Here's a random idea that might have more potential: create an adblocker browser plugin that also colors URLs based on how slow they are expected to load, e.g., smoothly from blue to red. The scores could be centrally calculated for the top N URLs on the web (or perhaps, an estimate based on the top M domain names and other signals) and downloaded to the client (so no privacy issues). People will very quickly learn to associate red URLs with the feeling "ugh, this page is taking forever". So long as the metric was reasonably robust to gaming, websites would face a greater pressure to cut the bloat. And yet, it's still ultimately feedback determined by a user's revealed preferences, based on what they think is worth waiting how long for, rather than a developer's guess about what's reasonable.
Thirty-five times! Apollo software got us to the moon. Doom wasted millions of man-hours on a video game.
My point of course is that these comparisons are not actually that illuminating.
Are web pages much heavier than they need to be? Yes. This presentation very capably talks about that problem:
Does comparing web pages to Doom help understand or improve the situation? No, not any more than comparing Doom to Apollo memory size helps us understand the difference between a video game and a history-altering exploration.
I have taken a lot of inspiration from http://motherfuckingwebsite.com/ and http://bettermotherfuckingwebsite.com/
Of course the size will differ depending on the site's purpose, but I feel like most web pages could stand to loose a lot of weight.
EDIT: I have a guide to setup a similar blog/site here
Times change, and 20 years in tech is equivalent to several geological ages.
If anything, it cannot really be underestimated how some developers were able to craft such compelling gaming experiences, with the limited resources available at the time.
My personal favorite as "most impressive game for its size":
1) How do the numbers come out when you exclude images?
It's valid and good to know the total sizes, including images, but that can hide huge discrepancies in the experienced performance of a site.
For example, a page with 150KB of HTML/CSS/JS and a single 2.1MB hero image can feel very different from a page with 2MB of HTML/CSS/JS and a few 50KB images.
If we're just interested in total bandwidth consumption, then sure, total size is a good metric. If we're interested in how a user experiences the web, there's a lot of variability and nuance buried in that.
2) What device and methodology were used to take the measurements?
In this age of responsive design, CSS media queries, and infinite scrolling/deferred loading, it really matters how you measure and what you use to measure.
For example, if I load a page on my large retina screen and scroll to the bottom, many sites will send far more data than if I load them on my phone and don't scroll past the fold.
I only skimmed the article and didn't dig in to the references. These questions may be answered elsewhere.
The Website Obesity Crisis
Heres the video of the talk if you prefer to hear him speak:https://vimeo.com/147806338
Try visiting Apple's website for example. I can't see how you can have a small page weight if your page includes several images that are meant to look good on high quality screens. You're not going to convince marketing and page designers to go with imageless pages.
Doom's original resolution was 320x200 = 64K pixels in 8-bit colour mode. Even an Apple Watch has 92K pixels and 24-bit colour (three times more space per pixel) now, and a 15" MacBook display shows 5.2M pixels. The space used for high quality images on newer displays is order of magnitudes higher to what Doom hardware had to show.
Every discussion about the web will continue to be a mess until we clarify what we're talking about.
Let's try rephrasing the title a couple times.
Rephrase 1: "The average size of a webapp is now the average size of a Doom install".
Response: Interesting, but not bad! Heck, some webapps are games. "The average size of a web game is now the average size of Doom" isn't a sentence that damns the web, it's a sentence that complements the web! (or would if it was true, and it might be for all I know)
Rephrase 2: "The average size of web document is now the average size of a Doom install".
Response: Well this sucks (or would if it was true -- still we don't know). Simple documents should be a few KB, not the size of a game.
Basically our terminology is shot to crap. Imagine if 19th century engineers used the same word for "hand crank" and "steam engine". "Hand crank prices are skyrocketing! What's causing this massive bloat!" Whelp, that could mean anything.
The best solution: web browsers should enforce a clear distinction between "web documents" and "web apps". These are two different things and should be treated separately. This won't happen though, which leaves us (the rest of the tech community) to explore other options . . .
1,000,000 * 10 / 2250 = 4444 web pages a month
4444 / 31 = 143 web pages a day at most on mobile.
While it is somehow acceptable, I don't see data plans getting cheaper yet the size of the average webpage is raising fast.
It doesn't seem like most websites have heavily invested in using HTML5 offline capabilities or actual mobile first design either, something easy to check with chrome dev tools.
Also let's talk about ads : Polygon.com a site I visit often , first article on the homepage with an Iphone 5 :
- with ads/trackers 1.5mb- without ads 623kb
More than half of the load is ad/tracking related. This isn't normal.
This video shows how we do it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S4LbUv5FsGQ
This document gives some results (like a GMail client that is 100X smaller): https://docs.google.com/a/google.com/document/d/1Kuw6_sMCKE7...
Oh, and you need a loop? \adds underscore.js\
I wonder how much of the problem is due to bloated templates.
and the video it refers to https://vimeo.com/147806338
Minifying JS and CSS, compression, CDNs and caching won't keep your browser from having to render all the stuff.
The stewardess on a new jet airliner:
- Ladies and gentlemen, welcome aboard of our new airplane. On the second deck you'll find a couple of bars and a restaurant. The golf course is on the third deck. You're also welcome to visit the swimming pool on the fourth deck. Now - ladies and gentlemen - please fasten your seatbelts. With all this sh*t we'll try to take off.
Doom isn't in true 3D, its an advanced raycasting engine. The levels are all 2D, there are no polygons, you can't look up and down. Doom has been ported to a TI Calculator. Lets maintain some perspective here.
I suggest that at the moment, we have basically two camps of website, with rough, fuzzy boundaries.
1. A place where someone sticks up an insight, or posts a wiki page, or whatever, to share some thought to others (if anyone actually cares). The blogs of many users of HN. Hacker News itself. Wikipedia. The Arch Linux Wiki. lwn.net. Etc. The sites are very roughly concerned with 'this is what I care about, if you do, great, this is useful to you'.
2. Commercial web sites that employ sophisticated means to try and enlarge market share and retain users. AB testing. 'Seamless' experiences which are aimed at getting more views, with user experience as an afterthought (a sort of evolutionary pressure, but not the only one).
Complaining that camp #2 exists is strange. It's a bit like lamenting the fact that chocolate bars aren't just chocolate bars, they have flashy wrappers, clever ingredients, optimized sugar ratio, crunchy bit and non crunchy bit, etc.
It works! A snickers bar is a global blockbuster, and 'Tesco chocolate bar' is the functional chocolate bar that just does the job, but will never attain that level of commercial success, it serves a different role.
My personal view:
Fundamentally what I want when we click a link from an aggregator, is an 'article.txt' with perhaps a relevant image or two. Something like http://motherfuckingwebsite.com/ maybe.
But if a site actually does that, a website like The Guardian, I'd fire up wget, strip all the advertising, strip the fact it's even The Guardian, and read it like a book. If everyone does it then no-one makes any money, site dies.
So what we actually have is this constant DRM-style race to try and fight for our brains to get us to look at adverts. It's not about jQuery, it's about advertising, branding, 'self vs other' (the integrity of a company as a coherent thing), etc.
I don't know what the answer is here. I think this is why I find concepts like UBI so appealing - I find it kind of alarming that we seem doomed to infect more and more of the commons with commercialization because we haven't found a solution to keep each other alive otherwise.
So indeed, there is a huge optimization opportunity of having a stricter error model.
Also, I'm really wondering how much battery could be saved when surfing such pages.
Also I'm sure there is a lot of potential going in the pre-parsed document model. But that's a next level kind of engineering I guess.
Sure, if man hours were free, we could trim it all down to (my rough guess) about 1/10th the size. But at $100 or even $10 an hour its just not worth it. Pay the GBs to your carrier, spend $50 more on a better phone.
As for why it's getting so insane, probably either:
1. Frameworks, since most people don't remove the code they're not using. For Bootstrap or Foundation, that can be a lot of extra code.
2. Content Management Systems, since stuff like WordPress, Drupal, Joomla, any forum or social network script, tend to add a lot of extra code (more so if you've added plugins).
3. The aforementioned tracking codes, ads, etc.
Wow. That's nice to see actually.
Locally I see so many companies building good looking but horrendously optimized websites for their clientele who don't know enough to ask for it.
The last company I worked at were building a local search engine and were displaying thumbnails whilst loading full size pictures which were hot linked from businesses websites. With an auto loading feature at the bottom of the page by the php backend, an initial 5-6 Mb page load could turn into 30+ Mb within a few seconds of scrolling. Add to this no gzipping and caching was not properly configured either.
I tried my best to get some changes going but the senior (and only other) dev wouldn't allow any modifications to the current system "for the moment". It was a bit frustrating to see so many easy fixes ignored.
Isn't that that the top websites have a lot more ressources available to improve asset management, cleanup and refactor?
Everything is sales.
If cleaner, 'purer' sites made more money you bet the average web page would be 10kb.
It's all about what translates to more sales. As such, you won't ever see a return to more traditional websites. Look at Amazon with it's virtual dress models, heavy as hell, but they most certainly land more sales.
Also:You can't use average page weight when you are just looking at the top ten. That downturn could represent a single website; all others could be increasing in size.
I kept looking for a "minimal" blogging platform, but they all had too much bloat/JS/etc. I guess minimal means different things to different people. I ended up just writing my own. The biggest post I have is 7.41 KB.
I used to be interested in front-end design, but since it's the industry standard to use $latest_framework, instead of tried and proven practices, I've given up on that idea.
It's not really surprising in a world where a graphical driver is > 100 MB (Nvidia driver for Windows).
It's actually better to show the user some progress bar, than the standard browser's "Waiting for yoursite.com".
You can get away with a lot without jQuery, while still having clean-ish code.
1) This is an irrelevant statistic.
2) Even if this were true it's not that big of a deal.
This is irrelevant because most people don't browse the average web page. They browse the top few sites on the internet and that's it. A more relevant statistic would be what have the sizes of the top 50 sites been over the last 15 years. I imagine they still may have grown on average, but download speeds have also grown over that time. Especially on mobile.
Even if we accept the premise that web sites as a whole, including the most popular ones are all growing and are now an average of 2.2MB each. Who cares? 2.2MB is nothing in 2016. Even on an LTE connection that's probably between 4 and 1.5 seconds to download the full page. And a lot of that size is probably in ads, which nobody minds if they load last or not at all.
Lastly, this is a self fixing problem. If a site is too bloated, users will stop going to it.
But I would propose that a lot of this increase in size is due to users (especially mobile) having higher and higher resolution displays, which necessitates higher resolution content, which of course is bigger.
Although I get really annoyed when I visit a blog post whose page is 100x larger than Dostoevsky's novels in .txt format. On my blog (https://pljns.com/blog/), JQuery and genericons are often my largest file transfers, but I still clock under 500kb.
I don't know if the story behind the facebookcorewwwi.onion domain name itself has been talked about much, but we wanted a memorable name for the domain so we took a new cluster that hadn't been put in production yet and threw something like 500k cores at brute forcing onion names till we had a memorable domain name. Alec had a script that looked for hashes that started with facebook and then he picked the one that seemed to fit the most. And that's how we have facebookcorewwwi.onion now.
I do not trust your company, and I think you are bound to act unethically in the future. But I do not ask you to become a trustworthy ethical company. Mess with the accounts of my friends all you want. I just want to be invited to the next BBQ. People have stopped using e-mail for announcing these social events, and _all_ use Facebook. Could it be possible for me to not be on Facebook, yet still stay up-to-date on what my friends, or hell, even my parents now, are doing? A more advanced social graph API that hooks into email, RSS, Twitter, whatever... ?
I'm sure you also have my email-address from the address books of my contacts, so you could verify me.
As one of your longest non-users (I remember when TheFacebook required a Harvard-email for invite), please let me become a semi-user. It won't pay you a dime, but it will make the world a better place.
So, I wasn't able to login via TOR via the purposefully created .onion address. Also, sent an issue report via non-TOR login about this, but never got any response.
Note also that this seems to mean to me, that there may be people who are cut off from FB via TOR same as me, but who don't even have a way to notify FB about the fact. And thus not having any chance of having the bug fixed.
in theory the only thing you're leaking over a plain https is, "Hey this guy has friends." (this connection is visiting facebook).
meanwhile in theory I'd expect facebook to leak everything else on their end, because come on. I have next to zero expectation of privacy on facebook.
by that I mean you think people are planning terrorist plots over facebook? come on.
so I find the mashup of tor with facebook to be kind of bizarre.
She's currently dealing with two overlapping regulations, one from the state, the other from the city:(1) All electrical outlets must be placed less than 18 inches from the edge of a countertop, to make them accessible to people in wheelchairs
(2) A countertop must have an outlet every 18 inches, or less.
They're getting held up in permitting because there is a no constructible L-shaped countertop that satisfies both of these constraints. The best part, nobody on either side seems to care much, they're "just doing their job"...and housing isn't getting built.
I'm not sure what to make of this, other than that it's the newest brilliant "innovation" from the place that banned happy meal toys, and outlawed plastic bags.
Any new builder will see their housing development costs go up, and given the short supply of housing, will cause RE prices to go up on new housing. This system therefore benefits existing landowners who were able to reap higher gains on existing buildings and helps create a moat on new housing development.
Also, just in case anybody is curious, most solar panels are not a good economic investment for an investor. In an optimistic case, they may pay for themselves in 7-10 years but the value of the asset itself depreciates so quickly that it isn't worth the risk financially or in on-going maintenance costs.
If there's one thing we really understand, it's complexity: why it sucks, how to avoid it, and how piling on rule after rule can make the legal code "unmaintainable" (sound familiar?)
When I plan to buy a house I'll seriously consider installing solar, but id almost want to tear down any installation forced on by the city. If it's your property it should be up to you to consider what you want to add to your domicile. Maybe I don't want the upfront cost of solar, or maybe I planned on other renewables.
Put solar on all your city buses, put solar on all city buildings, etc. Don't force solar on homeowners who never wanted it.
I do think that carbon reduction is pretty essential, but it's so essential that I don't think we can waste our money on low yield actions. I'm not saying this strictly is, I'd have to read about it more, but I'm not optimistic that mandating very specific technologies will be a good approach.
Learn more here: https://www.wundercapital.com/
Would it not have been sufficient to offer tax incentive carrots instead of making it a requirement?
I've lived in many US cities and WoW San Fran is a shock to the system!
Another great example is homelessness. Homelessness is actually something which should be addressed at the Federal (for Veterans) and State (for people who should receive medical help) levels, not the city. Oh well.
The end result of this solar initiative will be to increase costs for the poor. The 'real' solution is for CA gov't to stipulate that all dwellings of X and Y quality that receive Z amounts of sunlight are required to offset A% of their annual energy consumption with Solar/wind energy. You can either build it on your own home or buy a share in a solar/wind farm.
I thought the problem was that they have a lot of architecture preservation and not enough new office and residential construction.
Similar to Boston and Manhattan, mature cities where there isn't that much new construction, so this kind of ordinance seems more symbolic than practical.
A few comments, however ...
> ... we had to go to the dark side to be able to confront the threat posed by bad guys. We had to adopt their methods for ourselves.
He's using "we" there in reference to the government. But it can also be read with "we" as you and me, and "bad guys" as the government ;) But then, I claim a broad "right to be left alone", one that doesn't concede any state monopoly on power.
> ... you cant opt out of governmental mass surveillance that watches everybody in the world without regard to any suspicious criminal activity or any kind of wrong doing.
Well, sure you can ... as he goes on to explain ...
> You would need to act like a spy to pursue a career in a field like journalism because you are always being watched.
... and ...
> Instead of changing your phone to change your persona divorcing your journalist phone from your personal phone you can use the systems that are surrounding us all of the time to move between personas.
Right! Compartmentalization is for sure the way to go. There are numerous personas like Mirimir. Maybe I make it too distinctive. But I have no meatspace identity that goes on like Mirimir does. And Mirimir, ve has lots of vis personas. So hey, let's create a tangled morass of overlapping personas ;)
Like Schell and Karger said for 30 years, what we need is to start deploying high-assurance security practices, protocols, systems, methods... everything that's proven to get the job done in various ways. We need them deployed pervasively. More private protocols and encryption by default, too, but who gives a shit if it runs on systems so insecure it doesn't need backdoors?
Let's go back to 1960's moving toward the 70's and 80's on hardware stuff. Burroughs stuff was tagged so everything in memory was code or data, pointers protected, arrays bounds-checked, arguments checked on function calls, and OS tried to isolate apps from each other. Some LISP machines had GC's for memory management. System/38 had capability-security & built-in database. Solo had safe concurrency at OS level. One had read-only firmware you couldn't change without physically moving it with a nucleus that handle protected functions that OS's built on. Two implemented a secure, Ada runtime that enforced the language's safety properties. SAFE (crash-safe.org), Cambridge's CHERI, and Sandia's SSP/Score processors follow these traditions.
Now let's look at how Schell et al said to do assurance. Precise, math/flowcharts/whatever description of functional and security requirements to avoid ambiguities & resulting vulnerabilities. Similar for design with attention to simplicity. Implementation in safest language you can with simpler subset and style easy to analyze. Every module proven to match a requirement/spec so no subversion (well, a start on it...). Strict modularity, layering, and interface checks all over the place. Success and failure states modeled then shown to follow a precise, security policy. If you can't state it precisely, then you can't secure it because you don't know what security means for you. Code review, tests of each function, formal proofs if possible, static analysis if possible, covert channel analysis of info flows, configuration management that assumes malicious developers, source to object code verification, trusted distribution of HW/SW to customers, onsite verification/generation from source, and configuration guidance. All of this independently verified by at least one set of professionals that know what they're doing.
That was security in 1970's-1980's. Far from red tape some here claim, every method above was proven by researchers, field users, and pentesters to catch serious problems. The only dispute was what caught most and where to spend most money. Even those questions had decent answers. Well, plus specific design and modeling decisions but INFOSEC was in infancy & that was evolving. I'm talking assurance activities: getting it done right whatever it is. Fast forward today to find that all the problems Schell, Karger, etc predicted have happened and consistently in systems that don't use those methods whereas systems that do avoid many more problems.
So, here's the solution: raise assurance of our systems across the board using methods that go back to 1961. That's right, Burroughs engineers were doing a better job on security before that was even a thing just trying to improve reliability. This is 2016. We have better specs, better languages, better static analysis, easier formal tools, automated test generation, tons of sample code, fast dev machines... you name it. There's no excuse, outside willful ignorance or apathy, for security-focused developers (esp in FOSS) to not use everything at their disposal that's proven to work at reducing risk. Even less excuse for the stuff they make to still be less secure than tech from the friggin 60's and 70's.
Shout out to the exceptions that are trying to do it right. Groups like GenodeOS, Dresden, NICTA/OKL4, Carlisle's IRONSIDES DNS, Bernstein's stuff, Galois, JX OS, ETH, INRIA, Secure64, Sentinel HYDRA (minus bodacion crap lol), Combex, and even NativeClient since they knocked off OP browser. Enough stuff like this and NSA will be begging us to ban INFOSEC books and shit since their info will dry up haha.
I guess so? Not me though. Snowden literally only proved what I had learned on my own.
> But we were confronted with documented evidence in 2013 that even what most people would consider to be a fairly forthright upstanding government was abusing these capabilities in the most indiscriminate way.
Um. Who thought this? Ever? Since the 90s.
>You are receiving this error message because your ip (126.96.36.199) is listed in the StopForumSpam.com database.
>You can check the status of your IP and have it removed by visiting http://www.stopforumspam.com/removal. Thank you.
It's kind of ironical that they are quoting Snowden and their own site blocks Tor.
E: didn't HN used to have markdown quoting?
Before I shut mine down it could run 13 or so different languages, spin up collaborative REPLs for Node.js/Python/Ruby, and organize snippets into tutorials/lessions, etc. It was awesome, but now sits in my side project graveyard. It's a shame really.
Glad to see glot.io getting more attention.
And my guess as to different parts of the application has been developed in different languages and to the use of two db's are for educational purposes.
How does the rocket science work here? Like how do you run different programming languages in the client side.
Do they pass the code to the server and run it in there then pass it to the client?
Other than that, awesome job!
Edit: I do wish it had a more recent version of node though (currently v0.12.7)
Open source everything -- runners, site, etc
I always love the irony of people so against the basic social contract are always so quick to turn to authorities when things predictably go wrong.
We learn some more things. Bob has prior police records in Florida, where hes from.
Building a security system to handle this level of attack is a whole level beyond stopping even determined external attackers. Are there any best practices guides on this?
One thing that the article showed is the importance of external security review to deal with the threat of internal incompetence or evil.
At my humble and refreshingly drama-free place of work we have standard client images. Anything weird and the techies re-image the client. Assuming 'Bob' wasn't in charge of the images, would such a procedure have sorted the rdp?
This is pure and simple Mr. Voorhees (CEO) incompetency. After all, Bob is a criminal and he was just doing his "job".
His son Don Iwerks also created the first 360-degree camera (for use in Disney's 1950s nature documentaries).
(Shameless plug) If you like what you see, please upvote and comment on my ApplyHN: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11523675
ps: only recently I realized how much animation techniques were a big part of non animated movies too. Matte paintings etc.
While in theory anyone in the US can make it with sufficient effort, the reality is that some people get economically shat on through no fault of their own. Our national mythology/culture doesn't take this into account, and as a result we're incredibly vicious towards those who struggle.
As more and more capital needs less and less labor to be profitable and create value, we're going to need to find more effective ways to make sure everyone's needed, or things have a potential to get much worse before they get better.
EDIT: As others have noted, we also severely undervalue social capital, so we by and large firesale it to accumulate more material value. We work more instead of spending time with friends and family, thereby dangerously isolating ourselves. Thank you all for pointing this out.
In a group of professionals where we are taught "the sky is the limit!", it is important to remember that for the vast majority of our brothers and sisters on this earth, not only is the default difficulty of life set to hard but the deck is also stacked against them in every game.
An example is people tweeting food, if you follow thirteen people who post pictures of their lunch, then you will only have a comparatively good lunch once every two weeks. (And that is only if you don't follow people whose job is to post amazing food.) Similar, TV is full of people who complain about being poor sitting in an apartment with Hudson river view. ( It does not help, that the apartment looks like it was designed by an $5000/hr interior designer, because the director wanted it to look good and hired an $5000/hr interior designer.)
Basically this is a variant of Charlie Stross's idea, that news acts as a depressant, because that is the kind of news that sells. ( And is usually a lot easier to write.) Old-media is full of the kind of middle class existence that is at three times the median income, while social media means that the expectation is to keep up on average with the maximum of your peers (because only the best is posted).
That does not make it any less tragic or less deserving of attention, but we should pick appropriately-scaled policy solutions instead of those we might use for a crisis. (The NPR piece today about suicide rates in Greenland strikes me as an extreme crisis.)
It's also worth noting, for all the people pointing out economic causes for increased suicide, that economically-battered Greece has by far the lowest suicide rate in this group.
It is tragic that girls of that age range kill themselves at all. By 2014, their suicide rate rose to the level of boys' suicides in 1999.
Meanwhile, boys' suicide rate between 1999 and 2014 rose even more than girls. This however, is not alarming for some reason.
Crisis Text Line provides free assistance to anyone who texts help to 741-741.
If you prefer to talk on the phone, N.I.H. recommends the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline: 1-800-273-TALK (8255).
I think many Americans would have a healthier mental state if it was acknowledged that the poverty and unemployment many experience is not caused by their lack of hard work or character but a product of the failures of the society they live in.
America is now one of the least socially mobile places in the western world and yet the majority of American keep believing in the myth that anything is possible.
Why is the article mentioning accidents and diseases? Is it implying that these are counted as suicide? I.e. is this the same research, or a tangential discussion of some other results?
If liver disease was not considered suicide 30 years ago, but is counted a suicide, you will have a jump in the numbers.
More people dying of drug overdoses can easily be pinned on the War on Drugs, which creates an ecosystem such that only brutal criminals get to distribute drugs, and they don't care what they contain since they don't even bat an eyelash when they murder. Overdoes don't prove increasing "plight"; they more directly confirm increasing junk on the streets. Not to mention, new kinds of drugs!
All anyone does is pay lip service to any of this. It will get far worse before it's likely to get better.
Honestly, let it come.
A somewhat related statistic is the death rate in rural America.
If we see suicide as a mental-health issue, then its just another statistic demonstrating that people are unhealthy.
I think we're all searching for happiness. While I still haven't found what it is for me personally, I think we're all looking in the wrong place.
In fact it clearly states they can only retain stuff long term if the DOJ notifies them explicitly that they have a continuing litigation/preservation hold necessity (which is usually not the DOJ doing it,but say, a civil lawsuit that carries with it preservation obligations).
It also makes further clear that in all cases, the only people with access to most of any retained data is system administrators, not investigators, and that it can't be used for investigative purposes.
It does say general querying is allowed, but only people explicit 702 access rights are the ones who must be making such queries, or making such decisions. In all cases all records of who accessesd what with what query terms and their access level are explicitly logged, etc.
It also explicitly states that information acquired under section 702 will not be introduced as evidence against a person in a criminal proceeding, without1. Explicit approval of the attorney general2. in criminal cases related to national security crimes
In any case, this is not new, this viewpoint is something going back to FISC precedent from 2002.
So it's not like this just happened.
Additionally, the statute is pretty clear here.
It says:"(h) Minimization procedures, with respect to electronic surveillance, means
...(3) notwithstanding paragraphs (1) and (2), procedures that allow for the retention and dissemination of information that is evidence of a crime which has been, is being, or is about to be committed and that is to be retained or disseminated for law enforcement purposes; and"
So again, nothing new here, this has been law for quite a while.
In short, i may hate a lot of things about FISA/FISC/etc, but i think the EFF is stretching to say this is a new problem, or to blame the court for it.
Their previous defense was that "collect" meant to actually inspect the information.
This is not going to be a popular opinion, but I think a compromise is necessary. There is no way to stand up to the train of data collection. For one, the public being afraid of this and that will demand to be protected at all costs, no matter how small the threat. The more scandalous the news cycle gets, the more panic we will see. And then the technology improves so fast, soon enough publicly installed video cameras will track everyone, and all within the constitutional framework.
A middle ground would be to create the fourth branch of the government that is tasked with data collection, but will only give it up on court order. Orders may be for individual incidents based on reasonable cause, or for data-mining, based on a judgement of proper scope.
I'm counting on you lot at HN and beyond to create the technology allowing widespread encryption that makes such surveillance moot.
As I understand it, PRISM is not a thing that lets the NSA willy nilly search the internal networks of companies they've onboard,
It is instead a thing for companies who would be the target of large volumes of these requests just because of their size to upload the data they're legally required to because of NSL or similar, in a rapid fashion.
Is this assessment correct?
I want reporting, not advocacy. The better of the mainstream press outlets are balanced to a fault but get the interesting details wrong or leave them out altogether. The fringe outlets target their core audience with lots of spun details and a lack of opposing viewpoint.
EDIT: If anyone can get past "lefty vs righty" and answer my core question I'd really appreciate it. This is a genuine query for information, not a clever way to troll.
'Nothing to hide' privacy naysayers imagine innocence a perfect defense.
In practice a prosecution presents select facts in the order best suited to convict.
Under mass surveillance they have all the facts; the defense only has what one still possesses/ remembers.
With such resources, enough well cast aspersions could convict anyone of something.
Counter intuitively innocence can be harder to defend as the guilty will have prepared alabis. (part2 @)
Lawyers advise their clients not to talk freely to police for very good reason.@
If the judges and politicians had half a brain, they'd understand that they, and not us, will be the first to experience the downsides of a security state gone berserk.
His comments in the video about "sometimes they lose their way" was filled with compassion.
We need more people like that in the world.
It's a problem that stems from being surrounded by millions of people who take disproportionate pride in the belonging to a savant elite. What I always say to people who ask me to describe programmers: "Programmers are people who like to create metaphors, but who like to correct other people's metaphors even more".
That being said, I feel like I've progressed in my understanding of those concepts by reading the post, so thanks to the author.
As long as it doesn't include food or live animals - you're cool.
The U.S. is starting to get as bad as Heian Japan -- where the obsession of aristocrats on maintaining their privilege meant making a mockery of the Confucian institutions they imported from China.
No, it was an exercise in barriers. Everybody  has enough "privilege" to do this experiment, by which I mean the experiment itself without the "fair" elements, with little more than a slightly-interested science teacher. They just aren't allowed to do it by the science fair. Being able to speak with "actual" scientists about counting bacteria is at most a slight bonus; it is not necessary to the process, learning about it by reading would be a fine education on its own, and even failing at the process would be educational in its own way, as the author describes in his own experiences. (Science fairs have a major role to play in the pernicious idea that science is only "successful" when it obtains the positive result the experimenter was looking for... but that's a separate rant.)
This isn't someone being born with silver spoons in their mouth. This is regulation thoughtlessly applied with no thought about the costs. If "privilege" issues were as easy as just removing some regulation, we probably wouldn't be talking about it so much.
: Everyone plausibly within the scope of this article, anyhow, which is places that have science fairs at all. That would be a separate issue.
Homemade spacecraft - okay we've all had fantasies of doing this and depending on how far you've gone with it the primary material starts off with sofa cushions or cardboard. The sky is limit (no pun intended) for ideas on it. Environmentally safe batteries- okay there's a lot of room for this one too (potatoes come to mind).
Not sure about the last one though. How does a child develop an Ebola test kit?!
"Dad can you get me some Ebola ... it's for a science fair project!"
When they're alone then it doesn't workout so well.
For example, lets look at the Tesla Powerwall numbers. The Powerwall warranty covers 85% of capacity with 740 cycles in the first two years -- whichever comes first. Then it covers 66% capacity with 1,087 cycles in three years, and finally, it covers 54% of capacity for 2,368 cycles in five years. http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/is-teslas-powerw...
Running the numbers for the Powerwall, 85%, 66%, and 54% of 7kWh is 5.4, 4.6, and 3.8kWh respectively.
(740cycles x 5.4kWh) + (1087cycles x 4.6kWh) + (2368cycles x 3.8kWh) = 17994.6kWh
Thus the cost per kWh stored is
$3000/17994.6kWh = 16.7 cents/kWh.
Not included is the shipping and installation cost, which could add another $300 - $500, which would run
$3300/17994.6kWh = 18.3 cent/kWh.
UCI Researchers Accidentally Make Batteries Last 400 Times Longer
now if John Carreyrou had been conducting the interview, that would be another thing but I get the feeling that he would never be granted an interview simply because he is much more qualified in terms of competency in Theranos and its history and science relative to Shriver that they would see him as a threat
Shriver on the other hand probably came across as a 'safe' interview to the company, which it was
real journalism is so hard to find these days, sigh
"Journalism is printing what someone else does not want printed: everything else is public relations."George Orwell
Not an ad hominem or personal attack, purely curiosity.
So in a way, it can be seen as a good and necessary thing that expectations are brought back to match reality.
Or is Walgreens just trying to get from under the weight of theranos's bad publicity at this point?
(I have no idea whether that suggestion is accurate.)
Walgreens appears to have taken a cautious approach toward terminating the relationship, perhaps preferring to wait until federal regulators impose penalties or the criminal investigation yields formal charges, either of which would strengthen Walgreenss hand.
Essentially, Walgreens is playing the wait-and-see game before making their decision.
Mostly it's supported by Intel's ICC and ICPC compilers, but I was interested to see that it's been ported to LLVM.
There's a parallel project for GCC as well: https://www.cilkplus.org/build-gcc-cilkplus
Or is it just a compiler integrated green thread library?
The FAQ is really vague just says its makes interfacing with parallelism easier.
Enjoy having to put attribution in literally every Cilk binary you distribute :P
Highest suicide rates occur during the spring, around the vernal equinox not around the darkest time of the year. If you've never experienced the northern spring where each day is 10+ minutes longer than the previous, you'll never understand it. It just fucks up your mind in ways that are hard to describe.
My kitchen psychology thinks the high suicide rates in the spring may be related to the fact that people around you start to get more positive and active (some too much so) but if you're suffering from a bad depression, seeing that around you will make it worse.
It's not just suicides that peak. It also affects breakup/divorce rates as well as forming new relationships. It probably affects professional careers too, but I don't know if there are stats about it.
The long, dark winters and the rapid change that follows brings out some very primal sides. That being said, I'd recommend travel to the extreme latitudes around the solstices, both of them.
side note: we have about 15 hour long days at the moment. It's still pretty dark at night but I can't wait for the summer when you can see the sunset and sunrise at the same time if you look to the north at around midnight... it's magical.
Anyway, when in Greenland it is politically correct to eat seal and whale, once you find out how they are hunted and how the population cherishes the animals.
The coolest thing about Greenland was that the museums had no tools for warfare. Conflicts between people in Greenland were carried out by people playing drums and 'rapping' their cause in a song duel. If you had the laughs and opinions on your side, the person who 'lost' received sled dogs and food and was let go. I wish this could be used for all conflicts around the world.
I believe many mental illnesses, depression, suicidal behavior and anorexia among them, can be characterized as contagious. And perhaps some other things that aren't usually described as mental illnesses. The border between belief, religion and mental illness seems a bit fuzzy (echoes of Snow Crash). Small isolated communities must be much more susceptible to contagion taking hold, as single events have a great sway over perceptions, and there are few connections with a larger world to normalize things.
Charles Stross said something about the internet that stuck with me: "the accidental invention of telepathy". Just like public water supplies opened up new vectors for diseases such as cholera, I wonder if the internet's ability to more or less put minds directly in touch can facilitate the spread of certain mental illnesses. Consuming unfiltered internet might be looked on in a few years like drinking unsterilized water. In particular, I wonder if certain "echo chamber" social websites that allow easy isolation from mainstream opinion (Tumblr and 4chan, I'm looking at you) might be analogous to these dangerous isolated communities.
And no, it's not just the dark that makes people commit suicide. Of the top 10 countries with the highest suicide rates, only Lithuania can be considered as having a somewhat gloomy winter. The rest of the countries all get more sunlight (Guyana, Suriname and Sri Lanka for instance) than the countries generally accepted as happiest in the world: Denmark (ironically, considering the story), Switzerland, Iceland and Norway.
I spent years answering the phone on a crisis line. Some people's problems just didn't seem that bad, yet they were overwhelmed nonetheless. Some people had such crushing burdens I was astonished they could even talk.
I didn't find it uplifting, in fact it drained me. I am astonished by her ability to do it for almost 20 years. I guess it was a form of catharsis for her as well.
As a counterpoint to this article's title (but not content, really), there was an interesting piece a while back about seasons and psyche:
TL;DR: Mindset matters. If you don't like winter, then a long dark winter isn't much fun: "The survey results indicated that wintertime mindset may indeed play a role in mental health and well-being in Norway. The Wintertime Mindset Scale had strong positive correlations with every measure of well-being we examined, including the Satisfaction with Life Scale (a widely used survey that measures general life satisfaction), and the Personal Growth Composite (a scale that measures openness to new challenges). The people who had a positive wintertime mindset, in other words, tended to be the same people who were highly satisfied with their lives and who pursued personal growth."
 On a somewhat related note, I highly recommend the Norwegian original film "Insomnia" (the basis for the American remake with Al Pacino): http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0119375/
And I can't say that I really blame them. Attawapiskat is an extremely isolated community, with few jobs and no amenities. Kids growing up in Attawapiskat have nothing to look forward to. Those who leave the community have much lower rates of suicide, but given the memories of children being taken away from their families and forced into abusive residential schools, no politician in their right mind would dare to suggest that as an option. So they live out their lives in miserable isolation, waiting for their boredom to end; and some decide to speed along the process.
Very good article.
See also this trailer, which I like a lot: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vwNoqgg474s not the original movie, not the remake - but a StarCraft 2 mod allowing to play a mafia/werewolf-style game).
P.S: I like the article's side bar about responsible reporting on suicide. That's forgotten far too often in the rush for gripping headlines and clicks.
Their ancestors were hunters and this gave them purpose in life as well as good diet which led to much happier life. Now they have nothing to do except watch TV and sit on their couch and eat bad food. Of course they are unhappy, you would be too.
Government can be largely replaced by software. (just thinking long term here)
Democracy can be more pure. Corruption can be controlled. Economies can be stabilized and better planned. Environmental resources can be better managed.
We've got a lot more work to do past sharing images & allowing chats (though look at the massive affect of just those things)
China doesn't want to be a dumping ground for western media, and they're rightfully concerned about not being able to build a content export industry.
"This is particularly useful in government, because we need to complete quite a few training sessions and pieces of paperwork."
I can see the value in building a tool to track all of the moving pieces in what appears to be a bureaucratic, inefficient system ... but I would love to see more work put into resolving those inefficiencies.
Can any of those tasks be automated?
Is there any way to reduce the amount of paperwork required?
Can the training sessions be replaced with online tutorials?
- This seemed really cool since we have various processes and this would let us both document and operationalize the processes. Things like: add/change user permissions or create a new vm/container, etc. We could make it easy to show where documentation is and what should be updated.
- Installation is simple, but it is hardcoded to authenticate against Github and look and see if you are a member of the 18F group. If not, you are refused access. Changing the group is just a simple edit to the app.js file, but changing authentication from Github to another source would require adding another passport config file into api/ (as far as I can tell), and possibly additional dev.
- The checklists are all json files, there's no UI for creating the checklist. In fact, there's no CRUD for checklists at all, they are flatfile managed with a text editor. This is not ideal, but building an editor might not be too rough. The main thing is that checklist creation is a developer operation.
- There is no UI for associating checklists with role/users or grouping the checklists. Everyone sees all of the checklists and then self-selects which checklist they want to add to their plate. It looks like the tasks are all user-specific, so you couldn't have a checklist that was divided up amongst a team, it is all single-user focused. I suppose you could create a dummy team user that multiple people had access to, but that seems icky. Similarly, while you can see other user's tasks, you can't take one of their tasks and help them out by doing it.
- There's no context for the tasks. If you had two new employees or two VMs to provision, you would have to do them one at a time. Adding a second checklist while you have a first in progress just gives you a pile of duplicated tasks that have no context as to which initial action they are related to. You can add a note to the initial checklist assignment like "SE3: Jane Doe" which will give some context for that assignment, but I don't see where that is related to the tasks. If the tasklist showed "Checklist Name - Checklist Note" in the table, then at least you could keep them separate.
Otherwise, I would love for this to work. I am in academia where we have two problems that this impacts: 1) we have lots of bureaucracy 2) we have lots of turnover in IT staff because we pay poorly. For both of these reasons, having a checklist tool would be fantastic.
Devs: please comment!
I see it as the beginning of a platform to change how individuals (or mankind) manage knowledge overall. Future features involve exploiting the internals for collaboration (linking instances, sharing data, subscribing to each others' data, mobile, etc)
Feedback or participation are appreciated. If one has any interest at all, I suggest signing up for the (~monthly?) announcements list at least.
They sound down right proud of their bureaucracy.
And does anyone have an I.P. address to another Bangladesh bank with $10 routers and stuff on SWIFT network? Just so I can try to SMTP a warning to that address to help them avoid being hit, too.
I was thinking about having multiple layers (security loves onions!) with interchangeably components that you roll over at random. That way any given attack vector at one point might be mitigated by a different interface below it. Literally unplugging and plugging things in to shake things up.
I don't mean "this is a bad idea". I mean "I don't get it". What's the point?
My last online order was with Walgreens. I never tried them before but I googled for the product I had in my Amazon cart, it was cheaper at Walgreens, I added a few things to get up to $35 for free shipping, those things were also cheaper than on Amazon. I got the delivery faster than my last few free standard shipping orders with Amazon.
For a long time Amazon was the "default" in my mind for shopping online and I see now there's no reason it should be that way anymore.
It's especially silly for games, where the console manufacturers offer their own stores (both for digital and physical copies of the games). Heck, if you're buying them digital, it's about as little friction as using Amazon, since they have your payment details from other online services you use through the system (like Xbox Live).
One can't help but wonder if the damage this does to the brand outweighs the strategic gains through Prime subscriptions. After all, selection and availability is a huge part of Amazon's secret sauce to success, more so than customer service, shipping speed, or any other concern.
If customers lose the ability to assume that they can get anything on Amazon, it's hugely damaging to the brand.
It's that simple
If you don't like this, steer clear of strings-attached content platforms.
I mean, I get that if you live in Canada or Australia your bandwidth sucks and you have caps, but for most cases download speeds are way faster than DVD shipping speeds.
So this amounts to saying that they don't want my money. Very well; there are other options.
The weekend before his death, our house was filled with people who worked up the courage to come say goodbye, he sat among them in the living room and took a few minutes in person with everyone as much as his state allowed. I sat on his bed as he was treated with euthanasia, which was one of the most intense experiences of my life. I still miss the man every day, but because of the process we had together, I have nothing but fond memories of the times he was still there, including the very hard periods of time that come with a disease like this.
This turned into a bit more text than I intended but my point is this: If you ever have a choice in the way you are to die, take heed of the points in this story. It may seem brutal at times to be as honest and open as you can about such an intimate process, but having gone through it once, I have absolutely no regrets. I wish Pieter and his loved ones all the best in the coming times.
I am saddened to see you are so young.
> ... and enforce the barbaric torture of decay and failure. It's especially relevant for cancer, which is a primary cause of death
I'm glad you find yourself somewhere enlightened. As someone who watched his father die of cancer over 2.5-3 years in the UK it almost robbed me of my father for a while. The last six months were brutal. He was either away with the fairies on Morphine, or in his increasingly rare lucid moments, pleading with NHS to reduce his dose. He chose pain and lucidity over a zombie state yet was often denied that choice as the system sought to reduce pain above all. He made it plain when he could, many times during the end months, that he didn't want to play this game any more.
Post death, our memories were of the brutality, of the incoherent husk on drugs who had had enough long since, of the ever increasing dosages and tripping in the system's wish to reduce pain, of the morphine smell. Of being increasingly worn down by it. It was harder in those early weeks after death to remember the real man, so defined by his mind, intelligence, humour and practical jokes. I still miss my best friend.
The UK is no nearer enlightenment on this topic today than 20 years ago when my father died. The views of those claiming a hotline to god, in our increasingly atheistic country, were exceptionally hard to hear, yet always sought in any media discussion of euthanasia.
I am thankful your children and other family will have the blessing of kinder memories.
Thank you for your words
Take care /u/PieterH.
1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pieter_Hintjens2. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=115208883. https://twitter.com/hintjens
> My first free software is from 1991. I realized the power of community gradually from 2005 when fighting software patents in Europe. I refined and tested the techniques in the ffii for projects like digistan. I saw the failure of money and power in amqp. In zeromq it took years to find the right patterns. I documented much in culture and empire.
This earned my respect beyond words:
> "There's this experimental cure people are talking about." This gets the ban hammer from me, and happily I only got a few of those. Even if there was a miracle cure, the cost and stress (to others) of seeking it is such a selfish and disproportionate act. With, as we know, lottery-style chances of success. We live, we die.
And this is just awesome: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11521249
"I'm sorry to hear this, Pieter. I don't have a question, but would just like to wish you well"
> Excellent question! (can you tell I'm bored in a hospital)?Well, it all started when I was about three, and I discovered ants. Fire ants, to be specific. Biting me all over cause I'd chosen to hide right on top of their nest. There's a lesson there.
Thanks, Pieter. For everything!
If you'd like to thank Pieter more directly, he's accepting Paypal donations at firstname.lastname@example.org.
> Well this is really kind. Yes, I'm pretty broke and have three young children who will be semi orphans. Cue violins.Happy to receive on PayPal at email@example.com. I will give my family the keys to that so they can put it aside for ma wee bairns... Thanks for suggesting this.
Only thing I missed in your post is a snappy remark to alternative medicine (not expiremental, mind you); would have made it perfect. That stuff usually conflicts with the actual treatment and even if it doesn't and people survive they say it is because of the alternative junk instead of the actual treatment they conveniently forget to mention they took as well. You know, these sites that claim it's true and proven linking to multiple studies showing it...performed by themselves and published on their own website only.
I wish you the most with the time you have left but have no doubt you will make it count.
Well, one thing left.
This is Bob.
Bob is dying.
Bob doesn't whine or bitch about life being unfair.
Bob is one tough motherf*er.
Be like Bob.
P.s. If you think the stick figure sucks you should see my real drawings.
As the younger nephew, I didn't feel as much responsibility to be involved with the logistics (it felt more awkward to me but I think it was comforting to the children, spouses etc). So instead of joining in on the doctor/prognosis conversations and later the funeral arrangement/what to do with the house stuff, I just sat and talked to my uncles instead.
I had known both of them my entire life but I realized I knew almost nothing about them. All our interactions were just uncle to nephew, family occasions kind of stuff, but by this time I was an adult (just barely), and all the sudden we were just two people talking and I learned more about them in a 20 minute session than the prior 20+ years. Some other family who were on the periphery of the conversation confided later that they regretted not having those moments while they had the chance. I didn't even talk that much, just enough to make it a two way conversation, but I found my uncles both were very at peace but wanted to reminisce and tell stories they probably hadn't told anyone in decades. One uncle told me about joining the military during Korea and having gone through all the training and finally being sent all the way there to have the war end practically the day he got there and he ended up being sent right back and what a strange conflicted experience it was for him.
I've started visiting with my other elderly family a lot more since then and have had some similar conversations that didn't require anyone being terminally ill, but somehow that seems to make those conversations a little easier.
I can definitely agree with the piece, especially about what to say and what not to. I'm not expert by any means, I just did the only thing that felt natural whatsoever: just talk to them like a person and let what happens happen. Granted I had the benefit of the fact that they were well taken care of by their children and others, otherwise it would have been much more difficult.
Thank you Pieter, and godspeed on your big journey, whereever it will take you.
I couldn't agree more about euthanasia, I've always envisioned a Dia de los Muertos style party for when I go :). I would much rather go when people have a chance to see me happy and reminiscing like you mention. I would say thank you for your work, but I know there's much more to you than that!
Thanks for posting and thanks to Pieter for writing.
What a legend.
His series of articles on psychopaths and the havoc they wreak is well worth reading, even if it takes a while to take it all in.
My best lesson I learned on programming from Pieter was to use code generators effectively. The advantages cannot be overstated.
Thank you Pieter, you will be missed.
i) "One tactic I used was to take the cult techniques and reverse them"
ii) "We create culture by sharing" (extends to a successful project being a culture, a share-alike licence, and a name/domain which of course can be forked)
There are many others - his writing introduced me to Conway's law (was b) - "A software system mimics the structure of the organization that produces it ") - I've only read part of his work, time well spent and good to discuss with programmers and non-programmers - he made me think
If I ever have to die of some horrible disease I want to go on my terms and do exactly like op.
May your wisdom and compassion live on in your children and in all the other people you have influenced.
I'm not sure how long you'll keep on reading stuff, but rest assured me and many others will cherish the very fond memories of collaborating with you - you've always had a sharp wit and a practical sort of unconventionalism that gets things done. We have much to thank you for.
We worked together on Digistan and the "The Hague Declaration", which I helped host in The Hague - and I think it still is a strong statement that is worth repeating. People can sign that declaration:
I'm very much saddened to hear about your disease - and deep respect for the way you handle this unannounced change of plan. I hope your remaining time will be spent with those you love looking back on a rich life where you've left the world better than it is - and got the max out of it. I'll send you an email, so that when your kids are older and want to know about the things you've done they can contact me. Take care, my friend.
Death is coming to all of us. We all die. Death of some, however, will be a big loss. You, sir, are among them.
As for the euthanasia, my wife's aunt died of cervical cancer and it was very rough, not only on her, but on her entire family. It's not an exaggeration to say that they likely all have PTSD from the experience. I'm not a proponent of euthanasia but I can see the appeal. It probably depends a lot on the individual situation.
I think this is a great request: "Find a moment in your own jurisdiction, if it bans euthanasia, to lobby for the right to die in dignity."
Thank you for everything you've done as a blog writer and as a member of the open source community.
Apparently the cost finally dropped below $1kUSD this year
Thank you Pieter, you're truly a giver till the last drop, and a model to follow!
This approach is also fully compatible with the idea that life itself is a "terminal disease".
But it has huge implications for us in the very soon battle for understanding if turing-complete high-level-abstracting machines would experience "consciousness" like we do. In terms of medical care, rights, and other aspects for thinking entities.
And Pieter, if you are reading this, I wish you well in whatever lies ahead for your mind, and for your actions which will surely echo through the sands of time for people. Because like you said, even if life is indeed finite -- that we take a sensible approach, our legacy should be able to give us comfort that our actions do get magnified by time -- so do what you love, and it will speak through future generations.
Reading what Pieter just wrote makes realize that I lack fortitude in one aspect: compassion. Pieter's words confirms to me that one needs to wield formidable muscles in the compassion department for one to be at peace and be ready to die.
Great man, Pieter.
Euthanasia is bad from a practical standpoint, and an evil, because:
1. Objectively speaking, euthanasia is suicide, and the killing of an innocent person. If Schwartz killing himself (out of despair for his future, fear of suffering in prison, or otherwise) was a tragedy, why is Pieter's upcoming suicide not a tragedy? Is it because his certain death is closer? (This view promotes the idea that a "disabled" life, where one is "unhappy", or must be cared for at great expense, or is suffering, or (extrapolating) is cryogenically frozen, is not valuable in and of itself; but it is.)
2. Suicide increases the risk that friends and family will commit suicide. A search will yield numerous studies: "2.1-fold increased risk of committing suicide", etc. If you kill yourself, you are indirectly killing the people closest to you.
3. If you are against the death penalty because we might execute an innocent person, you should be against Euthanasia because we might kill a non-consenting person. This is already the case:
> "these laws and safeguards are regularly ignored and transgressed in all the jurisdictions ... about 900 people annually are administered lethal substances without having given explicit consent, and in one jurisdiction, almost 50% of cases of euthanasia are not reported ... some jurisdictions now extend the practice to newborns, children, and people with dementia. A terminal illness is no longer a prerequisite." 
Please, when you hear someone speak in flowery language about the dignity of choosing death, take a moment to evaluate what they are actually suggesting, and to research why people are opposed. Many seem to think that the only people against euthanasia are the religious whose reasoning is roughly "well, my religion randomly chose to mark this as evil, therefore it is", which is just not the case.
(...finally, this is likely a very poor protocol for dealing with death - people deal in different ways, and not all people will look back fondly on having to smile all the time, or on expressing "false" hope and being told that, actually, objectively speaking, they should not have hope. Also, a totally minor point, but we are not like Lego houses - we do not need to be utterly destroyed for others to live.)
I am stealing this.
It's so pathetic that we as a society waste so much time and energy on non-essential stuff instead of curing major killers. Yes, cancer is a hard one to beat (each cancer being different, too), but we've done even more complex things as humanity. I really don't think curing major diseases has ever been a top priority of our society! I hope one day soon people finally realize that diseases are not what other people get (the arrogance of the healthy), but what we all will eventually!
I don't know this man, but I love him. I will remember this to my own demise.
I will look for a political group that is for a humane way of dying, and ask what needs to be done.
My father died in extreme pain. For three days he was in hell. His last words he spoke to me, "when will it end?". I didn't have an answer. My father's death kinda ruined my life. Even though we had our differences; every day since that day in January, 11 years ago, I think about how he suffered, and part of me died with him.
The really unpleasant truth is that if we as a society began doing serious focused R&D on these life-threatening diseases earlier, the OP and many others wouldn't have to die.
But we didn't. Enjoy marketing your mobile apps until cancer suddenly makes you rot away.
So, what's up with the dates?
First, the article date:
> wrote on 22 Apr, 05:43 (4 hours ago)
Then later in the text:
> and on 25 April my oncologist confirmed it was cancer.
Seems like someone is a secret time traveler...?
In the context of this article, no, I don't have to wonder. He expresses very well why he doesn't want to entertain such longshots.
If that is the cause, it could be interesting as we may end up with AMD (and the rest of us) getting the benefits of heavy research into upcoming processors, simply as they become a strategic material for the Chinese government.
The competition would benefit all of us.
x86 has a user case: legacy software.
I think that fingerprints are fine for low security things, but I would never use it as authentication for anything that touches my bank account.
Biometrics, including finger prints, are human friendly, and that instantly makes them worthy of consideration as part of a system. Touch ID or the like can enable a person to use an extremely strong password that would otherwise be completely uneconomic, and the combination of a limited time, extremely fast biometric shortcut with a very strong core password, particularly if combined with coercion code use (only possible for now via jailbreak but something Apple or another manufacturer could and should implement at all levels), remote lockout (long available everywhere), etc., may be significantly better then merely a PIN code alone.
Threat models cannot be ignored for a security system, because they define the system. The greatest threat most people face are remote attacks, with the next greatest being scatter shots of various sorts (in other words, somebody was looking to steal or attack a device, not your device in particular). Persistent targeted threats are an entirely different situation and a password alone is not even necessarily better in a mobile scenario, because in a mobile scenario you often do not have even a modicum of control over your environment. A fingerprint might be possible to lift and use as the author links, but a PIN code or password can be taken, often even more easily, via shoulder surfing or cameras. In fact in the modern first world environment bird's eye view (ceiling/pole-mounted etc) surveillance cameras are becoming ever more ubiquitous and ever higher resolution. Are people going to seriously suggest nobody use their mobile device anywhere with a surveillance system? More and more, how will you even know that? Taking advantage of the ever increasing cost/performance/size/power improvements powered by the smartphone revolution, retailers are interested in ever more camera use not for thieves but for metrics, to figure out exactly what shoppers are doing down to precisely what they're looking at and for how long. The retailers of course have no interest in your phone info, and in fact an interest in not making people worried about that sort of thing. But if we're going to consider someone going to the specific trouble to rapidly spoof biometric identity for a specific device, then it's necessary to consider that once the cameras exist at all access for non-intended purposes may be just a hack or national-security-directive away.
Basically, it's frustrating to still see people pointing to "somebody broke into this security system!" as if it means anything without thinking about the time/resource cost and threat model. Biometrics absolutely have a role to play in general authentication for the general population for the foreseeable future. There are paths for improvement there just as in other areas, perhaps culminating in fusion technologies like security authentication implants wired into our brains someday, but we'll need functional authentication to get us that far and passwords alone do not cut for most of the population as currently implemented.
Look folks, maybe as part of some second or third factor it might be okay...but you still need a password.
Soon enough computers will be able to check every possibility for passwords as big as we can remember them. With good algorithms predicting what is likely to be a valid password, maybe they already can.
Even though I agree fingerprints aren't a good solution, passwords aren't either. Any ideas?
Maybe we could have some kind of card that would have big keys stored on it.
EDIT: Fixed missing word