Hey, thanks for putting that together, it's a very insightful read. One thing I would mention in the section "Encrypting Data":
KMS is great and very useful but there are limitations, for example the 4kb payload max. Another one is latency (back and forth is OK for a single decryption step, for 10.000 it might become problematic)
In case you have to go around these limitations they recommend a data key that you use to encrypt the data, encrypt the data key, store both encrypted blobs in your DB and throw away away the data key from the memory as quickly as possible.
E.g. "I have an API key and I want it encryptedly available to some servers, and engineers to be able to roll but not read the cred", KMS directly with a CMK is great. Otherwise: that's what the rest of the bulk encryption and key generation recommendations are for; get a DEK, use NaCl's secretbox or whatever.
DEK sharding strategies depend on your data model so that gets a little tricky to provide good advice for in this document but that's something we help clients with, sure :)
Enveloppe encryption (what you are describing) is absolutely the way to go, but the caveats described in the document for key generation and symmetric encryption apply.
you seem to know a lot, any chance we could talk about this topic, would love to hear more of your thoughts on the topic? I don't see an address to contact you.
Interesting, this is a topic that very rarely get discussed on this website, but which is probably top of mind for many here.
I am an immigrant myself, I don't think I have anything to complain about, but it is definitively harder to find a date when you're a guy on the West Coast (especially Silicon Valley) than on the east coast or anywhere else... If you are in a place like the Bay Area two things play against you:
* Second, Silicon Valley tends to be pretty normative and it sometimes can feel like every male in tech fits a defined stereotype, which is not attractive. It's a cliche but it's one that people believe in.
In terms of solutions, I have two beyond maintaining a good physical appearance. The first one is to cultivate a real and genuine personality and find a way to let it shine by not being shy and unafraid to show who you are (haters be damned). The second one is to truly work on being OK being alone and single!
Ah... trying to apply entrepreneur spirit everywhere, how could it go wrong?
Okay so let's recap, we are shown a table showing the PISA score of a lot of countries and we see the US in a very bad position. Great. Now let's look at the countries which are at the top, and weirdly these countries apply principles that are totally the opposite to what the author is trying to propose. China, France ( where I come from), Korea, Taiwan propose heavily standardized education. Specialization and choice comes very very late in education in the countries at the top. The best results on these tests should not be the ultimate goal of education in a country but they are an indicator of deep issues in the system.
I think one the problem in the US is the perception of education and the bad reputation is gaining over the years is not helping it: paradoxically by pointing out the real of imagined flaws of the system, you discredit it and lower the test scores because parents are blaming the system rather than the kids. HN is a great example with every week yet another "I was too smart for school, so they crushed me".
Please stop trying to fix it with entrepreneurial methods, it's an over simplified solution to a huge problem with many factors: financial, sociological, historical.
Oh and if we want to emulate the spirit in the silicon valley we have to remember that the vast, vast majority of projects FAIL. So maybe it's not so ideal.
In quality assurance, you need to be very careful what you measure, because you will always optimize towards what you do measure. As I've watched my kids' schools deal with crap like No Student Left Behind, I'm completely convinced we are not optimizing for learning or creativity in any way.
When you look at how well kids can learn when they are interested and curious and how little our schools use that curiosity, there is no question that things can be better. Just because we've done it for 100 years doesn't make it the right or best way (especially when schools became factory training grounds in the late 19th/early 20th centuries). Test scores are a horrible way to measure success in education because it fails to show anything about creativity and ability to continue learning, which are the things a knowledge-based economy need more than anything.
There are a lot of really good teachers out there who are completely hobbled by the structure of the system. It's a complex problem, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't try to come up with better solutions.
FWIW, I think we should start smaller. I would like to see students move through their education not with an age-based cohort, but rather a capability-based cohort, and they can get pushed back to a lower cohort if they aren't achieving (my understanding is this is how China's system works; if I'm wrong here, please correct my knowledge). That would remove the "bored smart kids" that cause problems in class and who fail out as soon as they hit something hard (that almost happened to me in college) and it would remove the "frustrated dumb kids" who give up on being "able" to learn from the equation. Both of these groups would just be challenged at their level, and the teacher would be able to focus the lesson plan around it.
I think you nailed it: school isn't optimized for creativity, it's optimized for creating workers. But I don't think that just applies to the factories of the 19th century.
The highest institutional rewards are given to the students who most effectively suppress their own desires, just like in the workplace. The students I knew in school who excelled at school didn't enjoy going to class, doing homework, or the challenge of memorizing answers for a test that they would forget as soon as the test was over. Most of them were smart, but the key ingredient was their ability to suppress their own desires. And I have no doubt that they have been successful in the workplace for the exact same reason.
His point in putting in the test score table is to say it's focusing people on the wrong things.
Just note the title: "America’s Problem: How the World is 'Beating Us' in a Battle We Don’t Necessarily Want to Win". The battle is the test score battle. The scare quotes around "Beating Us" mean that he's calling into question the notion. And in case that isn't clear, he then says explicitly: we probably don't want to win.
Yea, I still can't get my head around letting a 16 year old specilise based on some sort of long term plan. The problem with a lot of 'education reform' ideas is they take a more is better approach without separating those things that are useful for everyone vs. the foundations for continuing to focus in that area.
IMO, there are basic skills that everyone needs, such as understanding compound interest and letting students decide they don't need to know the basics is a horrible idea. That said being able to name the platonic solids is not a life skill. IMO, have some basic stills you need to graduate, let students test out of classes, and have stream lined versions of subjects that focus on what's important vs. what's been traditionally been taught.
PS: I question why someone would think a semester of Drivers ED is optional for anyone that's not blind, but we still need 4 years of English to graduate irregardless of actual proficiency.
Beyond this, I would argue that the good schools in rich areas aren't the problem. I went grew up in the shadows of NASA and my schools were all excellent -- my teachers all had masters degrees in what they were teaching, they loved their job, and they were well compensated for it. The issue is one of this achievement gap between the well funded suburban schools (my HS marching band had a budget ~500k/yr) and impoverished schools (both inner city and elsewhere). For those on the other end of the achievement gap, having a standard set that roughly equates to what is required to be an educated member of society seems entirely appropriate. Keep in mind that standards, at least in my experience, don't fetter education. For example, when I was in school, it was generally understood that if you were in calculus as a junior, you could probably pass your algebra I based exit exams so we spent our time on calculus.
Also, keep in mind that school is intended to teach you more than just history, math, etc. This is also where we learn to socialize. I guarantee you that my introverted self wouldn't have kissed a girl as early as I did if I wasn't forced to socialize with people for 170 school days a year. I learned how to make friends and how to balance my need for solitude with deeply fulfilling relationships -- something that would have taken much longer has I not been in school.
This isn't to say that my experience is biased towards the upper end of the achievement gap. In fact, while I'm in grad school in Boston, I'm volunteering at a charter school in its inner city and trust me, there are many problems with inner city education but the least of which is standardized testing. Traumatic home lives, poor materials, no cultural understanding of the value of education, etc represent far larger hurdles.
Indeed, I believe we should quibble about the standards and have a national discussion about what an educated member of society should know instead of debating the value of a standard at all. I believe that these standard have gone too far (plumbers probably don't need calculus, for example) but having a base-line of education is never a bad thing.
We may be discussing different things, but I don't agree with your assertion that specialization comes later in educational systems outside the US.
I lived in france when I was 12-13 (and attended French schools), and at the end of 3eme, I filled out a form indicating whether I intended to focus further science/math or letters. My dad wanted science/math, I wanted letters, the whole thing was resolved when we went back to the US.
In college, I spent a year at trinity (in Ireland), and I found that "majors" focused almost exclusively on one subject. Medicine and Law were done at the undergrad level, starting at age 18 or so (though they lasted longer than a typical bachelor's degree in the US). Math students studied math almost exclusively - to the extent that they branched out, it might be physics or CS. The "general undergraduate requirements" were far more considerable in the US.
Lastly, as a grad student here in the US (at UC Berkeley in Industrial Engineering), I definitely noticed that much of the initial coursework appeared to be review for the international students. This may partly be due to strong math education overseas, but I also think that the earlier specialization had a lot to do with it - when you only focus on math as an undergrad, you can do a lot more of it. I actually think this may turn out to be a big problem for students who came up through the US - I see some merit to our more generalized system (I think Paul Graham referred to it as a "late binding" educational approach in an essay). But in grad programs with high attrition rates, the US educated students may be at a disadvantage the first couple of years even if they are very talented.
EDIT - It occurred to me what you might be saying here... students may specialize in a subject earlier overseas, but the curriculum for that subject is much more standardized than it would be in the US. I can see how that would be the case.
> we are shown a table showing the PISA score of a lot of countries and we see the US in a very bad position
The whole premise is broken. While USA's PISA scores may be far from impressing, that is mostly because the American educational system is fighting a different battle than its counterparts in other countries. When you put them on the same battlefield (by correcting for demographics, immigration), it has nothing to be ashamed of: http://super-economy.blogspot.com/2010/12/amazing-truth-abou...
Thanks, I really want to get serious with that language seeing all the praise from people around. I have began to do some small things with it and it feels like a great language ( I love the no makefile idea !)
My only regret is that this format makes it really hard to print in one motion. Could you provide a link for a PDF version?
The animal on the cover looks really hilarious too!
yes, please provide a pdf version (free or paid, doesn't matter for me) ... oftentimes authors will make a kindle version of the book for sale on Amazon and forget to put out a pdf.
I am an author (not of this book) and I very occasionally get an email asking for PDFs. Maybe one in a thousand sales are PDF. Since it doesn't come up that often I've never bothered with setting up a paid system; I just send them a link and ask nicely for a few bucks via PayPal.
Where do most people go to buy PDFs? Is it really a large-enough market to worry about?
Lulu? At least that's the only place I've specifically bought a PDF - then I found out that it's wrapped in some horrible Adobe DRM (if there are any ways to remove this, I'd love to know). I don't begrudge the money, I just wish I could read it in Preview.app rather than Adobe Digital Reader or what ever it's called - it doesn't scroll smoothly, only page wise which is a massive pain when there's lots of diagrams.
Other than that, all the ebooks I've bought from individual storefronts, often from having seen them on HN, have come as a PDF/epub/mobi bundle to work on any device.
Please don't password protect PDFs for books. It makes it a huge pain in the ass to actually read. I'd much rather you do what the Pragmatic Bookshelf does and just embed our name into the PDF.
Don't know, but I find it a great way to read on laptops & desktops. Of course, a nice html would work as well, but that's rare. (also, the pdf reader in KDE remembers what page you're on and lets you annotate etc..)
I don't know if you are going to read this, but I'm going to write it for the rest of the audience too.
I think the trend of dismissing critics and commenting along the lines of "sour grapes" or "haters" very disturbing. Yes I go against your commentary. The great thing about internet and communities based on pseudonyms is that you get the first reaction that people have. Very few will take a few minutes to give their opinion, weight the different possibilities etc... It's brutal, it's direct. If you have run a service online you certainly know that you receive very angry/ threatening emails from people that use your services and are displeased. If it disturbs you it means that you are not ready for having a personal project on display, it's as simple as that. People in life and particularly on the internet are very angry and you have disturbed individuals. Opening a service with your name and your address is becoming some kind of "celebrity", people will HATE you for no good reason.
To come back to what I think is bad/annoying on Hacker News is of a different nature and I'll list a few:
* Well thought comments are often ignored and not read ( not up/downvoted, just ignored )
* Stardom: No matter what they post some ""famous"" people around here get their post on the front page. By courtesy I won't list who they are but everybody can spot it pretty easily. I'm very disappointed by this attitude personally, and it doesn't speak highly of a place that is supposed to be almost a pure meritocracy.
* Fads/ Jealousy: A lot of people here want to be rich and famous thus it creates tension. It allows me to come back to your point: these people are likely going to dismiss your ideas based on jealousy.
* Over-repetition of some stories ad nauseum: dumb benchmarks to see the number of req/s, analysis App.net, Education sucks...
All that being said it remains an interesting community but with some drawbacks. I guess nothing can have it all.
With all due respect, I think you missed the point of this post. The OP is not dismissing critics with claims of "sour grapes" and "hating". He is saying that the community is no longer a "safe place" where he feels OK to share work in its early stages.
In other words, he was not saying that negative criticism should be dismissed. He was saying that there is too much negativity for him to find the site enjoyable and that he thinks the change in attitude is for the worse.
That said, I also think that you're off the mark when you say the OP is not ready for having a personal project on display. The premise of OP's note is that he considered HN to be a more positive, supportive community than the larger Internet. There is nothing wrong with wanting to associate yourself with people who will build you up rather than tear you down. If Steve's been using HN for five years, he's probably well aware of how vicious people can be on the Internet. It sounds like he's sad that HN isn't a haven from this viciousness like it once was. And just because he's sad that this one community has deteriorated, that doesn't mean he's not capable of handling the slings and arrows of the wider Internet population.
Well said, there's nothing more I come to HN for than a positive, supportive community, even where something is wrong and needs to be improved.
I have noticed in the last year on here it's become a lot more like other sites with more general hacker interested threads and (maybe I'm wrong) less and less startup relevant stuff. I know HN is for both, but I personally come here for startup signal.
This is my main gripe with HN right now -- the anti-intellectualism of the community. I recall an article submitted where the author claimed "Academic papers are shitloads of crap. Want to read something? Read some beautiful source code instead."
Nearly all breakthroughs in computing sprung up from an academic context; why would you be so cavalier in dismissing it? You might actually find out what a Y Combinator is!
Textbooks are a great source for what little knowledge has been digested well enough and is popular enough to warrant a textbook. If your interests are a little more technical, you often don't have a choice but to read academic papers. On a very rough scale: to learn something you might learn at a university as an undergraduate, read a textbook, but to learn something usually only PhDs know, you need to read papers.
It's true that many papers are badly written, but (1) to emphasize: sometimes there is no other source for something, and (2) most books are pretty awful, too, you have to be selective with anything.
There's also the possibility that they simply don't subscribe to the sort of attitude that makes sweeping generalizations about topics with vast depth and breadth.
Well thought comments are often ignored and not read ( not up/downvoted, just ignored )
You cannot tell if they were read or not. Exhorting users to use their 'mod points' is a challenge (yes its a slashdot reference). The community is larger and only the opinionated seem to vote.
Stardom: No matter what they post some ""famous"" people around here get their post on the front page. By courtesy I won't list who they are but everybody can spot it pretty easily. I'm very disappointed by this attitude personally, and it doesn't speak highly of a place that is supposed to be almost a pure meritocracy.
Except it isn't a meritocracy is it. Its a place for Y-combinator folks to share links they are interested in. Both current and past members of YC have a few more options than available than folks who just happened by here. One of those is that YC launches always make the front page.
Fads/ Jealousy: A lot of people here want to be rich and famous thus it creates tension. It allows me to come back to your point: these people are likely going to dismiss your ideas based on jealousy.
I've heard this a number of times but I'm not sure I buy it. Some people are angry at themselves because they haven't launched and they lash out at those who have in attempt to position their own failure better. Constructive criticism takes time, a jab takes only a few seconds. So you're looking also at a time penalty.
Over-repetition of some stories ad nauseum: dumb benchmarks to see the number of req/s, analysis App.net, Education sucks...
Well given the way the karma system works this would seem to be a reflection of what is important to the community at large vs perhaps some individuals. There are a couple of great add-ons that knock out stories about things you don't care about (I believe Bitcoin was the motivation but could easily be wrong about that).
You hit the nail on the head about what bothers me about HN, after 4 years of using it: "Its a place for Y-combinator folks to share links they are interested in."
news.YC is biased and will always be biased towards YC-oriented stories, which means it will never be as good as it could be. The status quo doesn't mean that news.YC isn't any good - it's just suspect and you have to filter everything through that lens - the story rankings, comments, and job posts are not ordered by merit, there is a sub-filter in place.
I hope there is eventually a start-up news site that isn't architected and gardened to benefit a small group above all else.
Disclaimer: I was a YC reject, and you can chalk it all up as sour grapes if you like.
If the people submitting links have different biases, then the overall news site might not have any particular bias overall, even if individual stories do.
hmmm, has anybody studied reading patterns of people when reading from a screen? It may be possible to fairly accurately estimate the probability of a section of text being read.
For example if there are 6 comments on display at anyone time and they are on display (without scrolling away) for 2 minutes, one might arrive at a probability of how much of that page was read, and how much time was equally spent on previous/subsequent parts of the page.
Especially when factors like, people tend to scroll text to be at the top of the screen to read it, or like me, highlight text I am currently reading with the mouse. Using these factors, we might be able to know what is/isn't read...
before improving something, try to measure it first!
Fads/ Jealousy: A lot of people here want to be rich and famous thus it creates tension. It allows me to come back to your point: these people are likely going to dismiss your ideas based on jealousy
Maybe I've just missed it, but I haven't seen a lot of responses here that seem to be obviously motivated by jealousy. I get the feeling that, despite how many of us there are, most of us are working on different things. I mean, there are so many ideas, and potential ideas, I don't feel like I've seen a lot of overlap.
And when I have seen it, I feel like a lot of the comments have been of the "Hey, this is similar to what we're doing, shoot me a message offline and let's talk" variety.
> Maybe I've just missed it, but I haven't seen a lot of responses here that seem to be obviously motivated by jealousy.
Those are never obvious. Jealousy, unless in a romantic personal context, is never displayed directly. It is hidden behind multiple layers of rationalizations or a barrage of negative comments (jab at small detail, over emphasis of small mistakes for ex.: "Oh you just worked 5 months on this website, well it sucks because you use the wrong serif font").
>The great thing about internet and communities based on pseudonyms is that you get the first reaction that people have. Very few will take a few minutes to give their opinion, weight the different possibilities etc... It's brutal, it's direct. If you have run a service online you certainly know that you receive very angry/ threatening emails from people that use your services and are displeased. If it disturbs you it means that you are not ready for having a personal project on display, it's as simple as that.
Well that's all available on the internet at large. You don't need any kind of catered community to have that experience. What he's bemoaning is the loss of the intermediate, the more thoughtful and useful type of honesty.
It also seems to me people's online opinions will tend to extremes. If there is an average reaction, either like or dislike, that might not cross the "click the reply button and write a comment" threshold. So there could be quite a bit of positive reaction, some moderate opinion, but people just won't feel the need to comment on it. So due to this bias one would expect to see more sharply negative or strongly positive responses.
Also I guess HN was mostly about the startup ecosphere, and now that goal shifted. Now it is about technology, programming, social issues _and_ startups.
Announcing a new startup might get a positive reaction from people interested in startup but will get no or negative reaction from those not interested in startups.
I'll raise my hand and admit that I am not interested in startups at all at the moment. I try not to comment negatively or positively on them I just skip those topics.
Should I feel guilty for not being interested, and are characters like me perceived as destroying the HN culture?
The trend was already well established by the time you got here. If you go back three years, you do see a different site that is far more accepting and far less technical. Early in the HN world, when I read an article, my first thought wasn't "let's see how HN have dismantled this".
For many things (especially raw information), I appreciate that cynicism. For launches and discussions around early products, it annoys me to no end. I think it really shows the character of a person who, when somebody puts themself out there, their first reaction is to tear them down.
Alas, there is probably nothing that can be done. It is the tragedy of the commons, where goodwill is the resource being depleted.
The Internet is not a hugbox. People launching products and companies need criticism more than anything else, because if they get it now, they can fix the problem before a customer or a funding source spots it.
HN is not "the internet". I don't think HN should strive to be as terrible as most of the internet can be. If I want "the Internet" I can go to /r/all. That is a much better snapshot of what "the Internet" actually is. I don't see why it's a bad thing to want HN to be better than most parts of the Internet.
I also think your type of attitude really brings communities down. People who treat others with disrespect and insults like to defend their actions as "This is the internet. Deal with it." I've never thought it to be a particular worthwhile argument.
Surely there's a some balance point between "hugbox" and "hatefest". Also, we're not talking about the Internet, but a small self-selected community of humans that happens to connect via the internet.
You said a lot of what I just posted except shorter and better. One thing I missed that you got and that's worth expanding on is stardom. The stardom breeds a lot of the groupthink and hive mind around here I think.
I agree that there's a problem with fads and jealousy but I disagree with what that problem is. I think the jealousy comes from us nobody's and not the stars. It's the proletariat, so to speak, that are jealous of not just the stars but anyone who has the guts to put something cool they made in front of HN.
Fads again are just what promotes groupthink. Why does everyone on HN love Ruby but most people outside HN don't have any strong feelings for or against it? Because it's trendy. I work at a company in Chicago where we run our sites and apps on either Java, PHP, or Ruby. No one in the company ever looks down their nose at anyone else not using the language their primarily working with because that shit doesn't matter. The fads on HN aren't real. They're specific to HN and possibly Silicon Valley but people talk about it here as if it mattered somehow.
Overall though, you nailed it. And your very last line definitely holds true.
"security consultant, revealed that he had intercepted usernames and passwords for a large number of email accounts by operating and monitoring Tor exit nodes.[27] As Tor does not, and by design cannot, encrypt the traffic between an exit node and the target server, any exit node is in a position to capture any traffic passing through it which does not use end-to-end encryption such as TLS."
It's strongly suspected that China used that method to arrest some opponents of the regime that were talking with TOR. I don't know if Australia has the same level of organization and can drop into communications like that though.
For this story, it really looks that they just used other factors than TOR to find out this guy.
edit: apparently Silk Road is 100% TOR, so it does not work in that case! Mea culpa
Exit nodes are only relevant if you're communicating with servers outside the TOR network. Silk Road runs as a Tor hidden service[1], which means you never go through an exit node, it's TORified (and therefore encrypted) end-to-end.
One other possibility is to hack the computers running Silk Road itself. It's a rather high value target, so I'd be surprised if they didn't try. They could also order drugs from it in order to find out how they were being packaged and alert customs to any new techniques. In fact, there are quite a lot of things they could do, none of which require compromising TOR or Bitcoin.
Although by transmitting any personal information (email address, etc) through a supposedly anonymous network you kind of limit the benefit of said network.
I have read Steve Jobs biography and this is definitively a cautionary tale and a great warning for anybody, but for other reasons that stated in this article.
I am no Apple fan, as a matter of fact I don't like the look and feel of their product but I gained a great admiration for Steve Jobs because he seemed like a man in immense suffering. I'm not talking about the obvious physical pain of cancer and all his crazy diets ( we share something in common ) but mentally he seemed like a sad sad person. I don't want to do bar stool psychology but it seemed pretty obvious that he was missing something in his life and he probably never found it.
But he's the paragon of the self made man, in the Ayn Rand sense and people ( especially here, where there's something approaching a cult ) look up to that and as soon as they encounter problems they imagine themselves in the shoes of this man and try to act tough... or act Steve Jobs.
If there's one paradoxical lesson that should be taken from his biography it is that you should never to listen to anybody that tells you how to act, don't try to fit in a mold, even in the mold of a great man, because you fundamentally don't have the same substance and thus you won't come out the same way: ie successful nor happy. Be your own man, forge your own mold and challenge the statu quo.
I am no Apple fan, as a matter of fact I don't like the look and feel of their product but I gained a great admiration for Steve Jobs because he seemed like a man in immense suffering.
People tend to forget that the word "passion" itself is rooted in suffering and sacrifice. By (classical) definition you can't be passionate about something unless you sacrifice for it.
Thank you. This is something I try to explain to people who think passion is merely generic but forceful emotion. Similarly, compassion isn't airy-fairy altruism but rather the capacity to suffer-with.
As a Buddhist maybe not. Buddhism and Enlightenment Era ideology are both anchored in the idea of the "self". There's a great synergy between the two. To get what I mean look at the former CEO of Whole Foods, John Mackey. The staunchest of Libertarians, a legitimate Buddhist, and a pioneer of "Core Values" Branding( e.g Apple ).
While it may be the case that many Western Buddhists have found a way to merge Buddhism and selfishness, I'm pretty sure that this is a modern and specifically Western distortion of Buddhist teachings. At least I haven't found anything like that in the Buddhist sutras I've read. On the contrary, to the extent that the self appears there at all, it is to be effaced.
>On the contrary, to the extent that the self appears there at all, it is to be effaced.
Within the context of Theravada. Mahayana embraces the "small" self. All Buddhist acts of compassion are anchored in self-interest. Just how you caring for your family is simultaneously compassionate and self-serving.
Just how we try to create real "value" through meritocracy Buddhism preaches giving and skillful means. The overlap is significant.
I am skeptical of this as it gets applied in consumerist Western societies. It's all too easy to become the same ego you were before, only now with a spiritual varnish. In my observation, there is a lot of rationalization around this. When you have no roots in a tradition, it's easy to twist it to be whatever you feel it should be. Typically it turns into an accoutrement. George Westerholm brilliantly summarized this as "Does Taoism make me look fat?"
>It's all too easy to become the same ego you were before, only now with a spiritual varnish. In my observation, there is a lot of rationalization around this.
Can you think of anything more self-centered and intoxicating then conflating your ego with the "Ground of Being". Narcissism is the cliche sticking point of westerners. Than again Westernized lineages systematically address this. Mondo Zen being a good example.[1]
Historically, Buddhism doesn't export cultural context. It embeds itself in what is already there. Zen exists along side Shinto. Tibetan Buddhism envelopes the local shamanic beliefs. Trying to export the cultural context of Tibet or Japan to the West is a mistake.
Well it embodies the best and the worst of internet movements.
While the foundations are good: protecting the web from bad laws, restrictions etc... the execution is really ridiculous. Imagine you're an old style Senator or representative and you see that website with a weird ass looking cat... Do you really think it's going to make them think you're anything but a joke?
I find that the words used are equally ridiculous: "League", "XXX signal".
It really feels like a little club of geeks trying to have an impact in the world and it leaves a bad taste in my mouth. It could have been a great idea, it's ruined by a poor execution.
edit: I have seen a lot of negative reactions and I appreciate people taking the time to answer to me. I won't edit my previous comment but let me add some things:
I didn't mean to be insulting but if you want it to be a democratic movement you have to avoid inside jokes at all cost. It's literally filled with Reddit/ geek pop culture references and it won't take off in the general public because a very large portion of the population do not understand or don't like it. It's like saying a meme out loud: you feel ridiculous.
For old style senators I am talking about basically any person over 35 that has no idea what reddit/ twitter/ cat facts are and who will find that ridiculous. Yes Senators and representatives are supposed to work for you, but it's like for everything they have to take you seriously. We belong to the Z generation but in order to talk to other generations we have to use common references and avoid cats or internet memes or super hero folklore for what it matters. Serious business in two words.
35? Really? I'm over 35 as are most of my friends, and I seriously doubt any of them are going to be scratching their head at the cat reference. Suggesting we would is a little insulting to be honest. Not to mention the Justice League play is more my generation than yours. I think you need to up your age boundary a bit. Maybe 45, and even then...
Anyways, all of you youngsters who get the cat signal are certainly capable of calling or writing your local representative. I'll cheer for anything that raises awareness and reduces apathy among my generation and yours.
As if an "old style Senator" would base his support for or against a bill on a website's design.
This is about engaging young nerds and non-nerds, average citizens and making an impact on main stream media. It's a marketing and PR stunt. It will trigger media coverage and thousands of phone calls... politicians fear at least one of those two things like the plague. And it's probably not the phone calls.
We already have a formal projects such as the EFF. They are the backbone of all this.
I totally agree that the cat/league/etc. is ridiculous.
The problem is not with old style senators. The problem is with the 95% of the general population that is confused or turned off by it. You're trying to convince the general electorate, which then determines who gets elected.
It does feel like a little club of geeks, which is not effective as a movement that aims to convince/beyond that circle.
Honestly, the 95% of the general population is the percent that still throws around cat pictures as though they're the newest and greatest things. My mother is often sending me cute animal pictures that were popular in the 90's and early 2000's.
> We start it, early adopters. The mass picks up on it after a few years, only if it gets started in the first place.
Which, coincidentally, is a LOT of what you can see happening these days with "social networking" and "cloud computing" and all those other hypes and trends that basically existed very well in the 90s and before but now the public is "catching up" with technical developments.
I think you're looking at it from the wrong side. I believe the point of the goofy "league" and cat are to bring in sites, which are mostly made up of reddit'ors and weird-ass-looking-cat lovers. Once the sites are onboard and the "league" sends out the "signal", this site has to attract the users, who are the redditors and cheezburger-ites. Some small, minuscule fraction of those will do things like call their senators, resulting in tied-up phone lines, angry recriminations, and general panic.[1] That is what your old-style Senator is going to take seriously.
The organizational style is very similar to that of other organizations that attempt to motivate constituents like the NRA and AARP and if you really want to spend some time boggling, check out their communications to their constituency.
In other words, the "general public" is not the target here. Neither are representatives, directly. The target is the "Z generation"[2], which are underrepresented in political debates, I think. And if you want them to do something, you probably want to use some memes.
[1] That's hyperbole, but I do suspect that if .01% of the American readers of icanhascheezburger were to call their representatives,
[2] "Z generation"? I prefer to think of it as "Force Z".
You're missing the point. I'd argue initiatives like these should have the aim of educating as many people as possible: things like a 'cat signal' may undermine that effort.
And the problem with educating people isnt the quality of the informational value of the message, its the lack of entertainment value.
Consider the daily show or colbert report, do they make people read less well informed newspapers? Most of their viewers were not reading those. It is however taking attention away from reality shows.
Likewise this is not to replace the EFF, but to widen its reach, and get people actively involved, that wouldnt get involved otherwise.
No, the least you could do is make snarky comments about the people who are actually trying to do something. This isn't about 'signing up' for a website. This is about trying to mobilize a group of people that often times is not that involved with politics. The idea is that when you sign up, you'll take action on the items that the site informs you about. There is literally nothing like this on the internet for this demographic and the OP gets the most upvoted comment complaining that they used the term 'cat signal'? Politics and protesting can be fun and inviting. This has zero effect on anything except for grump old people who think that they know better. We stopped SOPA with a few days of action and a few big names stepping up. This is simply an attempt to harness that power and dedication. People who are already shitting on this, on day one, while typical is still extremely sad.
This is what I'm worried about. Who really stopped SOPA? You can bet that anyone who signs up for this will go around touting how they stopped SOPA, just like the guy next to me pretty much single handedly saved Haiti in 2010 with his $5 donation to the Red Cross.
There is a disparity between giving money so that others can continue to do work and being the one doing the work. I want that distinction clear, and to remain clear. The doctor who flew down to Haiti to personally help is infinitely more valuable than someone who donated.
EDIT: I'm not saying that this is useless or dumb. It's a step in the right direction, albeit (IMO) a small one. I just don't want to see "I signed up- I'm going to save the internet!" I think the people who really devote themselves to these causes should be respected on a different level than those that, for instance, sign up for this.
Why? Why do you need to make those distinctions? The doctor couldn't fly to Haiti if he hadn't been funded. You need a lot of different pieces working together to make big change.
But someone who posted "Like this if you love Doctors in Haiti" did very little, just as people signing up for a website do very little. I don't like to belittle "raising awareness" campaigns because I know how important they are. But there is no substitute for getting your feet on the ground or your money from your wallet. I worry that we are creating a generation of people who think posting something in their facebook feed is saving the world. It’s certainly helpful, but it has to be in conjunction with real work.
People who aggravated against SOPA certainly did something -- an important thing -- but people who made hard decisions, called or emailed their representatives and really coordinated this effort did more.
This is a little different. For every person who felt they contributed to defeating SOPA, that's a person that politicians have to consider when enacting legislation. That's called paticipatory democracy, and it's pretty awesome!
"There is a disparity between giving money so that others can continue to do work and being the one doing the work. I want that distinction clear, and to remain clear. The doctor who flew down to Haiti to personally help is infinitely more valuable than someone who donated."
Really? Let's say I donate enough money that the Red Cross can afford to send an additional doctor to Haiti. How is that not in the same ballpark as volunteering your time as a doctor to go work there?
We should care about the effects of our actions, and donating money to effective charities (see http://givewell.org) is one of the ways we can have the biggest positive effect.
(I take this seriously; I give about 1/3 of what I earn as a programmer to the most effective charities I can find.)
Like I said, if your money is supporting someone doing good and gives them the ability to continue doing good, then it's helpful.
Going back to the Red Cross example: If I'm a doctor in the US I'm making very good money, I get to see my family every day, and I have a very high standard of living.
It takes one of those doctors (not necessarily from the US, but I imagine most doctors live well) to give all of that up and fly over to a country in ruins to help. Without the people who are willing to really make those sacrifices, we've got a bunch of money and that's it. Money in and of itself is not what is usually needed to rectify situations.
What's important is that you've found a way to feel morally superior and do nothing to address the concerns raised by your parent that it doesn't achieve its goal and thus diverts valuable resources away from better thought-through initiatives that would be effective at reaching that goal. A true internet warrior.
This cat league stuff is marketing for the network itself, the actual message that will be sent over the network will depend on the specific issue being addressed and will probably be tailored for a more mainstream audience.
>it really feels like a little club of geeks trying to have an impact in the world
What's wrong with that? Go geeks!
Don't you think the first time the "Cat Signal" is activated, it will make the news, and bring attention to the issue?
Also, old senators die. We'll replace them with redditors.
victork2 has a very good point. There is a massive disconnect between the online nerd world and the offline non-nerd world.
As a marketing strategy - and let me be clear, this is a marketing & people problem, not a technical one - you need to be able to reach the "Joe the Plumber" types. Someone who checks his facebook & email on the weekends, possibly forwarding glurge. Someone who does not own a smartphone, because they are confusing. Someone who will not get troll culture, memes and lulz, seeing them as juvenile foolery.
Put another way: a campaign like this needs to drive on many fronts, including the internet culture drive, the corporate drive, and the blue-collar drive.
Well, from my quick glance at the site, the league isn't aimed at "Joe User", but internet savvy "Lance Site-Owner" so they can show solidarity with the fight against evils to be yet illuminated by "Fight for the Future".
Basically they are trying to institutionalize a network of "like-minded" internet activists; which will at least be interesting as a sociology experiment to see how it evolves and what kinds of reaction it gets.
Yes, but in order to move outside of the Lances, a different approach has to be developed. It needs not to be a geek-only campaign and instead needs to be a campaign that includes non-geeks.
Remember, most of the world are not geeks, and in a representative democracy, that means very few people in power are geeks. Geeks need to be able to communicate these socio-technical issues to non-geeks. I really hope that the Internet defence league works to communicate to the mainstream of the culture - the non-geeks - what's going on, because the mainstream is the primary driver of how we move politically (technically it's a feedback loop with the mass media playing a large part, but mainstream culture carries a large momentum and sway).
I believe the idea is that when the Committee for Public Safety decides something so heinous is about to be passed in (some?) legislature somewhere in the world (a little hazy on what will be actionable), they will fire up the cat-signal and provide updated campaign code to League members to demonstrate solidarity via a "hunger-strike" of sorts "going-dark" protest.
Not sure if the cat signal will be involved in this "final-mile" of the distributed protest action or not.
> It really feels like a little club of geeks trying to have an impact in the world and it leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
It kind of is though. Also some of these "little club of geeks" have extraordinarily deep pockets and any Senator/representative worth their salt knows how much that matters. I don't want to make demean important movements in the sixties by making comparisons of their oddities but money/power worked then and Senators/Representatives know it.
My guess is that the targeting here is aimed more at internet users than at Senators, i.e. it's an attempt to get more people who vaguely care about these issues actively involved in them and feeling that EFF et al represent their interests.
I'll second this. That stupid-looking cat tells me nothing about the goal of the movement, what it's fighting against, or the character of its supporters, other than they probably also like nyancat or hello kitty. If you want a serious symbol, use the liberty cap that Congress couldn't bring themselves to use on their statue of Columbia.
Don't think so. The liberty cap has been a symbol of emancipation from slavery in Western culture since ancient times. There's a statue of Columbia, goddess of liberty, atop the dome of Congress. She was designed with a liberty cap, but was created too close to the American civil war for the south to accept the symbolism.
What? This is an awesome design and approach which will appeal to most people. Everyone's seen Batman, watched cartoons and comedies. This hooks into popular culture and uses it to deliver a message. I don't see references to memes here - can you point any out?
Besides, just what the hell is wrong with cats? Maybe you're a dog person but a lot of us are not. Elitist.
The easiest position to take when disagreeing with someone is to stick a label on the opposition as if this justifies that you should not take their argument seriously.
I for one think he has a point and if you don't please come up with something better than name calling.
No but old style senators still like good old fashioned vote buying, vote early, vote often my friends.
If shitty internet legislation costs them popularity or makes them look out of touch then they'll stop doing it.
The key is that this is going to be put in place on many sites so that the power can be readily abused to bring the kinds of legislative changes we want to see.
If it works within a few years you should start seeing earmarks for whoever controls the switch.
For old style senators I am talking about basically any person over 35 that has no idea what reddit/ twitter/ cat facts are and who will find that ridiculous. Yes Senators and representatives are supposed to work for you, but it's like for everything they have to take you seriously. We belong to the Z generation but in order to talk to other generations we have to use common references and avoid cats or internet memes or super hero folklore for what it matters. Serious business in two words.
OK, I don't disagree with the general sentiment of what you're saying... but I think you overstate the extent to which you can generalize the youthfulness of the audience here, and/or the extent to which the Internet is only know nto the young. As a 39 year old "Gen X"er, I'm aware of plenty of people my age who know and use Reddit, Twitter, etc. Plenty of people roughly my age were in college in the 90's when the Internet was first becoming widely available, and are 'net savvy.
I agree with your premise. But I think when it gets momentum and gets picked up by the news media, there will be lots of 'explainers' on TV and the web.
I'd agree if IDL were meant to be a serious policy organization or directly lobby Congress. But that isn't the case - it's a way of applying grass roots pressure by making people like your average redditor aware of issues and motivated to do something about them. That's the target, so thus the geek pop style of communication. Wholly appropriate for what they're actually trying to achieve.
Hey another one of the "I was too different/intelligent for normal school", backed up by a TED Talk.
Here on HN we have one of these articles every week. I think that all of the "misfits" should acknowledge one thing: school is not for YOU it's for everybody to have "similar" chances in life.
Yes, yes you're all beautiful trouble makers with a mission to change the world. Now do things please.
When I say misfit, I mean genuinely different. Being unique and quirky because that is currently what is the 'in' thing isn't unique, different or being a misfit at all.
When you were a child you were mostly driven by emotion. As you got older you learned to control your emotions. But for many people they over-control their emotions. That is, they worry too much what other people think about them instead of expressing their authentic desires.
Now that I'm in my forties, I definitely feel like I am more myself than I was in my twenties.
> That is, they worry too much what other people think about them instead of expressing their authentic desires.
You make it sound like it's mutually exclusive. You don't need to express your authentic desires or to fulfill them to be a psychological healthy person.
I stand by my point that we are always ourselves, wether we want to hide what we call ourselves or not. And hiding it isn't a problem in itself. Reality boundaries are healthy to our desires of "total desires".
It's normal to be stressed out by the limites life impose on our desires.
It wasn't pointing out that certain people are more "different/intelligent", the idea was that everyone is different (and correspondingly intelligent) and should pursue that.
Having met Alex and chatted with him over dinner a couple weeks ago, I'd say he does NOT see himself as a troublemaker, he just wants to DO (and DOES) a lot of stuff. I'd normally advise everyone to at least try a year of college before giving up on studies altogether, but if you are going to drop out during high school, please do it with the passion, energy and focus of this guy.
Funny that the US immigration system actively repels the misfits of this kind (dropoffs). If you don't have MS degree, good luck getting the green card (it takes many years vs. 1 year or less for MS). I believe this will be Alex's problem too (he's British, right?).
I recall him mentioning he's on an O-1 Visa. I assume having a published book, many other projects presented as technical publications, and lots of high profile people ready to vouch for his talent, helped overcome his lack of academic qualifications.
O-1 is a work visa, and it's temporary. If he's here to stay, then he needs a green card. O-1 in green card world is called EB-1 (National Interest) and it's a PAIN to prove. EB-2 (Advanced degree, essentially an MS) is much easier, any immigration lawyer can do it for you for a few grand and if they're quick to submit you can have your GC in 9-10 months.
KMS is great and very useful but there are limitations, for example the 4kb payload max. Another one is latency (back and forth is OK for a single decryption step, for 10.000 it might become problematic)
In case you have to go around these limitations they recommend a data key that you use to encrypt the data, encrypt the data key, store both encrypted blobs in your DB and throw away away the data key from the memory as quickly as possible.
https://docs.aws.amazon.com/kms/latest/developerguide/progra...
Thoughts?