Don't use @import - <AUTHOR> http://www.stevesouders.com/blog/2009/04/09/dont-use-import/ <comment><USER2> Or more succinctly: "In IE @import behaves the same as using <link> at the bottom of the page, so it's best not to use it." Know and love <http://developer.yahoo.com/performance/rules.html>

</comment><comment><USER3> I wasn't even aware @import existed, and I don't really see any redeeming reasons to use it instead of 'link' anyways, as 'link' is "cleaner" and is HTML and thus can reap all the rewards that linked javascript, image links, etc. enjoy. Can someone please explain?

<comment><USER4> @imported stylesheets have high precedence over <link>ed ones. If you @import a stylesheet it's as if you typed it inline in the <style> block.

AFAIK, that's the only functional difference

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> I highly recommend his book (or wait for the upcoming 2nd edition), it is filled with invaluable stuff like this. Really an eye opener for me.

</comment><comment><USER6> Speaking of, is there a way to import the navigation menu into an xhtml page without php or somesuch? Both "link" and @import are only valid within the header, so they are no good for importing data into the body of the page.

<comment><USER7> Yes, if you're serving from Apache:

* <http://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.0/howto/ssi.html>

* <http://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.0/mod/mod_include.html>

I'm sure other servers have similar options.

<comment><USER8> If you do this, be aware of the security risks associated with SSI.

Read the relevant part of: <http://www.w3.org/Security/Faq/wwwsf3.html>

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> The original rationale for using @import for including a CSS file in HTML was that Netscape Navigator 4 did not understand the command and thus was an easy, effective and compliant way to exclude that browser, since it had atrocious support for stylesheets. Now that NN is no longer a factor it makes sense to relegate the use of @import to only within a CSS file. BWT, the screen flicker of IE is eliminated if LINK is used first (say to load a reset.css file) and any subsequent stylesheet loaded via @import behaves as it should.</comment>


WebGL Dungeon - <AUTHOR> http://www.ambiera.at/coppercube/demos/version3/dynamiclight/embedwebgl.html <comment><USER2> I hate to be negative, but I am starting to get tired of WebGL demos appearing here, and elsewhere.

I think it is now clearly demonstrated that WebGL is indeed a binding of OpenGL to javascript, for web-browsers. Therefore it is unsuprising, and now clear, that any openGL which isn't too CPU-intensive can be mapped to javascript+webGL without too much difficulty.

Come back when someone has either something impressive you couldn't do offline, or a game of high quality. While I'm sure people have fun porting off-line demos to javascript, I've seen enough now.

<comment><USER3> I agree, at this point, unless it is a demo of a game engine, there isn't much point of posting it.

Additionally, the lighting algorithm in this demo is horrid, you could never make a dungeon crawler with any sort of realistic lighting the way it is setup now. Notice how the light goes through walls if the textured face is facing the light, but is dark if it is facing away from the light. (Meaning they it isn't a more complicated algorithm for some sort of radiant lighting)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Wow, that's crazy amazing. I've really enjoyed some of the WebGL stuff I've seen, I only wish there was a more natural way to control the camera angle...The click and Drag thing drives me nuts.

<comment><USER5> Unfortunately there's no easy way to do that with the current state of JavaScript and WebGL. If you try to just translate raw mouse events into it you end up with lots of bugs related to the cursor reaching edges of the rendered area, browser window, or desktop in general.

The ideal solution in my opinion is to just offer mouse capturing as a user- enabled permission on page load from a domain (kind of how geolocation works now). The user would see a bar near the top of the browser asking if they want to give control of their mouse to the website, with the option to always break-out of that control with some key (such as ESC).

<comment><USER6> Chrome devs are working on such an API.

\- Bug tracker: <http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=72754>

\- Design doc: [https://sites.google.com/a/chromium.org/dev/developers/desig...](https://sites.google.com/a/chromium.org/dev/developers/design- documents/mouse-lock)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> This is not that impressive when you consider that Unreal Engine 3 runs in Flash 11 now, and Flash 11 will probably beat WebGL in terms of audience adoption (if it hasn't already)

<comment><USER8> > and Flash 11 will probably beat WebGL in terms of audience adoption (if it > hasn't already)

I suppose you could be defining audience to only be talking about the desktop, and that's probably legitimate when talking about the next 1-2 years. But if you're talking about longer term then you have to consider the tablet/mobile market as figuring into a large portion of the audience. Neither flash nor WebGL is currently really viable there, but I'd definitely bet that WebGL has a better shot at making inroads than Flash.

<comment><USER7> Flash already runs on a host of Android devices as a web plugin. WebGL isn't available on any mobile browsers yet afaik.

<comment><USER8> It runs pretty horribly though. I like that I have the option of using Flash if I really need it, but it's never anything close to a pleasant experience. In it's current form I wouldn't consider building anything in Flash if I wanted to target mobile devices in any way.

<comment><USER7> HTML5's Canvas element runs just a poorly on mobile devices, if not actually worse.

<comment><USER8> No disagreement there from me. I think the core difference is I have no faith whatsoever in Adobe ever supporting iOS/Android/Whatever other popular mobile platforms may arrive adequately with Flash. They've barely managed it well on the desktop (Flash doesn't work _well_ on OS X or Linux). However, I think there's a fair chance that at least Apple and Google might end up with good Canvas or WebGL implementations on some mobile devices. Further if the platform does gain enough momentum, it's open enough that anyone else interested in building a mobile platform will be able to build decent support into devices on their own without having to rely on Adobe (or any other 3rd party) to get their act together.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Tried viewing this in Chrome but it didn't work. The website says it should be supported. My version is up to date. Any tips?

Firefox worked.

<comment><USER10> It works for me using Chrome beta v15 on OS X Lion.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: How to get a moderators attention? - <AUTHOR> Sometimes I see posts that are obvious spam, but no way to flag it.
Example posthttp://imgur.com/iQ6NVMv
I don't see anything here:
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
or
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html <comment><USER2> Go to the detail view of the comment by clicking on the timestamp, there you'll find the flag-link.

For general contact to the mods, write them a mail (firstname.lastname@example.com, Contact link at the bottom of each page)</comment>


Global, U.S. Growth in Smartphone Growth Starts to Decline - <AUTHOR> https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2018/12/global-u-s-growth-in-smartphone-growth-starts-to-decline.html <comment><USER2> To summarize this very long article:

Essentially smartphones are entering the laptop stages of ubiquity and market saturation and making people wonder whats next. Smartphones are also losing their wow factor and just becoming another "commodity".

People are also finding less reason to replace their smartphones and replace cycles are getting longer.

The only double-digit growth is in the lower priced segments in developing nations and whats stopping Apple and other giants is their reluctance to dilute their premium branding.

<comment><USER3> > _smartphones are entering the laptop stages of ubiquity_

That might actually be an understatement, there are many poor people with phones but no computer. Laptops, as hopeless of a market as they seem like they are, at least have some hope of moving down-market to the new ground Google is after with the Chromebook.

<comment><USER2> Thats true, haven't been paying enough attention to laptop market

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Really when it comes to smart phones the things I would want are things not offered by most. \- Stop being phobic about thickness already and make it durable. Nearly everyone has a case on it anyway which makes it farcical. \- Boost battery life. \- Easily accessible SD card, include service doors for a change, stop dropping features like headphone jacks. I admit to being niche but I think at this point improvements in the peripheral aspects are what could move people in addition to anything and even if they got every little niche people wanted it probably wouldn't keep the market from saturating without adding major new functionality.

<comment><USER5> At least on Apple's part, their phones have been getting thicker since the iPhone 6 and I'd say battery life is improving with each generation, especially when you consider the growth in activity occuring on the device since that generation.

<comment><USER6> Though durability is worse; everything is glass now.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Norvig's Law:

Any technology that surpasses 50% penetration will never double again (in any number of months).

[http://norvig.com/norvigs-law.html](http://norvig.com/norvigs-law.html)

</comment><comment><USER8> Just a comment on Apple: they might be positioning the Apple Watch as their next 'big product.' I bought one for myself, then one for several family members and we all love them.

In an age when too many people stare at their phone in social situations, having a watch that handle calls, emails, text messaging, and simple apps - but, is not something you engage with for long periods of time. I usually don;t use my phone on weekends anymore. The Apple Watch keeps me connected but in a way that doesn't pull at my attention.

</comment><comment><USER9> I'm offended by these now $1K iPhone models, I'm getting off that train.

I want a tiny phone to do sms and emails. The only thing I might miss is maps ... but that could even be done on a smaller phone if Google removed all that crap from the screen as we try to use their maps ...

<comment><USER10> I'm still hoping for a $250-$350 USD Android device that has

* a headphone jack

* removable battery

* 4 years of updates

* no installed software except Play Store

* no modifications to stock AOSP.

As you mentioned, I would install maps, mail and be done with it.

<comment><USER11> Aren't Android One phones at least close to that?

<comment><USER10> The Lumia 6.1 comes close, unfortunately got poor reviews. Do you have any other suggestions?

<comment><USER12> I have a Nokia 6.1 (Android One) that I like. It does have a couple of quirks though (which show up every few days and disappear after a reboot).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I don't think there's much reason to upgrade these days. Years ago I would instantly notice the crisper screen resolution, the nicer photos, and overall snappiness of a new phone. Granted my current phone (Pixel 2) is only a year old, but I can't imagine what I would upgrade to or for what reason.

<comment><USER14> I would upgrade with the zeal of a fanboy for one reason:

A phone that could be plugged into a usb C hub and instantly I have a running full Ubuntu desktop environment with all of my phone's data in the right places.

I know there's some partial attempts at this out there but I'm talking the full thing with Apple levels of quality and polish.

<comment><USER15> You'd think everyone wants this but in reality hardly anyone would actually use it.

Imagine you want to go to a coffee shop, go sit somewhere else in your house, go to meeting someplace, get on a plane, go to an office etc.

There's no hubs, screens, keyboards etc. in these places so you'd be stuck with a phone. You're effectively much much less mobile than a laptop, only incrementally more than having a desktop at home.

Perhaps if hubs / screens became ubiquitous everywhere (maybe apple can do that) it would be useful.

<comment><USER16> I would want this. This is basically how I use my laptop. My computer I use both at home and at work and plugged into extra monitors, keyboard, mouse, headphones, internet, power, etc at both locations. On the road it is nice to have a screen and keyboard, so if my computer was my smartphone I would have to carry a little screen and key board (I already carry a mouse). I wonder if such an inexpensive screen exists not attached to a computer like an iPad or tablet.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Since I got my first HTC EVO, I've eagerly upgraded phones every two years, and frequently every one. Now I'm 2 years into my pixel one, and don't see a phone worth upgrading too. Between rising prices and the way it feels each recent phone has removed features I'm in no rush.

<comment><USER18> This makes me wonder. I bought an iPhone X outright and didn't mind the original cost. But I will not be upgrading to the iPhone XS. They were able to get me to cross the $1,000 phone barrier but it almost has a negative effect because I would traditionally not blink twice upgrading every year at the previous price point.

<comment><USER19> Well, will you upgrade next year? If so, not a dramatic difference between $1000 every two years and $500 every one year.

After I saw the announcement for the XS I immediately bought a used iPhone SE. $160 for a 64GB model. Even if it only lasts me a year (it won't get iOS 13, which I may or may not care about) the value for money is astronomical compared to Apple's current offerings.

<comment><USER20> Wait, why won't it get iOS 13? Or are you saying "if it doesn't get iOS 13, it may only last a year"?

It seems highly unlikely that Apple will drop the 6S and SE with iOS 13.

<comment><USER21> I don't know, but I believe the reason iPhones get dropped from support is not calendar years, but rather architectural change. That is, the 32 bit to 64 bit transition dropped the old 32 bit phones after a while. So unless there is a major architectural shift I don't see why they would drop the 6s and SE.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> New fad. Lots of sales. Market saturation. People realizing they don't need nor want the latest and greatest so don't. Market declines.

There's nothing new here we've not seen many times before.

</comment><comment><USER23> I made a commitment 2013 to only buy repairable phones. 5 years later my fairphone finally died (tbh, I had been wanting that for quite some time) and Motorola's vow to provide official parts for its phones made me go with them. The reason to buy the latest and greatest has never been smaller.

<comment><USER24> To me the risk is not hardware repairability, it's lack of timely security updates and long term support of them.

Outside of iPhones are there any phones on the market that get 5+ years of fast security updates?

<comment><USER25> The only way you are going to get 5+ years of fast security updates outside of iPhones is unofficial Android ROMs such as LineageOS. My 6 year old Nexus 4 still gets updates that way.

<comment><USER26> On the other hand, my release-year Nexus 4 started experiencing battery swelling several years ago, and I had to get rid of it.

<comment><USER27> You can replace the battery on them with a screwdriver, hot air, and some bravery to slightly bend the original battery as you rip it out. Then you can remove the adhesive and not have to worry about doing that again, until your next "non-replaceable battery" phone.

Considering any functional smartphone should be able to net you at least $80-100, and the battery can be found for $5-6, not to mention the waste electronics/recycling aspect, it seems like a smart move if you have the time and will.

I did this with a Nexus 5, and broke a few clips on the back, but just enough to make the back easily removable but also stays on firmly during normal use. Now it's a regular replaceable battery phone.

<comment><USER26> I did disassemble my Nexus 5 in the hopes of getting it to boot again. (It didn't work.)

In the process, I slashed my finger with the knife-like tiny screwdriver I was using, hurting quite a bit and drawing blood.

I don't consider this to be something I should obviously do with all my phones.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> This is going to causes ripple effect in the industry. Leading Node is getting even more expensive, it used to have an expanding base of Smartphone using leading node for the past 5 years, sharing the cost and making them affordable. Now it is shared by a smaller number, which means we might see slow down on new node introduction. Luckily TSMC already has everything set for up to 5nm in 2020. After that, not only have we reach the end of Single Core IPC improvement, we might also have reached the end of MultiCore Count increase.

</comment><comment><USER29> Many parts of this article are so disingenuous. There's a smartphone decline coming, but it's not here yet, and this article is a premature declaration that can't substantiate itself. It starts by talking about a "smartphone decline", then discreetly transitions to a smartphone _sales_ decline — of only -0.3%. And this decline can be explained by, as the article puts it: "there's no doubt that the replacement cycle for phones is elongating".

> If you bought a new iPhone 3G in 2008, and then a new iPhone 4 in 2010, you > were buying markedly different machines. [...] If you bought an iPhone 6 in > 2014 and then an iPhone 7 in 2016, that expected improvement was much harder > to mark (except, perhaps for that fact the the iPhone 7 didn't have a 3.5mm > headphone jack).

Yeah? What if you shifted the years 2014/2016 to 2015/2017\. Suddenly you're comparing an iPhone 6s to an iPhone X. Arguably an even bigger leap than iPhone 3G to iPhone 4.

<comment><USER30> Repair technician and mobile researcher, not really 2015 and 2017 internal components are amazingly similar.

Even the screen technology, taptic engine, Audio IC, Touch IC, and more are relatively the same — just a migration of location on the board.

The 6S screen design is even more similar to the X than I had originally thought when I started to tear into them.

Now the switch from 3G to 4? That was some brand new engineering techniques and internal chip sets.

<comment><USER29> I think you're mentioning the similarities but omitting all of the differences — radically different design, waterproofing, face ID, wireless charging, fast charging, etc.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> Unfortunately there are no modern smartphones with a removable battery and the Super AMOLED display screen (the screen on the Samsung Galaxy and iPhone).

Batteries are always the bottleneck here. My Samsung Galaxy S6 is at a point where the battery lasts maybe an hour. But because the battery can't be replaced I need to buy a new phone.

I'd get a LG V20 (most recent phone with removable battery, over 2 years old) if not for the fact that I'm so used to that sharp AMOLED display screen that I can't go back to an LCD screen.

I guess I'll be reluctantly buying the Samsung Galaxy S9+, but I hope the battery isn't useless in 2-3 years forcing me to buy a new phone again like now.

<comment><USER32> You can't just get the battery replaced at a phone store?

<comment><USER33> At least apple offers battery replacement, doesn't Samsung?

<comment><USER34> Pretty much every single phone out there can get battery replaced (might be it's even demanded by law in some regions) - you just need to take it to any repair shop.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> I am not paying 1000 for an iPhone. Period. Well start looking for budget but good enough Chinese phones as replacement, after all 1k can buy me 2 of those

<comment><USER36> I think most people would define <= $100 as "budget phone". $500 is a mid-to- high-end android.

</comment></comment><comment><USER37> I may be somewhat of an outlier, but I have been purchasing used phones since my first smart phone (a Galaxy S2). That was a manufacturer refurb from my provider. Since then I've branched out in to ebay and amazon purchased phones, and excepting one V10 that arrived in the mail with a boot-loop issue (resolved easily enough) I've had zero problems with them and saved hundreds if not thousands of dollars.

<comment><USER38> If you don't mind replacing batteries yourself or know someone sure. My experience is the batteries especially from eBay have major issues.

<comment><USER37> ah, yes. I also never buy phones that dont have an easily swappable battery or an expansion slot. Since I started looking up drop rating videos my phones have lasted a lot longer too :)

I've not personally had an issue with buying one but of course its as much luck as anything.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER39> My First lasted 4 years. [2G, VGA Camera]

2nd Phone lasted 5 years. [3G, GPS, WiFi, Bluetooth, Radio, 5MP Camera]

3rd Phone 2 Years and counting. [4G, GPS, WiFi, Bluetooth, Camera + Front Camera]

It's a simple pattern. Every new phone buy should be a major Technology Upgrade, not just specification upgrade. So Minimum Requirement for my next phone will be [5G]. Hopefully within next 2 years. :)

</comment><comment><USER40> I've always been surprised that cellular tablets didn't experience more marketshare compared to smartphones. No one has exclusively a cellular tablet that I know of, but frankly I'd probably ditch my smartphone for a cellular tablet that I carry around at all times. For me, communication mostly happens by email/text and phone calls have almost entirely been replaced by videocalling, so in the long-run I see myself moving to just a internet- enabled tablet of some kind. I guess the growing ubiquity of WiFi makes it less of an issue for most people

<comment><USER41> Tablets are in an uncanny valley. Phones fit in your pocket and are good for communication, brief transactional interaction with services, and casual stuff. When I want more than that I want a real computer, which means I pull out a laptop. Laptops are only a little bigger than tablets. Tablets have the crippled by design OS of a phone but none of the portability.

There is a market for tablets but I see it as somewhat niche.

<comment><USER42> There's nothing but app ecosystem standing between Tablet aand useful flyweight mobile computer.

Getting Termux on Android was a complete game-changer, and took the device from hated useless toy to ... well, still-hated, but occasionally useful toy. But clearly the limitation is in apps and OS, not form-factor.

<comment><USER41> That's what I said -- "dripped by design" OS. That being said I don't see it as something that's going to change. The duopoly behind phones and tablets wants these devices locked down. In Apple's case it's so they can take 30% of every transaction. In Google's case it's so the device can double as a surveillance platform.

<comment><USER42> I'm watching Purism and Ubuntu with interest.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER43> If you bought a new iPhone 3G in 2008, and then a new iPhone 4 in 2010, you were buying markedly different machines...

This is true. The first iPhone was a great product but 3G was a huge upgrade. Retina screens, LTE, the increase in screen sizes, OTA updates all well worth a yearly upgrade. Now the 6-8 are basically the same device with tweaks. Even the two versions of iPhone X don't make a significant case to upgrade unless you just upgrade because there's a new phone released.

<comment><USER44> I'm still using an iPhone 6 and honestly the iPhone Xs is a downgrade in a few respects. The lack of a headphone jack is a bummer in my bluetooth lacking vehicle. The lack of support for 32 bit apps means I'd have to leave a bunch of my favourites behind. The price point is still discouraging. All in all it leads to a pretty low motivation to upgrade.

</comment></comment><comment><USER45> Loved this presentation from Ben Evans at the a16z conference. Talks about the same thing in more detail.

[https://www.ben-evans.com/benedictevans/2018/11/16/the- end-o...](https://www.ben-evans.com/benedictevans/2018/11/16/the-end-of-the- beginning)

</comment><comment><USER46> I just purchased an iPhone 8 and I plan to keep this for about 4 to 5 years. My iPhone 6 Plus lasted quite well for 3 1/2 years, if you take care of it I see no reason to upgrade. Maybe the market will become completely saturated and stagnant, and Apple return to focusing on making computers.

<comment><USER32> I will definitely be rid of my 8 in the next year. I want to go bezel-less. It's just too big of a phone.

<comment><USER46> I love big phones and I cannot lie :-D

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER47> I wonder how much Apple was helped by the battery debacle in the iPhone 6s. I am sure a lot of folks upgraded because their phone was horrendously slow. Now that Apple has fixed that problem and seemed to make iOS 12 faster than 11, upgrade incentives have gone down.

</comment><comment><USER48> Incorrect title.

Also, Growth in Growth? Are we in derivative territory here, or is this a grammatical error?

<comment><USER49> Should be sales.

</comment></comment><comment><USER33> I'm on an iPhone 6 plus, have had it for a while and don't see any reason to switch except downgrading to a smaller screen. I've grown tires of this behemoth of a screen and miss my tiny Google phon I could manhandle with ease.

</comment><comment><USER50> I think there is a strong temptation for Apple and other manufacturers to push an iOS update that cripples their older models.

Long-term it would destroy their brand but short term they could potentially see an uptick.

<comment><USER51> With Android I think the case is not that they'll push updates that cripple older models; they just don't push updates at all.

<comment><USER52> At least with Android though you can install different, current, updated roms which are often better without the bloat that usually comes from the carrier, and a lot of them still get OTA updates. [https://www.xda- developers.com/](https://www.xda-developers.com/)

<comment><USER53> And that helps a few geeks with a few phones. That is not a long term solution for most people.

Even worse, with most Android phones, you're already starting out with slower processors than the iPhone of the same year.

<comment><USER52> The processor speed hasn't mattered to me for the last few years. I'm still using an "old" Galaxy S6 and it does everything I need it to just as fast as the day I bought it. I don't plan on upgrading anytime soon except maybe a battery replacement at some point, but a charge still lasts me most of the day. I'm not a part of the rat race for the latest and greatest to run apps that I don't care about, or want. I used to. Most apps are crap imo and a waste of time. I use my phone mostly as a work and communication tool and really just have like 5 apps installed. I've removed myself from the pointless yearly upgrade game. I no longer care about having the newest and shiniest gadget in my pocket. My quality of life is improved as I don't spend much time on my phone, and I've saved quite a bit of money since I bought the phone outright at the time of purchase. Nothing during the last few years is really revolutionary. You can throw more resolution at it and my eyes see it the same. I mean on something that is 5" or 6", 1080 looks about the same as 4k. You can throw in a higher clock speed and more memory, but my apps run just as fast.

> That is not a long term solution for most people.

I agree. Someone just needs to make an app to install roms from a repository source easy, so anyone can do it. Like how easy it used to be to jailbreak an iphone simply by just visiting a website and pressing a button.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Nobel Prize in Economic Sciences (2009) - <AUTHOR> http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economics/laureates/2009/info.pdf

<comment><USER2> Dr. Williamson's work is surprisedly very relevant for hackers' startups. His transaction cost economics of markets vs hierarchies explains how startups can compete or sell services to big enterprises.

<http://groups.haas.berkeley.edu/bpp/oew/choicetocontract.pdf>

</comment><comment><USER3> There is no such thing as a Nobel Prize in Economics. There is a Bank of Sweden Prize in memory of Alfred Nobel, but it has nothing to do with actual Nobel Prizes.

<comment><USER4> It does have something to do with them, it's awarded by the same institution that decides on the real Nobel Physics and Chemistry.

The technically accurate name is apparently "Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel"</comment></comment>


Feynman's Derivation of the Schrödinger Equation - <AUTHOR> http://fermatslibrary.com/s/feynmans-derivation-of-the-schrodinger-equation <comment><USER2> Not many people know that Schrödinger wrote a a paper involving a dog, and to show solidarity with a fellow scientist, opted to model the dog after a subject of Pavlov's experiments. I called the UIUC library to ask if they had a copy of the paper just a few months ago, but I couldn't remember the title of the paper. The researcher that answered told me, "That sure rings a bell; I'm not sure if it's here or not, though."

<comment><USER3> "Rings a bell." Hah

<comment><USER4> Actually both parts are a joke, but only if you don't look for it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I find that often reading a scientist's dissertation will often tell you something about how they approach the rest of their research. Somewhere I actually have a paper copy of Feynman's Thesis under Wheeler, which covers exactly this material. He was clearly enamored of Lagrangian formulations quite early (I didn't know that it was due to a High School teacher).

You can find this actual thesis on-line at CERN: [http://cds.cern.ch/record/101498/files/Thesis-1942-Feynman.p...](http://cds.cern.ch/record/101498/files/Thesis-1942-Feynman.pdf?version=1)

It's short at 74 book pages, and relatively readable.

<comment><USER6> The actual thesis is fun to look at! A typeset version is available: [http://www.amazon.com/Feynmans-Thesis-Approach-Quantum- Theor...](http://www.amazon.com/Feynmans-Thesis-Approach-Quantum- Theory/dp/9812563806)

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Here's a link for the (download-able) pdf: [http://www.physics.utah.edu/~starykh/phys7640/Lectures/Feynm...](http://www.physics.utah.edu/~starykh/phys7640/Lectures/FeynmansDerivation.pdf)

</comment><comment><USER8> Apparently Schrodinger _guessed_ his equation. Not that it was an easy guess - a woman was involved.

See p. 547 of "Quantum Foundations and Open Quantum Systems:Lecture Notes of the Advanced School"

[https://books.google.com/books?id=LVICCwAAQBAJ&pg=PA547&lpg=...](https://books.google.com/books?id=LVICCwAAQBAJ&pg=PA547&lpg=PA547&dq=schrodinger+guessed+his+equation&source=bl&ots=7JTetjnUdo&sig=y2cYDRiTm4S6Jo7faIQoq- sJC4c&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi0stmbn8jKAhUD6aYKHY21D_8Q6AEIIjAE#v=onepage&q=schrodinger%20essentially%20guessed&f=false)

<comment><USER9> Can you please write which woman and how she was involved? I failed to find that in the linked material.

<comment><USER10> "A few days before Christmas, 1925, Schrodinger, a Viennese-born professor of physics at the University of Zurich, took off for a two-and-a-half-week vacation at a villa in the Swiss Alpine town of Arosa. Leaving his wife in Zurich, he took along de Broglie's thesis, an old Viennese girlfriend (whose identity remains a mystery) and two pearls. Placing a pearl in each ear to screen out any distracting noise, and the woman in bed for inspiration, Schrodinger set to work on wave mechanics. When he and the mystery lady emerged from the rigors of their holiday on Jan. 9, 1926, the great discovery was firmly in hand."

[http://www.nytimes.com/1990/01/07/books/the-lone-ranger- of-q...](http://www.nytimes.com/1990/01/07/books/the-lone-ranger-of-quantum- mechanics.html?pagewanted=all)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> The Schrödinger equation was not __derived __, a more accurate word would be __guessed __. It 's a fundamental law, like F = ma (although that is actually more of a definition than a law). There is no fundamental explanation why electrons obey the Schrödinger equation, just like there's no fundamental explanation why macroscopic objects obey F = ma.

<comment><USER12> A lot of things can be derived from more basic or at least more beautiful principles. It makes perfect sense to say that Schroedinger's equation can be derived from Lagrangian Mechanics, even if this is not historically how it happened.

An especially beautiful constraint is "Schroedinger's equation has to be linear because otherwise you can build a (quantum) computer that can solve NP- complete problems in polynomial time". Schroedinger did not know about NP- completeness, but this notion does give us clues why the equation is what it is.

It is always instructive to see how a "fundamental" law can be derived or at least constrained from other laws. Thermodynamics and the notion of entropy would not have been invented if engineers did not "rederive" what was considered fundamental at the time.

<comment><USER13> I think you're both right.

The grandparent post is right in the sense that reductionism always reduces, ultimately, to a guess (in this case, Lagrangian mechanics is the guess).

You're right, though, in that a basic framework can be established, using minimal assumptions and axioms, in which most of classical physics and even much of quantum physics can be derived via (mostly) rigorous mathematical arguments. But that framework itself is, at the end of the day, a guess. It's simply the best guess we have at the given moment in time that fits the evidence (e.g., by allowing us to derive from it known rules and patterns that past generations have verified fit the evidence).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Where did we get that [Schrödinger's equation] from? It's not possible to derive it from anything you know. It came out of the mind of Schrödinger. -The Feynman Lectures on Physics

For anyone who wants to study quantum mechanics and has a math background, I strongly recommend Shankar's quantum textbook. It has the most rigorous, clear, and correct derivations I have seen thus far, starting with vector spaces and moving to physical systems only after a hundred or so pages.

<comment><USER15> For the love of God, do not use Shankar!

The book is just down right atrocious. The fact that it became almost standard in American universities speaks more of the power of networking than anything else. Shankar's book is anything but rigorous, quite on the contrary.

There are so many good QM books:

For an absolute beginner I'd recommend David Griffiths

Dirac's is very readable

Sakurai's is very good though a bit advanced

Whatever you do, it's difficult to go wrong by not using Shankar's

<comment><USER16> It's been a long time now, but I pretty much agree with you. I really enjoyed Griffiths as an introduction but for reasons that escape me now I remember having a bad time with Shankar.

<comment><USER15> Griffiths is not great but for someone completely unfamiliar with the subject it will hold your hand quite nicely and is not pretentious at all.

For someone a little more knowledgeable it might get a bit boring...

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> This was written by a high school physics teacher. Very cool.

<comment><USER18> He was actually my high school physics teacher! And very good. A really cool guy and super smart.

<comment><USER19> whoa.. I think we were literally in the same class at Lab. Nice to see you here!

<comment><USER18> oh, hey man! likewise! it's been a while. :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> That's nothing:

Feynman's proof of the Maxwell equations (FJ Dyson - Phys. Rev. A, 1989 ([http://signallake.com/innovation/DysonMaxwell041989.pdf)](http://signallake.com/innovation/DysonMaxwell041989.pdf\))) shows, that it is possible to derive Maxwells equations from Newtons second law of motion and the uncertainty principle.

<comment><USER21> [http://signallake.com/innovation/DysonMaxwell041989.pdf](http://signallake.com/innovation/DysonMaxwell041989.pdf)

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> Btw, David Derbes, the writer, is perhaps the most overqualified high school physics teacher there is. (He was my teacher.)

</comment><comment><USER22> This is goosebump material!

It is fascinating how concepts from classical mechanics port over into quantum mechanics. If we'd stuck with F=ma, perhaps we may not have gone far. However, the Hamiltonian and Lagrangian approaches are sweet ports.

Noether's theorem [1] connects symmetries of a lagrangian with corresponding conservation laws. Time translation symmetry implies energy conservation. Space translation symmetry implies momentum conservation in the direction of translation. This ports directly to QM. Feynman, in his lecture series, mentions another such symmetry - phase translation symmetry - that exists for QM actions and asks what conservation law does that correspond to. It is the conservation of charge. Mind blown!

[1]: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noether%27s_theorem](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noether%27s_theorem)

</comment><comment><USER23> Feynman's "Quantum Mechanics and Path Integrals" is about $18 on Amazon

[http://www.amazon.com/Quantum-Mechanics-Path-Integrals- Emend...](http://www.amazon.com/Quantum-Mechanics-Path-Integrals- Emended/dp/0486477223)

That is a serious graduate level book - written in his own style.

<comment><USER24> I think I would rather my copy of the original hard cover w/ published corrections.

"...recasts many equations for clearer comprehension" to me is an unacceptable modification.</comment></comment>


Google Maps co-creator unveils Weav 'interactive music format' - <AUTHOR> http://musically.com/2015/05/20/google-maps-weav-interactive-music/

<comment><USER2> A "responsive" audio format seems interesting. Not sure about how good - in an aesthetic sense - it can sound, though.</comment>


HipChat client updates - <AUTHOR> The last client release for HipChat on macOS was 8 months ago, same with the rest of the clients. AFAICT there hasn't been a single feature release or bug fix since that point for the 'cloud' version. That seems like a pretty large gap for a product which is certainly not bug free.<p>https://www.hipchat.com/release_notes/mac <comment><USER2> most "issues"([https://jira.atlassian.com/projects/HCPUB/issues/?filter=all...](https://jira.atlassian.com/projects/HCPUB/issues/?filter=allopenissues)) appear to actually be enhancement improvements - however, many seem specific to organizational whims --- smells like plugin developer fodder to me (there are some exceptions of course) - ./2cents</comment>


Ask HN: Anyone used Buoy? (Digital Ocean UI) - <AUTHOR> I came across Buoy (http://www.imgearl.com/) because I was searching for a UI kit similar to Digital Oceans.
I think DO's UI is spectacular and really well done, so far its inspired me on a recent project of mine.
Can't seem to find much info about Buoy, no scss or Ruby gem , JS files referred to on the site, could someone shed some more light on the project?
edit: Found more information:
http://jessecha.se/work/buoy.html
I believe the kit was created by Jesse Chase. Really like his work with DO UI. Sadly can't find any more information. <comment><AUTHOR> Update: The link posted is no longer available and looks like it was taken down - I suspect it was removed because Digital Ocean has not open sourced them. I don't know the reason for the decision except a friend contacted Jesse and told me DO needs to open source them.

Looks like there's no other reference to Buoy on Google other than Jesse's work site and this HN post which is a little funny but sad as it was a good resource. RIP until its opened.</comment>


Ask HN: What are the most misleading things in life? or in the modern world? - <AUTHOR> <comment><USER2> The idea that the system (legal, economic, social) is fair, just, and works the way it's supposed to.

</comment><comment><USER3> Insurance, especially if heavily regulated, _especially_ if mandatory: "oh yeah but this law from that year when this rule was not yet in force meant that this special exception triggered this special ruling and in conclusion you don't get anything, thanks" is becoming a classic of my encounters with it.

<comment><USER4> I agree. Many years ago I had a motorcycle accident. My bike was dinged a bit, but otherwise fine. But because the police were involved (as they tend to be for accidents) my insurance company kept on telling me they were denying my claim. The thing is, I wasn't making a claim, but they were quite repetitive in denying all the claims I didn't make.

It made me realize most of the things you can insure aren't worth insuring, because the likelihood of getting money from them is so close to zero.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Media, including the Internet. It just presents a warped view of reality.</comment>


PS4 kexec-style code to load Linux kernel released - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/fail0verflow/ps4-kexec <comment><AUTHOR> This code as well as fail0verflow previous Linux kernel work is now useful since PS4 BadIRET kernel exploit leaked.</comment>


Facebook Advertising Efforts Face a Day of Judgment - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/23/technology/facebook-advertising-efforts-face-a-day-of-judgment.html?_r=1&hp&gwh=9368CACCDFF6C5D632DB97B51755B7E0 <comment><USER3> From the submitted article: "Indeed, Facebook hit a legal roadblock in May, when it reached a tentative settlement in a class-action lawsuit over the use of sponsored stories, one of its most effective advertising tools. In the would-be settlement, the company promised to inform users explicitly that their 'likes' could be used as endorsements for a brand or page, and that they could opt out. By one estimate, it could cost Facebook $103 million in revenue." Yeah, that's the problem Facebook has, that many approaches to leveraging user data to maximize advertising impact may be illegal, off- putting to Facebook users, or both.

I have been running AdBlock for a long time on Chrome, and either F. B. Purity or Social Fixer on top of Facebook, and I notice that just since about the time of the Facebook IPO that Facebook advertisements are again showing up as I view my own profile on Facebook. Most but not all of these show up as "sponsored stories." I never like any of the ads. I don't like the "social" ads that mention my friends by name and face (surely without those friends really meaning to suggest to me that I buy the things advertised). I don't like any of the other ads either, and mostly find them completely irrelevant to my interests. I have a friend who used to take elaborate steps to hide keywords in his wall posts (for example, he would use non-ASCII characters to respell words referring to politics or religion), but whether a person does a little or a lot to confuse Facebook, Facebook seems just plain clueless about what kind of ads to serve up, and increasingly clueless about how to provide a satisfactory user experience in general.

Prediction: Facebook will go the way of AOL, still being a factor in the industry years from now, but also serving as an example of a company that could never monetize up to the level of the hype surrounding it.

<comment><USER4> I bet your prediction is wrong. I've expanded on it elsewhere, but fb is sitting on a couple enormous businesses.

1 - they can launch the first serious adsense ($10B/year pre tac) competitor because they see most people move about the internet on fb connect;

2 - the ad exchange (fbx) is brilliant: you can bring your 3rd party data in and run ads on fb properties. This allows everyone to reuse their retargeting / behavioral targeting data and target in a guaranteed brand safe environment. But no data leaves: fb is a data sink.

3 - adding to the above, they have real demographics for brand advertisers, so they can diversify from the dr people.

4 - adding to #2, they're even better positioned for 2nd screen. Tons of people want to connect desktop/laptop display with mobile, but fb doesn't have to do any guessing or prediction: fb knows all the data because of the shared login. Thus they'll monetize mobile better not just because they know dems, but because they can extend online 3rd party data to mobile via fbx. If nothing else, buckets of dirt cheap impressions for your targeting/bt lists.

edit: 5 - how could I forget gambling? Zynga moves into real money gambling / poker (some relevant court cases have apparently been recently decided) and fb continues to collect a 20-30% tax.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> I loaded Facebook when I read this, and I have 3 ads on my timeline page. All 3 are appropriate to my interests.

One of them is for an independent film currently in theaters. Like newspaper ads for movies, it's more an "awareness" thing than a call to click.

One seems to be an app for "news geeks" to see what's most shared on Facebook right now. Interesting, though I''m not immediately anxious to click on it. Still, I now know it's something that exists.

The other is an ad for CalTrans for a fanpage for a study they're conducting on a particular Los Angeles transportation route.

All targeted to me, all at least sort of interesting. All things I'd _never_ search for or have turn up in a google ad.

It's better than it has been.

<comment><USER6> (I'll provide the opposite single datum, resulting in a thread that neither proves nor disproves the point being made in the article.)

I did the same. I have five sidebar ads (I don't use the timeline): Two directing me to "Mature Singles" (despite the fact that I am in a relationship (though, maybe this is the correct demographic, statistically speaking), one for a local-ish restaurant, despite the fact that I have never (as far as I know) "Liked" any restaurant on Facebook, one for a company offering to help me get a pardon, and one asking me to advertise on Facebook (I think it's a third-party service, not an ad by Facebook for itself; I'm not going to click on it to find out).

This is just as bad (or good) as going to any random site on the internet and ignoring the banner ads there. So the experience isn't terrible. However, for a company that's supposed to be The Big New Thing In Advertising, I think it's pretty disappointing.

<comment><USER7> I don't use timeline either, and I have six ads, as follows:

\</comment></comment></comment><comment>

\- "Enter to win a Free Lasik Procedure in the Denver Area today!" (I'm not in Denver and my eyesight is fine)

\- "Alienware's first 3D Capable gaming laptop – Get yours NOW" (I've been to the Alienware website recently, fair enough)

\- "Cloud Hosting for Websites, Servers, Apps and Storage. Try Cloud Files for only 10¢ per GB!" (Ad for Rackspace, and I already have a cloud server with them)

\- "Switch to Verizon and be a part of the largest 4G LTE network in America." (Well, I am using AT&T...)

\- "Win Counting Crows tickets in the Get Some Giveaway. Wanna get some? Enter to win." (I've never listened to this band before.)

\- "Nonstop service from Denver to New York (LaGuardia) Akron and Dayton starts August 12." (No idea why they think I'm in Denver...)

And the ads reloaded, so a few more:

\- "Switch to Viaero for just a buck, and get a free month of service and a dollar smartphone!"

\- "Want the Best Smoked BBQ in Denver? Ribs, Chicken, Fish, Crab Legs. We've got it all." (I'm vegetarian!)

\- "Get 100+ graphic design concepts in just 7 days. You pick the winner! Check out 99designs!" (I've been to 99designs before, again, fair enough)

\- "Searching for answers? 50% Celiacs DO NOT recover with a GF diet! Click & Learn Why!" (I'm not GF; at best, I've researched it lightly.)

\- "Buy 2 Original HP® Ink Cartridges and Get 1 Cartridge for Free!" (I might have looked at ink cartridges once or twice in the past couple of months.)

\- "Exclusive running & cycling brands at up to 70% off retail prices. LeftLaneSports.com" (I never, ever buy shoes online. I did search to find some local shoes stores about a month ago, though.)

\</comment><comment>

Overall, I feel the same way as you. The ads are no better than something non- targeted.

</comment><comment><USER8> > _""You would much rather hear a message from your friend than hear a message > from a brand,""_

Not sure I believe this. I guess it depends on the context of _friend_.

Sure, maybe if one of my best friends has something to recommend, I'll listen to what he has to say. But chances are it's going to happen _in person_. If he has a cool shirt? I'll see him wearing it. If he has a new car he loves? I'll go for a drive with him. And if he tries to give me advice on something I know he's clueless about, I'll ignore him.

However, what do I care if a "friend" on Facebook exclaims that they've been using some new product, and they love it? If I don't know this person well enough to speak with them in real life, their opinion is nearly worthless to me. I think I'd rather just listen to the branding.

<comment><USER9> One kind hearted but kind of ditzy friend "likes" everything under the sun. Result, I see a promotion for HP ink jet cartridges because she likes HP.

Both obvious promotion/manipulation, and utterly meaningless to me and, I suspect, all of her other friends. Fail.

I took a screenshot with the intent of mailing it to her and saying/explaining, 'See, this is what all you quasi-random liking gets you, and your friends.'

I suspect that once she sees it in "black and white" (more than one pun I could start to appy, here), that will be the end of that.

If not, people are probably going to start turning down the "dial" on her stream of posts.

<comment><USER10> Sounds like there's a need for a meta-like system which would then allow you to give more or less weight to a friend's tastes.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> All I know is that a tiny little startup I work for got called, _called_ , by a human, _human_ , at facebook, trying to get us to advertise with them a few weeks ago.

Not bullish.

<comment><USER8> Oh? Care to elaborate? Were they offering a deal of some sort?

That's very interesting. And, I agree, if Facebook has begun to stoop to the level of ad sales people cold-calling small businesses, things are not well.

<comment><USER12> We get calls like _that_ also.

But while his call could be from FB, the call that we received to me sounded suspiciously like a third party or possibly a company trying to get a leg in by making you think they _are_ facebook when they are just a company offering to help you with FB advertising. This actually happens with some frequency with people trying to claim they are google when they are just trying to offer consulting around what google offers.

(Next time it happens I will attempt to not hang up and dig a little deeper. But it is not unusual for third parties to make reference to a known company and throw their name around. Back in the day this was actually quite common with copier dealers claiming to be Xerox.)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Link around paywall:

[http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&#...</a>

</comment><comment><USER14> Kind of tangential to the article, but I often wonder why facebook has not tried the "freemium" model at all. I'm not suggesting they do the typical freemium model, which would be to offer users the option of paying to get rid of ads. Instead, I think they could try charging based on usage (kind of like heroku). They would have to keep the service free for the majority of users, but I think they could get by with charging super-power users; I.e. the ones who can't live without the service. I know many people that would fall into this category, and I'm sure they would be willing to pay $5/month if it meant keeping their facebook.

<comment><USER15> How much of the value of facebook to casual users depends on what power users are posting?

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> Can anyone tell me offhand when Facebook's lockup period for employee stock sales ends?

I've always assumed that their stock is going to get hammered when the lockup ends, and I want to be ready for it (i.e. have money in my Fidelity account to snap some up).

edit: answered my own question: [http://blogs.marketwatch.com/thetell/2012/05/17/facebook- sho...](http://blogs.marketwatch.com/thetell/2012/05/17/facebook-shortens- lock-up-period-for-some-holders/). Approximately August 19.

</comment><comment><USER17> "There is such disagreement over whether Facebook is the next big thing on the Internet or whether it's going to fail miserably."

Who are the people having this type of conversation? Why would a company like Facebook, with billions of dollars in revenue and hundreds of millions of users be on track towards "failing miserably"....Simply for being tied to a $100 billion valuation? Perhaps the valuation was lofty but I don't see a company like Facebook outright failing due to greedy investors.

</comment><comment><USER18> If you want to read the article without a nag screen, go via the Google link: [https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=Facebook+Efforts+on+Advert...](https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=Facebook+Efforts+on+Advertising+Face+a+Day+of+Judgment&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en- GB:official&client=firefox-a&channel=fflb)

</comment><comment><USER19> I read these articles and just /sigh

While it is true that they will need to show their ability to grow, FB ads are already a proven platform that many advertisers have built staggering success on.

I say we just leave that alone and focus on the growth of the platform - <USER2> is what matters most. They are already proven to work.</comment>


The future of computers: 3D chip stacking - <AUTHOR> http://www.extremetech.com/computing/119843-the-future-of-computers-3d-chip-stacking

<comment><USER2> There's also wire bonding at the edge, requires different size die: [http://electroiq.com/blog/2010/10/vertical-die-stacking- goes...](http://electroiq.com/blog/2010/10/vertical-die-stacking- goes-3d-without-tsv/)</comment>


Causes of death over 100 years - <AUTHOR> http://visual.ons.gov.uk/causes-of-death-over-100-years/ <comment><USER2> It's incredible to think how removing the "bottlenecks" _drastically_ increased average lifespan around the turn of the century. Makes you wonder if there are a couple of things we could do around aging processes that would extend the average lifespan another 30+ years.</comment>


Twitter send warning to pro crypto french activist - <AUTHOR> https://twitter.com/chiffrofete/status/675613946078982144 <comment><USER2> Free translation:

As a precautionary measure, we wish to inform you that your Twitter account is one of a small group of accounts that may be the target of an attack by state sponsored agents. We think that these agents (who may be associated with the government) are seeking to obtain emails, IP addresses, and/or telephone numbers.

At the moment, we don't have proof that they have access to your account details, but we are actively pursuing our enquiries. We hope to have more details to give you, but we are not at present able to provide more information.

It's possible that your account has not been specifically targeted by these suspicious activities but we hope to tell you more as soon as possible. We are conscious that this situation could have particular importance if you tweet using a pseudonym. If you would like advice concerning the protection of your identity on the internet, these pages ... will be of particular interest to you.</comment>


Economists Have Admitted a Mistake That Could Change How We View Capitalism - <AUTHOR> https://news.bitcoin.com/economists-mistake-change-capitalism/ <comment><USER2> Let's assume the elephant chart is (still) right. I don't understand how it denounces capitalism. Every single group besides the upper middle class and the very very bottom have gotten richer.

It's impossible to have a perfect system so I would expect, in any SUSTAINABLE system, for the bottom tier to remain unchanged. As for the upper middle class, the middle and lower middle class improves so much more than them. Isn't that what everyone who denounces capitalism wants anyways?

I think the chart is stupid regardless but I don't see how it says anything disproving capitalism.

</comment><comment><USER3> "The banking system's fractional reserve scheme creates the business cycle."

The tulips crazy predates it by 30 years: 1634-1637

fractional reserve banking:The Swedish Riksbank was the world's first central bank, created in 1668. Many nations followed suit in the late 1600s to establish central banks which were given the legal power to set the reserve requirement, and to specify the form in which such assets (called the monetary base) are required to be held

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> With the constant bias and falsities economists keep getting caught in, do you guys think they serve a purpose at all?

<comment><USER4> Isn't that like asking "With all the failures in cryptocurrencies, do you all think they serve a purpose at all?"

Well, obviously a senior editor for Bitcoin.com would say they do serve a purpose. But obviously economists also serve _some_ purpose as otherwise why would Bitcoin.com authors refer to some of them favorably? As examples:

"Austrian School Economists were Bitcoiners, They Just Didn't Know It Yet" \- [https://news.bitcoin.com/austrian-school-economists- bitcoin/](https://news.bitcoin.com/austrian-school-economists-bitcoin/)

"From Skeptic to Evangelist: Economist Jeffrey Tucker on the Bits of Freedom" \- [https://news.bitcoin.com/skeptic-evangelist-economist- jeffre...](https://news.bitcoin.com/skeptic-evangelist-economist-jeffrey- tucker-bits-freedom/)

"Against the Luddite Mentality: An Ode to Technology and Capitalism" \- [https://news.bitcoin.com/luddite-mentality-ode-technology- ca...](https://news.bitcoin.com/luddite-mentality-ode-technology-capitalism/) contains "In a brilliant essay by Austrian economist Ludwig Von Mises ... expertly identified the consequences of socialism".

If you really think they serve no purpose, stop using them to support your arguments. Otherwise you're just being snide.</comment></comment>


Backbone patterns - <AUTHOR> http://ricostacruz.com/backbone-patterns/ <comment><USER2> This is all fairly basic patterns. More interesting patterns are using collections inside a model, using sparse arrays or transparent loading (for infinite scroll), creating a "loading" event and handling loading, optimizing number of render calls, complicated routes, and using a vent to pass events and information between views. Those are the 'tougher' challenges I deal with on my backbone apps.

<comment><USER3> _collections inside a model_

I would really love to know the best practice for this, because I was trying to work with something that basically amounted to a model with two or three collections as well as a few simple properties.

But, when I went searching a month or two ago I couldn't really find much in the way of how to handle this sort of nested collection. Is there a good example out there?

<comment><USER4> i'm using something like that :

SubModel,CollectionSubModel

MainModel { subModelCollection : CollectionSubModel }

ViewSubModel { model: SubModel, collection: MainModel.subModelCollection }

ViewSubModel listens model and collection ( using model.bind() and collection.bind() ). If someting happened, which should inform all submodels i fire an event with a collection.trigger(). Say if i want to hide MainModel, MainModel's View calls model.subModelCollection.trigger('hideParent') before remoing it's "el".

* : i'm sorry if you confused because of my explanation. i tried my best.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Thanks a lot, just when i started using Backbone!

</comment><comment><USER6> Most of these are applicable to Spine, which I recommend you all give a try.</comment>


A halftone representation of an image made of thread - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/theveloped/ThreadTone <comment><USER2> Looks like CAT scan image reconstruction in reverse!</comment>


I Use GitHub.app and You Should Too - <AUTHOR> http://bbaumgar.svbtle.com/githubapp

<comment><USER2> I too find Git to be the kind of tool that works well through a GUI. However, I went one step further and bought Tower [1]. In addition to the many things that GitHub.app does, Tower takes things one step further. If you tried using GitHub.app, but ran up against a Git activity that isn't exposed through the app, then you should take a serious look at Tower.

One specific example is partial commits within a single file. Tower shows a diff view of edited files that breaks edits from different regions of a single file in to chunks. You can stage/un-stage these chunks right through the GUI. This is very similar to `git add -p filename.ext`, but with a very nice GUI.

1: [http://www.git-tower.com](http://www.git-tower.com)

</comment><comment><USER3> It still has major issues. But, for many things it is absolutely better to have a GUI.

</comment><comment><USER4> I use SourceTree for most of these same reasons.</comment>


Arduino-copilot makes it easy to use Haskell to program an Arduino - <AUTHOR> https://joeyh.name/blog/entry/announcing_arduino-copilot/ <comment><USER2> Author here.. Just as a preview of the next release of this, I've been teaching it how different pins of the arduino can be used. Some pins support digital IO, some also PWM, some analog input pins also support digital IO, but others don't.

So I can write a program like this and pick pins to use essentially at random:

        import Copilot.Arduino.Uno

        main :: IO ()
        main = arduino $ do
            pwm pin2 =: longer_and_longer
            delay =: constant 10

And without even needing to load it into a board, let alone hook up wires, the compiler can tell me it won't work:

       demo2.hs:5:9: error:
        • This Pin does not support PWM
        • In the first argument of '(=:)', namely 'pwm pin2'
          In a stmt of a 'do' block: pwm pin2 =: longer_and_longer

This is implemented using type level lists and type level programming, and user-defined type error messages.

</comment><comment><USER3> When I first met arduino (and quickly more embedded boards afterwards), the hard part was not C[++], nor a toolchain around it – I'm a C guy since '00. It was the fact that this area has few de-facto standards on how things should cooperate. Basic tutorials have no notion of event loops, you just for-loop forever and poll pins. But once I've got few non-standard devices, like that pressure sensor I got somewhere in the city, it all falls apart, because e.g. the time required to talk to it via provided library consumes enough cycles for your entire process to be late on physics. And vice versa, your logging is not async and interferes with signal timeouts. You simply spend tens-thousands of cycles spin-locking on i/o and there is no way to fix that without rewriting "drivers" under some "os". Idk if haskelling everything could help with that.

I decided to just move on to high-mhz stm's or even -pi variants, where a whole different stratum of software lives (seemingly), but luckily project folded for unrelated reasons. My conclusion was that if you're a software developer, don't just go embedded, it is not what you used to and routes you can take are limited.

Edit: obviously missing some details here, and it was 7 years ago, would like if someone would elaborate on the state of the embedded world today.

</comment><comment><USER4> I'm not familiar with Haskell and functional programming in general, so I'm curious if these codes in the OP make sense to Haskell people? Every lines of the codes are full of side effects (LEDs, buttons, delay...) and completely procedural.

<comment><USER5> Pardon the off-topic question, but I noticed you used the plural "codes" instead of "code", which has typically been used in American English. Traditionally, "codes" has been used in other dialects of English, but I've noticed an increasing number of Americans using the plural form.

Is this a thing now? Are we saying "codes" instead of "code"?

<comment><USER4> Interesting question. I'm Korean and actually I was asking myself if "codes" is correct English while typing. I don't know, but except for grammar "code" seems to be countable to me.

Note that Korean grammar (and maybe some other languages) doesn't have strict rules about plural forms.

Anyway "Codes" make sense to me when they refer "snippets".

edit: added some more thoughts.

<comment><USER5> Yes, I think it's something some American developers have picked up from others using "global" English. I heard the plural used a lot from devs in and from the Indian subcontinent, and now, I'm starting to hear native American devs use the plural form.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Trying to keep an open mind here about this - but what does Haskell offer on an _arduino_ aside from developer preference?

Surely C/C++ will be the better performer on such a tiny board... And usually you want to squeeze every drop of performance out of tiny boards

<comment><USER7> You are right C is a good choice for arduino, but if Python can be used with it, I believe Haskell can also be used in similar way.

It will bring many high level features like type safety, immutability, runtime error free code and code that is easy to refactor, once the Haskell learning curve is climbed. I like Haskell for its brevity and pseudo code like syntax which really runs like Python with all the necessary safety.

Given Haskell share in the overall eco-system of languages, I don't expect it to have any significant impact. But this little steps are necessary to move forward Haskell.

I think the biggest stumbling block Haskell need to overcome is to have good documentation like Python. I believe if instead of just features, language research Haskell community needs to put extraordinary efforts in documentation. In spite of Haskell being an old language more than 50% of packages on hackage do not have proper documentation and unless that do not go up to 90% or more Haskell won't be able to be used effectively by programmers to solve computing problems. We all stands on giants of shoulders and for that to happen need documentation. I believe people underestimated the power of good documentation. It should be twice or thrice more efforts than the language feature development itself.

<comment><USER8> My 2020 goal is to learn Haskell, so beginner here.

Is there a way other people can contribute to documentation ? Also how to generate documentation like found in Hoogle ?

<comment><USER9> The Haskell documentation generation tool is named haddock. It comes with GHC. I've never run it standalone, so I don't know how involved that is. But I frequently run it with the command "cabal haddock", which takes care of telling it where all your source files are and where to drop the output.

<comment><USER8> Thank for reply. I'll dig into it. Kind of documentation I am thinking about not only description of what method do, but also include example of 'how to use' it.

<comment><USER10> Doctests are often useful to briefly demonstrate how something works: [http://hackage.haskell.org/package/doctest](http://hackage.haskell.org/package/doctest)

They are a bit finicky to set up though.

Another good resource: [http://yannesposito.com/Scratch/en/blog/Haskell- Tutorials--a...](http://yannesposito.com/Scratch/en/blog/Haskell-Tutorials-- a-tutorial/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> This looks like a great system to simplify Arduino programming.

However, this runs your program in a loop. You can add a delay to reduce power consumption, but it will reduce responsiveness. I am really looking for interrupt-based Arduino programming.

</comment><comment><USER8> That looks pretty cool. Is there some comparison table exists about binary size, memory usage etc against other languages?</comment>


13 year old Firefox bug - <AUTHOR>

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=63895
Ran in to this for the 2nd time recently. Is firefox the new browser to work around? It's been working properly in IE for years.
Clear example: http://jsfiddle.net/YjHaB/9/
How is it that some bugs go neglected for this long? <comment><USER2> The last time I checked (ca. early 2012), there were tens of thousands of untriaged bugs in the Moz Bugzilla instance. Add to that unresolved bugs in the 3M+ lines code base and multiple platforms supported, and the job is obviously huge. There simply aren't enough people working on such things to keep up.

It is an open source project, so there is something that one can do about such things beyond complaining.

</comment><comment><USER3> > How is it that some bugs go neglected for this long?

I think it's because no one fixed it yet.

</comment><comment><USER4> > Wow you people are a mess. This bug has been around for 12 years!! are you > kidding? It works in IE!!

Way to get volunteers to fix it.</comment>


Why android doesn't provide open XMPP implementation? - <AUTHOR> http://code.google.com/p/android/issues/detail?id=201

<comment><USER2> I implemented asmack in an Android app and it works swimmingly. Communicates well with an openfire server, piggybacks java objects on the XMPP messages to communicate with a game server. No need to depend on first-party support, the protocol doesn't change much.

</comment><comment><USER3> that topic and most of the comments are from 2008/9

<comment><USER4> Its still relevant today.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> What does it really matter if android ships a XMPP library? Is the barrier to entry to use a 3rd party library seriously that high?

Sure it would be nice if it came standard, but the impression I get from many of these posts is that the believe the sky is falling and XMPP is impossible without google shipping a library.</comment>


The Paris Attacks and the Abuse of History - <AUTHOR> https://www.facebook.com/notes/mark-humphries/the-paris-attacks-and-the-abuse-of-history/919018744800165 <comment><USER2> Niall Ferguson's argument style is tendentious and question-begging, painfully oversimplified and predictable in the extreme, which he tries to paper over with rhetorical flourish. It seems like every other sentence he says something jaw-droppingly wrongheaded. Nothing of his I've ever read has contained even a shred of insight, and he's infuriating and frankly exhausting to read. His "success" owes to his ability to effectively flatter a particular group of rich men, but I don't know anyone of substance who takes him seriously.

Just ignore him and move on.

<comment><USER3> I have tried to take his work seriously. At first glance it looks like it should be thorough and center-right -- not a bad way to read history when read along-side differing accounts. However, he can't help himself from reducing his voluminous work to strangely simple political jabs. Maybe if he stuck to long-form topics from long-ago periods he could keep his credibility.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I was hoping to see more specific criticism from someone claiming to be an expert in 5th century Rome.

But all I see is a left-wing professor unhappy with insufficient PC-ness of someone's argument (too Western-centric, not afraid to use the 'us-them' language, etc).

His one real point is that the Rome collapsed because of partly internal and partly external factors. That's certainly true - but it was the barbarians who ultimately sacked Rome and not a civil war that did them in.

<comment><USER5> I think the fact that he posted this on facebook gives us reason to believe this was intended for a very general audience. Yes, his criticism is not so far from mere insult. But it remains true that Ferguson's argument is laughable, and perhaps the author's frustration with its absurdity has leaked into his writing.

This is to say nothing about Europe's interests in preventing an influx of refugees, just that likening the West's conflict with Islamic extremists to the circumstances surrounding the fall of Rome is nonsense.

<comment><USER6> What good does responding to a laughable argument with a angry laughable argument do?

This fb post doesn't belong on HN.

<comment><USER5> One possible reason is that Ferguson's words lent credibility to a social movement the author considers destructive. Even if the remarks were absurd in the context of the available evidence, few people will read further than to see they were written by a Harvard professor.

<comment><USER6> Does lashing out against something one feels is destructive without a reasoned argument accomplish anything positive? I have my doubts that it does. It might even lend weight to the very arguments he's attacking since he's made such a weak argument.

I'm not debating his position, which I respect, but his argument. If an argument is nothing more than talking about how angry one is and then attacking those who hold the opposing position, it's noise at best and a rallying cry to a mob at worst.

<comment><USER7> The argument in the facebook post appears reasoned. He points out that

* Ferguson knows very little about the 5th Century, by his own admission

* Ferguson cites Edward Gibbon, who is a poor source by modern standards. Gibbon himself felt that he his conclusions were invalid.

* Ferguson grossly oversimplifies his other source, because that source tries to say the exact opposite of what Ferguson concludes.

I feel like you skimmed the post, found some PC-like arguments, and concluded that its weak.

<comment><USER6> > _I feel like you skimmed the post_

Your feelings have lead you astray in this case. I read every word.

I read Humphries' claims of his own expertise in 5th century history, his claims of Ferguson's ignorance and claims and over-simplification of the same and his outright personal attack at the end and I was not impressed with either his critique or his methods. Rather than attacking the person (or even his sources), why not address the actual fallacies in his historical analogies?

What is good for a political talk show blowhard seeking ratings is not the same as what is good for a constructive discussion.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> My favorite line:

> Some of my fellow historians have asked the obvious question why Ferguson > fixates on the fifth century, when the seventh century in the East, which > saw the rise of Islam, might present more obvious food for thought. Perhaps > Ferguson knows even less about that.

As the author notes, Niall Ferguson chose his Roman comparison to evoke fear of a fall from greatness, not because it is an insightful comparison. The rise of ISIS and its war with Al-Assad's Syria and Iraq should be seen in the context of an emerging revolutionary state like the Russian, Chinese, Cuban, Cambodian, and Iranian revolutions. The refugees are just like those that are typically cast out during the rise of a revolutionary state.

We get much more nuanced comparisons of ISIS and the refugee influx in this context. Here is a great set of such comparisons: [https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/middle-east/isis- rev...](https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/middle-east/isis- revolutionary-state)

> In his 'General considerations on the decline of the empire in the west' > that concluded volume 3 of his History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman > Empire, Gibbon made this European dimension explicit by considering how a > similar chain of events might impact on the Europe of his own day.

The best vaccine against alarmist predictions is looking at the previously incorrect alarmist predictions from the same source. This review is like @pessimistsarc on Twitter, except for angsty pundit-historians. Very gratifying.

</comment><comment><USER5> I always find it surprising how many academics at prestigious institutions manage to get away with professing such obviously risible ideas. There is no meaningful analogy to be drawn between the sack of the city of Rome and Western civilization's current conflict with Islamic extremism. The imbalance of power, resources, and organization between the West and Daesh is not remotely comparable.

Concerns about the import of ideology along with refugees might be legitimate, but comparing the downfall of modern Western civilization to the sack of a single city, Rome, is just ridiculous.

<comment><USER8> I always wonder if people don't understand the massive disparity between the economic and military power of first-world countries and organizations like ISIS, or if they do understand but still somehow think it makes sense to compare it with Rome or be paranoid that they're going to conquer Europe or whatever.

<comment><USER5> There was an article on HN a few days ago that put the financing of ISIS into perspective. The US spends more on a typical large bridge than ISIS would earn over the course of several years at their peak income. Comparing this to, say, the GDP of the United States alone, or even the US military budget, it's easy for even a layman to see how silly this professor's argument is.

<comment><USER9> That is because the USA is building things and ISIS is destroying things.

It cost more to build things than to destroy them.

ISIS has an ideology that it uses to recruit people who are willing to work for a low amount of money and do suicide bombings. Most of their weapons they stole from Iraq, and they stole oil and sold it to raise more money.

Yet the USA spends more on its military and drones and still cannot stop ISIS. We are told ISIS is contained, but right after that the Paris Attacks happened. ISIS can just recruit people and give them resources and money to carry out attacks.

We are not fighting a nation or religion, we are fighting an ideology. One that can recruit people over social media and operate on a low budget with low pay because everyone they recruit thinks they will have 72 virgins in paradise after they die.

The USA is a nation of laws and we have a separation of church and state. We have minimum wage laws and pay people more based on their skill set and value. We pay more for our military and for building bridges because we are trying to build an economy and improve our nation's infrastructure. ISIS does none of those things so they can operate on a lower income, and since their recruits can become a suicide bomb they don't have to pay them after that. They recruit so many people that life is cheap to them and they sacrifice them as pawns.

ISIS or any other terrorist group always finds a way to get an income, blackmail, stealing oil, fake Islamic charities, raiding banks for cash, forcing people to pay a tax or be killed, killing people and taking their wealth, and all sorts of things. They operate like a criminal operation and are even known to deal in drugs as well sometimes.

Defeating ISIS will be very hard indeed. You have to disprove their ideology so they stop getting recruits. You have to cut off their sources of income. You have to kill of their leaders until there is nobody qualified to be a general or leader. Then in the process make sure no innocent women and children get killed or else it will be used as propaganda to recruit more people.

You have to understand what we might be seeing World War 3 in the Middle East right now if things don't get any better.

<comment><USER5> I maintain that, even if one were to grant everything you've written, the disparity in economic and military power is so significant that there would still be no comparison to be made between the fall of Rome and the current circumstances of Western civilization.

The death of 150 people is a great tragedy. Its impact will be felt directly by tens of thousands, and indirectly by millions. But this is nothing in comparison to the events foreshadowing the sack of Rome, and there's little reason to believe it is a sign of things to come.

I think we are simply so sensitive to these acts of violence that we have lost our bearings -- there is simply no realistic series of events by which Islamic extremists can topple Western civilization.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> For those looking for more concrete information about Roman history, a classics professor I know has written a really in-depth two part series about immigration in the Roman Empire over at a new online classics journal called Eidolon:

[https://eidolon.pub/barbarians-inside-the-gate-part- ii-c22c5...](https://eidolon.pub/barbarians-inside-the-gate-part- ii-c22c5becd228)

Granted, he's writing about Republican Rome so it doesn't directly relate to the 5th century, but it deals with similar themes in a thoughtful way.

And I agree that it would be better for everyone if we collectively just ignored the 2015 incarnation of Niall Ferguson, but unfortunately being a tenured professor at Harvard (and now Stanford) gives you quite the bully pulpit! His first book is actually good, but it's been a downhill slide into largely fact-less political assertions and nasty ad hominem attacks since then...

<comment><USER3> > And I agree that it would be better for everyone if we collectively just > ignored the 2015 incarnation of Niall Ferguson, but unfortunately being a > tenured professor at Harvard (and now Stanford) gives you quite the bully > pulpit! His first book is actually good, but it's been a downhill slide into > largely fact-less political assertions and nasty ad hominem attacks since > then...

I couldn't agree more. The 2011 Ferguson was pretty vapid when dealing in short-form too. He debated Zakaria and Kissinger in 2011 on the future of China: [https://www.munkdebates.com/debates/china](https://www.munkdebates.com/debates/china)

It is hard to believe how frequently he resorts to ad hominem arguments. Furthermore, he can't seem to even acknowledge a the crux of a compelling argument made by Kissinger/Zakaria. Unsurprisingly, he drove the audience away from his argument in droves.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> I've posted this on HN before:

Every time someone tries to shoe-horn the Fall of Rome into contemporary history it's good to post Demandt's "210 Reasons for the decline of the Roman Empire" [1]. You can nicely see which ideologies have tried to fit Rome into their own crusade.

[1] [http://www.utexas.edu/courses/rome/210reasons.html](http://www.utexas.edu/courses/rome/210reasons.html)

</comment><comment><USER12> There's no link to the Ferguson article in Humphries's attack piece.

The Sunday Times has a paywall, even for a single article in the current edition. But Ferguson's piece has been syndicated.

Here's a link at the Boston Globe:

[https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2015/11/16/paris-and- fal...](https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2015/11/16/paris-and-fall- rome/ErlRjkQMGXhvDarTIxXpdK/story.html)

</comment><comment><USER13> Niall Ferguson's pseudo-scholarship ignores the fact that Karl Popper's entire career was based on debunking the myth of historicism Gibbon and Spengler espoused. Today nobody takes the latter two seriously, while Popper is still standing tall.

</comment><comment><USER14> If you're not from my caste/religion, you're non-human to me; [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_writings](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_writings)</comment>


Electronic Sniffing Dog Brought Down Fogle - <AUTHOR> http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/porn-sniffing-dog-helped-bring-down-subway-star-jared-fogle-n415826

<comment><USER2> How would the components of a microsd card or USB stick have a unique odor compared to the myriad chips in all of our electronics? Such as TVs, stereo's, computers, etc.? Wasn't there an article that said drug dogs were about as accurate as a coin flip?</comment>


Show HN: CADWOLF – Web-based math and engineering platform - <AUTHOR> http://www.cadwolf.com <comment><AUTHOR> Submitter here,

I am a long time everyday reader of HN but I have never posted or really commented. I am a structural engineer with a few years of work in the space program. I have spent a great deal of time building something that I think can redefine the way we do engineering and I am close to finished with an initial version.

I am extremely nervous about posting this, but I would love to hear what everyone thinks. (There is a video in the overview section)

Thanks

<comment><USER2> I know it is difficult to describe complicated software simply. Make the examples more prominent, and provide a sandbox for someone to try them. Some people like watching videos, others don't.

<comment><AUTHOR> There actually is an example document that any user can fully edit. It's under the docs and examples link.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> As a mech engineer doing mostly structural work these days, you are definitely solving an important problem, one which I both witness and experience first hand every single day. Excel is used a lot, but it's error prone and sucks for communicating your work (formulas and logic is hidden). Plus, trying to track down the latest version of some calculation someone did 10 years ago, digging down 29 subfolders on the common drive, ugh.

I do like projects like Jupyter (I used IPNB a lot during my masters), but it seems like 95% of my fellow engineers feel like python/julia/even matlab are "too complicated for something excel does". Which I disagree with (ever tried extracting eigenvalues in excel? or simply plotting a hisogram?), but eh. Programming is also less visual/graphic, which is one plus of excel (colors, fonts, layout of a spreadsheet do help with processing information)

I can't say if your solution is "the one". It's too complex a problem for that. But my personal feeling is you're tackling the right issues at the right angle. As good as your product is though, getting traction is going to be the hard part, by far. I wish you the best, and certainly hope I get to use your product some day.

<comment><AUTHOR> I agree. There is a huge amount of "inertia" in the engineering field. People find something they like and then use it forever.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> If this has trouble getting traction in engineering as originally designed... Please pivot!

I watched the document section of your introduction video and was struck by how elegantly it would solve my needs for a blogging platform. I may even try using it for that without a pivot.

<comment><AUTHOR> Interesting that you say that. There is a spot on YC applications that asked if you had any other ideals that you may have applied with or something along those lines. I mentioned pivoting to just that sort of thing.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> I think this is very interesting, although I'm still trying to understand it. So excuse my ignorance, but how does this differ from open source projects such as Jupyter, Sage, and JuliaBox?

<comment><USER6> Or, as a commercial product, from the functionality available inside Matlab, Maple, or Mathematica? Those all have the same kind of notebook feature, but have the additional advantage of thousands of third-party libraries.

edit to add:

This project seems to be pretty neat, and it's clear that a ton of work has gone into it, but I'm unlikely to ever use it.

Here's my list of criteria for something like this:

(1) Is it open source? Am I being locked into someone's proprietary environment? Can I inspect the code of every function I'm calling on, to make sure I trust them to behave correctly?

(2) Does it interoperate easily with my existing data and workflows? Can I easily scrape a webpage to feed data in, or import from a file in some obscure format from the 90s?

(3) Can I run it offline? Can I share it with anyone I want, and can they build on what I've made without paying a license fee? [Personally I think running on a computer locally is a big advantage over having everything done "in the cloud" and displaying in a web page, and thus being completely unavailable when offline. I'm assuming all the numeric code is being run on some server somewhere? Or is all the processing done locally in Javascript?]

(4) Is there some well tested library that already solves my problem that I can run within the tool, so that I can just download the library, use its API, and be done without a bunch of custom work on my end?

[Or more generally: does the tool solve some problem that I can't easily solve in any other way?]

(5) Is the plotting functionality easy enough to make plots of data with a few seconds of work, but flexible enough that I can make a custom data visualization if I need to? (For a web project, I would just feed the data to D3.)

Don't let me discourage you though. It's great that people are working on tools, and quite possible that you'll find a good market of folks who would use this thing.

<comment><AUTHOR> Matlab, Maple, etc are very good at what they do, but they have two problems that my platform solves.

1\. Your manager and/or customer can't see your work unless they have a license and can understand the language. Mine only needs a web browser.

2\. If the analysis changes, the documentation must be updated as well. Mine does everything on the same web page.

As for the questions, those are all ones that I have asked myself about several times and here is where I am now.

(1) It is not open source and you really are kinda locked into using the system once you get going. I really couldn't find a way around this as the real appeal for most engineers is the absence of the need to code stuff. I have documentation that describes how I solve most algorithms and some demos.

(2) Scraping web pages is high on my to do list. You can paste most forms of data already, but you can't yet import files directly. Seeing that this is high on someone else's list I may put most of my effort there.

(3) Right now, everything is done locally in javascript but there is no way to save changes without server access. Part of my business plan is to use a server side code to solve large data sets and possibly charge for that. I have been surprised at how well the browser has handled most problems though.

(4) The main problem that this will solve for most people is this ... You get data from a test run somewhere. You put that data on a server, run a Matlab or Python code on it and then create a word document to pass on that info. With my system, you upload the info, analyze it, and display the results all on the same web page. It isn't just about analyzing the data, it's about doing everything on the same platform.

(5) The plotting functions are pretty easy to use and you can get something up in a few seconds. I also have 3D plotting.

<comment><USER6> My main suggestion would be to first find some concrete customers, and then ask what they need. (As I said, I'm not likely to be one of them, so don't prioritize just based on my opinions.)

All the best luck!

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for the input and I totally get what you are saying. It may help to know that the end goal is to tie in a CAD system. This way, each "document" contains the math to design a component while the CAD reads from that to display it. This way, the CAD model automatically updates with changing design requirements just like the part trees already do. What you see is really just a first step.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>