He performed pioneering work taking a type of adult stem cell from the nose and showing how it can be be used for spinal repair. A polish paraplegic, Darek Fidyka, regained the ability to walk following surgery in 2014 using this research findings. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darek_Fidyka
When I ran track in college, I somehow developed focal cartilage defects in both knees. This brought my running career to a halt and made walking extremely painful for about a year. In an attempt to fix this, I had a type of surgery known as the OATS procedure performed. This is where the surgeon takes a plug of undamaged articular cartilage from a low load bearing region of the knee and swaps it with the damaged cartilage. Walking is mostly pain-free for me now, but it still hurts too much if I attempt to run.
As though one cartilage injury weren't enough, I somewhat stupidly decided to take up weight lifting after I couldn't run anymore and attempted to set down a barbell that was way too heavy for me. In doing so, I triggered a mild lower lumbar disc herniation. So now I have two permanent injuries. Luckily, neither injury is very severe, so some days I don't even notice the pain while other days it approaches mildly annoying "background noise".
These types of cartilage injuries are common, and arthritis is even more common. But the issue with cartilage is that once it's damaged, it doesn't heal on its own because cartilage has no vascular system. You can break all the bones you want and eventually they will heal, but damaged hyaline cartilage will not. The best that your body can do is to produce "low-quality" fibrocartilage in place of the damaged hyaline cartilage.
Fortunately, there's been a lot of research over the last decade on using mesenchymal stem cells (taken from your own bone marrow) to regrow true hyaline cartilage as opposed to fibrocartilage. The stem cells have actually been shown to differentiate into hyaline cartilage. For me, this has the potential to permanently alleviate both knee and back pain. Moving this research away from clinical trials seems to be taking forever for some reason though...
> The stem cell procedure Kris received is part of a Phase 1/2a clinical trial that is evaluating the safety and efficacy of escalating doses of AST-OPC1 cells developed by Fremont, California-based Asterias Biotherapeutics. AST-OPC1 cells are made from embryonic stem cells by carefully converting them into oligodendrocyte progenitor cells (OPCs), which are cells found in the brain and spinal cord that support the healthy functioning of nerve cells. In previous laboratory studies, AST-OPC1 was shown to produce neurotrophic factors, stimulate vascularization and induce remyelination of denuded axons. All are critical factors in the survival, regrowth and conduction of nerve impulses through axons at the injury site, according to Edward D. Wirth III, MD, PhD, chief medical director of Asterias and lead investigator of the study, dubbed SCiStar.
90 days!Paralysis to utility!
Is someone going to tell me something like: oh, the nerve wasn't completely severed so recovery might have happened anyway?
Well, go ahead, but in the meantime I am enjoying this news.
I haven't pulled the trigger yet, but do plan on banking my own stem cells while I'm in my early 30's because parts of me will inevitably start to break down in the coming decades, and I really like the idea of tapping my own young cells when I am old to heal some of that.
The only company I know of that is doing this is Forever Labs, https://www.foreverlabs.co/, I am not associated with them, I just think they are on the right track with stem-cell banking and have spoken to one of the founders and was pretty excited about what they were doing and think its something worth supporting, which is why I'm writing this comment.
So it's hard to say how wide a range of patients will be treatable with the new technique, but that's what medical research is for: to find out what helps for which patients. I hope further research continues on this and other treatments for spinal cord injuries.
For me the stem cells are some sort of a magical Wolverine regeneration sauce. Never understood why they even work.
We really need to wait until the clinical trial publishes its results to know whether or not the treatment works. This person might have recovered naturally without any treatment.
The level of medical awesomeness is off the charts - so many people can now start to hope for not just a better life, but a radically better life.
Engraftment of human nasal olfactory stem cells restores neuroplasticity in mice with hippocampal lesions
I am currently in Iran due to my visa not being issued despite the 7 months I have waited for it. I was able to defer my admission to Spring 2017 semester, but then _this_ happened.
I am quite sure that I will never be able to attend this program. I had very high hopes for my future because of this admission.
I was very sad today after hearing this news. I have to come up with a new plan for my life, since it never occurred to me that I would not be able to attend.
Edit: Thanks for all the support from the HN community.
> U.S. permanent residents (green card holders) who are outside of the United States may be barred from reentry.
That's huge. I don't mean to diminish the importance of banning new immigrants and visitors on a religious basis, that's bad too. But banning people who have already legally immigrated from re-entering the country is completely nuts. There are no doubt people who have lived in this country for decades who happen to be abroad at the moment and are now stuck away from their homes for an unknown period. There will be people who have lived in this country for decades who will be faced with an illness or death in the family and will have to make a choice between going to visit or retaining their ability to stay where they live.
> To the Trump regime, I make one request: if you ever decide that its the policy of the US government to deport my PhD students, then deport me first. Im practically begging you: come to my house, arrest me, revoke my citizenship, and tear up the awards Ive accepted at the White House and the State Department. Id consider that to be the greatest honor of my career.
Given the pedestal that you (presumably, by the amount of points this has gotten) are on, there are more actionable ways to be useful, rather than be a martyr. No mention in the post on how to stop Trump. For example, telling your readers how they can take action to stop Trump. I'll share some of my own thoughts on how to do this. Feel free to respond to this if it's not exhaustive enough.
To follow my own advice, if anyone sees this:
- Local congresspeople (http://www.house.gov/representatives/find/) - Senators (https://www.senate.gov/senators/contact/) - Local officials (https://www.usa.gov/elected-officials)
- Get involved in local elections (this is a decent start - to become informed locally http://www.npr.org/stations/) - Protest - Attend town hall and city council meetings (see npr)
- Tell your friends
6. Stop reading and start doing one of the other things.
And yet, from the very source linked in the article--
"Details about the forthcoming executive orders are still unconfirmed. But heres what we can say with high confidence."
If you trust AP, then sure, it's likely that it will happen. But it's still important to draw a distinction between "has done" or "is doing" and "is expected to do". Articles like this, posted before any official announcement, are merely adding to the Trump hysteria.
I firmly believe anyone with a brain should begin making contingency plans to regroup somewhere like Australia or Japan, outside of the reaches of far-right populism. An Erdogan-style academic purge may be on the agenda and sooner than we think
There are two things that everyone concerned should be doing all the time right now, and they're by far the most important things.
You should NOT be bothering with online petitions or emailing.
1. The best thing you can do to be heard and get your congressperson to pay attention is to have face-to-face time - if they have town halls, go to them. Go to their local offices. If you're in DC, try to find a way to go to an event of theirs. Go to the "mobile offices" that their staff hold periodically (all these times are located on each congressperson's website). When you go, ask questions. A lot of them. And push for answers. The louder and more vocal and present you can be at those the better.
2. But, those in-person events don't happen every day. So, the absolute most important thing that people should be doing every day is calling. You should make 6 calls a day: 2 each (DC office and your local office) to your 2 Senators & your 1 Representative.
Any sort of online contact basically gets immediately ignored, and letters pretty much get thrown in the trash (unless you have a particularly strong emotional story - but even then it's not worth the time it took you to craft that letter).
Calls are what all the congresspeople pay attention to. Every single day, the Senior Staff and the Senator get a report of the 3 most-called-about topics for that day at each of their offices (in DC and local offices), and exactly how many people said what about each of those topics. They're also sorted by zip code and area code. Republican callers generally outnumber Democrat callers 4-1, and when it's a particular issue that single-issue-voters pay attention to (like gun control, or planned parenthood funding, etc...), it's often closer to 11-1, and that's recently pushed Democratic congressmen on the fence to vote with the Republicans. In the last 8 years, Republicans have called, and Democrats haven't.
So, when you call:
A) When calling the DC office, ask for the Staff member in charge of whatever you're calling about ("Hi, I'd like to speak with the staffer in charge of Healthcare, please") - local offices won't always have specific ones, but they might. If you get transferred to that person, awesome. If you don't, that's ok - ask for their name, and then just keep talking to whoever answered the phone. Don't leave a message (unless the office doesn't pick up at all - then you can...but it's better to talk to the staffer who first answered than leave a message for the specific staffer in charge of your topic).
B) Give them your zip code. They won't always ask for it, but make sure you give it to them, so they can mark it down. Extra points if you live in a zip code that traditionally votes for them, since they'll want to make sure they get/keep your vote.
C) If you can make it personal, make it personal. "I voted for you in the last election and I'm worried/happy/whatever" or "I'm a teacher, and I am appalled by Betsy DeVos," or "as a single mother" or "as a white, middle class woman," or whatever.
D) Pick 1-2 specific things per day to focus on. Don't go down a whole list - they're figuring out what 1-2 topics to mark you down for on their lists. So, focus on 1-2 per day. Ideally something that will be voted on/taken up in the next few days, but it doesn't really matter - even if there's not a vote coming up in the next week, call anyway. It's important that they just keep getting calls.
E) Be clear on what you want - "I'm disappointed that the Senator..." or "I want to thank the Senator for their vote on..." or "I want the Senator to know that voting in _____ way is the wrong decision for our state because..." Don't leave any ambiguity.
F) They may get to know your voice/get sick of you - it doesn't matter. The people answering the phones generally turn over every 6 weeks anyway, so even if they're really sick of you, they'll be gone in 6 weeks.From experience since the election: If you hate being on the phone & feel awkward (which is a lot of people) don't worry about it - there are a bunch of scripts (Indivisible has some, there are lots of others floating around these day). After a few days of calling, it starts to feel a lot more natural. Put the 6 numbers in your phone (all under P Politician. An example is McCaskill MO, Politician McCaskill DC, Politician Blunt MO, etc...) which makes it really easy to click down the list each day.
I'm really speechless.
I'm not wild about the Trump immigration ban on these countries, but I really, really hope he ends these wars.
In his 2007 interview[2,3] general Wesley Clark spoke about the plan to take out 7 countries in 5 years (Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Iran). Bush went to war with Iraq. Obama ravaged Libya and Syria. Six of those seven countries are on the Trump's visa ban list. At least he has no plans for new wars, for now I guess.
 interview transcript: https://www.democracynow.org/2007/3/2/gen_wesley_clark_weigh...
The recent breakthrough in TSP approximation was due to an Iranian; the woman who won the Field's prize earlier was one too! They are a tiny nation but are very well represented.
They were already at the receiving end of the stick under Obama, having to deal with the sanction and single entry student visas.
These policies make no sense considering their distinctions as immigrants; it's an affront to one's humanity TBH.
Given all of that I don't understand why we can't sue? Take this to the Supreme Court? They didn't use any religion in the executive action but it is so clearly targeted at one individual religion that it could easily be struck down...
(g) Notwithstanding a suspension pursuant to subsection (c) of this section or pursuant toa Presidential proclamation described in subsection (e) ofthis section, the Secretaries ofState and Homeland Security may, on a case-by-case basis, and when in the nationalinterest, issue visas or other immigration benefits to nationals of countries for which visasand benefits are otherwise blocked.
One thing I like about this sort of controversy though is perhaps some day, some people might start wondering who these mullahs are and how they came to be. Now that type of conversation would be rather uncomfortable, and I suspect is somewhat of an underlying cause of a lot of the hand wringing we're seeing from various government agencies.
EDIT: Interesting I've got two downvotes already, do people think the interesting history of the leadership of Iran is some sort of a conspiracy theory?
No, first they came for the immigrants, muslims, women, and leftists with this guys good conscience. Then Trump was elected on those premises and came for the Iranians. But somehow he's surprised when it affects him personally?
(d) Immediately upon receipt of the report described in subsection (b) of this section regarding the information needed for adjudications, the Secretary of State shall request all foreign governments that do not supply such information to start providing such information regarding their nationals within 60 days of notication.
(e) After the 60-day period described in subsection (d) of this section expires, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of State, shall submit to the President a list of countries recommended for inclusion on a Presidential proclamation that would prohibit the entry of foreign nationals (excluding those foreign nationals traveling on diplomatic visas, North Atlantic Treaty Organization visas, and C- 2 visas for travel to the United Nations) from countries that do not provide the information requested pursuant to subsection (d) of this order until compliance occurs.
EDIT: In Section 3
Stopped reading there. I don't agree with his immigration policy at all, but we voted and Trump won fair and square.
Really? This is they way you see it?
Looks like it's not going to ever happen under Mr. Trump.
Oh well. I wouldn't say it's as urgent as having PhD-level brains here...but it's too bad. We're doing the process right. We're doing it legally. We're following all the proper procedure and making sure that nothing is overlooked or done to cheat the process.
My father (who voted for Trump) is in complete denial: he thinks "The people around Trump told him to do that."
[remember not to vote on Reddit if you land with an external HTTP Referer or you risk being banned for 3 days on the whole site for participating in a "voting brigade"]
I read it and it seems Author was OK with it if KSA was banned by Trump.
Author is biased or innocent as he has no idea of terrorism promoted by Iran in Syria and Iraq.
Firstly, many people involved in terrorist incidents are natural born citizens of allied countries. So are we going to ban all French or Belgium citizens given they have been shown to harbor terrorists ? It's clear that Trump/Bannon desperately want a Muslim ban as opposed to a Iran/Iraq/etc ban.
Secondly, this is going to alienate moderate Muslims who Western intelligence agencies have unanimously and categorically stated are the only people capable of solving this problem of radicalisation. It's often their children or friends or community members who are being radicalised. Why should they help the US government when they are encouraging the public to hate them purely based on their religion ?
This is very important people - calling everyone who voted for Trump a racist homophobe, a moron, and not deserving of the franchise is not going to help anything. I didn't vote for Trump, but I do identify with some of the beliefs of those who did, and I can tell you that the rhetoric I'm hearing from many of the most vocal left is pushing the middle away.
Second, it's not "Muslim". Muslims from all other countries (some of them pretty large, e.g. Indonesia and Pakistan), will experience no change in their ability to enter the US.
Other than Iran (which imo shouldn't be on the list) we're bombing and droning all of those countries at the moment. It's insane to accept military age males from there for entry into the country, particularly if information about them is very sparse (which in war torn countries it typically is).
But there's another aspect of this that baffles me. Somehow Sam has no issues with democrats totally destabilizing the Middle East, and funding/arming ISIS to depose Assad. Yet the moment Trump attempts to mitigate the negative side effects of that to this country, "it's time to take a stand". The time to take a stand was back when Obama and Clinton armed extremists in Iraq and Syria -- years before Trump.
This is the same kind of bullshit that's lost Hillary the election and got us here in the first place. It might have worked in the '90s to get a gold medal for Rosa Parks. It will not work in 2017 to make Trump back off his core message.
The problem here is not that your side isn't loud enough and can't get political attention for an issue. The problem is that the opposing side is too organized and too strong and already has a decided stance about your issue.
Being more strident won't help. Ostracizing people who have links to the opposing side will positively hurt.
Instead of doing all this "yell out louder" crap, any serious opposition should rather do some serious soul searching to figure out how to win back key constituencies. The only people who need to be ostracized are the idiots who got us here in the first place.
We need to find a way to rebuild bridges between different tribes in America, so that we can have a reasonable dialog. I don't pretend to know how to do this, but I'd love to have a discussion about how to get it done. I think that is the only way to keep Trump or someone else like him from capturing the voice of the people long term.
"How to Culture Jam a Populist in Four Easy Steps"https://www.caracaschronicles.com/2017/01/20/culturejam/
But the time for talk has passed. I don't think very much is going to happen because Trump is empowered by his election victory, and he won't listen to anyone. Has he ever listened to anyone, even during his celebrity-only days? To think that you can actively engage him in a conversation is not the way to do this.
What is needed is to prepare for the 2018 and 2020 elections RIGHT NOW. We need an organized social media structure where all of the positive, democracy-pro candidates in every electoral district gets publicized and supported. EDUCATE YOUNG PEOPLE WITH GREAT POLITICAL CANDIDATES AND MOTIVATE THEM TO VOTE. I'm not talking about just voting for the Democrats. Democrats are just as bad as the Republicans. We need a new voice that actually cares about progressive, democratic values, and actually believes in what they say. Not the same, tired politicians that play us for fools and leave us with the best of two evils.
Organize now, smash the two-party oligarchy and elect REAL POLITICIANS, hopefully young people that care about the US, not people who want to enrich themselves from the teat of government funding. You could argue that Trump was that candidate for half of Americans, as well as Sanders for the other (nearly) half. We need fresh blood, and we need to start now.
The only way to stop Trump is to silence him by breaking up the Republican Congress majority, and it's only in 2 years.
For example, the Keystone XL and Dakota access pipelines were heavily debated, protested, and ultimately rejected under Obama but Trump just signed orders to have them built and Sam's post doesn't even mention it. Seeing Sam write about the accusations of voter fraud instead brings this quote to mind:
> The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum....
- Noam Chomsky, The Common Good
- Demand to see the detailed plan for TrumpCare. What's it going to cost us? What will it do to our employees? Where are the details? That's what lobbyists are paid to find out. Employers have a big stake in this.
- Demand to see the tariff plan. So far, it's all talk, but soon it will be legislation. This has huge impacts for many businesses. Business planning and investment will stall until the details are settled. Already, you don't want to build a factory in China or Mexico. On the other side, will there be efforts to make it easier to sell into China?
- About that infrastructure thing. What kinds of projects will be supported? Roads? Internet access? Pothole repair?
- How serious is the administration about not employing illegal aliens? Will employer sanctions be increased or more stringently enforced? Will employers be going to jail? On the other side, will the enforcement be effective enough to force growers to use robotic picking? Is it time to get behind ag startups like Abundant Robotics? Get into robotic floor cleaning for commercial buildings?
- Will there be tax incentives for investing in communities in rural America? If so, how much, and when will they become available?
- Will Glass-Stegall come back? That was a Trump campaign promise, and it's in the Republican platform.
Every one of those is a real business issue, and business needs to know what's going to happen.
Honest question - What will statements by tech CEOs do? Trump has a mandate given to him by the people of your country against the very elites this post is appealing to. The politicians are with him because they want to keep their power.
And am I misremembering all these powerful tech CEOs went grovelling to meet Trump and hoping to have a foot in the door with the new administration with Thiel?
These are turbulent times.
I'd say Protecting the Nation From Foreign Terrorist Entry Into the United States is a fitting name given everything he has said up to this point.
Whether or not you agree, this looks like the democratic process to me. Taking action against his policies after election is obviously fine, but if you cared so deeply then why didn't you do this rallying call before he got elected? He is doing exactly what he said he would do and what the people voted him in for.
* PS: I'm not endorsing Donald Trump's decisions at all.
Refugees didn't come from a vacuum and it wasn't some natural disaster. They started streaming in because the West including US has been meddling and destabilizing that part of the world.
Unfortunately it seems profiling to prevent terrorism has worked ok for Israel recently. It is not something pleasant and nice, but so far it seems there have been deadlier and more frequent terror act committed by radical Muslims in Europe than in Israel. People see the news from Europe and they don't want that here. A closer vetting of refugees from that region seems reasonable and letting them in unchecked seem irresponsible.
How about Peter Thiel? What did he say when you spoke to him?
Green card holders (legal permanent residents of the United States) are being turned back from the US as soon as they get to the airport. They are being forced to file waivers which can be denied.
How can legal permanent residents be denied entry? I mean this has to be breaking So many laws, how can this be ok?
Islam by country https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_by_country
It's probably not a great tactic to perpetuate the American habit for making sweeping comments about the rest of the world which aren't really grounded in truth. Might be best to be scrupulously fact-based on these matters.
Everyone is entitled to their opinions. But when you openly support a candidate who likes to "grab [women] by the pussy", and now is making headway into some sort of Muslim ban which was a campaign headline, how will female and muslim applicants feel if they know part of their process might be controlled by someone who finds this acceptable? Might it discourage them?
Many products of Silicon Valley and Hollywood companies are simply blocked in China. Mainly to protect Chinese young companies. As far I known Google is completely blocked in China. Hollywood movies are also not freely distributed in China. And for some reason it is Trump accused of acting against free trade. What should be the right reaction for Chinese protectionism? More know-how transfer to the land of democracy?
And if you really care about Muslim countries then explain to me: why the PhD brain drain is so good for these countries?
Trump is hell bent on destroying America from within and his followers (who we are not supposed to criticize) are A-Ok with that.
Soon to be seen in a theater near you in Europe as well.
EDIT: If there's no answers from the current batch (either due to sample size or general shyness), I'll pose the same question regarding past YC alumni. I find it hard to believe out of a thousand people there isn't a single Trump supporter.
If 2/3 of the country can't agree that it needs to apply to the whole country then it's a state policy and not a federal one. Embrace the 10th amendment and make nullification a common act and not some rare that people scorn. It's the agree to disagree amendment. Push it's use and you can unite this country again because half the country won't be able to impose themselves on the other half every 4 years.
How is "we chose to discriminate against Muslim majority countries" any different from "we chose to discriminate against populous countries"? Both look arbitrary to me.
I cannot blame these people: that is how it is. But we need to accept that fact: we live in a very diverse country where there are people who do not share the same moral values as SV, NY, LA, etc.
But frankly I've lost hope in any political process. I know this is a grim message, but perhaps standing idle is exactly what needs to be done.
I fear people now vote out of frasutration, and leave it to someone else to make the right choice and cancel out their vote. Perhaps it's time for everyone to realise the full force of their voting power, and perhaps it's time to trust the powers to be. That breaking social contracts will be detrimental to The society in the long run and hope that voters will realise this.
My pessimistic two cents.
Donald Trump becomes our democratically elected President.
> Guys, _now_ is the time to take a stand against Donald Trump.
No, the time was 6 months ago. You failed.
It is astounding to me how little respect Silicon Valley elites have for the democratic process. This article is another instance of the continued marginalization of the massive voter base who voted for Trump, and, if it were read by them, would do nothing but convince them that Trump was the right choice.
How about, instead of saying "Trump is really bad", we encourage those in power to work with him and find solutions to the problems he has highlighted that work across the isle? Sam is just perpetrating class and party politics with this article, and its infuriating.
Donald Trump is a man extremely concerned with his popularity and public image. If the media were to present a balanced and fair portrayal of the positive (or non-negative) things he does, he would be able to gauge how unpopular actions like this ban are and would probably listen to the message. But the press simply cannot contain itself - CNN, for example, has turned into HuffPo with a cable channel.
In short, the universally negative coverage of every breath Trump takes has actually empowered him. Trump will do some good things, such as making it less punitive for large corporations like Apple to repatriate foreign cash and invest it here, and he will do some bad things, like this temporary travel ban. The media will treat it all negatively, which gives him carte blanche to ignore all forms of criticism and defeats the entire purpose of the free press.
This type of empty outrage and chatter serves little purpose.
Well articulated facts and solutions along with the leverage to put them in to practice or enforce them is productive. Tabeth's comments are appropriate and on point.
Sam has clearly proven he is a bright guy, but this is nothing more than a chant for a march, or a pointless drum circle. I know it feels good, and that's not a bad thing, but a call to action should have more direction.
Here's the lead story on Breitbart today, demonizing Mark Zuckerberg for his position on immigration. http://www.breitbart.com/video/2017/01/28/sheriff-clarke-im-... I'm sharing it, not because I agree with a single word of it, but because it's in the mix. To convince the current Congress (or the emerging Supreme Court) of the merits of the pro-immigration case, the argument needs to be made in a way that polarizes less and enlightens more.
This is in no way intended to denigrate the esteemed author or his thesis. I'm just disappointed that we're at this point.
1. This doesn't set a good precedent. 2. Donald Trump is aiming for a Muslim ban. He said so during the elections.
He said it during the elections: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trum...
At this point I'm surprised by how many people are bickering over this. Why don't you guys just say that you voted for Donald Trump? That would simplify the discussion.
A Muslim ban would mean any Muslim coming from any country is banned. Sad that this is the level of discourse and understanding these days.
I care more about correct terms than if you are for or against it. Stoking fears over something that does not exist is childish at best.
Protecting the Nation From Foreign Terrorist Entry Into the United States (January 27, 2017)
(...Well, one can hope, can't one?)
Never vote for a politician if you can't take him literally. He might mean it literally.
I think Trump is a show man to some degree. He has said in the past he wanted to be in Hollywood. This is important to understand what drives him.
I think what Trump is doing is a part of a show, to tell his voters he is credible. But I think his long term policies will not be this drastic even if they are. I think the tech community should work with him to do the right thing, dissenting with him is not the right way at this point in time. It is too early to decide that you are against Trump ( as a Tech community).
Instead of ads for products/services, they should allocate space for ethical and moral issues.
Staying 'politically' neutral is no longer an option when we're dealing with issues which affect a great part of Earth's population, like climate change, globalised economy, aggression and war and so on.
Tech companies must get political - in fact, they must reinvent politics like they reinvented so many other fields.
We have to do this now or these people will slowly shut everyone down, like they did in China, Russia, Turkey, etc..
NY Times says about Paul Ryan today : "House Speaker Paul D. Ryan said it was right on target."
Which one is it?
We already know of 800,000 (http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jan/26/hillary-clinto...). Detroit was apparent. The rest will come easily.
What else is Altman wrong about??
So kudos, Sam, and please America don't go the route of politics that mimic politics of Europe's 1930s (sadly there are also suboptimal developments in Europe).
You have more power than most of us here to stop this Muslim ban. Call your representatives in Congress before your party allows America to be destroyed by white nationalists.
i hope more US citizens "take a stand" like the OP and show how they want their part of the world to be like.
just my two cents - euro cents (a currency used in another union of only 28 states...)
Has anyone considered renunciating their US citizenship? Do you have practical advice on how to go about doing so and handle the ramifications?
Half my earnings going to government through taxes has been a hard to swallow fact, but funding an administration making decisions like this, just seems like something I want to be no part of.
It's so infuriating how quickly people forget their own past and become entitled oppressors themselves.
I see this mistake a lot. "Muslim" isn't intended to target a certain religion here; it refers to citizenship status with problematic countries that happen to be predominantly Muslim. I support the "Muslim ban", but would be surprised if Trump tried to target Muslim US citizens(especially 3rd-generation US citizens, to avoid all doubt).
You might oppose the immigration controls, but it's nothing more than a rhetorical trick to say they violate religious freedom, so that you can bring up the first amendment. I don't believe the first amendment offers any protection with regards to citizenship status.
Surely, we should stand against such a law, and I will. But let us not do so at the expense of more dangerous and less publicized attempts to curtail freedom. This will be fought on many fronts and is much bigger than immigration. We stand to have surveillance bolstered, restriction in our movements, loss of input in our governments behavior & worse. We are entering into a world war-- which is already being fought publicly; and we need to work as a country & the global community for diplomacy and freedom.
1) YC voted Thiel off the island2) YC establishes a policy of "take money from Thiel and you are toxic to us"
Anyone in a position of power who took a look at Trump and didn't recoil with disgust needs to be exiled from civil society.
There is nothing 'mindlessly nasty' here. The central theme of the Trump campaign, and now the Trump administration, is right-wing virtue signaling with no consideration for the effects those actions would have on real actual human beings. This shitty situation is exactly what everyone said would happen if he got elected, and you elected him anyway. There is no room for interpretation here. Hillary is a straw man. You elected a man who is causing American citizens active trauma and the best I can hope for you and those like you is that one day you at least realize what you have done, and take responsibility for it, instead of this weak-kneed "well I only support SOME of his policies" apologetics.
You won. The least you can do is develop a fucking spine.
It's now clear that Trump wasn't kidding and actually intends to follow through on his promises to ethnically cleanse America of Muslims, latinos and various other scapegoats.
Therefore, the solution is extremely simple. Trump cannot continue to be President and we need every institution of our society -- our courts, congress, businesses, media, schools, etc -- to put aside petty partisan differences and unite on this point.
Now that we have full knowledge that Trump is every bit the white-supremacist fascist he campaigned as, it cannot remain socially acceptable to continue to support him.
The people who have supported him are complicit in ethnic cleansing and their beliefs are absolutely incompatible with the our core American ideals of multiculturalism, freedom-of-religion, equality and diversity.
Trump needs to be removed from power and in our personal, familial and professional lives we need to make it our mission to stamp out the hatred and intolerance which fuelled the rise of this white-supremascist cancer which we if turns out we never fully excised.
You're never going to get anywhere without recognizing the source of the problem.
But it's more than that -- it's illegal. Apart from known criminals, the government can't arbitrarily choose which groups to deny entry:
NYT Op-Ed: Trumps Immigration Ban Is Illegal: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/27/opinion/trumps-immigratio...
Idk if this could take off but i feel like it could become a tool for voicing discontent and seeing some of these numbers of how many other people are voting could lead to something more.
One of the fundamental instruments of dictatorships is deceiving the public about how many other people are dissatisfied with the regime. If you know for a fact that 9/10 of the population is extremely dissatisfied with the regime, you can topple these regimes.
AV products like Bitdefender will MITM your HTTPS connections by installing their own root certificates, by default and without warnings
And consider that I, a highly technical and security conscious software developer, only noticed it because I saw green icons appearing in my search results and then noticed that Google's SSL certificate is now a fake. And I only noticed it because I know how this shit works and those green icons seemed suspicious.
And yes, I'm using the word "fake", because I doubt that companies like Bitdefender have to pass the same certifications as a certificate authority or that they have any deals whatsoever with Google. And it's a serious vulnerability, because their certificate can get stolen and used by malicious software, not to mention you now have to trust a third-party with all of your secure connections, which includes your Google searches exposing your most secret desires, your Facebook and Slack chats, your bank account, everything. A third-party that does not have the scrutiny of your open-source web browser.
That's just preposterous and these products only survive because users are gullible and technically illiterate.
Far worse are the lengths that a company like AVG will go to to get and keep their software installed on your computer. Their browser toolbars essentially take all the dirty tricks they've apparently learned dealing with malware to.. build a piece of malware. Honestly whether it's active malice, incompetence, or lack of motivation I don't know, but I do know I've spent hours trying to extract their stuff from people's browsers. (I should say here that I fully expect someone reading this has managed to uninstall an AVG toolbar with no issues. They have multiple different auxiliary tools to their antivirus, and I'm not sure specifically which one(s) caused me trouble personally. It's also likely that they're only a _real_ pain in certain circumstances. But regardless, if you google something like 'how uninstall avg' or 'avg malware' I'm sure you'll find many more examples.)
BTW, there are also region-specific malware - so for example I would rely more on Kaspersky for detection of malware targeted at Russian businesses, than Symantec or Microsoft AVs.
> see bugs in AV products listed in Google's Project Zero
All software has vulnerabilities, including Defender. Searching for [product] in Project Zero shows that only 3 vulnerabilities have been discovered (which is arguably a bad thing, but not according to this author) and it took, at most, 4 days for them to be resolved.
> if they make your product incredibly slow and bloated
This is precisely the reason that I have returned to [product]: performance. I'm running off an HDD and Defender saturates my HDD for a good 2 minutes after boot. I don't experience this with [product]. In addition, it has a "gaming mode" which allows you to further cut back on its activity (I have never needed it). Looking at objective tests, Defender fares quite poorly in both performance and protection.
Additionally, a homogeneous market is an easy market to exploit. Let's assume that everyone took this advice and installed Defender. It is guaranteed that Defender has vulnerabilities. If you wanted to pwn as many machines as possible, you would only have to worry about exploiting a single AV.
This is just bad advice, I'm sticking with the competition (which may not always be [product]). There are bad players (McAfee, Norton) but that does not mean everyone sans Microsoft is utterly incompetent.
: http://www.av-comparatives.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/av...: https://www.av-test.org/en/antivirus/home-windows/windows-10...
I apologize for present anecdote when data is needed but I manage a Windows network with 100+ users and on a daily basis, Kaspersky catches 5-10 emails from Outlook that have nasty attachments. It prevents my users from opening these innocuous looking but nasty Invoice-Jan-2017.docx files. Without a good AV there is no way to know which Invoice-Jan-2017 has a virus/worm vs. which doesn't. Relying on the Office security feature is not sufficient because actual vendor/customers send macro-enabled files to us regularly.
I'm not going to advocate for any particular vendor as I used to work for an AV company (and currently use a product from a competitor). But I can attest that I've used products that have caught threats that Windows Defender didn't, and many products also include a much more robust and configurable firewall.
It's annoying when someone else's lousy code breaks your own code. This happens to the sites I administer frequently, where we will randomly get blacklisted by some no-name AV product's web security feature. I understand the frustration when you have no control over this. But to conclude that all AV software is bad does not follow from the evidence given.
Isn't it funny how at the same time someone is recommending to not trust other anti-viruses because they MITM you with their own certificates, Microsoft is doing the same god damn thing, or worse (allowing a whole country to spy on you through it, and not just itself).
> This program is an extensive review process that includes regular audits from a third-party web trust auditor.
Is that the same auditor that audited WoSign as well?
Why hasn't Microsoft started requiring Certificate Transparency yet for all certificates? Maybe then I'll believe them when they say they're sure nothing wrong is going on here.
Another example of how obnoxious it is becoming to merely _get_ to someone's computer to infect it now that users rely less on executables, is that the Fake Indian Microsoft Support Technician has become a thing. Actual humans calling other humans and hoping for the best by social engineering. This is so far fetched and works so rarely that the desperation is real.
E-mail has been another traditional way of getting to someone but that's nowadays mostly Outlook.com or Gmail.com, which have their own very efficient AV systems in place.
I guess my point with this is that even Microsoft's so-so antivirus tool (given that it's less intrusive) should indeed be enough. Hell I think a user with common sense will be fine with no AV whatsoever for longer than one may think.
I also don't think we should trust Microsoft to not use similar exploits as other AV products in the future and I think the biggest problem here is primarily an issue for proprietary software.
One example is "Furthermore, as Justin Schuh pointed out in that Twitter thread, AV products poison the software ecosystem because their invasive and poorly-implemented code makes it difficult for browser vendors and other developers to improve their own security"
I have a hard time beliving that a libre-AV would have this problem. I've never seen bad architecture prevent security fixes and I've never seen bad architecture stay for long when it's only one rewrite away from being fixed. (I'm making no comments about compatability because no doubt even the command arguments will be renamed and their order will be changed)
But users insist. I have probably never convinced anyone to go without the AV, at least not on a permanent basis.
The best I can do is usually to set up som ClamWin and a daily or weekly scan for everybody's peace of mind.
I mean, I've experimented with assembler when I was a teenager and I may have developed some kind of program which could replicate itself.. but I highly doubt today's viruses are written by teenagers...
Who and why do people write viruses ? Is this a thing at all or are all the viruses written by the Antivirus makers themselves ?
More 'threats' is good news for the A/V makers so why not have a separate department which develops them ?
I wouldn't be surprised at all, given that much crazier things are happening in this world..
Can anyone confirm or disprove this ?
First: free AV, generally marketed to the individual or small business. If it's free, they are making money somehow; you are almost never getting it for free out of the goodness of the vendor's heart. Most of this stuff is crap, introduces ridiculous vulnerabilities in lots of instances, and can wreak havoc on totally clean machines. For this class of AV, I 100% agree with OP; kill it with fire (aside from maybe malwarebytes).
Second: paid AV products targeted towards large businesses and the enterprise. Some of them still suck, but a lot of them are pretty good, and responsible + low impact in general. We have ESET deployed to ~700 machines and have yet to have a SINGLE problem caused by the AV while I've been here. Some of those are workstations, but a huge number are servers (granted, they get a special kind of av, not the full suite of web protection and everything).
That said, traditional AV is becoming more and more useless every month and is starting to do very little aside from catch browser toolbars, random adware, and if you don't have a firewall it can sometimes help block known bad websites (at a cost). We have also had a fair number of instances where malicious crap made it past MULTIPLE layers of email security and was caught by AV on a workstation. Malware is not distributed such that every payload has consistent content/file-hash anymore, the alternative products out there that have a chance at pseudo-reliably catching real malicious stuff are neither free, cheap, or realistically going to be deployed outside of medium to large companies.
- While it's downloading it seems to scan each chunk. I have a gigabit connection, with defender off I can download at nearly full speed. With it on I can download at about 1MB/s.
- While the game loads a level. For example, the intro level to the new Deus Ex took over 10 minutes to load the first time. At that point I disabled defender entirely and just promised myself I would be careful. Naive, I know, but at least I can play my video games.
Personally I don't use an AV, I am a bit paranoid and technical competent so my case and my relatives is totally different.
I'm still unsure what to tell them about our Macs and Linux Notebooks that we've acquired since the last audit.
Does anyone have a solution for this?
Mikko Hyppnen, famous for his TED talk, is from F-Secure https://www.ted.com/talks/mikko_hypponen_fighting_viruses_de...
Perhaps it should go without saying --- but you also need to your OS to be up-to-date. If you're on Windows 7 or, God forbid, Windows XP, third party AV software might make you slightly less doomed.
After multiple episodes of this, it dawned on me that I shouldn't be able to reinstall the software if Norton truly was removing it. The issue was that Norton's products did indeed remove it as part of an antivirus "update", but they quickly released another "update" that got rid of the problem. I turned off something labeled "pulse" updates and set it to daily instead. Not only did I never see this problem again, the PC's generally had better performance.
I've also read various reports of security problems with AV software, so I'm not comfortable recommending anything third-party.
Defender + uBlock is a pretty simple and effective combo.
I personaly have avast installed and i don't like it very much, i find it too invasive (it keep prompting to delete an firefox addons from test pilot, for example) and i always disable https scanning, but from comparison that i found online, seem that microsoft AV do much worse in respect to others.
what HN crow suggest to protect a Windows machine (win10), is microsoft AV really better or just like the others?
Microsoft AV is fast and non-disruptive, but is a laggard in terms of effectiveness, even by the standard of AV.
It's best used when you need to check the AV box, and it is less disruptive than other solutions.
The situation is generally bad, AV vendors are often shady. However I think "vet your AV vendor" is much better advice.
I contacted Symantec and had to uninstall Norton Security and install Norton Antivirus for the windows firewall to be activated.
I kinda have my doubts.
Personally, on Win7 I use a combination of 3 things:
- MSSE- TinyWall as a lightweight firewall- heavily modified HOSTS file
Never had malware/virus problems and sometimes I do visit shady webistes or download quirky software.
There is a lot to be said for the skepticism around "free" products.
I've turned off the MITM on https though.
I know that many Mac users don't use anti-virus. Are they right not to?
In short: It sucks so bad it's virtually unusable.
MS AV still too slow at the moment. In Windows 10, you could turn on Defender to run both AV at the same time.
Many of you are probably watching the horror show unfold and wondering what tangible thing you can do. Joining or contributing to the ACLU is one small but important, specific way to help: https://action.aclu.org/secure/become-freedom-fighter-join-a....
> Stay covers the airport detainees and those currently in transit. Doesn't change ban going forward. Prev unclear tweet deleted
> Important clarification. This does not prevent Trump admin from blocking new travelers.
And the list of countries is from Homeland Security's list of "countries of concern" compiled during the Obama administration. And signed into law by Obama himself.
Of course some will blast me as supporting Trump or supporting this ban. Not true.
>Friday night, DHS arrived at the legal interpretation that the executive order restrictions applying to seven countries -- Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Syria, Sudan and Yemen -- did not apply to people who with lawful permanent residence, generally referred to as green card holders.The White House overruled that guidance overnight, according to officials familiar with the rollout. That order came from the President's inner circle, led by Stephen Miller and Steve Bannon. Their decision held that, on a case by case basis, DHS could allow green card holders to enter the US.
Conspicuously absent are Egypt, Saudi Arabia, UAE and Lebanon, which is where the people who hijacked the 9/11 planes, the worst, and most logistically complex, terrorist act against the US ever, were from. Where's the logic? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11_attacks#FBI
I don't at all think that this order should be in effect, but I don't see the logic in its implementation.
Even if you completely agree with what the order does, it's impossible to claim that the implementation of this was anything other than a complete and utter disaster. No warning, no clear way to enforce the order, widespread protest, and getting the courts involved within 24 hours.
This is going to have ramifications for years to come. We want to encourage the world's best and brightest to come here, and a precedent of unannounced, widespread, severe changes to enforcement of the laws will cause people to reconsider.
This is utter negligence and I'm ashamed of my country.
Radicalization of US-born or US-admitted Muslims by clerics, relatives, social media -- is real, eg  (Fort-hood terrorist), San-Bernardino terrorists .
Therefore, the argument could not just be about questioning if any visa/green card holder for the initial list of 7 'banned-county -->to--> Muslim terrorist perpetrating killing on US soil'.
It is a preventive measure, with a time limit .Very appropriate for this period of time, given the war with ISIS.
I am not, however, impressed with the execution or the preparation that went into this particular order.I would like to see a different level of scrutiny and reduced personal inconvenience afforded to US green card holders.
Appreciate that majority on this forum, including highly respected scientists, will disagree with me.But please allow the expression of, at-least partially informed dissent.
"Judge Ann Donnelly of the US District Court in Brooklyn granted a request from the ACLU to stay deportations of those detained on entry to the United States following President Trump's executive order."
Is the U.S. Marshals Service part of the judicial or executive branch?
Here's one woman who was flying from Costa Rica to Scotland. Her initial flight transited through the US, where she was told her transit visa was no longer valid.
No foreign national in a foreign land, without ties to the United States, has any unfettered right to demand entry into the United States or to demand immigration benefits in the United States.
This is one of those important stories. Americans can not stick their heads in the sand about these anti-muslim actions.
Please do not delete this story. The American and global tech community needs to discuss this. Trump and his advisors win when HN deletes stories like this.
Order PDF: https://www.plainsite.org/dockets/download.html?id=242131326...
Related Cases: https://www.plainsite.org/tags/trump-muslim-immigration-ban-...
The ban is absolutely necessary. You Americans have a great country but you're going to ruin it if you don't take your time to listen to Trump.
There is no way that unchecked immigration is a good thing for any country in the world let alone America.
I've heard what has been said about how immigration made America what it is today - great. However, immigration should be based on whether the immigrant will add value to your country. If an immigrant is coming to set up a business, do further studies and other positive things like that, then by all means provide them with a way to come in.
However, if there's a threat of terrorism from the immigrant or if they aren't adding value but will instead be recipients of welfare all I can ask is, WHAT THE HELL IS GOING ON?
How can you sustain this? You cannot save everyone in the world. You just can't. The best you can do is help them from a camp in their own country and even then, it's your choice as a country that has fair elections.
Why did you even have these elections if you're going to disallow the president that you yourselves chose in FAIR elections to do his jobs. Is there anything new that Trump is doing that he did not promise his voters he would do? If not, then you're saying that the majority of the people that chose Trump don't deserve to be heard and that only your views matter.
And don't even get me started on that business of, 'we didn't vote for him...he didn't get the popular vote'.
Why is it okay for previous presidents who won in the electoral college to be legitimized but not Trump? This is absolutely UNFAIR and selfish of anti-Trumpians. Remember, you take away California and Trump actually wins the popular vote anyway. To me, this is a clear indication that one state wants to bully the rest of the country into doing things their way and their way only. So UNFAIR.
Without getting into my country of origin, I will tell you this; we too are building a wall to stop illegal aliens from a neighboring Muslim country from getting in. These fundamentalists are really terrible human beings. We have lost so many lives to their suicide attacks. Friends and families losing their loved ones to these actions. I remember a time we were so scared of the attacks that we had to close offices in the daytime when working and verify you knew who was knocking on the door before letting them in. It was a terrible time and with a recent attack, last week to more precise, the fear is coming back. I just wish we had finished putting up our wall by now and that it was as strong as the proposed American one.
People have to be responsible for their own country. They have to build their own countries and stop the fundamentalism.
Regardless, we'll see what his next move is.
Phone calls are better than files, generally speaking, and you should be calling from a burner; i.e. a pre-paid phone that is not in your name. You shouldn't even give your real name to the reporter on first contact. Reporters take notes and some of them have to share their sourcing with editors. So be really clear with them how they will treat your real identity, if you choose to share it.
Face to face meetings are sometimes better than phone calls. You should assume, when you're handling highly sensitive information, that the reporter's devices may eventually be hacked, bugged or subpoena'd, so make sure that an electronic trail does not lead back to you.
You should carefully choose the journalists you leak to. The best choice will have to be well sourced. That's because the information you leak to them, in most cases, will have to be confirmed. That is, they will have to call other insiders they know and ask "Is X true?" If they don't have other sources, the information you provide will probably not make it to the public.
Reporters also get contacted by a lot of nut jobs, so early on, do what you must to establish credibility. Trust has to be established both ways.
Anyone from governmental agencies who read this article at home or work can now fairly easily be targeted by the relevant surveillance agencies.
> Ive lived through many transitions, and I dont think this is a story, said a senior E.P.A. career official who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak to the news media on the matter. I dont think its fair to call it a gag order. This is standard practice. And the move with regard to the grants, when a new administration comes in, you run things by them before you update the website.
Try to save some of your outrage for actual outrageous events.
Vice and Intercept made a better choice using a path on a their regular domain:
They can't block it, but good luck finding real signal in millions of requests.
Or, more subtly, deliberately leaking easily discredited stuff. Once it gets published, it becomes a propaganda target. As a great example, consider how Dan Rather was taken down by https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killian_documents_controversy. Planting a perfect smoking gun was enough to bring down Dan Rather and make the story of how Bush got his draft deferment toxic in the media.
The ultimate irony there is that the story that Dan Rather reported was actually true. It had all been reported in The Guardian by Greg Palast, and Dan Rather had started with access to his research. It didn't matter, planting perfect fraudulent documents managed to discredit it.
I guess the guy was the only one on the network using tor, making him easy to identify.
So unless tor gets a huge userbase in DC, it seems like an encrypted url would be safer. (I don't know much about tor; am I wrong?) Everyone reads WaPo; no suspicion getting on that site.
But I think the main difficulty in becoming a leaker is that you have to hide your mental evolution as you decide to become a leaker. By expressing your dissatisfaction to your colleagues before you decide to leak, you make yourself a suspect post-leak. Leakers should be aware that traditional investigative mechanisms are very powerful, and even if the crypto is rock solid, it is still very likely they'll be caught. It's then a question of whether they are willing to 'take one for the team'.
The hard part when you leak is that you are now in a set of people that knew the information. That usually boils things down to a handful or even one suspect. With US federal agents where in fact it is illegal to lie to them, they will have you in their office by lunch.
Lately there seem to be very few completely open wifi points. Most of them at least require some click through for agreeing to terms. Is there any risk involved here?
Hotels can normally link a computer on their network to a room number... Suggesting they use a hotel wifi isn't a good idea IMO (unless you are not actually a guest, and its just an open public wifi network).
I stick up for Google a lot --- nobody has done more to improve the security of the web than they have --- but they deserve credit for this kind of thing too.
>They formally applied for their exit visa in September 1978, and as a result his father was "promptly fired". For related reasons, his mother also had to leave her job. For the next eight months, without any steady income, they were forced to take on temporary jobs as they waited, afraid their request would be denied as it was for many refuseniks. During this time his parents shared responsibility for looking after him and his father taught himself computer programming. In May 1979, they were granted their official exit visas and were allowed to leave the country. At an interview in October 2000, Brin said, "I know the hard times that my parents went through there and am very thankful that I was brought to the States."
>In the summer of 1990, a few weeks before his 17th birthday, his father led a group of high school math students, including Sergey, on a two-week exchange program to the Soviet Union. His roommate on the trip was future Carnegie Mellon University computer science professor John Stamper. As Brin recalls, the trip awakened his childhood fear of authority and he remembered that "his first impulse on confronting Soviet oppression had been to throw pebbles at a police car." Malseed adds, "On the second day of the trip, while the group toured a sanatorium in the countryside near Moscow, Brin took his father aside, looked him in the eye and said, 'Thank you for taking us all out of Russia.'"
What was starting to worry me is that many of the top CEOs were all kissing Trumps ass as to who can bring back more jobs. They were stumbling over themselves, "we are bringing 10000 jobs in the next 2 years".
There needs to be a lot of vocal people against this, immigrants are one the weakest groups in society. Trump just deomstrated and confirmed this.
What I don't get, and maybe someone can explain it, why isn't this un-constitutional? It feels like banning people, people who are perfectly legal not citizens but still legal, based on their religion is against the constitution. Am I missing something? Wasn't this country started by people looking to escape religious persecution?
AMZN and Jeff Bezos have strangely been absent even though he was the most critical pre-election.
Why is restricting our borders considered so inhumane as to cause an Internet-wide outcry, while killing people for years hadn't?
That's from someone who finds plenty of opportunity to criticise Google. Including presently for the company's support of the GOP, now a de-facto fascist party. Yes, I'm aware the situation's a complex one, and Google isn't a garage operation any more.
Regardless: thank you, Sergey.
Obama last did it in 2011.
The hypocrisy here is that because Trump did it, it is wrong.
We are a nation of laws and in order to maintain law and order, we must follow those laws. The minute tech companies (let's not be obtuse here, corporations are in the business of making money and appeasing shareholders) decides they are either for or against certain laws, well...you have anarchy.
This has nothing to do with denying rights to immigrants and everything to do with the far lefts disproval of the elected president of the United States.
Edit: apparently I was mistaken. It applies to 'the people' of the US, which is anyone with 'substantial connection' to the US and under US jurisdiction. Green card holders would seem to be pretty clearly of 'the people' then.
Of course, it's a damn shame to treat any legal immigrant or legitimate asylum seeker this way. Seems to be absolutely against the long standing traditions of the country.
I was denied a entry visa into Paraguay left to be stranded in Brazil. I barely made it to my grandmothers funeral. I had to call the embassy and spend several days in limbo. I understood that I was powerless because I was not a citizen of Brazil nor Paraguay. I wasn't entitled to representation by either country nor would they provide it.
I was jailed in Mozambique for refusing to pay a bribe at the border. I did not expect nor receive any special treatment. This is the way things are.
I overstayed my visa in Chile by less than 24 hours, was forced to remain at the border between Argentina and Chile for the day and threatened with jail. I did not fight and riot nor protest. Why would I? I need to follow the laws of the country I am in.
What we have here is a nation so divided that you have people on the right who are for less government and rule, but respect the rule of law and people on the left who have no regard for the law and demand more regulations and laws.
OK, this doesn't have much to do with Brin.
Will that have a material impact on anyone's bottom line? Who knows, but I'd love to see the graphs for new account signups/account deletions.
 Taxis were not servicing JFK in support of those who were being detained there.
I think it'd make most sense to avoid both services if you are concerned about the recent immigration ban.
Listen to what these muslims say themselves:
13% percent of Syrian refugees support ISIS, another 10% have mixed feelings about it. Source: Arab Center for Research and Policy Studies
And if you think they change their beliefs upon immigration, think again:
52% of British muslims think homosexuality should be illegal
40% of UK muslims want Sharia Law in predominantly muslim areas:
27% of British muslims sympathize with the Charlie Hedbo terrorist act:
If you are a student, consider running for student office. It's likely (in fact almost certain) that your student government makes more decisions that impact your life and spends more of your money than the national government does.
They typically have multi-million dollar budgets, seats on powerful state-wide committees where tens or hundreds of millions are spent, and the ability to impact academic policy for students of the next generation.
Some also run sprawling field campuses, nature preserves or camps. I'm particularly fond of one that is run by the Albany Student Gov: Dippikill. Very special place.
Students in decades past fought very hard for the power and placement that today's student governments enjoy, and education "administrators" are always looking to carve them out and take them away. They need to be continually defended and used.
> This year I ran for Florida House of Representatives District 49 (Orlando). I lost, but I got 31% of the vote and I only spent $3000. My opponent got 69% of the vote and spent $100,000
He open sourced  several tools that he used to do this.
He advises participation in local hob-nobbing events (I presume this was a local Florida thing, but your local community may have similar), and More Facebook Advertising. He reminds us that signs should be big, and WILL be stolen. He also advised cultivating good relations with local media by doing press releases.
While he was running for a state office, you could probably use similar tactics for more local things.
0: http://blog.sheasilverman.com/2016/11/how-to-run-for-florida...1: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=130080712: https://github.com/SheaSilverman
I'm a politics nerd that likes local government, and believe it has dormant power for movements. I wrote a piece called The Bottom Carries the Top that explains my thoughts on that stuff.
Anyway, I agree with many of the comments and we think the university positions is a great idea.
If you like, feel free to email me at email@example.com or firstname.lastname@example.org
Hope to hear from you
> Today, 40% of state legislature races go uncontested and the problem is worse at the local level. There is a crisis of leadership occurring in our democracy. We need more people to lead. We need more people to run for office.
> Run for Office is a free service that provides all the tools you need to launch a successful campaign whether you are a seasoned veteran or firsttime campaigner.
You won't "launch a successful campaign" if you are a nobody running against an incumbent who is supported by the dominant political party in a bright red or deep blue state. You'd need to be a seasoned veteran with wide name recognition who is very well connected, well liked, and also wealthy, but then you're not likely to be using this tool.
It's in the races where the incumbent is not running for reelection, the position is nonpartisan, or there's a lot of turnover that someone could say "Hey, I have a chance at that spot."
I've found it's remarkably easy to have that conversation with people. Ultimately, telling someone you'd support them if they ran for elected office is a pretty major compliment. And you don't really need any context or permission to bring it up; like saying "that's a nice jacket", you can say it any time. More importantly: when someone they know gives them permission, people actually will consider running.
I would much rather get 10 of my friends into local office around the country than run myself, so that's the goal I've set for myself. I'm making decent progress!
You or your friends should consider (and probably prefer) local administrative offices, like park districts or water reclamation. You don't need to be a subject matter expert to run for these --- that's not expected of you (source: friends who have these jobs). If you're wondering "why bother?", the answer is that having any kind of elected office magnifies your influence with other representatives and stakeholders. It's also great practice.
Running for the kinds of offices everyone has heard of --- Congress and Senate --- is extremely expensive (in the multiple hundreds of thousands of dollars) and, depending on the state you're in, might have a large component of building relationships with your state party. I say this not to discourage people from trying --- especially if you're thinking of running D in an unopposed R district or vice versa --- but to set expectations. Running your first time is easier than you probably think it is, as long as you pick the right office to run for.
If you're on a (recreational) Slack right now, consider opening up a channel and inviting people into it and spontaneously getting a couple people interested in running. I was on IRC channels in the 1990s that started companies that later sold for 9 figures (and the #!w00w00 people can tell you better stories). Getting a couple friends elected to their local library board seems like an extremely reasonable expectation to set for yourself.
If you're organizing something to get people to run for local office, I'm interested in talking/helping. I think there are a bunch of useful applications to be built here, and also a lot of opportunities for people to get together to share encouragement and notes.
Also, no local elective offices in my jurisdiction.
What people usually don't know about is all of the local government positions that affect their daily lives: many of the things you care most about exist below the level of a city, and yet websites like this throw aside all of the water districts and park districts and commumity service districts as if they don't matter :/.
Honestly, as someone deeply involved in politics at this point, who burns a lot of time into trying to educate people as to how government works and how to get involved, I believe this website--which is so bad it didn't even include city council of a smaller city as a local result, returning only internal democratic party positions--can only do more harm than good.
Thank you for the comments and suggestions. We agree with the comment on student governments, by the way, and would be happy to include them.
Anyone can email me at email@example.com if they like
It cost me about $200 for my campaign, most of which went to GoDaddy for hosting. So don't think that you need a billion dollars to run for office (except if you want to run for US President).
I wonder if there's a way to algorithmically determine how a candidate with subpar funding could beat somebody established with many more (a playbook of kinds). That would be the next step forward -- sure, you can run, but it flips the dynamic when you're smart about running to win.
And I'm sure people in places like Canada, Australia, France, etc would be interested in a similar site for their country as well.
Still, seems pretty neat so far.
For example, for women, there's this course:
Mostly, we want people to simply know what they can run for and how to get on the ballot.
Inaccuracies on the site are my fault. I work with amazing students, mostly from USC, and we put it together as best we can. The shapefile stuff is also sometimes wonky. A GIS student from UCLA is the awesome person behind that.
However, it is showing me a lot of "Next Election" times that were last year. I guess the data needs some cleanup.
Also, President seems to be missing. :)
For example, to run for California Attorney General, one "Must be admitted to practice before the state Supreme Court for at least five years immediately preceding election or appointment to the office".
And the answer to that is to run for your state legislature. It's there that voting rules, and support for incumbent national members of Congress, are set and enforced.
Join the smoke filled room that's close to home.
Many people run for office thinking they can change the fundamental culture entrenched around them. But then they realize that there are so many existing systems safeguarding the status quo, that one person can't do it. You'd need to hire a whole new administration.
Instead, what if organizations would contract with one another for services and respect each other's cultures as a take-it-or-leave-it kind of thing? Then market discipline would apply.
While I understand government agencies' desires to investigate persons of interest, the checks and balances of the system were put in place to do just that check and balance the power of the system. It's outrageous that agencies feel they can side-step these checks and leave out the need to get a judge's approval for these kinds of things.
A response from the Internet Archive (2016) also stated:
> The NSL we received includes incorrect and outdated information regarding the options available to a recipient of an NSL to challenge its gag. Specifically, the NSL states that such a challenge can only be issued once a year. But in 2015, Congress did away with that annual limitation and made it easier to challenge gag orders. The FBI has confirmed that the error was part of a standard NSL template and other providers received NSLs with the same significant error. We dont know how many, but it is possibly in the thousands (according to the FBI, they sent out around 13,000 NSLs last year).
I wonder what kind of legal action could even be taken against this kind of treatment (being given wrong / outdated information on legal options)?
Do these releases get media coverage? Is anyone talking about the various lawsuits and blog posts about public releases of NSLs by tech companies?
I wish the NYTimes and WaPo spent as much time caring about this stuff as they did about being the non-critical mouthpiece for various "anonymous intelligence officials". There is definitely a story that could be made out of this plus the Cloudflare, Google, etc posts... so hopefully I'm proved wrong in this assessment.
> While the actual NSLs request a large amount of data, Twitter provides a very limited set of data in response to NSL
I'm curious just how much they asked for here. I'm guessing it's the user plus 2 hops of anyone they talked to? Including:
- t.co links clicked on
- IP addresses when accessing twitter
- device IDs, browser, OS, etc
- phone numbers
- visits to URLs of 3rd party web pages containing embedded tweets? (not sure if this is tracked via cookie)
That could turn out to be plenty of data but I don't believe a single users data would be referenced by Twitter as "a large amount of data", it's very likely at least one hop or more, but who knows.
Is there some kind of database anyone is keeping that helps the public figure out what information companies have been ordered to produce in the past, and what they have actually produced? (I don't specifically mean NSLs here -- subpoenas and any other things would all be included in my question.)
This would be useful in several respects, because it would not only provide a check on the government, but it would also provide a check on the companies. For example, can I be sure that if I delete something, and a company with my data claims it is deleted in 60 days, can I rely on it to be true? If the company has been ordered to produce such information in the past, knowing whether or not it has done so would seem to be the most foolproof way to figure out how much data the company retains or discards. Is anyone keeping such records publicly (insofar as the information is available)?
How recently? Why?
In general for anyone conscious about freedom of speech and press it should alarming how certain agencies breach people's data and then put gag orders in place. This isn't freedom, this is tyranny.
The citizens of North-Korea probably have more freedom that then the citizens of USA.
While it's been easy to think about many possible negative outcomes in the proceeding days, weeks, months, another subtle aspect of this policy's ramifications is how it weakens trust and faith in the concept of stability for future American policy the likelihood of future government actions, executed with little to no foresight, warning, or serious consideration, with serious consequences. How this effects this country's current reputation as a place to study, travel, find work, and start families + settle down can't be understated.
You need to speak up now, or one does not know where this will end.
Who matters? Not the US public: von Clownstick & co know it will be forgetten in a month or three, and by the next election (if there is another election) enough red meat can be thrown to the know-nothing base to "win" again.
Who matters: other wealthy nation governments. That's it. And none of them, however loudly they profess civilised values, will risk a hair on their precious bankers' heads to protect distant low-status nonwhite humans. That's a plain fact.
We all know what ought to happen: civilised nations should band together and just say no to America. An escalating series of sanctions, starting with trade, going via targeted military cooperation downgrades, and ending with cancelling all visas to US citizens. Some nations have strong leverage over America, eg. Australia threatening access to Pine Gap would make the US tremble.
None of this can or will happen, and we will plunge into the abyss. WWI and II were prequels. RIP homo sapiens. You will be little missed by our once-glorious planet's other sentient beings.
And what most people don't realize is that without grad students, most research will be severely impacted. So if this continues at the rate it's going, we begin to lose foreign grad students to other countries.
I hope this ends well, but I have my doubts.
As far as I understand, there is no legal requirement for the White House to even entertain the petitions.
I work at a company where we have several Iranian researchers working as interns, and they are doing excellent work.
If the US doesn't want Iranian engineers and scientists, then I'm sure Canada will be glad to have them.
 When I was in high school Iranian students of 9th grade age who immigrated to Canada would immediately be placed in our 12th grade math classes-and they would still get top marks.
This is the time to follow the "no quarter given" tactics of the NRA - they get their members to show up at any legislation anywhere that even smells of Gun control and raise a massive ruckus - similarly the time to protest is NOW before Trump rolls out the really evil stuff.
EDIT: I just signed the petition, and with email verification, and it's not showing up. Anyone else having that problem?
Good luck with this petition! Let's fight for an open world.
We cant give up on those who love to learn and want better lives for themselves and their families.
This is just such depressing madness.
Does anybody know how they figure this out? Do a bunch of signatures from people who have no rights in the US invalidate the petition?
@daxorid shared his view - which wasn't inflammatory. The comment was downvoted, then flagged before I could reply.
Terrifying, how? This is what Trump promised, and the reason we voted for him. Half of us are quite happy to see campaign promises actually implemented.
HN is acting as if this was capricious and unplanned. In fact, it's what half of us wanted.
@daxorid voted for a political party that you disagree with. If they can't share their views openly and honestly we won't learn from their perspective.
Based on a tiny sample of GOP friends, they agree with @daxorid. Those friends voted for Trump based on campaign promises and they're happy that he's following-through those promises. For me this was a sort of "oh shit" moment. What else did he promise?? WP has a list:https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/trump-promi...
Half of the country is excited by that list. The other half is not.
I ask because I understand ban is for admission of refugees and travellers from seven countries. Not nationalities.
Another method is to count breaths in increasing cycles: 1; 1 2; 1 2 3; ...; 1 2 3 4 5 6 7;... Each number corresponds to one inhalation and exhalation. See how high you can count before making a mistake. This comes from Buddhism.
On top of that, concentrating on breathing takes your focus away from other inner monologue and intrusive thoughts; meditation programs typically start you off on that path.
Don't do what I did.
I never bothered to measure the intervals, so does anyone know if there's more to it? (the watch has access to heart rate and shows a current rate result afterwards; maybe it's adjusting heart rate goals over time?)
You used a circle to depict "box breathing"; when you could just as easily have utilized a box.
Our Guru, With his tough practices of Kriya yoga and other meditating techniques, could achieve this state and He can get into this Gayathri state at any time. This is THE ultimate state to experience the Universal source of energy. This is where every soul came from and will get into.
As technologists we are materialistic and we are operating in lower dimension.The other dimension (spiritual), once opened/experienced, can answer any question in this universe. This is how RUSHIs and yogis could fathom universal truths with out any scientific tools, eons before our modern science.
hmm.. you could apply that to anything
The box breathing works because it slows the breath down and brings it to a standard rhythm. Think of it this way, every emotion has a specific type of breath. When a person is experiencing sadness, happiness, anger, etc. there is specific pattern of breath that can be observed with regards to speed, length of inhale and exhale, depth, etc.
Emotion and breath are linked, and as the box breathing shows, it is a two way street. As emotions change, the breath does, but if we change our breath, our emotions do too. Have you ever been told to count slowly to ten when you're angry? Same principal.
You'll crush the competition by a wide margin (assuming they're not doing the same) and be amazed at how many minutes you can go.
Struggled with severe stress and IBS during my youth; controlled breathing was really one of the only things that had an (near-immediate) effect.
What's the phenomena called - where you encounter the same new thing multiple separate times within a short time frame?
For vortex breathing (in 3, out 5, no pause between either phase), listen to "Breathe (in the air)" by Pink Floyd.
Relapps - https://appsto.re/us/8PGcfb.i
Humans bullshit everything, painting degrade to the modern colorful Warkshok inkblots, music - to sophisticated noise, yoga became a method of hipster's public snowflakery. Philosophy - Hegelian nonsense, politics - vagina marches.
More info at the wiki: http://archiveteam.org/index.php?title=Ftp-gov
Join us on IRC: #cheetoflee on freenode
Not that I believe this or anything, but come on - you know that accusation is going to go around. It might make sense to use a remote server to timestamp files as they're uploaded, or something like that.
Here is the closest article I could find: http://www.salon.com/2016/11/23/politicizing-climate-change-...
Provide a mailing address to which to send hard drives.
(When I say "metadata", I refer to the data sources, methods of the data acquisition and so on. When a scientific field is politicised it is not only hard to trust the models but even the data, so I think the metadata are very important, if they are available.)
What is left to do to have truly open computation?* somewhat-to completely free computational power?: CircleCI, Travis CI, whatever* open source repositories to run code from?: Github hooks and others* trusting trust?* open hardware?* decentralized websites?
Left leaning people will not accept any science generated under a Right leaning government
and as we already know Right leaning people find it hard to trust the science coming from a Left leaning government.
From what I can tell, PostgreSQL is sensibly structured. At least, it seems better than MySQL. The hackiest thing I have heard so far about MySQL is that if you run the exact same SQL text more than once, it will fetch the result from cache. If you run a differently worded query, it will skip the cache, even if the query were to bring back the exact same data.
This is different than what I remember about PostgreSQL (correct me if I'm wrong). I remember reading in some book that PostgreSQL just let its rows become memory pages, and if a query resulted in data already in memory, then it got it from memory, otherwise it got it from disk. No need to make sure you didn't insert a space or something into your query the second time.
The only thing, I am missing are incremental materialized views.
I always see these things posted while they're still being written and then I never go back to see them when they're completed. And nobody posts when it's completed.
I'd prefer the posting not be done until it's finished, or, that there be an "email me when it's finished" button.
Disclosure: I'm a former Google employee
I think that much of what Google is espousing is only applicable to companies like Google, I.e. Technology companies with billions in the bank to spend on extra nine's.
The "problem" is much more fundamental. Most businesses still feel that technology is a cost to debit against the business. As long as those in charge feel this way, the issues that necessitate a book like this will continue to persist.
Command: wget --mirror --convert-links --no-parent --no-verbose https://landing.google.com/sre/book/
"And taking the historical view, who, then, looking back, might be the first SRE?
We like to think that Margaret Hamilton, working on the Apollo program on loan from MIT, had all of the significant traits of the first SRE."
The book was informative as it contains true to life episodes in a huge (and formative) devops environment.But ,in general, there was nothing that I took away from the Google SRE 'way'...except that I have no desire to work in a huge and hugely rigorous devops environmentlike the one at Google (though I see it's necessityat that scale).
Under the guise of being creative and solving unique problems you eventually drill down to the reality of a pseudo-religious approach to building,maintaining and administering rapidly changing large systems.
I'd argue that the truly valuable parts of the book for most folks are snippets on the evolution of Google infra, component reuse, design philosophy and lessons learned. These are valuable for any size environment doing any sort of computing.
For example, I'm looking for forums where you can engage in serious discussion about the role, or other books/blogs/articles that aren't simply regurgitating what the SRE Book says.
On the other hand, testing (e.g: unit testing, load testing, etc.) is the preventive counterpart.
Both are important and necessary and should not be neglected.
It becomes immediately obvious why, eg, ^[ becomes escape. Or that the alphabet is just 40h + the ordinal position of the letter (or 60h for lower-case). Or that we shift between upper & lower-case with a single bit.
esr's rendering of the table - forcing it to fit hexadecimal as eight groups of 4 bits, rather than four groups of 5 bits, makes the relationship between ^I and tab, or ^[ and escape, nearly invisible.
It's like making the periodic table 16 elements wide because we're partial to hex, and then wondering why no-one can spot the relationships anymore.
If you work on embedded devices you will still encounter serial/RS-232 all the time. Often through USB-to-serial chips, which only adds to the challenge because they are mostly unreliable crap. Then there are about 30 parameters to configure on a TTY. About half do absolutely nothing, a quarter completely breaks the signal giving you silence or line noise, the final quarter only subtly breaks the signal, occasionally corrupting your data.
Still, there is nothing like injecting a bootloader directly to RAM over JTAG, running that to get serial and upload a better bootloader, writing it to flash and finally getting ethernet and TCP/IP up.
What I can add for everybody who feels the same disappointment as ESR: It's very common for a growing community that three things happen.
A) The number of people with just a little knowledge over the holy grail of your community increases.
B) The popular communication is taken over by great communicators who care more about their publicity than your holy grail.
C) This gives the impression that the number of really cool people decreases. And that is depressing to old timers. But it's in fact often not true. Actually most often the number of cool people increases too! It's just that their voices are drowned in all the spam of what I like to call the "Party People" (see B).
So yes, you can actually cheer. It's harder to find the other dudes, but there are more of them! Trust me, I'm not the oldest guys here but I've seen some communities grow and die till now, and it's nearly always like that.
I'm not suggesting the article is a, "Gosh, Millenials!" conversation. I just get a warm tingle when reminded that I have absolutely no clue how to do something people did just a generation ago, and I don't need to. It's success!
The ACARS protocol I work with every day starts each transmission with an SOH, then some header data, then an STX to start the payload, then ends with either an ETX or an ETB depending on whether the original payload had to be fragmented into multiple transmissions or fits entirely into one.
These codes aren't archaic and obsolete in the embedded avionics world.
 ACARS: "Aircraft Communications Addressing and Reporting System" - see ARINC specification 618
Why is DEL's bit value 0xff (or 0255)? Because there was a gadget out there for editing paper tape. Yes. You could delete a character by punching out the rest of the holes in the tape frame. I used it once. It was ridiculous.
BTW, I use Form Feed (CTRL+L) character in my code to divide sections, and have configured Emacs to display them as a buffer-wide horizontal line.
* ASCII codes for those single and double box characters, so I could draw a fancy GUI on those old IBM text monitors
* Escape codes for HP Laserjets and Epson printers for bold, compressed character sizes etc.
* Batch file commands
* Essential commands for CONFIG.SYS
* Hayes modem control codes
* Wordstar dot format commands
* WordPerfect and DisplayWriter function keys
* dBaseII commands for creating, updating and manupulating records
I wish they would all move out of my head and leave room for me to learn some new stuff quicker!
But DOS was developed on/for systems with CRT displays.
It doesn't really bother me, but every now and then this strikes me as peculiar.
Aw man I'm only 36, but now I feel old for growing up in a time where a typewriter was still common enough to run into (even if they were rapidly being displaced by personal computers).
They still exist in the wild though as a hipster accessory they probably do well on Instagram too I suppose.
Oh wait, this article is 'man ascii' & 'man kermit'.
The slide pertaining to ASCII is here:
It also doesn't help that most modern web servers also include logic to handle a single LF character to terminate lines anyway.
I have ported Linux to a custom ARM board many years ago. Started with a boot loader written in assembly and writing a single char into serial port for a debug console. It takes a single line of assembly or C. Infinitely easier than USB. From there on, I was able to unwind the whole system, develop USB drivers, TCP tunnels, etc.
Not quite true - early adopters like DEC kept using the 1963 version for a very long time, which prompted others to follow them. When the Smalltalk group decided to replace their own characters for ASCII in Smalltalk-80 to be compatible with the rest of the world, it was the 1963 version that they used.
Due to this, since I use the Celeste program in Squeak Smalltalk to read my email, I see a left arrow whenever someone wrote an underscore. The other difference is that I have an up arrow instead of ^. But it did adopt the vertical bar and tilde from 1967 ASCII, so it was a mix.
Plus, people used them manually (control-S/control-Q) on systems to stop output scrolling by, and restart it when they've read what's on the screen, before built-in pagination filters (e.g., more(1) or less(1)) became common. (Specially back in the DECsystem-10/-20 days.)
That's not quite right (the ACK part isn't right at all). See <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enquiry_character>.
I'd like to see how looks editing and running BCPL/C programs using ed on such a terminal.
An annotated history of some character codes or ASCII: American Standard Code for Information Infiltration
It describes how we got here in excruciating detail, starting with Morse. Military communication systems had great influence. Before the ASCII, as we know it today, there was an "ASCII-1963" that was a bit different.
The long and winding path:MorseBaudotMurrayITA2FIELDATAASCII-1963ASCII-1967
Aren't SO and SI used by the ISO-2022-JP character encoding?
The `]` character itself will not be printed, since `\b` will delete it from the visual line, and this effectively creates a side-channel for communicating "invisible" information within the regular character stream.
It's a pain to work with, though, since it makes things like `strlen` behave in very non-intuitive ways. Just imagine a string becoming longer when you delete the BS character. That's no fun.
I was shocked how literally the ASCII codes were followed by the PBX. It sent an "ENQ" before each command, we had to send an ACK back, and then it sent us STX/ETX-delimited records.
I'm 32 and working today, in 2017. I hope I make stuff that lasts this long.
> 56 kilobits per second just before the technology was effectively wiped out by wide-area Internet around the end of the 1990s, which brought in speeds of a megabit per second and more (200 times faster)
That should read 20 times faster?
I've been talking to the police directly, and nothing is conclusive yet. Nothing has actually been ruled out, nor determined to be the cause. They don't even have full toxicology reports yet, those take days and sometimes weeks.
On a personal note, I can tell you that there were two devices in the house, a small 3D printer, and a small laser cutter, that were used for building models and rigs for scientific research. Val was an immaculate engineer, and conformed to all safety rules in operating these machines. To the best of our knowledge, neither of the machines were operating the night they passed away.
Again, please refrain from fear-mongering and speculation. I know it's natural for engineers to attack unsolved problems, but you are not working with correct or full data. Once more data is available, we will write up a complete and truthful statement to try and provide closure on this issue.
CO is odorless. You might get a headache, or you might only feel tired. What's worse: a lot of cheap CO detectors are pretty shoddy.
There are lots of things you don't want to cut on a laser cutter unless you're cutting under an inert gas, or at least nitrogen. Polycarbonate, any of the chlorinated plastics (PVC, some synthetic leather), styrenes, and polyethylene, for example. ABS melts, and Fiberglas's glass component won't cut. Acrylics cut very well. Delrin cuts OK. Wood and cloth are OK. Techshop is careful to teach people about this.
TechShop's laser cutters have compressed air coming in, a big exhaust hose going out, and a fire extinguisher nearby. TechShop has an ad slogan, "Don't try this at home. Do it at TechShop". There's something to be said for that when you're using industrial-strength tools.
In addition to the two people, their two cats died. Operating these things in a closed room is a really bad idea.
He was so into his indy game, Shard, and even whipped out his laptop to show me and started explaining intricacies of the renderer when I met him at an industry event years later.
I didn't know his wife, but from the things I've read she was also a pioneer in her industry. Rest in Peace.
My sense is that laser cutters should be required to come with CO detectors, and more generally we should be looking to add the appropriate chemical detectors to 3d printers and laser printers to warn of other chemical output issues. These home machines are often advertised for use in confined spaces (size is one way manufacturers compete), which is why I think it should be regulated - its not like someone took a commercial machine home with them. Laser cutters are a fairly large capital expense and bolting on a CO detector is very inexpensive (probably <1%), and it could integrate with the cutter's electronics to prevent usage if it exceeds a certain level.
Safety regulations are usually written in blood. Having two deaths with such a small # of these machines out there suggests there are probably others who have cumulative CO effects already. Very sad, my heart goes out to the friends and family of Roger & Valerie.
That's a surprising cause though. How much CO can a laser printer/cutter produce, worst case?
"According to a study completed by a team at the Illinois Institute of Technology, typical desktop 3D printers emit particles and compounds during printing that federal agencies say could cause cancer or other ailments."
Anyone with combustion sources of any kinds (gas heat, cooking, cars in a garage, many kinds of tools) should have a CO sensor properly placed. I'm staying at someone's house for a month, don't see one, so I just ordered a couple.
i'd prefer it that the 'authorities' do a thorough and scientific investigation and release the results in public on the internet, this needs to be proven beyond all doubts that it is caused by the laser cutter or 3d printer
if this is not done, it would stir worldwide unnecessary panic about laser cutters and/or 3d printers by saying that laser cutters and/or 3d printers produces carbon monoxide and is dangerous and hence cannot be used
i'm not sure about laser cutters but normally 3d printers is more a fire hazard than do anything else, i.e. 3d printers main hazard is fire, but carbon monoxide is likely 'fake and invalid/assumptions/speculations'
It's a tragedy, and reminded me of Marie Curie (who eventually discovered her research was causing damaging levels of radiation exposure).
Why even bother? The device has one job, and it fails. All you get is a false sense of safety.
I've been talking to the police directly, and nothing is conclusive yet. They don't even have full toxicology reports.
Both MIT grads; one a founder of gaming company Glug Glug and co-author of game Shard
You realize then that clustering, hot reload, availability etc... are not only features but the logical consequence of a beautifully crafted environnement that aims at developer productivity.
I'm sometimes amazed on how easy I can achieve stuff on the Erlang VM that would take ( if it's not impossible at all ) at least 10 times the time in a more usual language ( Ruby or PHP when you work in the web industry as I do ).
My last example was when I needed to batch sql inserts in an events database. In a normal language I would have needed a queue, the libraries for it, workers, new deployments and infrastructure to monitor, monitoring, supervision, etc... In Elixir, in 20 lines of code, it's done.
If you do not need complex calculations, the Erlang VM can basically become most of your architecture. It's already per se a SOA.
An Erlang VM is a living system that has a shell which you can connect to, and control both the VM and the applications running in it. You can also remotely connect to another VM, execute arbitrary code, debug, stop processes, start processes etc. It really is an operating system in itself, that was _designed_ to be that way.
And the best part is that you get all this for free. Whether that is a good thing depends entirely on your needs. You probably wouldn't want to replace your bash scripts with Erlang programs :)
What Erlang is not really suited for is where you need multiple levels of abstraction, such as when implementing complex business logic. You would think that the functional nature of the language lends itself to that, but then you quickly realize that because the primary concern of an Erlang engineer is to keep the system alive, and for that reason you must be able to reason and follow the code as it is running on the system, all kinds of abstractions are very much discouraged and considered bad practice (look up "parameterized modules" for an example of a feature that was _almost_ added to the language but was discarded in the end).
I think that from this perspective Erlang and Go are actually very similar - both prefer simplicity over abstractions.
Go multitasking is based on the compiler inserting switchpoints on function calls and syscall boundaries. But this affects the scheduling of a single OS-level threads executing that specific goroutine. The number of OS-level threads that the Go scheduler uses can arbitrarily grow, and OS-level threads are preemptively multitasked.
So I think the description is focusing a narrow view of the problem. What is usually required by applications is low latency in reply to system events (e.g.: data available on network sockets), and Go performs very well in this context. For instance, the fact that Go is transparently using a epoll/kqueue based architecture under the hood is probably affecting latency much more than the whole "cooperative" issue as depicted.
> Within Elixir, there is no operator overloading, which can seem confusing at first if you want to use a + to concatenate two strings. In Elixir you would use <> instead.
When this popped up, it reminded me of something people try to do often and then have issues with performance. You probably do not want to concatenate strings.
"Yes I do" you'll first think, but actually erlang has a neat commonly used thing to help here.
Let's say you're doing some templating on a web-page. You want to return "Welcome back username!". First pass (a while since I wrote erlang so forgive syntax errors):
welcome(Username) -> "Welcome back " ++ Username ++ "!"
Instead, many of the functions you'd use to write files or return things over a connection will let you pass in a list of strings instead.
welcome(Username) -> ["Welcome back ", Username, "!"]
full_greeting(Username) -> welcome(Username) ++ unread_messages()
Anyway, there's a better way of doing this. The functions that take lists of strings actually take lists of strings or other lists. So we can just do this:
full_greeting(Username) -> [welcome(Username), unread_messages()]
So, for people about to get started, try not to concatenate your strings, you can probably save yourself and your computer some time.
For more info on this, you want to search for "IO Lists" or "Deep IO Lists".
To review: https://gobyexample.com/errors
Manually checking every possible error (and then, only in the spots where you can imagine an error occurring) is a heck of a lot of extra work for the programmer (and code for the code reader/reviewer) and still won't catch all possible errors (both conceivable and inconceivable) properly. And arguably, the fact that an unchecked/undetected runtime bug in Go will basically send it into an "indeterminate state" which is impossible to reason about (much less debug), is an incredibly strong argument against this philosophy, IMHO. As far as I'm concerned, as soon as my code goes "off the beaten path" state-wise (read this as: "significantly differing from my mental model"), it should crash, ASAP. Isn't every bug literally a situation the programmer didn't account for? Aren't runtime errors by nature unexpected by the programmer? Why would you then give bugs and errors even more room to corrupt the state of the world, then? ;)
We are all obsessed with computers and languages when the real limit is the programmer's mind and ability to reason about the code s/he's building and the states that code can get into. I think BEAM langs and purely functional langs more generally (along with functional/immutable data structures, etc.) do a much better job of addressing this root problem. I'm going to quote John Carmack from his great blog post about functional programming here (http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/169296/Indepth_Functional...):
"My pragmatic summary: A large fraction of the flaws in software development are due to programmers not fully understanding all the possible states their code may execute in. In a multithreaded environment, the lack of understanding and the resulting problems are greatly amplified, almost to the point of panic if you are paying attention. Programming in a functional style makes the state presented to your code explicit, which makes it much easier to reason about, and, in a completely pure system, makes thread race conditions impossible."
Sometimes mutations are useful. There are lot of good programming design patterns which depend on mutations.
Also, always copying objects by value every time you call a function seems very expensive; especially if you're dealing with very large objects/structs/maps/strings which have to be processed by many functions.
I definitely want to read more about this.
Having coded in imperative languages like Java, Python and C++, I had been on the lookout for a practical general purpose language which provides good abstractions/high expressiveness.Elixir appealed to me more than Go in that regard. It's been six months since I started writing Elixir and it's been a pleasure.
@brightball Go has had first class support for cross compilation for a while now, no?
The other trade-off that comes from mutable versus immutable data comes from clustering. With Go, you have the ability to make remote procedure calls very seamlessly if you want to implement them, but because of pointers and shared memory, if you call a method on another box with an argument that references to something on your machine, it cant be expected to function the same way.
I think that this makes a lot of sense. My experience in just about any language, is that the official means of error handling already feels like a code smell, even before you start using it. And if that's not the case, then it still manages to feel that way when used in a large project.
Lots of Smalltalk projects would actually handle errors by saving the image on an unhandled exception. For server applications, this was like having a "live" core dump where the debugger could open up right on the errant stack frame, and you could perform experiments to aid in debugging.
I know the syntax is more similar to Elixir, but the format seems closer to Go in the sense that it compiles to a binary.
As developers, we try everyday to squeeze till the last byte and optimize things. We all know how performance is important.
So why download for every website the same asset: React, jQuery, libraries, CSS utils, you-name-it? What a waste!
The reason is simple. Websites have lots of static content that seldom changes. But you don't know in advance when it is going to change. However after the fact you know that it did. So you either set long expiry times and deal with weird behavior and obscure bugs after a website update, or set short ones and generate extra load and slowness for yourself.
Instead I'd like to have the main request send information that it does not want static resources older than a certain age. That header can be set on the server to the last time you did a code release, and a wide variety of problems involving new code and stale JS, CSS, etc go away.
See also: http://jacquesmattheij.com/301-redirects-a-dangerous-one-way... and the related HN thread with good discussion
There are a few ways to improve things:
1. Predictive modelling user resource demand in the browser (eg. preloading data) Very very easy to do nowadays with great accuracy.
2. Better cache control / eviction algorithms to keep the cache ultra hot.
3. (This). Immutable caching is one of the major ways we could improve things. I'm not a fan of the parent articles' way of doing it though, because if widely implemented it will break the web in subtle ways, especially for small companies and people that don't have Facebooks resources and engineering talent. It doesn't take into account usability issues and therefore leaves too much room for user error.
I've written up a very simple 11 line spec here that addresses this issue. https://gist.github.com/ericbets/5c1569856c2ad050771ec0c866f...
I'll throw out a challenge to HN. If someone here knows chromium internals well enough to expose the cache and assetloader to electron, within a few months I'll release an open source ML powered browser that speeds up their web browsing experience by something between 10X-100X. Because I feel like this should have been part of the web 10 years ago.
Many websites already do that, they change the URL each time the content changes.
Two wholly different strategies, which has ultimately split how the browsers handle caching.
I just hope the draft as-is expires and never makes it to an RFC.
To summarize, the issue is that Facebook was seeing a higher rate of cache validation requests than they'd expect, and looked into it. Chrome produced an updated chart documenting different refresh behaviors , which is the spiritual successor of this now-outdated stackoverflow answer from 2010 , and in response to Facebook's requests, and have re-evaluated some of their refresh logic.
In this thread, Firefox was being asked to do the same, but they pushed back on adding yet another heuristic and in turn proposed a cache-control extension. Meanwhile, Facebook proposed the same thing on the IETF httpbis list, where the response not enthusiastic , largely feeling that that this is metadata about the content and not a prescriptive cache behavior, and that the HTTP spec already accounted for freshness with age. One of Mark Nottingham's responses :
(...) From time to time, we've had people ask for "Cache-Control: Infinity-I-really-will-never-change-this." I suspect that often they don't understand how caches work, and that assigning a one-year lifetime is more than adequate for this purpose, but nevertheless, we could define that so that it worked and gave you the semantics you want too.
To keep it backwards compatible, you'd need something like:
Cache-Control: max-age=31536000, static
(or whatever we call it)
 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1267474 https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vwx8WiUASKyC2I-j2smNhaJa... http://stackoverflow.com/questions/385367/what-requests-do-b... https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/httpbisa/current/msg25... https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/httpbisa/current/msg25...
With subresource integrity hashes, you don't have to encrypt public content. Less time wasted in TLS handshakes.
This increases the democratization of the web and allows small fries to have a disproportionately larger footprint.
So is this like Rails' Turbolink but built into the browser?
Only visitors from the few countries in blue or green are permitted entry automatically:
I mention this without any advocacy for any position, but because some commenters seem to expect that borders are normally open. Every country has similar restrictions. Many countries don't admit US citizens without a visa.
Edit: Rayiner, I'm in favor of more and easier travel generally, I'm referring to the wording of Brian's tweet.
It seems we're entering a new era where businesses engage in political activism as well as simple commerce.
If that's the case, it's only fair that other groups, whose politics may differ from the activist-businesses', start using politics to weaken those businesses and counter their influence.
For example, it's well known that Airbnb operates under the radar of housing regulations in many localities.
Perhaps people who disagree with Airbnb's politics should organize and bring about legislation that will eliminate or severely curtail Airbnb's ability to do business in their town, county or state.
Or perhaps the Republicans, though new federal liability laws, should render Airbnb's business model non-viable at the national level.
The left has been engaging in total war against the right for about a decade. They seek to impose social and economic penalties on those who hold political views different than their own. And they've done this, fairly secure in the knowledge that there would be few or no repercussions against them.
But I have a feeling that's starting to change.
People who really want to help can use CouchSurfing web site instead of promoting a for profit business.
If Airbnb offered free housing it would mean they would actually pay the host to house refugees, they are not.
I wonder how many of the people protesting the entry ban will offer their flats for free to the refugees?
Brian Chesky and the entire Airbnb team are showing America at its very best: forward-looking, innovative, diverse, multicultural and. The contrast with the Trump-type people -- primarily angry, insular, bitter old people who are terrified of brown people and still live within 10 minutes of their high school -- could not be more striking.
It's easy to pretend you're hospitable and generous when you're not paying the toll of your actions. You're not providing "free housing", the actual owners of the houses are. This is a unilateral announcement because you don't know if hosts will accept.
I mean, it is good if someone in need is helped, but why now and why that wording and scope to only refugees?
Could someone explain what the process for proving it would be in this case? I presume some kind of animal testing?
Seems pretty immoral to give someone a wildcard treatment and not back it up with something known to work. Not disparaging this treatment but given we don't know if it works yet (and how aggressive cancer can be) it seems totally fair to administer it alongside chemo.
Their research was expanded to human trials at Univ. of Penn. where 27 of 29 patients with incurable leukemia and most of whom had a prognosis of death within a few months went into remission and showed no sign of the disease.
This modality may work with other forms of cancer; engineered T-cells that can enter every capillary in the body could potentially wipe out entire colonies of cancer cells. The potential is enormous, as are the challenges; cancers can be very difficult to differentiate from healthy tissue.
> Either type of treatment is likely to cost insurers half a million dollars or more if they reach the market.
Can someone more familiar with the pharmaceutical industry explain this?
This sounds like wishful thinking from VC who just put a lot of money into the Bespoke solution. The idea of immunotherapy is that your injecting cells that can attack the cancer. What does it matter it it's your own cells especially when the cost is an order of magnitude bigger.
So the title is basically click-bait, as the treatment is unconfirmed.
Abstract: The London team also gave the children standard chemotherapy, they failed to show the cell treatment actually cured the kids. There is a hint of efficacy but no proof, says Stephan Grupp, director of cancer immunotherapy at the Childrens Hospital of Philadelphia, who collaborates with Novartis. It would be great if it works, but that just hasnt been shown yet.
And that's when it will get sunk into an abyss of bureaucratic processes and this treatment probably won't see sunlight for another ten years.
Is author serious with this statement? Two kids lives were saved with a potentially inexpensive technique and the author think's this point is relevant? If 500 companies go bankrupt because cancer is cured, that is a monstrous win.
(America is bombing seven countries by the way, in case anyone forgot. Our last president is the first in history to have the US in armed conflict for every day of his presidency. He will not be the last.)
What I also hate is that Uber tries to play the PR game and show themselves as the great guys here. Forget that they pay their drivers peanuts, that drivers have to drive up to 30% more now to make the same wages as just a few years ago, and that many are calling Uber to unionise.
I hate they way everyone is just using people to further their message and forgetting that these are people.
However, is Travis really the best messenger? Is this just glorified PR or does he actually care? I can't read his mind, so we can only judge from his actions. Let's see what he's done to "stand up for what's right" in regards to his own organization (this isn't exhaustive, at all):
- Uber employees order fake rides to sink competitor 
- Blaming the media for suggesting Uber is liable 
- Blind passengers denied rides 
- Uber executives looking into critics' personal lives 
You may think those things are irrelevant, but one should practice what they preach, especially when they have a post titled: "Standing up for what's right." My examples, by the way, only scratch the surface to Uber's own shady practices.
For the record, I'm super proud of working at Uber because those on the outside never see the things we do for our drivers. This is a big one and I'm really proud. You just don't see this on the news that often because who knows.
I've said this before but the Uber of the last 2 years is not the same Uber from 2013/2014. As a company it has grown up and matured and realizes the responsibilities it has to its drivers, riders and cities.
He is a 70 year old man who just won the presidency with no prior political experience, spewing angry divisive comments against all sorts of weak minority groups. He has a massive following who cheers his divisive comments against foreigners and and against the press.
Yet in spite of this, some commentators (see Travis) think that "if only" he gets some good advice, everything will be just fine. This is a bias of smart, reasonable people: they assume others are the same. They are treating it as a reasonable person who is just misguided.
In fact, the opposite is true. Trump has shown that his values are not aligned with traditional free democracy as we've known it in America. Giving him some good advice or trying to talk reason is futile, and moreover will result in endorsement by association.
Looking in from the outside, it seems like all the political process that Obama had to go through just isn't applicable?
The example I always comforted myself with w.r.t to Trump was Obama trying to get the gun laws changed - even the POTUS couldn't do it. So then he mustn't have unlimited power. So what's going on here?
I'm really curious how executive orders work in the US. Are they just the first step in a process, or do they override any democratic process? The latter seems to be what all the reporting is implying, but I don't know if that's hyperbole or true.
This had substance and was clear and articulate. It's exactly what Sam's Time to Take a Stand post is missing.
I have nothing against helping refugees escape atrocities in their home countries. If possible, good for them. The problem I see is that there is an inherent unfairness in this process when compared to those who try to immigrate legally, especially when using the H1B process.
A refugees obtains a green card in a matter of months if not 1 year at most. With no particularly serious/harsh vetting. Look at what this has brought, considering that all the past attacks (Boston, California, Florida) where done by people that entered US by this rout.
An H1B has to usually wait if somewhere between 8-16years, sometimes more just to get the green card. And for every step, they are scrutinized and verified in the most intimate detail.
In my opinion this is not a fair process. And, personally, I am ok with increasing the scrutiny on those that apply for refugee status.
If you actually want to leave your bubble, read both sides on every issue. If you want to remain in your bubble, read the screaming twitter comments and media only. Choice is yours.
Even the "pro" arguers have serious reservations in this case.
I agreed in early December to join President Trumps economic advisory group along with Elon Musk (CEO of Tesla), Mary Barra (Chairwoman/CEO of General Motors), Indra Nooyi (Chairwoman/CEO of Pepsi), Ginni Rometty (Chairwoman/CEO of IBM), Bob Iger (Chairman/CEO of Disney), Jack Welch (former Chairman of GE) and a dozen other business leaders.
Kalanick and all those people lend their credibility to Trump and his policies.
The fight has just begun. It's just a matter of time now till they to tear apart net neutrality.
Trump might just be the wake up call the nation needed to wake up and stop being so complacent.
It's heartening to see tech CEOs speak out against bigotry and disheartening to see other tech leaders remain quiet and it all makes a potent narrative and easy access to the tops of message board front pages.
But it does not. actually. matter. what tech leadership does.
We are not all sitting dutifully in our seats at Moscone waiting to see what "one more thing" from CEOs and venture capitalists is going to look like. We're also not prisoners of the management of companies whose CEOs join the administration or attend summits at Trump's garish Barad-Dfus.
It may not be true for all workers in all industries but as someone who's been working in tech for more than 20 years I'm telling you that our management needs us more than we need them. There has never been a better market for our services or a set of employers more dependent on our goodwill and cooperation than in 2017.
Do not wait for your firm's CEO to take a stand. Organize with your coworkers. If you don't know how to get started doing that, start thinking of stabs you can take at the problem. Organizing is a problem where code actually might make a difference. Organize a pledge, or a group statement, or meetups. Or some other idea we haven't come up with yet.
A lot of engineers want to believe their work is apolitical. I understand the impulse. But your work is political whether you want it to be or not. If you don't put your market power to use for your beliefs, you're just accepting your employer's default settings, and putting it to work for theirs. Don't accept the defaults.
Organize your workplace. You have a crazy amount of influence you're not using right now. It won't always be like this; don't waste the opportunity.
Places to start:
The Indivisible guide:
https://www.indivisibleguide.com/ --- there are at least 10 software projects buried in this thing, but also remember the same ideas apply on a smaller scale both in local politics and at your work place.
https://twitter.com/techsolidarity --- show up to one of these. They're well attended and they'll interface you to your local (serious) activist community, people actually working with those at risk.
Also things I've said in the last few days that I'd rather not repeat but are relevant:
On calling your reps:
https://news.ycombinator.com/edit?id=13509555 --- please punch your Senators and Congresspeople's numbers into your speed dial.
On running for office:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13493366 --- please convince a friend to run for local office.
On U2F, TOTP, and SMS:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13493100 --- please disable SMS authentication on services that will let you. :)
If you're building applications to ensure that people put pressure on their local representatives or, even better, to get normal people to run for local elected office, I want to help!
>> We are working out a process to identify these drivers and compensate them pro bono during the next three months to help mitigate some of the financial stress and complications with supporting their families and putting food on the table. We will have more details on this in the coming days.
This does not seem consistent. One is right to move freely and the other is right to live. Why is this so much worse than the other? This is just one more in a line of negative actions towards a particular region and its people who are being abused and killed for self serving geo-political and economic reasons.
For them it's fine to totally to run companies who:
* Abuse user privacy. * Constatntly pretend they are driving positive social progress. * Track people in a non-transparent, disrespectful way. * Build echo chambers to keep people ill-informed and hooked on using services. * Avoid paying tax. * Automate people out of jobs, while not contributing to wellfare systems. * Get rich off state owned infrastructure and give little to nothing back. * Give money to political parties. * Exploit cheap labor. * Censor things for government agencies.
Where is the outrage when a child goes hungry in Africa, or a person is bombed in Syria by a US drone? The billions and billions of dollars tied up in these companies should be going back into communities, education, medical and food aid. Not on "moonshots", and ambiguous charity initiaivies which only go towards lining their pockets further.
It's companies that operate in this way which gave Trump a voice, knowingly or unknowningly. Trump didn't just magic himself into the Whitehouse, did he?
I feel sorry for anyone affected by this but having CEOs throwing bullshit into the bonfire won't help.
Everyone is responsible for the current situation, it's not just the actions of one man.
Such PR bullshit. Trying to look good in the public eye.
We have the largest computer company in the world, a shit load of people work there, supposedly smart people. Yet they can't put together a refresh of many of their desktop machines. Why the fuck not? What do all those people getting paid all that money do all day? I can only imagine the conversations, "it takes years it has to be super innovative". No it fucking doesn't not on the PC, just put the latest processors and tech in it. You don't have to innovate every fucking time, not on the desktop PC. We see this all the time with Apple devices and I can't understand it.
I mean I don't understand what do they do all day every day for 800 days that they can't refresh this simple Machine. Maybe I'm being nieve here or I'm missing something.
When they do the math, iPhone might seem the most lucrative (they seem not to care about anything else) but since they are killing the ecosystem with no Mac Pro, no Mac Mini and with so called pro MacBooks, developers will abandon Apple eventually. Even if iPhone becomes/remains the most technologically advanced smart phone on the market, it would be like a distant paradise island with no airports. Airplanes (developers and subsequently the end users) will be landing on alternative airports on emerging islands, letting them prosper. Consequently, Apple island will be deserted.
I ended up with the latest "Skull Canyon" NUC as well. Even though it is thinner than my old Mini, its footprint on my desk is about the same, it's just less square. I'm not a fan of the color or the design; it seems marketed at teenage gamerzzz, not at the boring middle aged guy who prefers a minimalist Scandinavian style. But that's not very important. I did have to buy the SSD and the RAM separately, I had to install Windows myself (so that's no better than buying a Mini to run Windows on), and I did have to hunt for a couple of drivers. I don't know why they don't sell a fully configured machine.
Its fan is not as quiet as the Mini, and it has some weird transient behavior when it wakes up from hibernation. It didn't come cheap (I maxed pretty much every spec though). It is very fast, it does the job competently, but I don't Love it like I Loved the Mini. Sad that Apple has abandoned this cute nifty little machine.
That sounds totally unrelated to the age of the machine, and totally related to what's installed, the mini running out of disk, etc.
Maybe do a clean install of the OS?
Aside from the mechanical parts (CD ROMS, Hard Disks, etc), the "digital" parts of a PC do not age and their age does not affect program execution speed (all other things being equal).
Either they work, or they don't (well, corrupted memory can cause crashes when accessed, but it wont slow down programs).
It's bizarre to see a company with the wealth and resources of Apple not even putting out spec upgrades for their machines. I could say the same about my old MacBook Air I've been wanting to upgrade. Just throw us a bone here Apple. Even a small bump in specs.
I'm using a Lenovo Q190  that runs lubuntu. It's a little slow to start, but everything runs fine. I run Plex Server, Plex Home Theater, Spotify, and RetroPie.
I would gladly trade it for a 2010 Mac Mini. That's crazy. Just reinstall everything and run a scan on your disk and RAM.
 For a more complete spec including the other parts you may need, see: https://rwmj.wordpress.com/2015/05/04/new-home-gateway-route...
(a) quiet at load
(b) have the PSU integrated in the case?
Those are about the only redeeming qualities of a Mac Mini right now, and it pisses me off to no end that no one bothers with (b) on the Wintel side.
Edit: please don't explain to me how a power brick that's sometimes as large as the NUC doesn't bother you, it does bother me.
To be honest, I think the NUC or any other intel platform is overkill for TV these days.
If you don't mind ~35mm more depth to your TV, you can mount the NUC on the back. Or, mount it to the back of a monitor, for an iMac replacement.
But I'm surprised he quickly says "No worries you might say, go to Apple and buy a new Mac mini!". If your Mac Mini behaves like he describes, wouldn't the straightforward response be to open it up, give the fans a good cleaning, maybe replace any HDDs with SSDs, and give it a fresh install (of either OS X or Windows 10)? If you blog about tech as this guy does surely it would be no issue at all to just (attempt to) quickly fix these issues.
Don't get me wrong, I too like buying new toys. But I'm amazed at how some apparently tech-savvy people think "this computer does not work as it used to, so it logically follows I should buy a new one!". The problems with his Mac Mini don't sound particularly bad and perfectly fixable in less time it would take to set up a new computer.
What's the point in making something small, when you need a huge power brick to power it?
It's a shame that Apple's stuff is outdated, but it's just so much nicer when you look at the details.
So I moved to an Apple TV and a server running freenas. Any computer-y stuff basically involves the Apple TV talking to the nas, and I can admin the nas over web ui and ssh. I'm sure you can get remote admin setup with windows for similar experience, but having been on both sides, stuff breaks down all the time on windows and it's just a less-than-stellar OS for the tv.
It's a perfect successor to the Mac Mini.
Could be even cheaper if you already have some spare parts.
It might use a bit more power and has a larger footprint, but there is enough space for 3.5" drives and it is practically noiseless at any load. Plus you can expand it with a TV tuner, a graphics card or a HDMI capture card.
Oh yeah, Apple? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13511241
There will always be some pros and some consumers that want or need something a bit different and for them there's Linux and Windows, and from Apple's point of view that's fine.
Apple are long past trying to occupy every ecological niche that computers can fill. The level of fit and finish they put into their products means they just don't have the bandwidth to cover all the market, or update every product on every cycle. The NUC us a great little device and Windows 10 is the least worst version for years, so go for it. Enjoy.
The hardware is rock solid even if it is 3 or 4 years old and the software is upgradeable. And I know I will be able to use it for another 5 years without too much hassle.
My casual computing needs do not include high end gaming or deep learning using the latest GPUs.
I don't need anything more powerful to browse the internet, check my email and some casual document editing. This is what my family also does 90% of the time.
Sometimes it is cheaper to just change the timing belt on your car rather than leasing/buying the next latest/shiniest new thing.
The Apple world view is that they do not need to aggressively compete in desktop/laptop computing.
We pay for quality and we expect Apple to deliver. That NUC is ugly as fuck.
I use a Raspberry Pi 2 as my HTPC. As I only watch my own media on my NAS, it is perfectly adequate. But what is pretty surprising to consider is that this NUC is only about twice as expensive as my complete Raspberry Pi system.
These also look quite capable:
> a died in the wool Mac user
Not sure about the rationale behind most of Apple's design decisions the last couple years...
Now that we might upgrade to a 4K TV I might need to look for alternatives. I wonder whether the NUC is my best option.
Laser focus in apple (cf @nattnewton), laser focus in customers perceptions.
I simply replace the mac mini with the nuc, same hdmi etc and nothing.
So tread carefully.
Apple doesn't make the computer that fits your niche because it doesn't have to. They make gobs of money selling old machinery because for most people it works just fine.
A significant portion of every day computing is in the cloud anyway. It's why computers now have less file storage than before. Most people spend more time looking at their smartphone instead of their computer screen.
Really makes you wonder why Apple seems to be neglecting the Mac Mini, or the Mac line in general.
Approximate setup I used:
* Amazon.com: CanaKit Raspberry Pi 3 Complete Starter Kit - 32 GB Edition: Electronics || https://www.amazon.com/CanaKit-Raspberry-Complete-Starter-Ki...
* Amazon.com: Air Mouse,ELEGIANT 2.4G 6-Axis Portable Mini Wireless Air Mouse Remote Control Keyboard for PC HTPC IPTV Smart TV and Android TV Box Media Player: Computers & Accessories || https://www.amazon.com/ELEGIANT-Portable-Wireless-Control-Ke...
You can also get some game controllers and RetroPie and turn your Raspberry Pi into a sweet little gaming machine. I have every NES, SNES, Genesis, and N64 game ever made I think. Plus it plays every video format (tends to struggle with 4k video outputs... I don't have a 4K TV so I just re-downloaded the video after I saw the issue).
* RetroPie - Retro-gaming on the Raspberry Pi || https://retropie.org.uk/
* Amazon.com: Buffalo Classic USB Gamepad for PC: Computers & Accessories || https://www.amazon.com/Buffalo-Classic-USB-Gamepad-PC/dp/B00...
NOT SO FAST. This is a Kit. I have to buy the components separately and assemble. Hurray for roadblocks.
It's more clear for me after my Mac Mini 2009 is no longer supported by Sierra without any constructive reason (you can install it with pair of crutches but no Wi-Fi). Actually Apple is selling fancy outdated hardware with pretty questionable "new features" like touchbar bullshit to excuse their ridiculous pricing model.
Awesome that more people abandoning it.
edit: The mini hasn't competed on a purely specs/price level since, perhaps, its first year or two of existence. There have long been better, similarly sized options if you don't care about OS X.
I always have a variety of pens and pencils with me, and writing/drawing with high-quality pens & pencils on real paper is better and more convenient in every way than writing on an equivalent-sized whiteboard surface. I then have 100 pages I can keep or give away instead of one that I have to delete and reuse, and without all the mess. Plus, I always have a couple of pens in my pocket, even when I don't have my laptop, so I never end up with a whiteboard but no markers.
The only time I've found whiteboards more useful than paper are when I needed a very large surface. If a small surface is good enough, paper works better for me.
Also, I wonder if a "whiteboard magnet" would stick well to a mabook or aluminum bodied portable - wouldn't leave any residue: http://www.ebay.com/itm/17-x-11-Dry-Erase-Magnetic-Refrigera...
But this one is much better, because it occupies the entire laptop!
Unfortunately for my screen-doodling habit, new MacBooks have some kind of coating (AR? Oleophobic?) that causes the marker's fluid to bead up, ruining the effect.
And now I probably am carrying a backpack which makes paper + pen better. I think the #1 benefit of a whiteboard is the size. I can draw huge diagrams and everyone in the room can see and not have to huddle around a piece of paper.
I still think it is interesting....
You can even recycle broken laptops by painting the screen!
In addition the case, if laptop size, would be semi drop proof. The point being, I'd travel more by bike if I didn't hear a fall would total my hardware.
Finally, big ask here, make it insulated. Leaving my machine in a cold car while snowboarding means I generally like to wait a bit til the machine comes back to room temp.
Yes. I've seen hardened cases (a la for DJs & musicians) but they're often overkill, AND I want the outside to serve a purpose (I.e., whiteboard).
Keep it in the $100 range and you have a winner.
Others have mentioned the stick-on dry wipe vinyl whiteboards that are available. For walls there is also 'magic whiteboard' - a roll of plastic material that sticks to the wall using static electricity.
I'd mention the 'mini-whiteboards' sold for use in classrooms - usually A4/Letter size. These are about 2mm thick and can be used as clipboards as well with a suitable bulldog clip. My final idea would be to get a map case like the one that hikers use to keep their maps dry and put completed whiteboards in that for reference.
Personally, I prefer paper/pen &c
I guess the problem is that even with digital pens, haptic feedback and maybe precision are not up to par with the real thing. But those things might improve a lot in the next 10-20 years, there seems to be a decent amount of research going on for the former.
And Google and microsoft have note taking apps that makes your hand writing searchable.
Edit: wow, some people on HN really dislike touchscreens...
writing on this wb surface on laptop, then re-covering with clear plastic to make it semi-permanent [ preventing wipe off with handling / slipcase / backpack ]
Does the original peel-off wb material cover would re-adhere ? .. if so, handy.
And they even include a marker...
(IOW: I think it's a cool hack that fails to consider actual implications outside of the immediate problem solved.)
I've done two Pi projects now that I keep meaning to blog about. One was a sprinkler control system. My old system was dying, and not very flexible, so I decided to run everything off a Pi. The tricky part was driving 13 sprinkler lines with 24V AC current. I bought a 16-relay board and eventually got it wired up. For someone with little electronics experience, there was a lot to learn.  is an attempt before I realized I had to use the relays. Eventually I got it working and used it all summer. With cron, I can schedule things however I want!
The second is a security camera for a vacation rental home, and is not quite done yet. The hardware side was not challenging at all, but I still need to work out how to copy the images up to S3 or a Linode. I'm using MotionEyeOS and it doesn't seem to know how to do that itself. One of the big reasons I went with a Pi is I didn't want to pay or rely on someone else's servers. Also I wanted to avoid the security problems that have been in the news lately. I don't want inbound traffic to my LAN; I'd rather push the video somewhere else.
It took me a long time to figure out worthwhile uses for a Pi. A friend of mine loves using these things for media servers and CI servers and whatnot, but to me it's only satisfying if it's something where you actually need the miniature scale. Also a Pi really hits the sweet spot for me in terms of hardware-vs-software. I'm sure I could have done the first project with an Arduino, but using ssh, cron, and python was really nice.
I wouldn't call it simple to set up, but it was cheap - about 70 (not including Alexa device, which could even be the same pi - https://github.com/alexa/alexa-avs-sample-app/wiki/Raspberry... )
Anyone getting into this field should take a look at Peter Scargill's Tech Blog - he has published details and code for a home control system centered around a Pi using MQTT with a range of modules (mostly ESP8266). The most interesting recent stuff is on control, monitoring and dashboard design for phone and Web apps - his work on the dials and gauges is very good.
Pete also takes a regular look at other non-Pi platforms from an IoT control perspective.
I've been trying to keep a blog of my progress, if anyone is interested, though please forgive the poor grammar / stream-of-consciousness in the posts... I've been writing quickly to get caught up.
a PI, many sensors and controls.the pi to do the things the pi always does.the sensors to sense room temp. in each room.And this is the hardest one, flow control per radiator.
I want that I can set room temp schedules, and can go off schedule using the app (manual intervention) When the current temp in any room is below the set temp for that room the heater system turns onThe rooms that are already above their set temp have the radiators turned down.
Why? Because I don't like to waste heat to a room I don't enter 90% of the day.And when my living room has reached the target temp there is always a room that is either still stone cold or feels like sauna.
The hardest part about this is the controllable radiator valves, the rest already exists.
Looks more like monitoring and control, on which you could of course build automation, but I personally am also not sure where to head on that one.
Nevertheless: Cool project! :)
1. Z-wave switches/outlets/locks - all lamps, receptacles and locks controlled by Vera Edge;2. DSC alarm system - door/flood sensors, integrated with Vera;3. Nest cameras - not integrated;4. Nest thermostat - integrated with Vera and Alexa;
Currently trying to integrate Vera and Alexa to have fully voice- controlled home.
so: wall --> adapter --> lightbulb
Although you fine folks might remember me from a few other projects, I'm currently a Graphics Editor at The New York Times. We're actively curious and interested in pursuing lines of inquiry about this sort of behavior, and if any HN'ers have any interesting leads or tips, I'd encourage you to get in touch. You can reach me at my username @nytimes.com, or email me and I'll send you my Signal number.
I remember when I first moved to the Bay Area in 2009, I met a smart guy at a startup meetup, a serial entrepreneur with a previous exit. I asked him what he was working on, and he said "Oh, I've been writing a Twitter bot that will follow people of your choosing, engage them in simple conversation, and retweet their tweets. It's building a network of followers - I don't know yet what I'd do with that, but it's an asset that's likely valuable to somebody." I ran into him again a few weeks later, and he'd sold the company.
I think I'd heard from either him or someone here on Hacker News, around that time, that 75% of Twitter traffic was bots and automated accounts. Note that that was early 2009, before Twitter went mainstream and when they still had a really easy-to-use developer API.
The landline telephone business has, for a long time now, been compromised by spammers and bots (telemarketing calls and robocalls). I canceled my land line about four years ago after going for three months without receiving a single call I wanted.
It seems the commercial social networks are headed for the same fate. And, they're headed for hardnosed and unpleasant regulation by governments. They probably need to clean up their acts.
I'm more fascinated by the spam by Facebook accounts. These show up all the time in relatively popular comment sections, and yet apparently FB doesn't care, or the problem is trickier to automatically flag. For example, this comment  is clearly spam...but if you click through to the account, it seems to be a real person , with a normal-seemingly friend network, mundane photos of life that aren't obviously stock photography. There are a few junk comments (a bunch of "hi's", but as an outsider, this is what makes FB a lot trickier to analyze, because you don't know how much privacy that user has enabled on their own account.
Everyone. Everyone should know.
We're watching this terrible trend rip apart the entire social proposition of the internet after spending 2 decades trying and finally achieving buy in. And here y'all are, hopefulls for a digital economy cheerfully defrauding the very networks that will probably bet the monetization strategy for many startups that pass through HN's doors.
The total lack of any personal responsibility here, or notion of consequence... It stuns me.
Numbers come from their 2016 Q3 filinghttps://investor.twitterinc.com/secfiling.cfm?filingID=15645...
Its pretty clear what the bot guys get out of it, pay to promote services, pay for followers, etc. They can monetize "fame" through the robotic horde. But as this article and ones before it point out, these networks are generally quite easy to spot. So why not take them out?
It probably isn't because they can pad 'subscriber growth' or 'MAU' numbers, they appear to be only small components of that number. And while I could imagine it may be hard to purge them at the moment, its been a problem long enough that someone in engineering must have figured out a system for taking down large numbers of accounts.
The only thing I can come up with, and it is way too tin-hattish to really count, is that it creates an "observable" for the underside of the Internet. By watching what people are asking the twitter bots to do you can observe other objectives that are perhaps less observable. There are some obvious customers for that but I don't think they actually pay for that (except perhaps by buying access to the Firehose)
 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11905266#11906591 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9170433 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=485659 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5525638 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5501654 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5996790 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=833188 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4346386
> Per eZanga, 4.3 millionor 39 percentof Trump's more than 11 million Twitter followers as of August came from fake accounts while the other 6.7 million are actually real users. And for Clinton, 3.1 millionor 37 percentof her more than 8 million followers were fake while 5.3 million come from real accounts.
350,000 is about 0.1% of Twitter's user base. Does anyone here think the number of fake accounts isn't orders of magnitude higher than that?
The problem with having a user reporting based plan for acting against fake accounts in an environment where the psychological motivations of using the service, if not to disseminate news, or maintain a closet standup comedian habit, is affirmation. In almost every motivation for using the service, the user has an incentive to keep their numbers up, whether they are real or not. A huge part of the game is the number of followers.
Personally I'm just surprised that they've moved from advertising cam sites (which could conceivably act as a secondary, almost passive income) to quoting star wars novels while inflating numbers for people who pay for followers. That's the aspect that confuses me, and makes me feel vulnerable.
Strange that these bots aren't spammy but are posting every minute or two. I wonder what they're for...
> Users were barred from writing programs that automatically followed or unfollowed accounts or which "favourited" tweets in bulk, he said.
I am constantly getting followed by accounts with tens or hundreds of thousands of follows and followers, usually checkmarked accounts though I've never heard of them. It's painfully obvious these verified users are using bots to randomly follow people, both to spam my inbox with "you have a new follower" messages and to encourage people to "follow back".
But Twitter does nothing about it. It's not "strictly enforced" at all.
I just search for my domain on Twitter, and there are dozens of "people" who do nothing but retweet hacker news articles. They are presumably doing this for some kind of "reverse" reputation.
I'm interested if anyone has any more insight on this phenomenon. Maybe it's as simple as convincing some naive users to follow them with links vetted as high quality.
https://twitter.com/bartezzini (123K tweets, nothing but HN-type links and comments)
https://twitter.com/EggmanOrWalrus (15.7k tweets, ditto)
Secondly, of course there are this many. There are probably many more. I run several bots myself; there's nothing wrong with this.
Twitter's TOS is only as good as its enforcement, and if there's anything twitter is terrible at, it's having any control over its community.
You need to scroll down at least 5 load-more's to see regular people tweets. It's a really terrible user experience that Twitter needs to solve.
He already had about 250k followers so it wasn't a huge spike in that context but it was interesting to think of the implications of that when you come across a random account with 100k followers and 100 following... they might not be as influential as it seems.
Also this was about a year ago and last I checked his follower account was roughly the same.
Wasn't there a story on HN about a guy who created a fake identity and twitter account with 20k followers and got invited (and paid?) to speak at a tech conference?
So we have 5-9% as a lower bound and perhaps we can look at e-mail for an upper bound with nearly 60% spam by volume.
I don't even use Twitter, and I have 4 different Twitter accounts. The amount of fake accounts must be staggering, but there's no way Twitter will cull them otherwise their MAU numbers will tank, and along with it, their ad rates, etc.
The smoking gun. What real person still has one of those.
Disclaimer: I owned a Nokia Lumia 920 for > 2 years.
1. Get burner email and phone number
2. Post bot to DO, AWS or run it on a raspi
4. Profit from all those sweet followers.
Many of them look entirely "real" or they can be hilariously obvious. I would bet it is happening on Facebook, Instagram, Snap and any other social network where "value" is derived from followers/eyeballs.
Twitter fake accounts are expected to be counted in MMs.
The problem with this is that while bots can be detected (even if doing so is an arms race) it's much harder to detect "bot" humans.
anyway - the most interesting part here is that they actually managed to fool google, up until this very moment!google recommended me to view their app.. spam does work !
ps - googling (ironic, i know) 'hitwe app scam' showed me this on the first result:http://www.datingbusters.com/hitwe-com-exposed-for-fake-prof...
i am interested in a response from one of google play's spam engineers/managers ..
edit2: it took me 0.5 secs to start sensing that it's a fake-boosted app. a human reviewer at google could have just scanned the top 100x dating apps in a single day and map out the fake apps. what do you think?
And another paper covering the topic:https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13445295
he genuinely didn't know why he was doing it at the time (he'd been heavily involved in gaming Google rankings previously for credit card companies) and it was at significant cost - but he was completely sure at some point it would be useful
I remember a twitter bot (name escames me now) which would crawl pastebin and tweet updates when passwords / DBs were leaked. It had lots of followers (security researchers who found it very useful).
Most humans on twitter are boring and waste people's time with youtube style comments. Most bots are spammy and waste time too. Why not allow both and let people decide who they follow/ban?
Having a botnet is now an essential part of building your social media following.
So I guess this is a product of this.
What's the difference? Apart from the legal requirement to have a diver ready to take over in test vehicles (which necessarily makes it Level 2), the fundamental difference is that you'd have to show a lot more than one demo to establish that you've achieved Level 4. Level 4s are supposed to be able to operate without human intervention at all within prescribed domains (e.g. downtown cities). That doesn't mean operate one trip or one day or one month without a disengagement -- that's still Level 2.
I'm super impressed by the demo but Cruise will have to show more data to back up a Level 4 claim.
* There are frequent steering twitches to the left. This may be associated with passing parked cars. There are similar twitches to the right when in the left lane of a one-way street.
* Crosswalk behavior when turning needs some work. The vehicle enters the intersection, then stops in the intersection before the crosswalk with people in it. This is a hard problem, because the system needs to recognize people waiting to cross but not yet in the roadway. When the light turns green, both the pedestrians going straight and the turning vehicle can enter the intersection, the pedestrians having right of way. The pedestrians now block the vehicle, and the vehicle blocks the bike lane.
* Left turns into multi-lane streets are too wide and into the wrong lane.
* On two occasions, the vehicle is stuck behind a doubly-parked vehicle engaged in loading. The options are to wait or to cross a double yellow line. There's a delay of several seconds, then forward movement. Suspect manual intervention.
That was nice and clean city driving in the video clips but nothing that distinguishes it from "Level 3" (human intervention may be required within ~15 seconds or so) or even "Level 2" (human intervention may be required within seconds, current state of the art).
Level 1: Driver must be ready to take control at any time. Automated system may include features such as Adaptive Cruise Control (ACC), Parking Assistance with automated steering, and Lane Keeping Assistance (LKA) Type II in any combination.
Level 2: The driver is obliged to detect objects and events and respond if the automated system fails to respond properly. The automated system executes accelerating, braking, and steering. The automated system can deactivate immediately upon takeover by the driver.
Level 3: Within known, limited environments (such as freeways), the driver can safely turn their attention away from driving tasks, but must still be prepared to take control when needed.
Level 4: The automated system can control the vehicle in all but a few environments such as severe weather. The driver must enable the automated system only when it is safe to do so. When enabled, driver attention is not required.
Level 5: Other than setting the destination and starting the system, no human intervention is required. The automatic system can drive to any location where it is legal to drive and make its own decision.
From the Society of Automotive Engineers
I'm also curious how it would react to going up Mason and California, where there's a traffic light at the top of a steep hill. Last time I had to physically pull myself up via the steering wheel to see anything, and as a seasoned driver I was a bit worried.
You might not be able to turn an aircraft carrier on a dime but when you do you've got an aircraft carrier.
GM (and the other automotive manufacturers for that matter) decided they wanted in on self driving and electric vehicles, had a few meetings, wrote a few checks and a few years later look at the result. Are Google and Tesla going to reply with similar videos?
Nor do they have any presence I'm aware of on Github. This is in contrast to BMW, for example, who have made a number of contributions: https://github.com/bmwcarit
Anyway, just curious to what extent Cruise used (or still uses) ROS and open source software in their stack.
Thought: Once we have 99% self driving cars it will be quite easy to convert a portion of roads to pedestrian only at times when traffic is light: bollards go up, lighting changes, cars informed to reroute.
Add to this complexity the weather conditions. Suppose the sun is shining straight at you and you need to squint and shade your eyes just to make out what the light is -- this happens to me frequently -- can the camera see the traffic light and distinguish its color clearly under such conditions?
What about when it's raining, misting or drizzling, snowing heavily, etc. and the traffic lights are these fragmented outlines that you, the human, can heuristically distinguish but a machine might not?
One last thought: suppose it's right turn on red and first car in line is a self-driving vehicle. Can it really look left and safely determine there's enough time to beat the cross traffic? If it's highly conservative and just waits until green, there could be ten irate motorists behind it and guaranteed to honk and curse.
It's exciting technology but there are some very difficult problems to solve. I worry that if these machines can't demonstrate 110% of a human's ability to drive, they simply won't be implemented in many places except some very well defined rigid routes that are free of problematical challenges and variations.
And so you end up with posts like this trying to analyse a video frame by frame to assess the reality of the technology, and yet everyone including the author tries to guess where's the catch ( is the green light really trustworthy ? Why is the video accelerated ? Etc..).
Every time ... cars pass it, and dive into its lane (a typical reaction to slow moving vehicles).
Still, nice accomplishment.
Here is my stack:
1. NZB downloader - NZBGet - http://nzbget.net/
2. TV Shows - Sonarr - https://sonarr.tv/
3. Films - CouchPotato - https://couchpota.to/
4. NZB Search - NZBHydra - https://github.com/theotherp/nzbhydra (I contribute to this project)
5. Plex - https://www.plex.tv/
Add Torrent support:
6. Client - rtorrent - https://rakshasa.github.io/rtorrent/
7. Web Interface - ruTorrent (warning: PHP) - https://github.com/Novik/ruTorrent
8. Proxy private trackers to XML-RPC - Jackett - https://github.com/Jackett/Jackett
9. Cloud Torrent - web interface - https://github.com/jpillora/cloud-torrent
10. Plex stats, analytics and user management - PlexPy - https://github.com/JonnyWong16/plexpy
11. Plex request - allow users to request content - https://github.com/ngovil21/PlexRequestChannel.bundle
Hardware is a pair of HP Proliant Gen8 microservers, Ubuntu 14, Docker, nginx and LetsEncrypt. There is no real easy way to set this all up, you have to do each part of the stack yourself (a docker-compose file would go a long way to simplifying it)
 I spend over $200 a month on content subscriptions so I don't feel bad about utilizing the conveniance of NZB downloads + Plex
I rewrote this after an initial version that used Redis as a queue to process. Asking end users to install Redis was a step too far I think, so I stepped back and thought about how to solve this without external dependencies.
I ended up with a simple Elixir and Erlang queue implementation. It works much simpler, just as fast, and no freaky deps. GenServer starts up a worker for each crawler, and it schedules work by itself. It's really strange to use a language so complete, it kind of feels like cheating. Programming in easy-mode.
Pull requests very welcome to the crawler folder, it's super easy to write a crawler for your favorite site!
These sites have sitemaps:http://torrentproject.se/robots.txthttps://www.torrentdownloads.me/robots.txthttps://thepiratebay.org/robots.txthttp://goldtorrents.com/robots.txthttps://bitsnoop.com/robots.txt
Enough with the hype: "high performance" What??Your program is not concurrent: you have one process per website and go through URLs one at a time.You don't even use Bloom filters.
Many torrent clients can monitor an RSS feed, so that would probably be the best solution. I would add the ability to create a user account, and each user could set up a few RSS feeds. In my case, I would like to have one RSS feed with the label "Movies", and one for "TV Shows". Then the main search page would have buttons to add the magnet link to either RSS feed.
I already use http://showrss.info, which provides an RSS feed for all of my favorite shows. So it would be great to manage my own RSS feed for movies and specific episodes.
This ought not be surprising: presumably, who better to say that Google is indeed Google than Google itself?
The reason everyone doesn't run a root CA is because it's difficult to coordinate trust between parties that may not know about each other ahead of time, and each and every root CA adds more maintenance burden on part of trust-stores. When I self-sign my cert, I am effectively my own root CA, but I lack a compelling value proposition for everyone to add it into their trust-stores, and of course there's the initial difficulty of me propagating my key fingerprint over a tamper-proof "out-of-band" channel ahead of time where you have assurance that it's coming from me.
Google, on the other hand, is fairly easy to verify that they're indeed Google, considering they just published their public keys on their own website. By having a prior web property that's already trusted, they have bootstrapped the trust necessary for fingerprint distribution, and the rest should follow.
When Google's CAs start issuing certs to non-Google parties, we can revisit the 'eggs-in-basket' question.
The foundation of a more secure web apparently requires you to trust Google with the entire internet, using their properties as leverage to force it to be so.
Perhaps just a general feeling that all the internet eggs are being put, one by one, in one single alphabet basket.
As much as we might trust Google, shouldn't there be something like separation of powers as a safeguard?
Brian Smith has argued for supporting only P-256, P-384 and Curve25519: https://briansmith.org/GFp-0. That said, Mozilla decided to continue to advertize support for P-521 for NSS (https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1128792).
P-256 and P-384 are widely supported in various TLS libraries (SChannel, SecureTransport, OpenSSL, NSS), whereas Curve25519 doesnt yet seem present in Microsoft or Apples libraries. I suppose with TLS 1.3 support perhaps we may see it implemented?
Unfortunately it seems none of the NIST curves (P-*) are considered safe by DJB and Tanja Lange: https://safecurves.cr.yp.to/.
How do we (or Google) know that the CIA and FBI can't create certificates from all the CAs because they have stolen/demanded the Root CA for them?
If I was a TLA I'd want the ability to perfectly MITM anyone.
I think these questions imply that there needs to be a better way to think about security and trust for web endpoints in the days of the state as a bad actor.
* pki.goog does not enforce TLS
* Why use .goog instead of .google?
but then again, government players plague every security system we have.
In the meantime, DNSCurve would be a great start, vs the major issues I have found with DNSSec.