Hacker News new | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit | sounds's comments login

How exactly does a factual statement, "Microsoft cut off security fixes for Windows XP, except to some big users that pay exorbitantly," cause Fear, Uncertainty, or Doubt?

Are you really uncertain about whether Microsoft will EOL your current Windows version, or what that will mean for legitimate businesses who need it to continue to function?

If you don't want to hear what the FSF has to say, that's fine. But their statements are carefully worded in the hopes we can have a calm, logical discussion about the issue -- user freedom has become impossible with Microsoft's latest OS.

This submission is not intended to be biased.

It is FUD because of the implication that there are competitors who do support their operating systems for more than 15 years without requiring expensive support contracts.

The low-barrier-to-entry plays are getting lots of attention, while the ones that take more capital, research, a breakthrough, or all three, are also getting some attention.

The article also simply states the obvious: trivial stuff "is trivial."

This "culling of the herd" can happen continuously, or there can be a flood of investment leading to a bubble. Lots has been blogged about how to make different mistakes [1], how to think different [2], or just how this time will be different [3].

Failing is part of innovating.

"We avoided dying till we got rich." - pg [4]

[1] Just one of many: http://www.inc.com/niel-robertson/brilliant-failures/dot-com...

[2] http://www.thenational.ae/business/technology/apple-is-the-t...

[3] https://avataric.wordpress.com/2015/08/14/startup-culture-ev...

[4] http://www.paulgraham.com/die.html


> The low-barrier-to-entry plays

One of the reasons the barrier is so low is because you often don't have to ask your users to pay. One of the many ways advertising undermines the way the free market is supposed to work.


I think the key bit with this news is that they're doubling down on "the employees snuck this by us. We had no idea. Absolutely no clue whatsoever. Pinkie swear."

They may even be able to "find" an employee who has some kind of plausible story.

The reality is that most auto manufacturers cheat on emissions tests in europe. Mechanics who work on the cars know it. Even the regulators are hesitant to reform emissions testing.

The silver lining is that perhaps an actual improvement in emissions is happening, with the EPA adding road-testing to their emissions test suite.


>"the employees snuck this by us. We had no idea. Absolutely no clue whatsoever. Pinkie swear."

That's how I read the headline. Good thing I wasn't in mid sip when I read it[1]. You can imagine what would happen to an engineer that tried to bring that up. I swear you can smell that dynamic at a company within fifteen minutes of walking in the door.

[1] Seriously this sort of stuff happens, the board members should be banned from serving on a board of directors again.


> I think the key bit with this news is that they're doubling down on "the employees snuck this by us. We had no idea. Absolutely no clue whatsoever. Pinkie swear."

> They may even be able to "find" an employee who has some kind of plausible story.

Maybe! But then they are just claiming to be incompetent as an auto engineering organization, rather than malicious. An interesting choice.


It won't be long before their email servers are going to be impounded. I assume they've long since been scrubbed of evidence but then there are the backups. It's going to be very tough to keep that house of cards standing if it isn't grounded in fact.

Personally I wouldn't write a line of code like that even when authorized by management, I'd rather resign (but then again that's a argued from a position of relative luxury), but I hope that German programmers working for VW or Bosch would want to see some very explicit authorization that this is exactly what it is they are supposed to make with a note to the effect that they believe this is not legal or ethical or both.

If not they may very well end up holding the bag, I have no doubt that this thing will be researched to the bottom.


Working through the Ogre issues on OS X is like a rite of passage, I thought?

I tried multiple times to contribute OS X fixes to the Ogre code base. They're not hard things --

1. Use SDL not OIS.

2. The symlinking is broken.

3. Link the frameworks properly.

There was one more thing, I think. Just minor issues that probably have crept into the codebase because no one is able to contribute the fixes.

It's Ogre. It's not OS X.


Thought too. But in my opinion, an OS has larger responsibilities when it comes to improve inter compatibility, instead of breaking things to have developers who stay loyal and ending up with apple-exclusive software. I really wonder about the value objective C brings, especially since NextStep did not work as a project. You can't always put the fault on library devs.

What boggles my mind, is that OSX is an unix underneath, so I don't understand why it would do anything different and force developers to learn new habits. That's not how you attract devs. Apple has made an habit to break backward compatibility, something neither linux nor windows tend to do.

I think it's not so much to think that OS manufacturers should not to be different than their competition by separating even how their development tools work. The only objective of that is to have developers who stay loyal to apple because they can't have their app running on both windows and mac. Not to mention I had to re do everthing at each new XCode version.

So in the end, having my project run on both XCode and MSVC, was too much time lost, so I just sold that aging laptop. Apple is just so special, and I guess I was not good enough for that.


Serious question, anyone know the ballpark figures of thrust-to-weight based on 1000 ft/min ascent rate for fully loaded and ground level?

I'm trying to calculate maximum theoretical fuel capacity, essentially 1:1 thrust-to-weight, given it burns kerosene - 6.82 lbs/gallon at STP.

10 gallons of kerosene = 68.2 lbs is much less than the weight variation of a standard adult human, which falls roughly in the range 100 lbs - 200 lbs, so doubling the fuel capacity should be easy.

I suppose engine upgrades would also be easy. They did mention the JB-10 was in the works...

[Edit: thanks Retric, 68.2 lbs not 16 lbs]


Yea, 10 minutes of flight time seem incredibly high to me. That means you could significantly increase it with external fuel tanks (say, for a total of 20 gallons). 15 minutes would be a darn long jet pack ride. Limiting factor is actually just how much weight you could plausibly carry on your back.

(Edited numbers.)


it seems they are using pure jets and in this case high-by-pass would be a way to immediately improve the thrust and thus to decrease the fuel consumption.


It crossed my mind that all you really need is the right engines and some means of control ...


Cost for 150lbf thrust about $15k http://crxturbines.com/jetbeetle.htm


10 gallons of kerosene = 68.2 LBS


Or, more likely, they can't get involved for legal reasons. If they took steps to block the easy stuff, an arms race would ensue, and the content providers would never be satisfied with the performance being provided for free by Google. The content providers would always demand stricter enforcement, and could threaten to sue for copyright infringement regardless of merit.


I think if that were the case they would not have pushed out the "Panda" updates which penalized content farms so heavily. If their past behavior (with content farms and other "low value" content sites) is a guide they will not do anything until enough people complain about it.

In the mean time it isn't even Google's content so its not a hosting issue, they are just the "neutral" third party providing their 10 blue links (oh and supplying the advertising engine those sites are using)


Different isotopes of hydrogen:



Any time I see an article claiming Microsoft's app store and XBox will wipe out Valve, I remind myself that it's not Microsoft's direct counters to Valve, it's Microsoft's sheer size that will create the openings Valve needs.

The OS group is undoing all the progress the XBox group has won.


A buyback seems like a statement that the best use of google's cash-on-hand is to increase the value of the stock directly; that there is no other investment that would give a better ROI.

Google execs think GOOG will be ahead vs the value of other investments in the future.


  I think it is mostly to pay and retain talent. They are giving employees stock options and those are not worth as much if stock prices do not go up.
   Anyway Alphabet stock is still undervalued specially with their investments in Uber(google fund), Magicleap, Google Fiber, Google self driving cars, Nest, Renewable Energy, Health Sciences. Once Alphabet starts reporting all these separately it stock prices are going to hit $1000 or more.


I think the submission here on HN has overdone it on the title.

It doesn't compute "flops" like a traditional computer. The relevant text from the article:

"The prototype achieves a processing speed equivalent to 320 Gflops and it is incredibly energy efficient as it uses low-powered, cost effective components."

I am as interested as anybody in switching out for photons instead of electrons/holes. But please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait.


Ok, we took "32O Gflop" out of the title. If anyone suggests a better title we can change it again.



Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | DMCA | Apply to YC | Contact