer paper). I write down all my assumptions, and start designing experiments to test each one in turn. It's a fair amount of overhead (which is why I don't use this approach for everything), but when all else fails, the scientific method powers through.

[1] [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BSUMBBFjxrY](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BSUMBBFjxrY)

<comment><USER7> _As Adam Savage [1] says, "The only difference between science and screwing around is writing it down."_

Not true at all, though publishing is an important step. _Understanding_ what is going on is important. A startling revelation that the MythBusters guys have no understanding of statistics was when they invented their buttery-toast dropper. Doing a 'calibration' dry run (literal dry run!) with toast with one side marked with an X instead of butter, 7 out of 10 trials read one way. Adam remarked "This isn't random enough - it should be 5!".

The Mythbuster guys get 11/10 for curiosity and the spirit of investigation, but 4/10 for scientific rigour :)

<comment><USER6> That's not how I interpreted it at all. To me "writing it down" has nothing to do with publishing. "Writing it down" means that you systematically track the results of your experiments and then you use those results to update your hypotheses. If you don't write anything down, you're debugging by superstition.

<comment><USER7> I would not categorise that rather complex set of activities as 'only'. It's not just 'writing down', but analysing, predicting, and designing new experiments.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> So what I want to know, is, as per all the recent agile/scrum discussions - how does the modern "do sprint planning/commit to a number of sprint points to do/tasks to work on/be the product manager's monkeys" align with, "you saw something that's probably representative of a major problem in your system, but stopping what you're doing to investigate it will kill your velocity, and make your team's statistics look bad"?

<comment><USER9> Any time a sprint commitment must be broken the decision rests on the team's product manager who is best (or _should_ be best) suited to understanding the tradeoff between sprint completion and a potential emergency bug situation. If the PM decides it's not worth it, then that's on them. It's worth noting, you may want to include a wide enough distribution so it's known that you noticed but PM didn't want you to work on it in order to cover yourself.

As for how to account for that work in your velocity, I don't believe it is realistic to size a story for fixing a _potential_ issue (not to mention the difficulties in sizing bugs anyway [1]). However, it _is_ possible (or at least a bit easier) to size a story for research that answers a specific question as its acceptance criteria -- in this case, the acceptance criteria for this article's situation would've been something like 1) "will latency continue to rise?" and 2) if so and it is unacceptable, what is the cause and add an implementation story to the backlog"

Some may say "well, how do you know how what is causing the issue", and if no one really can figure it out the answer to the research story question and the bug has manifested itself as an emergency, then sure your velocity will tank as you break the sprint(s), but it's up to the team/business to understand how to remove outliers for an accurate velocity.

[1]: [http://www.agileforall.com/2010/05/agile-antipattern- sizing-...](http://www.agileforall.com/2010/05/agile-antipattern-sizing-or- estimating-bug-fixes/)

<comment><USER8> Yeah, I figured someone would respond that way. I have a feeling that the more process that lies around making such fixes...the more likely the system is likely to be under performing (and or broken) long term.

<comment><USER9> In Scrum, speed and efficiency are traded for predictability and consistency (whether or not those trade-offs are worth it is another conversation).

It's worth noting that I agree with your point and also don't believe Scrum is a panacea, but I am starting to understand its appeal from a business perspective.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Not related to the post, but after going to the main Yeller page, I noticed that at the bottom one of the features listed is "HTTPS Everywhere (we don't even allow HTTP over our API or website)", yet the site is not over SSL at all. In fact manually entering HTTPS in the URL shows that the certificate is not valid.

<comment><USER11> Hi (author/founder of Yeller) here.

You're totally right, I need to change the wording there. The marketing site doesn't run over https - I'm bootstrapping, with relatively limited funds, and so can't properly afford the SSL costs for a CDN (my current one wants to charge $600 or so a month for serving ssl requests).

The webapp and the api are all HTTPS only.

I should change the wording on that page to reflect that.

<comment><USER12> I highly recommend CloudFlare. Their basic plan is completely free, and even comes with a free SSL cert.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> "Not once have I regretted spending unbounded amounts of time investigating something fishy"

While I agree with the gist here (heed warning signs, proactively preempt failure), there are literally hundreds of "fishy" things, many/most of them low impact, that I could investigate on a given day, and my time is bounded.

At the semi-formal dance of distributed systems, meandering investigation should be chaperoned by ruthless prioritization.

</comment><comment><USER14> Can't find any way to contact you guys, so hopefully you'll read it here. On OSX Chrome v 41, the 'Subscribe to your free one month course' button extends a decent amount beyond the pink box on the right side.

<comment><USER11> Post author/founder of Yeller here:

Huh, interesting. That's my setup as well. I'm not super great at CSS (yet), so not too surprised by a few minor visual bugs like that. I'll fix it soon. Thanks so much.

<comment><USER15> If that's this xpath: /html/body/div[2]/div[2]/div

Being:

        <div class="span10 offset3">

Then swapping out the "margin-left" property for a "padding-left" for selector ".row-fluid .offset2:first-child" should fix the problem.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> The bit about how Riak resolves concurrent writes sounds backwards. As far as I know, it's last-write-wins by default. You need to opt into storing all the writes via allow_mult.

<comment><USER17> allow_mult has been enabled by default since at least 2.0 - [http://docs.basho.com/riak/latest/dev/using/conflict- resolut...](http://docs.basho.com/riak/latest/dev/using/conflict-resolution/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> Does anyone have a good article for a more generalized version of this motto? It seems to apply to many forms of design</comment>


Vectr – Ephemeral Q&A App - <AUTHOR> http://www.vectrapp.com <comment><USER2> This is an interesting idea. Concept seems similar in some ways to Reddit/Hacker News. Would Vectr have a way to leverage existing communities of experts (to answer user questions) or would it aim to create new ones?

</comment><comment><USER3> You misspelled "Intelletual Network" in the video... might want to fix that.

</comment><comment><USER4> How is this different from Quora?

Also the iOS UI is not using native resolution.</comment>


Show HN: Square Game - <AUTHOR> https://smitop.com/square-game/ <comment><USER2> Looking at the bottom of the JS file [1], it looks like OP already started working on a genetic algorithm for this. I don't have time right now, but for anyone who's curious to try, you can just call

      myRPG.parseKeyPress({keyCode: 40})

replacing keyCode with the respective key's code, to automate moves. The global variable "dead" should tell you if you've failed, and "score.innerText" should tell you how well you've done :-)

1\. [https://smitop.com/square-game/rpg.js](https://smitop.com/square- game/rpg.js)

<comment><USER3> `mutate` in this code means "altering state". It does NOT hint at a "genetic algorithm". This game is solvable using floodfill where each floodfill state is a series of moves and the boundary condition is whether you've ended up alive or dead.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Please fix the rendering on Firefox by adding `image-rendering: crisp-edges;` to the canvas.

<comment><AUTHOR> Fixed, thanks!

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> My best is 61: Left to 26, Right to 38, Up to 54, Right to 61.

Is there a JavaScript API for programatically controlling this game?

<comment><USER6> 240: left 26, up 27, right 30, up 32, right 33, up 35, left 38, down 41, left 42, down 45, right 50, up 53, right 54, up 58, right 59, up 60, right 61, up 66, right 67, up 69, right 71, up 73, right 78, down 81, right 82, down 83, right 84, down 85, right 87, down 88, right 90, down 93, right 94, down 95, right 99, up 100, right 103, down 109, left 112, down 113, left 114, down 115, left 116, down 119, left 123, down 127, left 130, down 131, right 132, down 135, left 136, down 137, left 142, up 145, left 148, up 151, left 161, up 169, right 172, up 177, left 178, up 179, right 182, up 191, right 200, down 203, right 205, down 207, right 211, down 215, right 222, down 227, left 228, down 229, right 233, down 234, right 235, down 240

<comment><USER7> 248: left 26, up 27, right 30, up 33, left 36, up 41, right 44, up 45, right 48, down 51, right 52, down 55, left 62, down 69, right 74, down 75, right 76, down 79, right 80, down 82, right 86, down 91, right 92, down 93, right 98, up 101, right 102, up 103, right 104, up 105, right 106, up 107, right 110, up 114, right 118, up 119, right 122, up 127, left 130, up 131, left 132, up 133, left 134, up 135, left 136, up 139, left 142, up 143, left 144, up 147, left 150, up 153, left 154, up 155, left 160, down 163, left 166, down 169, left 177, down 185, right 189, down 193, right 195, down 197, right 200, down 203, right 206, down 209, right 210, down 213, right 218, up 221, right 222, up 223, right 224, up 225, right 226, up 227, right 230, up 233, right 236, up 239, right 243, down 244, up 247, left 248

<comment><USER6> 346: left 26, up 27, right 30, up 32, right 33, up 35, left 38, down 41, left 42, down 45, right 50, up 53, right 54, up 58, right 59, up 60, right 61, up 66, right 67, up 69, right 71, up 73, right 78, down 81, right 82, down 83, right 84, down 85, right 87, down 88, right 90, down 93, right 94, down 95, right 99, up 100, right 103, down 109, left 112, down 113, left 114, down 115, left 116, down 119, left 123, down 127, left 130, down 131, right 132, down 135, left 136, down 137, left 142, up 145, left 148, up 151, left 161, up 169, right 174, up 179, left 180, up 181, right 184, up 189, left 190, up 192, right 193, up 194, right 195, up 196, right 202, down 205, right 207, down 209, right 212, down 215, right 219, down 221, right 226, up 227, right 230, down 237, left 241, down 243, left 244, down 247, left 248, down 249, left 252, down 253, left 254, down 257, left 258, down 259, left 262, down 263, left 264, down 267, left 272, up 275, left 277, up 279, left 283, up 286, left 287, up 289, left 293, up 299, right 302, up 303, right 304, up 308, right 311, up 313, right 316, up 321, left 323, up 326, right 332, down 335, right 338, down 341, right 344, down 346

<comment><USER7> Can you share the code you used to calculate these?

<comment><USER6> [https://gist.github.com/courthead/3d41cc03edda1e596051129b44...](https://gist.github.com/courthead/3d41cc03edda1e596051129b445fca17)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> 497: left 26, up 27, right 30, up 33, left 36, up 41, right 44, up 45, right 48, down 51, right 52, down 55, left 62, down 69, right 74, down 75, right 76, down 79, right 80, down 82, right 87, down 93, right 98, up 102, right 104, up 105, right 106, up 107, right 110, up 113, right 115, up 116, right 122, up 127, left 130, up 133, left 136, up 139, left 142, up 143, left 144, up 147, left 150, up 153, left 154, up 155, left 160, down 163, left 165, down 167, left 177, up 178, down 183, right 184, down 187, right 190, down 193, right 195, down 197, right 200, down 203, right 205, down 206, right 208, down 215, right 220, up 223, right 224, up 225, right 226, up 227, right 229, up 230, right 236, up 237, right 238, up 240, right 242, up 247, left 252, up 255, left 258, up 261, left 263, up 265, left 266, up 267, left 268, up 269, left 270, up 271, left 272, up 275, left 276, up 277, left 282, down 285, left 286, down 287, left 293, down 299, left 303, down 309, right 311, down 312, right 314, down 315, right 316, down 317, right 318, down 323, right 328, down 333, right 334, down 335, right 340, up 343, right 344, up 345, right 346, up 347, right 348, up 349, right 352, up 353, right 355, up 357, right 358, up 361, right 366, up 371, left 375, up 377, left 378, up 379, left 380, up 381, left 382, up 385, left 387, up 389, left 392, up 397, left 404, down 407, left 410, down 412, left 415, down 421, left 425, down 426, left 427, up 428, left 429, down 435, right 438, down 439, right 440, down 445, right 448, down 449, right 452, down 457, right 458, down 459, right 464, up 467, right 468, up 469, right 470, up 471, right 474, up 475, right 476, up 477, right 478, up 479, right 480, up 482, right 486, up 487, right 490, up 495, left 497

</comment><comment><USER8> Similar in some ways to the ancient "Daleks" terminal game.

<comment><USER9> I remember it being called robots: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chase_(video_game)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chase_\(video_game\))

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> 526: left 7, up 18, left 19, up 20, right 25, up 26, right 27, down 28, left 29, up 32, right 33, left 34, up 35, right 36, down 42, right 43, left 44, down 46, right 50, down 51, right 52, down 54, right 58, down 59, right 64, down 69, left 72, down 73, left 74, down 75, left 76, down 80, left 82, down 86, left 87, down 91, left 96, up 99, left 101, up 103, left 106, up 108, left 112, up 117, left 121, up 127, right 130, up 131, right 132, up 134, right 135, up 143, left 144, up 146, right 154, down 157, right 159, down 161, right 164, down 167, right 170, down 171, right 172, down 173, right 174, down 175, right 181, down 187, left 190, down 191, left 192, down 193, left 194, down 197, left 199, down 201, left 203, down 204, left 205, down 208, left 209, down 211, left 216, up 219, left 220, up 221, left 227, up 231, left 232, up 233, left 235, up 236, left 239, up 241, left 242, up 247, right 250, up 251, right 252, up 257, right 258, up 260, right 261, up 262, right 263, up 266, right 267, up 268, right 274, down 277, right 279, down 281, right 284, down 287, right 290, down 291, right 292, down 293, right 295, down 296, right 300, down 301, right 302, down 307, left 311, down 313, left 314, down 317, left 318, down 319, left 323, down 325, left 326, down 330, left 336, up 339, left 340, up 341, left 349, up 353, right 354, up 355, left 357, up 358, left 361, up 367, right 371, up 378, right 380, up 381, right 386, up 391, right 398, down 403, right 408, up 409, right 410, down 415, right 422, down 429, left 432, down 433, left 434, down 435, left 436, down 439, left 440, down 441, left 444, down 446, left 447, down 449, left 450, down 451, left 454, down 457, left 458, down 459, left 464, up 467, left 468, up 469, left 470, up 471, left 472, up 473, left 475, up 476, left 481, up 483, left 484, up 491, right 494, up 500, right 503, up 504, right 508, up 513, right 514, up 516, left 518, up 519, right 524, down 526

</comment><comment><USER11> Considering there is no win condition I think the "War Games" mantra applies.

<comment><USER12> Highest score posted here before comments are closed wins!

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> I got to 65, and from what I can tell the 'exploitable' pattern is that when an enemy to the side follows you for 'n' squares, it will join the 'queue' behind you, allowing you to play a game of inverse snake.

</comment><comment><USER14> Just to be clear, I shouldn't expect this to work on a phone, right?

</comment><comment><USER15> got 91, fun it's sort of like live action mine sweeper.</comment>


AI will drive the societies of the future. Will the governed consent? - <AUTHOR> https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2019/06/ai-artificial-intelligence-societies-future-governed-consent <comment><USER2> More interestingly, will said consent be manufactured?</comment>


Mali's Desert Elephants, on Edge of Annihilation, Get a Fighting Chance - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/29/world/africa/mali-elephants-gourma.html <comment><USER2> The leader of the new anti-poaching group, Rory Young, is active on Quora, when he can anyway, and his writing is gripping. If you join Quora for no other reason, you should join it for his posts:

[https://www.quora.com/profile/Rory- Young-1](https://www.quora.com/profile/Rory-Young-1)

</comment><comment><USER3> There is a link between power structures and illegal activity. It is heartening to see this positive development where both government and communities are working together. As the article suggested, the poachers along with the entire network of supply chain [0] of illegal ivory trade should be dismantled by prosecuting all those who are involved, else this will only be a temporary gain.

After narcotics and weapons, animal trafficking is listed as the most lucrative illicit trade commodity. [1]

Countries like Tanzania should take note. The Economist reports [2] that "Every third poached elephant in Africa dies on the watch of Tanzania's president, Jakaya Kikwete". Just two months back, Wayne Lotter, an elephant conservationist was shot dead in Tanzania [3].

The solution is not easy: _" a gate-keeper state" run by corrupt politicians, with wildlife policy too heavily influenced by "prima-bwanas" – heads of international NGOS. Local people get left out. Poorer, marginal communities' land and grazing rights get nibbled away. They have lived alongside elephants for centuries but are being neglected and excluded. Vulnerable, they succumb to the offer of money so they can live. Supporting and strengthening communities so they can manage wildlife responsibly from the bottom up, with some controlled hunting, is an argument that many wildlife experts have come to see is the only long term viable solution."_ [0]

0 : [http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/africaatlse/2017/01/27/book-review- iv...](http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/africaatlse/2017/01/27/book-review-ivory-power- and-poaching-in-africa-by-keith-somerville/)

1 : [https://www.cfr.org/blog/lords-resistance-army-and- elephant-...](https://www.cfr.org/blog/lords-resistance-army-and-elephant- poaching)

2 : [https://www.economist.com/news/middle-east-and- africa/216312...](https://www.economist.com/news/middle-east-and- africa/21631202-claims-links-between-politicians-and-poachers-merit-further- investigation-big)

3 : [https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/aug/17/leading-...](https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/aug/17/leading- elephant-conservationist-ivory-shot-dead-in-tanzania)

[https://www.cfr.org/expert-brief/tackling-illicit-african- wi...](https://www.cfr.org/expert-brief/tackling-illicit-african-wildlife- trade)

<comment><USER4> Slight note, Tanzania's president is not Jakaya Kikwete.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> The US Army Rangers would be ideal for this work.

<comment><USER6> I know you are joking, but it's not that far fetched [https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/may/30/us- army-...](https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/may/30/us-army- veterans-find-peace-protecting-rhinos-poaching-south-africa)

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> So guns do work as deterrent?

<comment><USER8> Do you have an elephant poaching problem in the US?

<comment><USER7> did I mentioned the US?</comment></comment></comment>


Apple Stock closes at all-time high, now 4th largest Market Cap in the US - <AUTHOR> http://www.edibleapple.com/apple-stock-closes-at-all-time-high-apple-now-has-4th-largest-market-cap-in-the-us/

<comment><USER2> Proof that you don't need to have market dominance to make a lot of money.

<comment><USER3> Apple dominates _its' own_ market

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Kinda interesting that Google's market cap is now higher than IBM's despite having 1/10th as many employees. I guess it sorta makes sense, since employees are costs and therefore should adversely affect the market cap.

In a similar vein, Wal-Mart (with its 2 million employees, 100 times more than Google) has a market cap of only $206B. On a good day, Apple could pass that and become #3.

<comment><USER5> Even accounting for employees being costs, though, the valuations seem like they must be based mainly on a prediction that either Google is going to grow a lot, or those other companies are going to shrink. Wal-Mart and IBM both make around 2x Google's annual profits, for example (around $13.5b each vs. $6.5b).

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Slight error: Berkshire Hathaway is currently 4th at $206B.

<comment><AUTHOR> Berkshire is 5th with $194B (the A shares that is) [http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=brka&d=t](http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=brka&d=t)

<comment><USER7> However, the market cap is the A shares plus the B shares.

<comment><USER6> Ah that's the issue. Yahoo gives only class A (and doesn't show class B); Google just merges them.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> So the "wisdom of the crowds" is that Apple is really onto something with the iPad? Or are people manipulating the market into excess optimism about Apple so they can cash in?

<comment><USER3> iPad has very little to do with it

<comment><USER6> Somehow though it has overtaken Google in the past few months. (Personally I am betting they'll converge again.. )

<comment><USER9> They have overtaken GOOG before.

<http://news.cnet.com/8301-1001_3-10017015-92.html>

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> Yes, but how long can it hold there?</comment>


National Broadband Map by FCC - <AUTHOR> http://www.broadbandmap.gov <comment><AUTHOR> Props to the FCC for making this, it really takes out a lot of annoying research out of deciding what ISP to go with.</comment>