[HN Gopher] Ask HN: Why are e-ink note-taking devices so expensi...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Ask HN: Why are e-ink note-taking devices so expensive compared to
       iPads?
        
       Looking at decent e-ink devices to write notes on, I cannot
       understand why they're so expensive. For the price of a remarkable
       2, for instance, you could buy an iPad which supports note-taking,
       and much more.  I know there are some advantages to e-ink displays,
       but I don't think that's enough to justify the high price tag on
       these readers/note-taking devices.  There's also hidden costs
       involved, such as buying new tips for the e-ink pencils.  Has the
       e-ink industry reached a dead-end where patents are impeding
       progress, or are there other reasons involved?
        
       Author : behnamoh
       Score  : 253 points
       Date   : 2021-02-15 15:11 UTC (7 hours ago)
        
       | pidg wrote:
       | I own a reMarkable 2.
       | 
       | There is certainly enough to justify the cost, if you are a
       | prolific note-taker.
       | 
       | Conversely, I find it hard to justify the cost of an iPad,
       | becuase I already have a phone and several laptops. I can't see a
       | situation where a tablet would be more useful to me, so I've
       | never bought one.
       | 
       | Turns out different people have different needs, and the e-ink
       | note-taking market caters to that. Most people would find an iPad
       | more useful, so they're lower cost.
        
         | crooked-v wrote:
         | The one thing that's kept me from getting one of those is the
         | measly 8 GB storage and not even having an SD card slot.
        
           | mumblemumble wrote:
           | It doesn't seem _that_ measly to me. By my estimate, it would
           | be enough for my collection of academic papers I 'm saving to
           | grow to about 4,000, which, at my current reading rate, gives
           | me about 40 years of runway.
           | 
           | It wouldn't be much for a phone or tablet. But phones and
           | tablets also need to be able to store apps, photos, videos,
           | and audio content.
        
         | pizza234 wrote:
         | Very interesting. I did the opposite reasoning - I also do lots
         | of note taking, however, I preferred to have a more flexible
         | device with OK note taking (in short, a 10" Android tablet),
         | rather than narrow device with good note taking.
        
         | abeppu wrote:
         | > Turns out different people have different needs, and the
         | e-ink note-taking market caters to that.
         | 
         | I have the first generation, and I do enjoy it. However, I
         | think a distinction is _how_ one takes notes. For
         | brainstorming, and just writing free-form, it's great. However,
         | I find it really annoying for taking notes about a doc, for two
         | reasons:
         | 
         | - If you need more notes than fit in the margins and whitespace
         | of a PDF, are you going to flip between the doc and a separate
         | file of notes? What if you want to compare two documents, and
         | take notes about the distinct ways two authors discuss the same
         | material? The idea that you can't have more than one thing open
         | feels immediately limiting.
         | 
         | - If you're several pages into a doc and want to flip back to
         | some prior point (and you don't recall the specific page
         | number), it's actually pretty awkward.
         | 
         | I feel like these devices are on the cusp of being much more
         | satisfying. But at present, either I print out all but one
         | thing which I can deal with on the remarkable, or I end up
         | looking at a combination of a laptop and the remarkable, and in
         | either case, I can't help feeling that an obvious use case was
         | not well considered.
        
         | Larrikin wrote:
         | My killer use case when I was a student was having a device I
         | could take handwritten notes on, watch class videos on, and
         | read my textbooks on. I then had one single device with a large
         | screen for most of my needs. Trying to read notes on my phone
         | was uncomfortable on the train but perfect on the iPad.
         | 
         | The real game changer was when I started taking the iPad to the
         | gym and putting it on the elliptical and could do required
         | reading or rewatch classes.
         | 
         | There was a positive reinforcement loop of wanting to run a
         | certain amount but then also wanting to stay on long enough to
         | finish a chapter and then once again figuring I should run just
         | a little longer and get ahead in class.
        
           | dorchadas wrote:
           | I do this too with my Kindle. I feel odd, but I usually set a
           | goal for 30 minutes then if I'm halfway through a chapter or
           | something, I'll often just keep going. It's actually been
           | kinda helpful at times, though I don't do it on days I run,
           | only when I walk/do legs.
        
         | mumblemumble wrote:
         | Could you expound a bit on why you think it's more useful?
         | 
         | I am thinking about getting one (or one of a couple other
         | similar options), because I think it would be MUCH more
         | comfortable for reading and annotating papers, which is my main
         | practical use case for an iPad. And if it's at all a decent
         | replacement for a paper notebook, that would reduce the number
         | of things in my bag.
         | 
         | But I'm also a bit worried that the organizational features
         | might be lacking. Specifically, it sounds like there's no
         | fulltext search feature, and syncing has to be done through
         | their cloud service, which sounds troublesome because I've
         | already got a system and encompasses file types and tools that
         | ReMarkable doesn't handle.
        
           | codethief wrote:
           | I'm in the same boat as you, I'm thinking about getting a
           | ReMarkable 2 and am turned off by their cloud service. It
           | seems possible to run Syncthing[0], however, so this is
           | giving me hope.
           | 
           | [0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26145584
        
           | GloriousKoji wrote:
           | The remarkable is really good at feeling like pencil and
           | paper, which mean it's really good for written notes. The
           | epaper display is also nice for reading text in daylight.
           | 
           | The iPad has the Apple Pencil and it's not bad but for
           | everything else the iPad is far better. You can annotate a
           | pdf and send it somewhere else in different ways. It can take
           | a or download a picture and mark it up. With the appstore it
           | can handle and convert just about any file type. It also does
           | a million other things like web browsing, chatting, videos,
           | music and games. For most people that adds up to a more
           | objective "useful" score.
           | 
           | But there is a huge charm and advantage for gadgets that are
           | highly focused on a single function. For what it's worth I
           | still sketch and take notes using a mechanical pencil and
           | spiral bounded notebook.
        
             | mumblemumble wrote:
             | FWIW, I use a Paperlike screen protector, and have been
             | very happy with the writing comfort I get out of it.
             | 
             | If there's one thing I'd absolutely miss with the actual
             | writing experience on a ReMarkable, it's colored
             | highlighting. I've been using the same color coding system
             | for years and years now, and I'd hate to lose it. But it
             | might just be worth it to lose the backlight and the glare,
             | and gain the ability to do my reading outdoors.
        
           | yobert wrote:
           | This is not the normal use case of a remarkable 2, but I have
           | found it to be the absolute best childrens toy ever. My 4
           | year old spends probably 2 hours a day drawing on it, making
           | mazes out of the graph paper templates, drawing beehives on
           | the hexagonal templates, doodling on cut-away diagrams of
           | space shuttles and pirate ships that I found and imported as
           | PDFs from the web.
           | 
           | It feels wonderful for him to use, as opposed to the iPad
           | which makes me feel like I'm rotting his brain. After a half
           | hour of using the ipad, he's irritable and throws a tantrum
           | when it's time to put it away. With the remarkable it's just
           | like a pad of paper, but I don't have to worry about him
           | getting ink on my bedspread.
        
         | d3ckard wrote:
         | Let me help you - iPad is the ultimate content consumption
         | device. It's by far my favorite electronic device and by far
         | the most used. I work on my computer, I communicate on my
         | phone, but I relax on my iPad. Internet browsing, shopping,
         | watching shorter videos (or even longer ones when cooking),
         | sometimes playing games, reading books.
         | 
         | Thanks for the recommendation for Remarkable 2, considering
         | buying one for a while now.
        
           | Cthulhu_ wrote:
           | I have heard of some using the ipad pro as a drawing tablet,
           | in which case it competes with e.g. Wacom, whose prices for
           | their display-drawing-tablets are on par with ipads.
        
             | girzel wrote:
             | My daughter is in art school. She was considering a Wacom
             | tablet, then did her research and bought an iPad pro
             | instead. She seems thrilled with the choice.
        
         | rtkaratekid wrote:
         | I've had the same thoughts about the iPad. Do you know if you
         | can use reMarkable as a display screen to draw on for video
         | conferencing? If it could I'd probably just buy one now.
        
         | visarga wrote:
         | Got mine a week ago. I always take notes and draw mind maps
         | while working on a project, so this fits perfectly.
         | 
         | I like the pen and paper sensation, the fact that my
         | handwriting is exactly the same as on paper, the ability to
         | erase, rewrite, cut and paste.
         | 
         | I don't like the flaky sync but love seeing my drawings as
         | PDFs. The LiveView function almost doesn't work but a third
         | party app allows me to display the tablet on the desktop for
         | Zoom meetings.
         | 
         | Arxiv PDFs are easy to read only if you crop or zoom, which is
         | a bit unfortunate. I would have loved integration with Pocket,
         | Dropbox, Arxiv and other sources. There's no TTS option, which
         | is also unfortunate, because I find TTS doubles my focus when
         | reading technical text.
        
           | vmladenov wrote:
           | I installed KOReader so I could rotate papers 90 degrees and
           | read them without squinting. Would highly recommend
        
           | codethief wrote:
           | > I don't like the flaky sync
           | 
           | Probably relevant:
           | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26145584
           | 
           | > Arxiv PDFs are easy to read only if you crop or zoom
           | 
           | Have you tried another PDF reader, like KOReader[0] or
           | plato[1]? There's also [2] which looks really interesting for
           | cases where you want to save time.
           | 
           | [0]: https://github.com/koreader/koreader
           | 
           | [1]: https://github.com/darvin/plato
           | 
           | [2]: https://github.com/GjjvdBurg/paper2remarkable
        
           | ahnick wrote:
           | > The LiveView function almost doesn't work but a third party
           | app allows me to display the tablet on the desktop for Zoom
           | meetings.
           | 
           | What's the third party app?
        
             | chrismorgan wrote:
             | I use https://github.com/bordaigorl/rmview to good effect,
             | though it just occasionally stops working and I need to
             | restart it to get it going again (I think it's from brief
             | USB connection blips, which can happen on the Surface Book
             | for reasons I won't go into but which won't apply to almost
             | any other hardware).
        
             | pietschy wrote:
             | I'm using https://github.com/bordaigorl/rmview. It does
             | occasionally need to be restarted to work but other than
             | that it's been pretty stable.
        
         | dominotw wrote:
         | same. I spent ~500$ on boox air. To me its my most used device
         | after my laptop. I use it everyday for hours to save my eyes,
         | totally worth $500. I also have an ipad which i never use.
        
           | zwayhowder wrote:
           | I have no regrets buying a Boox Note 2. It runs Android so I
           | have the Kindle app installed and the Adobe Digital Editions
           | reader for my uni books and well anything else I want. The
           | only thing I wish it had was MicroSD support.
        
           | tluyben2 wrote:
           | Exactly the same as my situation. And given Boox is Android
           | makes it really flexible for any kind of reading content.
        
         | zepto wrote:
         | > There is certainly enough to justify the cost, if you are a
         | prolific note-taker.
         | 
         | Would you mind saying what you find most useful?
         | 
         | I have an aging iPad and would very much like to replace it
         | with an a-ink device because I don't like staring at a light
         | source.
        
           | adamrmcd wrote:
           | I have one as well. For me the killer feature is the ability
           | to copy/paste your own handwriting.
           | 
           | I'm on the device 6 of 8 hours in a day, constantly taking
           | notes of my meetings and conversations. Frequently I write
           | sentences in the wrong order, and have to rearrange them for
           | logical/linear understanding.
           | 
           | Sure, you can do that on a Slate or iPad, but neither feel or
           | sound like you're writing on real paper.
           | 
           | It is just so satisfying to use.
        
           | luch wrote:
           | I also own a reMarkable 2 since last December and the fact it
           | is not a light source makes it valuable when you spend almost
           | all your waking hours staring at screens.
           | 
           | For me, the most useful trait is that it gathers all my note
           | in a "physical" gadget rather than being scattered on several
           | laptops/smartphones/notebook.
        
         | spaetzleesser wrote:
         | I would take one if i also could use it as replacement for my
         | kindle.
        
           | mjcohen wrote:
           | If it runs android, you can use the kindle app.
        
           | bloodorange wrote:
           | If you are willing to strip the DRM and convert the files to
           | epub or PDF, you can read them on the Remarkable 2. I do this
           | as I prefer to read on the Remarkable 2 (compared to reading
           | on the Kindle). It's just convenient to have all the
           | technical material, notes and the leisure reading in one
           | place.
        
         | _ph_ wrote:
         | I also own a reMarkable 2
         | 
         | Considering how small the company behind it is compared to
         | Apple, I was positively surprised how well it is designed and
         | made - in some aspects I consider it superior to the iPad.
         | Apple can fund a lot or R&D thanks to the volume of iPad sales,
         | a small company has much more problems to do so. And probably
         | the reMarkable sales numbers are small compared to the iPad. At
         | least they were able to bring down prices quite a bit with the
         | second generation. To be honest, I wouldn't have paid much more
         | than the 400EUR for the device.
        
       | powerapple wrote:
       | People buy e-ink devices for a special need, the market is small,
       | so the price would be higher. I wish Apple can produce a eink
       | device. I bought an Onyx BOOX Nova 3. I bought it mainly for web
       | browsing and ebooks. Surprisingly, taking note with it was quite
       | pleasant. Although I love it and use it everyday, I really with
       | there is a good quality device both on hardware and software
       | level as Apple devices.
        
       | aurizon wrote:
       | From what I read, it has no advantages in the marketplace -
       | except for a high price...
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | brassattax wrote:
       | I think e-ink screens would be great for musicians too! A lot of
       | musicians are using iPad Pro, but I personally would rather have
       | a dual screen e-ink device like this (for better battery life,
       | better readability): https://www.gvidomusic.com/ ($1600!!)
       | 
       | First company to build something like this and bring the cost
       | down to something a bit more reasonable will get my business.
        
         | donarb wrote:
         | Do e-ink tablets even have music-worthy sound capability? Even
         | at $1600 Gvido has no speaker!??
        
           | input_sh wrote:
           | It's about displaying musical notes that the musicians then
           | follow. Your options are either printing a lot or looking at
           | a tablet.
        
         | mhh__ wrote:
         | Musicians often don't have all that much money though, so
         | unless this device cost less than maybe $200 it's a very hard
         | sell.
        
           | cannaceo wrote:
           | Even the broke musicians I know have thousands to tens of
           | thousands of dollars in gear.
        
             | mbreese wrote:
             | Remember what the device is replacing though...
             | 
             | Expensive eInk device vs... paper.
             | 
             | Even if it is more convenient, you are still competing with
             | the price of paper. iPads at least have multiple functions,
             | but a set of eInk screens for music are pretty specialized.
        
             | quijoteuniv wrote:
             | thousand in Gear! Not computers/ipads! :)
        
             | _joel wrote:
             | The broke musicians I know can barely afford to pay their
             | rent.
        
               | wott wrote:
               | Both can be true at the same time.
        
               | _joel wrote:
               | Having expensive equipment by virtue doesn't mean you
               | have captial to buy more expensive equipment. I think my
               | definition of being broke must be different to yours, if
               | it means you're able to buy an expensive (for what it
               | really is, you're paying mainly for IP there) e-ink
               | display just for scoring. Especially in an age when the
               | usual gigging and live performances have been virtually
               | non-existent for a year.
        
             | NeutronStar wrote:
             | That's for gear. Not for a paper replacing device. What's
             | the cost of paper and pen compared to this?
        
         | zwily wrote:
         | I would love a quality eink display to replace my iPad Pro for
         | piano music. One reason I haven't tried anything else is it has
         | to be rock solid - crashing/locking up/etc during a gig would
         | be terrible. The iPad (with a Bluetooth pedal for page turns)
         | hasn't let me down yet.
        
         | toyg wrote:
         | _> for better battery life, better readability)_
         | 
         | High latency could be an issue though.
        
       | jacklolo wrote:
       | The 12 Best Jobs for Dog Lovers
       | 
       | https://bit.ly/MONY23GIFT
        
       | throwaway4485we wrote:
       | Throaway to not get sued.
       | 
       | E-ink, the company, holds the patents of the pigment core tech
       | that makes _" paper-like"_ displays possible and strongarms the
       | display manufacturers and the users of their displays to absolute
       | silence. Any research project or startup that comes up with a
       | better alternative technology gets bought out or buried by their
       | lawyers ASAP.
       | 
       | E-ink don't make the display themselves, they make the e-ink
       | film, filled with their patented pigment particles and sell it to
       | display manufacturers who package the film in glass and a TFT
       | layer and add a driver interface chip, all of which are
       | proprietary AF and unless you're the size of Amazon, forget about
       | getting any detailed datasheets about how to correctly drive
       | their displays to get sharp images.
       | 
       | In my previous company we had to reverse engineer their waveforms
       | in order to build usable products even though we were buying
       | quite a lot of displays.
       | 
       | With so much control over the IP and the entire supply chain and
       | due to the broken nature of the patent system, they're an
       | absolute monopoly and have no incentive to lower prices or to
       | bring any innovations to the market and are a textbook example of
       | what happens to technology when there is zero competition.
       | 
       | So, when you see the high prices of e-paper gadgets, don't blame
       | the manufacturers, as they're not price gouging, blame E-ink, as
       | their displays make up the bulk of the BOM.
       | 
       | Tough, some of their tech is pretty dope. One day E-ink sent over
       | a 32" 1440p prototype panel with 32 shades of B&W to show off. My
       | God, was the picture gorgeous and sharp. I would have loved to
       | have it as a PC monitor so I tried building an HDMI interface
       | controller for it with an FPGA but failed due to a lack of time
       | and documentation. Shame, although not a big loss as an estimated
       | cost for that was near the five figure ballpark and the current
       | consumption was astronomical, sometimes triggering the protection
       | of the power supply on certain images.
        
         | JohnJamesRambo wrote:
         | It's so silly though, have they done real correct math on how
         | much more they would make if everyone used it?
        
           | schnevets wrote:
           | My mind immediately went to the most recent episode of NPR's
           | Planet Money, where they explored buying rights to one of
           | Marvel/Disney's +7,000 characters. Specifically, they tried
           | licensing Doorman, an obscure joke of a hero who can teleport
           | others.
           | 
           | Although they never said it outright, it sounded like the
           | main deterrent is just anyone else making money with an angle
           | Disney hadn't explored. It sounds similar to eInk refusing
           | millions if it means someone else makes a greater fortune.
        
           | lostcolony wrote:
           | Volume doesn't always equate to greater profit. High margin
           | luxury goods are a valid business strategy too. I'm sure
           | they're doing the thing that their data points to as netting
           | them the largest profit.
        
             | ChuckMcM wrote:
             | FWIW, I believe this has been debunked. Volume (when there
             | is a net margin) _always_ equates to greater profit until
             | market saturation. Veblen goods rarely work for niche
             | markets but can work for commodity markets (see cars and
             | watches for examples).
        
               | weberer wrote:
               | Then why are there diamond cartels?
        
               | ChuckMcM wrote:
               | You aren't serious right? I mean there is a whole article
               | on DeBeers (https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/
               | 1982/02/have-yo...).
        
             | hakfoo wrote:
             | The "luxury goods" strategy is viable in a direct to
             | consumer play. But does it still apply at the component
             | level? If anything, I'd think there's an aversion to lower
             | volume, single-source boutique parts just because of the
             | fear of supply chain kinks. Maybe there's some marketing
             | case to be made of "you can elevate your product's market
             | position with expensive premium components" but that
             | argument has a lot of moving parts when you're not the only
             | displauy tech on the market.
             | 
             | I wonder if there's a non-margin factor in play. Maybe
             | something like:
             | 
             | * They don't want to be in the "support" business, so by
             | keeping the product line away from hobbyists/small players,
             | they keep their overhead low.
             | 
             | * Their main concern is product secrecy and therefore will
             | only deal with firms large enough to take NDAs and licenses
             | seriously
             | 
             | * Their manufacturing capacity is finite and not easily
             | scaled, so they couldn't actually deliver on a hypothetical
             | millions-of-screens-per-year order.
             | 
             | * Some sort of brand protectionism. I see a lot of "we
             | could probably hack and rig an E-ink display to do
             | something outside its normal sales case" discussion. I
             | could imagine a situation where they ended up-- in the eyes
             | of end consumers-- responsible for the failings of such
             | products. They never said to use their panel as a desktop
             | monitor for playing 60fps video, but they can't stop
             | someone from trying and then bellyaching about it to the
             | world.
             | 
             | Of course, a mandatory-licensing mechanism could help
             | escape whatever tarpit they're in.
        
         | helmholtz wrote:
         | I've heard this narrative before quite often. My follow up
         | question is, is there an end in sight? Is there reason to be
         | hopeful that, later this decade for instance, things might get
         | better and we might have 27" high PPI e-ink monitors available
         | around the same price as a typical LCD?
        
           | varjag wrote:
           | Patents expire after 20 years.
        
             | Cthulhu_ wrote:
             | Looking up their patents
             | (https://patents.justia.com/assignee/e-ink-
             | corporation?page=3...), looks like their earliest patents
             | are from 1998, so those should be expired already. That
             | said, there's 36 pages of patents that seem related, so I'm
             | sure that newly made e-ink technology will be covered by
             | the newer patents.
        
               | ianai wrote:
               | I wonder if the market based solution is for their IP to
               | be bought by someone seeking to make products. And what
               | that would cost.
        
               | alisonkisk wrote:
               | It would cost the sum of as what it costs now, probably?
               | 
               | There's not much of a market-based solution to a legally
               | protected monopoly. The best you can hope for is to
               | higher demand at lower price points that makes a lower
               | price profitable
        
               | ianai wrote:
               | Theory says it should cost some multiple of whatever
               | revenue they're making on it y/y now. And it'd be worth
               | it if the buyer knew they could grow that revenue
               | substantially compared to interest rates.
        
               | m-ee wrote:
               | You can also make things tough on competitors by filing a
               | new patent that's different enough from the original to
               | get approved, but close enough to the original that it
               | would be difficult to use the older patent without
               | infringing on the new one.
        
               | 8ytecoder wrote:
               | Evergreening. US patent system has no provision to ban
               | this practice. India, for example, requires the patent to
               | be substantially different from the original. It's the
               | same trick used by drug manufacturers.
        
               | zerocrates wrote:
               | I've never quite gotten the problem with evergreening.
               | The story is, a drug company seeing their patent
               | expiration come up, makes some small improvement and
               | patents that, getting them a new term. So far I'm
               | following along.
               | 
               | But the narrative is, this locks out generics somehow.
               | The new patent can't cover the subject matter of the old
               | patent, as its automatically prior art, so only the
               | improvements are covered by the new patent. If the
               | "improvements" are so minor as to be irrelevant then I
               | don't see how this is a real impediment to a generic. If
               | on the other hand there's a _significant_ improvement, it
               | seems like that 's really something that _should_ be
               | getting patent protection.
               | 
               | I just feel like there's always a step missing in the
               | usual simple descriptions of evergreening I see. Is this
               | all just tied in with something like doctors writing
               | brand-name prescriptions, and the brand name just gets
               | these minor pointless "improvements," but enough to
               | diverges away from what the generic is so it can't be
               | easily substituted?
        
               | toyg wrote:
               | It also takes time for manufacturers to design and
               | produce. Even if someone had rushed out of the gate in
               | 2018, they would probably not have ad products ready for
               | a couple of years (and last year there was covid too) -
               | and this with the most basic tech, which we know actually
               | took significant time to be refined.
               | 
               | I think a more realistic timeframe for usable eInk
               | patents is 20 years from the first Kindle release, so
               | 2027 or so.
        
               | neltnerb wrote:
               | If I recall correctly e-ink took almost a decade to work
               | out the very complicated processing required to produce
               | displays with good enough quality control.
               | 
               | It was a really hard problem that required totally
               | different tooling from a normal display manufacturer so
               | I'd absolutely expect that to be a huge source of delays
               | in getting set up.
               | 
               | You can't just convert an existing display factory to
               | make e-ink displays, so the startup costs are huge and
               | the odds are good that you'll take at least a few years
               | to work out the quirks. Probably more like 4-6... if you
               | get lucky and can figure out what tools to use quickly.
        
               | throwaway287391 wrote:
               | > Even if someone had rushed out of the gate in 2018,
               | they would probably not have ad products ready for a
               | couple of years (and last year there was covid too) - and
               | this with the most basic tech, which we know actually
               | took significant time to be refined.
               | 
               | Ignorant question: are you not allowed to start
               | developing a product, or "planning" to develop a product,
               | before a patent it infringes on expires? I see from
               | glancing at Wikipedia that with a US patent, "making" the
               | item is infringement, but where is the line on that? Is
               | it that you literally can't fully make the thing, i.e.
               | only get 99% of the way there and you're fine? Or is it
               | infringement to have an on-the-record chat with a buddy
               | that you're thinking of working on X when the patent for
               | X expires? (Responses in the form of LMGTFY are welcome,
               | I couldn't quickly figure out how to search for this.)
        
               | dctoedt wrote:
               | > _Is it that you literally can 't fully make the thing,
               | i.e. only get 99% of the way there and you're fine?_
               | 
               | Lawyer-no-longer-practicing-patent-law here: You have to
               | look at each individual, numbered _claim_ (at the end of
               | the printed patent). Treat each claim as its own
               | infringement checklist, with each term in that claim as a
               | checklist item. IF: Every checklist item _in that claim_
               | is present in what you 're doing, either literally or, as
               | an edge case, by a "substantial equivalent," a term of
               | art; THEN: _That claim_ is infringed. (It only takes one
               | infringed claim for liability.)
               | 
               | A canonical hypothetical claim is this: "1. A seating
               | structure comprising: (a) a generally-horizontal seating
               | platform; and (b) at least four legs, of substantially-
               | equal length, each affixed, substantially orthogonally,
               | to the same side of the seating platform to extend in the
               | same general direction relative to the seating platform."
               | 
               | For that hypothetical claim, a tripod-style _three_
               | -legged barstool with angled legs wouldn't infringe
               | because four legs are required for infringement. (There'd
               | probably be an argument whether the angled legs would
               | satisfy the "substantially orthogonal" element.)
               | 
               | For the same claim, suppose that you had a conventional
               | four-legged chair _with a back._ That chair _would_
               | infringe claim 1 because the checklist elements are all
               | present; the addition of the back is irrelevant to the
               | infringement analysis.
               | 
               | (In chemical- and biological fields, extra elements _can_
               | be relevant to infringement analysis, for reasons we won
               | 't go into here.)
               | 
               | Another edge case if if you "induce" someone to infringe
               | the claim; still another is "contributory infringement,"
               | which I won't go into here.
               | 
               | > _Or is it infringement to have an on-the-record chat
               | with a buddy that you 're thinking of working on X when
               | the patent for X expires?_
               | 
               | No infringement there -- for infringement to exist,
               | someone has to actually make, use, sell, offer to sell,
               | or import the subject matter of at least one issued claim
               | of the patent.
               | 
               |  _(Usual disclaimer: I 'm not your lawyer, don't rely on
               | this as legal advice about your specific situation, small
               | changes in facts can sometimes make a big difference in
               | outcome, etc.)_
        
         | m-p-3 wrote:
         | Seriously, I hope their patents expire ASAP. They're hampering
         | the technological progress of e-paper devices with their iron
         | grip on the technology.
        
           | mottosso wrote:
           | I can see what you mean but on the other hand; are they
           | really, though?
           | 
           | If they hadn't come up with the technology and written the
           | patents in the first place, we wouldn't even be here talking
           | about it.
        
             | kiba wrote:
             | Patent held back the development of 3D printers, and
             | accessibility of 3D printing in general for everyone. I now
             | see weird and clumsy workaround to avoid patent lawsuits
             | for things like conveyor belts as well lack of certain
             | commercial goods such as heated chamber.
             | 
             | Just because someone is an innovator doesn't mean they are
             | for continual innovations or for the spread of innovations
             | or like the idea of people building on their works.
        
               | PurpleFoxy wrote:
               | A lot of this stuff would have been invented anyway. We
               | still would have had 3D printers without these patent
               | holders.
        
             | atrus wrote:
             | But what are we talking about though? We're talking about
             | how this technology is unavailable for nearly all usage,
             | and prohibitively expensive for any actual use. It
             | effectively _doesn 't_ exist.
        
             | sunshinerag wrote:
             | good answer
        
             | GekkePrutser wrote:
             | True, but there should be mandatory tech licensing at least
             | so they can't just suffocate progress.
        
             | Grustaf wrote:
             | You can come up with technology without patenting it
             | though. If there were no patents then presumably companies
             | would find other ways to make money from inventions, for
             | example by being the best at producing them or improving
             | them more frequently.
             | 
             | Consider Linux, a bunch of companies have made bank from
             | that.
        
             | tehjoker wrote:
             | In all likelihood, they did the initial research with
             | public funding or built on such research. Since the 1980s
             | academia has been a get rich scheme where the public funds
             | research and then the professors go to the private sector
             | to make money.
             | 
             | I think the inventors should be rewarded, but it seems
             | misguided to do it by making them have to exploit an
             | exclusive hold on their invention which blockades progress.
             | Why not just give them prize money? You could set objective
             | standards whereby a new invention that gets produced over X
             | quantity by any party gets Y prize money.
        
         | danaos wrote:
         | Have you heard of Clearink? [1] They are using a different
         | technology which appears to be superior. One can hope they will
         | be reaching market soon.
         | 
         | https://clearinkdisplays.com/
        
           | cosmotic wrote:
           | All these product shots look fake and I don't see any
           | specifications, just vague claims. I'm curious in what way it
           | seems superior.
        
             | danaos wrote:
             | They have short response times and higher refresh rates.
             | Their online videos show video capable devices.
        
           | codethief wrote:
           | I had never heard of Clearink before but, damn, their tech
           | does look quite impressive[0]! I would LOVE to see a
           | ReMarkable with such a screen!
           | 
           | At @4:08 the company representative says
           | 
           | > Our current schedule is to bring gen-1 productions to the
           | market in 2020
           | 
           | Well, I guess I'll be crossing my fingers that it'll happen
           | as soon as this pandemic over.
           | 
           | [0]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zjJ2-cdhwMQ
        
           | therein wrote:
           | Is that what one would find in those color e-ink HiSense
           | phones?
        
             | GekkePrutser wrote:
             | No they usually use Kaleido. They don't specify but it
             | matches with the poor color saturation and 4096 colors.
             | 
             | Kaleido is a b/w eink panel with a colour LCD overlaid.
             | 
             | There's tech that looks much better like eInk's ACeP (much
             | stronger color saturation) but it needs multiple flashing
             | refreshes to update so it's not feasible for interactive
             | devices. They're just being marketed for advertising and
             | the like.
        
         | RantyDave wrote:
         | I've done a little work with e-ink displays. My God, is that
         | stuff a pain in the arse or what.
        
         | xxr wrote:
         | >the current consumption was astronomical, sometimes triggering
         | the protection of the power supply on certain images
         | 
         | That's surprising, since I was always under the impression that
         | E-Ink displays were pretty low-power. Is it the drawing of the
         | new image that requires so much energy in a small instant?
        
           | nine_k wrote:
           | E-ink is zero power when displaying the picture. But moving
           | all these tiny ink particles around takes a lot of energy.
           | 
           | I suspect that low refresh rates are partly due to the
           | problems of power delivery to the pixels via transparent
           | conductors.
        
           | retrac wrote:
           | E-ink has no draw when static, but changing from white to
           | black or back involves a physical state change that takes
           | quite a lot of energy. Many eink readers rate their battery
           | life in number of full screen refreshes.
        
         | robomartin wrote:
         | I understand where you are coming from. I have a love-hate
         | relationship with patents. That said, I try not to pass
         | judgement on such things until I fully understand the story
         | (not saying you don't).
         | 
         | For example, if a technology took ten years and ten billion
         | dollars to develop to the point of it being commercially
         | viable, well, yeah, a patent-protected monopoly is likely the
         | ethically correct privilege the inventors should be granted.
         | 
         | An example (out of many) of bullshit patents and monopolies
         | that should have never been granted are the horseshit patents
         | Color Kinetics got years ago. These people had the audacity to
         | patent the use of pulse-width-modulation to control the
         | intensity of LEDs and make lights that could produce different
         | colors. The patent office granted these people patent after
         | patent. Once they had enough they started to attack the entire
         | LED industry. Philips ended-up acquiring them. They let the
         | industry know they would not enforce the bullshit patents.
         | Still, the crooks took their thievery all the way to the bank.
         | 
         | -----
         | 
         | As for the relative cost of LCD's vs. E-ink. I think the
         | primary difference is very simple: Volume. I haven't done the
         | numbers, but I think I can say that the LCD industry is at
         | least 1,000 times larger in volume. It's like the LCD vs. OLED
         | comparison. Volume is king.
         | 
         | Another element is the tooling-up for manufacturing. A modern
         | LCD manufacturing plant runs in the billions. Two billion
         | dollars the last time I checked, but I haven't been in the
         | industry for ten years and have lost touch. You are not going
         | to take a multi-billion-dollar factory and slice-off a corner
         | to make e-ink displays. These factories are highly automated
         | and tuned machines. They are designed to make millions of
         | displays per month.
         | 
         | This means that making e-ink displays requires putting-up a
         | specialized factory or retooling an old LCD factory that might
         | no-longer be competitive for making LCD's. Regardless of the
         | approach, this is likely to be a very expensive undertaking.
         | That, coupled with lower volume, is guaranteed to translate
         | into higher prices.
         | 
         | Disclaimer: I was in the high performance display business for
         | ten years. Exited a decade ago. So, yeah, I am a little
         | disconnected as to the latest and greatest and what might be
         | new in manufacturing. That said, I get the sense that material
         | changes haven't been as significant in the last ten years as
         | they were during the prior ten.
        
         | iso8859-1 wrote:
         | Why can't a Chinese company clone their product and kill them?
        
           | dodobirdlord wrote:
           | They could replace E-Ink _in China_ , and maybe they already
           | have. But China's disregard for IP protections doesn't mean
           | that goods created in China that violate international IP
           | agreements can be exported.
        
             | mieses wrote:
             | Boox exports to the US and violates GPL.
        
           | mywittyname wrote:
           | They could easily clone & kill the technology itself. The
           | problem comes from the fact that e-ink is worthless unless it
           | is attached to a device with really strong vendor support.
           | And any vendor worth a damn doesn't want to be the target of
           | a billion dollar lawsuit.
           | 
           | So the choice is between an overpriced device from a major
           | player, or a cheap device with next to no support from a no-
           | name vendor.
        
             | purplecats wrote:
             | I'll take the second, as long as there are no hazards. I
             | think the hacker community could build something usable.
        
         | neonological wrote:
         | The question is, If the patent system didn't allow the inventor
         | to screw with the market and take advantage of everybody would
         | they have had the incentive in the first place to develop the
         | technology?
         | 
         | So yes the patent is responsible for the existence of the
         | monopoly, but it is also responsible for the existence of the
         | product that the monopoly is built upon.
         | 
         | I think a 10 year limit on the monopoly is a good compromise
         | (which is basically what the patent system is already doing).
         | Even with those companies patenting DNA... after 10 years the
         | argument is over.
        
           | pfortuny wrote:
           | geometric increase in the patent permit price.
        
       | edent wrote:
       | I have a Boyue Likebook Ares - it cost PS190.
       | https://shkspr.mobi/blog/2019/11/gadget-review-boyue-likeboo...
       | 
       | It has an 8inch screen - about the same size as the iPad mini. It
       | runs Android 8 but, obviously, some apps work better than others.
       | It came with several nibs for its pencil.
       | 
       | They have an 10 inch version for around PS230. See
       | https://goodereader.com/blog/electronic-readers/boyue-p10-is...
       | 
       | So, there are some cheapish, largeish, eInk devices out there.
       | 
       | I was told (and I have no way to back it up) that the yields on
       | eInk are fairly low. They make a couple of square metres of
       | screen, and then have to cut it to size. Because of defects in
       | the process, they can have a lot of wastage. So the larger sizes
       | are disproportionally more expensive.
        
         | Snitch-Thursday wrote:
         | I ended up with a Likebook Mars as it fulfilled the entire
         | criteria I had. Very similar design to the Ares.
         | 
         | headphone jack
         | 
         | runs new enough android to run syncthing
         | 
         | supports SD card
        
       | dpritchett wrote:
       | Not supporting a browser, games, or a media player IS the killer
       | feature for anyone with ADHD or other focus issues.
       | 
       | There are lots of us out here.
       | 
       | Some even people do their deep work on a separate airgapped
       | computer just to preserve their focus.
        
         | nojito wrote:
         | I used to have this problem, but I set up my ipad with parental
         | control features so that I am unable to distract myself.
        
           | dpritchett wrote:
           | What stops you from unlocking the parental controls?
           | 
           | If that's not a recurring issue for you then you may not have
           | an executive function disorder.
        
             | matsemann wrote:
             | (I don't have a disorder, but) for me the case is often
             | that I just mindlessly click my HN bookmark, open reddit
             | app, lichess puzzle etc to kill a few minutes. Just the
             | popup telling me that it's blocked is enough to make my
             | brain realize what I'm about to do and abort. I _could_
             | just click the button to override, but my  "mindlessly
             | browsing" mode got disturbed and suddenly I'm conscious
             | about it happening.
        
               | dpritchett wrote:
               | For a few decades I tried and failed to make hostfile
               | blocks, guided access mode, browser focus-tracking
               | extensions, day planners, public accountability, timers,
               | and more work for me.
               | 
               | What _actually_ works as I count the weeks to my fortieth
               | birthday is a fragile and ever-shifting combination of
               | adderall, sleep, diet, exercise, therapy, e-ink devices,
               | and the courage to be open up and be vulnerable with
               | those who depend on me at work and at home.
               | 
               | Splurging on a color laser printer and an e-ink tablet
               | have given me two more ways to have a hope of staying on
               | task a bit more every day.
        
             | stocknoob wrote:
             | Have a friend/spouse/hated rival set the parental control
             | code.
        
       | ericd wrote:
       | I wouldn't think of the remarkable 2 as "less than" an iPad. Part
       | of the point of it is that it is completely focused on being a
       | paper replacement. It doesn't pop up random notifications at you
       | while you're trying to think, and it doesn't offer the
       | opportunity for distraction when you get momentarily stuck on
       | something, which makes it a lot easier to power through.
       | 
       | It's like how not having junk food in the house makes dieting a
       | lot easier - you don't have to use willpower to do the right
       | thing, because the wrong thing is hard to do.
        
         | PurpleFoxy wrote:
         | You can trivially disable notifications and remove games/social
         | media from the iPad.
        
       | mlthoughts2018 wrote:
       | I own a Remarkable 2 and it is vastly superior to an iPad (which
       | I also own) for many use cases. I would likely pay more for
       | Remarkable 2 than for a full-sized iPad at this point, as the
       | streaming and browsing capabilities are not useful to me anymore
       | (I would use iPhone for all of that).
       | 
       | I'd also like better integrations with alternate cloud storage
       | providers, but this is true for Apple products too.
       | 
       | Combine with the fact you can literally ssh to your Remarkable
       | and write your own apps, it's a no-brainer.
        
       | ohitsdom wrote:
       | I would have loved to buy something more capable, but instead I
       | settled for this cheap LCD writing display as a mini-whiteboard.
       | I don't even know how to describe this technology but it gets the
       | job done at $20.
       | 
       | https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07QL11LWF
        
         | AshamedCaptain wrote:
         | This has been my point many times -- people actually have
         | trouble distinguishing eInk from el-cheapo non-backlighted LCD
         | displays.
        
       | sneak wrote:
       | My guess, from ignorance: the volumes are way lower vs
       | traditional tablets, thinning margins and driving retail price
       | up.
       | 
       | Niche devices almost always cost more.
        
         | Someone wrote:
         | I don't think they still be niche if they were competitive with
         | LCDs in other aspects, most importantly color gamut and ability
         | to show video (I think longevity and power usage already are
         | competitive, if not more than so).
         | 
         | So, why? Are they inherently more difficult or expensive to
         | manufacture, do they use materials that are too rare?
        
           | sneak wrote:
           | The way e-ink works is quite different from an LCD. They
           | didn't even get color until recently.
           | 
           | Personally, I think the benefits of reflective reading
           | surfaces (ie e-ink) over backlit reading surfaces (everything
           | else) is massively overblown. I have an e-ink tablet now that
           | they are >300ppi and it's nice to read on, but it's a
           | novelty. Some people love 'em, but that hasn't stopped the
           | iPad Pro from outselling all of the e-ink tablets by a huge
           | factor. I think e-ink's future is mainly in small/low
           | power/ambient displays, like price tags or luggage tags.
           | 
           | Most people read most things off of their phones or tablets
           | and it's just fine.
        
             | m-p-3 wrote:
             | If I could bind a 8/10" eInk tablet that was around $200
             | (or $300) on which I could read and reply to my emails,
             | read RSS feeds, check my calendar and take handwritten
             | notes on it (that I could export/sync) I'd constantly use
             | it.
        
               | criddell wrote:
               | These guys sell something like that:
               | 
               | https://www.boox.com/
               | 
               | I've heard they are great except for the GPL
               | violations...
        
             | cmiller1 wrote:
             | What about a hybrid display for portable devices. A
             | transparent OLED panel sitting over an e-ink display. You
             | could have the battery life and readability of e-ink and
             | just turn on the front panel when you needed full color or
             | fast refresh rates such as for video.
        
       | jMyles wrote:
       | The same reason we can't have many nice things: threats of
       | violence toward innovators under the guise of intellectual
       | "property".
        
       | RicoElectrico wrote:
       | The company holding patents for e-ink is literally retarded, as
       | if they don't want it to succeed. I'm not making this up. [1]
       | 
       | Sure e-ink has its flaws, but wouldn't it be better to have a
       | smaller slice of a much larger cake?
       | 
       | OLED is patent encumbered too, there's also a patent holding
       | company, despite that you can buy smallest modules for less than
       | $2 on AliExpress.
       | 
       | [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22829798
        
         | Naga wrote:
         | I agree completely with your points, and I'm sorry be that guy,
         | but "literally retarded" is offensive language and is frankly
         | below the level of discourse of HN. I'm not one to be the PC
         | police but really, come on. You can make your argument without
         | resulting to slurs like that.
         | 
         | https://www.verywellfamily.com/what-is-the-r-word-3105651
        
           | ThePower wrote:
           | wonderful response from all of you to a very annoying comment
           | from Naga. "Your offense offends me" is exactly how I feel.
        
           | nate_meurer wrote:
           | As a synonym for "inexplicably, self-destructively foolish",
           | the word "retarded" is effective, illustrative, and even more
           | concise. As I said elsewhere downthread, I can't offhand come
           | up with a better single phrase to describe the crew in charge
           | of the E-Ink patents. And yes, I'm sure that says more about
           | my limited linguistic faculties than anything else.
           | 
           | I do think it's important to point out that your taken
           | offense is entirely your opinion. You are certainly entitled
           | to that opinion, and I trust that you're coming from a good
           | place, but I feel it's also important to acknowledge the
           | occasional usefulness of language that you might be
           | personally offended by.
        
             | 6gvONxR4sf7o wrote:
             | > it's also important to acknowledge the occasional
             | usefulness of language that you might be personally
             | offended by.
             | 
             | I appreciate the emphasis on usefulness rather than right
             | or wrong. I certainly didn't interpret "inexplicably, self-
             | destructively foolish" when I read the comment and
             | apparently that extends to others too, which also speaks to
             | usefulness or lack thereof.
             | 
             | On the internet, writing anonymously to a large anonymous
             | group is very very much communication on hard mode. Things
             | like Poe's law reign supreme. If your goal is to get idea X
             | into as many of the comment readers' heads as possible,
             | then it's useful to use language that means the same thing
             | to as many of those readers as possible. I think that's
             | what people mean when they talk about "inclusive" language?
             | 
             | The HN style generally seems to be choosing the clear
             | inclusive phrasing over the stylistic(?) phrasing, choosing
             | "inexplicably, self-destructively foolish" over "literally
             | retarded."
             | 
             | (Not trying to be language police. Just a language nerd who
             | likes to talk about language.)
        
           | pid_0 wrote:
           | Is this really necessary? Retard is not used to refer to
           | people with mental disabilities. It is not a slur. Its a new
           | social justice campaign to get mad about something when they
           | ran out of things to complain about.
           | 
           | Guess what, stupid, moron, idiot, etc used to refer to people
           | with mental disabilities. Why aren't they campaigning to ban
           | those words too?
        
             | darkwater wrote:
             | > Guess what, stupid, moron, idiot, etc used to refer to
             | people with mental disabilities.
             | 
             | No, they were not. And despite what the "you get offended
             | so quickly" mob says, "retarded" main meaning when used in
             | a negative fashion against someone always, _always_ appeals
             | to the  "that person/entity has the mental abilities of
             | someone with Down syndrome or any other similar
             | intellectual disability". And you, me and everybody else
             | KNOW this. You just decided that this won't trouble you.
        
               | TulliusCicero wrote:
               | > No, they were not.
               | 
               | Yes, they were: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idiot
               | 
               | > An idiot, in modern use, is a stupid or foolish person.
               | 
               | > It was formerly a technical term in legal and
               | psychiatric contexts for some kinds of profound
               | intellectual disability where the mental age is two years
               | or less, and the person cannot guard themself against
               | common physical dangers.
               | 
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moron_(psychology)
               | 
               | > Moron is a term once used in psychology and psychiatry
               | to denote mild intellectual disability.[1] The term was
               | closely tied with the American eugenics movement.[2] Once
               | the term became popularized, it fell out of use by the
               | psychological community, as it was used more commonly as
               | an insult than as a psychological term. It is similar to
               | imbecile and idiot.[3]
               | 
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imbecile
               | 
               | > The term imbecile was once used by psychiatrists to
               | denote a category of people with moderate to severe
               | intellectual disability, as well as a type of
               | criminal.[1][2] The word arises from the Latin word
               | imbecillus, meaning weak, or weak-minded.[3] It included
               | people with an IQ of 26-50, between "idiot" (IQ of 0-25)
               | and "moron" (IQ of 51-70).[4] In the obsolete medical
               | classification (ICD-9, 1977), these people were said to
               | have "moderate mental retardation" or "moderate mental
               | subnormality" with IQ of 35-49.[5]
        
               | nate_meurer wrote:
               | > _And you, me and everybody else KNOW this._
               | 
               | No, you may know this about yourself, and I don't doubt
               | that you feel strongly about it, but you're projecting
               | your feelings onto everyone else here.
               | 
               | To me, words like retard, imbecile, idiot, etc. don't
               | immediately invoke thoughts of mentally disabled people.
               | Rather, I take them as descriptions of fools. GP's post
               | is a good example of this, and was an effective use of
               | the word to describe extremely foolish behavior.
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | 2038AD wrote:
               | >No, they were not
               | 
               | Not arguing any real point other than yes those words
               | did. Have a couple of definitions I found in a rather
               | harshly titled old book, _Backward and feeble-minded
               | children_
               | 
               | > Idiots. -- Those so defective that the mental
               | development never exceeds that of a normal child of about
               | two years.
               | 
               | > Morons. -- Those whose mental development is above that
               | of an imbecile, but does not exceed that of a normal
               | child of about twelve years.
               | 
               | https://archive.org/details/backwardfeeblemi00huey/page/6
               | /
        
               | reaperducer wrote:
               | Bonus points for not citing Wikipedia.
        
               | 13415 wrote:
               | I think you and others are missing the point of how
               | language works.
               | 
               | The situation is similar to famous Dutch insults like
               | _Kankerlijer_ (cancer sufferer), _Klerelijer_ (cholera
               | sufferer), or _Pleurislijer_ (tuberculosis suffer). Using
               | these to insult people who indeed suffer from these
               | diseases is questionable and can be rather tasteless. It
               | may even be confusing and fail to work entirely. By the
               | way, it 's also wrong to insult sick people just because
               | they are sick, and it's wrong to insult people with
               | mental disabilities just because they have mental
               | disabilities. But using such expressions to insult,
               | swear, or exaggerate at healthy people is a quite normal
               | function of the Dutch language. So Yes, if this e-ink
               | company was indeed lead by people with mental
               | disabilities, using the r-word to make fun of them would
               | be rather tasteless and possibly also ineffective.
               | 
               | Swear words and insults work because they break a taboo.
               | If you regulate language to avoid one taboo, then
               | speakers will simply resort to breaking another taboo.
        
               | reaperducer wrote:
               | _using such expressions to insult, swear, or exaggerate
               | at healthy people is a quite normal function of the Dutch
               | language_
               | 
               | English, too.
               | 
               | It reminds me of early 2002 when all the little kids on
               | the playgrounds were calling each other "terrorist" as an
               | insult. Their parents were aghast, but to them, they just
               | knew it meant a really bad person.
        
             | alisonkisk wrote:
             | What do you think "slur" means? All of these words are
             | slurs, and they detract from discourse while adding
             | nothing.
             | 
             | No one's banning "words" here. They are discouraging misuse
             | of language that drags down the quality of discourse.
        
               | da_big_ghey wrote:
               | I don't think it detracted from the discussion at all.
               | Rather, I think that RicoElectrico's comment is helpful
               | and that this sub-thread is not. It's not like retard is
               | a clinical diagnosis any more, so there are no "retards"
               | out there to offend, anyway.
        
             | 1shooner wrote:
             | It's called the euphemism treadmill[1]. It's nothing new,
             | and it's a normal part of language. Attributing it to some
             | sort of contemporary 'social justice campaign' seems very
             | reactionary.
             | 
             | [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemism#Euphemism_treadm
             | ill
        
               | wernercd wrote:
               | crying about a word is reactionary... especially when you
               | are getting offended for other people who haven't asked
               | for your help.
        
               | 1shooner wrote:
               | I don't think anyone is crying about it. Here's a simple
               | thought experiment: would you use that word while sitting
               | at dinner with a developmentally disabled child and his
               | parents?
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | alexfrydl wrote:
           | I was thinking that this word is not, in fact, below the
           | level of discourse of HN and based on the other replies I
           | don't believe I even have to back this statement up.
        
           | fortran77 wrote:
           | This is why Hacker News is a big joke among _real_ tech
           | leaders. Literally.
           | 
           | https://www.reddit.com/r/LOLHackerNews/
        
             | thatguy0900 wrote:
             | And the people on a lol reddit are the real tech leaders?
        
             | gregallan wrote:
             | I suppose you consider all 87 of the members of that
             | subreddit to be the " _real_ tech leaders ", then?
        
           | bzb6 wrote:
           | You say you're sorry to be that guy, but you seem happy to be
           | that guy. Don't be that guy, because it's your comment and
           | the successive noise that is below the level of discourse of
           | HN, making this discussion pretty retarded.
        
           | minikites wrote:
           | I agree and the people who are tying themselves into knots to
           | justify using the r-word reminds of people who pointedly use
           | the word "niggardly" instead of any number of synonyms just
           | to get a rise out of the audience.
        
             | sgtnoodle wrote:
             | You just justified to yourself a reason to use an even more
             | controversial word out of the blue in a contrived way. I
             | hope you were being intentionally ironic.
        
               | minikites wrote:
               | It's less controversial than the r-word, which is why
               | it's a good analogy. People who insist that it's okay to
               | say one usually insist that it's okay to say the other
               | one, because they don't understand the ways words hurt
               | people.
        
               | reaperducer wrote:
               | _It 's less controversial than the r-word_
               | 
               | I'm not sure that's true.
               | 
               | About a decade ago some prominent politician or other
               | official was publicly excoriated for using "niggardly"
               | correctly. I don't think anyone's lost their job for
               | using "retarded" in its academic form.
        
               | minikites wrote:
               | >I don't think anyone's lost their job for using
               | "retarded" in its academic form.
               | 
               | I could be convinced otherwise, but I believe that's a
               | result of more people knowing not to use it, the same way
               | you don't hear much about people getting fired for saying
               | the actual n-word. "Person gets fired for saying
               | technically correct word" is more 'newsworthy' than
               | "Person gets fired for saying obvious slur".
               | 
               | I did find this, although the person who was fired also
               | made racial comments in addition to saying the r-word:
               | https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/tory-candidate-
               | lost-j...
        
           | reaperducer wrote:
           | I once worked next door to a charity that had a name
           | something like "Association For Retarded Citizens." It was
           | very well loved and respected in the community.
           | 
           | Then the 1990's happened and it changed its name to something
           | more politically correct like "Association For Individuals Of
           | Differing Abilities." I found out when the big sign out front
           | that i used to park by was changed.
           | 
           | A year or so later, the sign changed again. Back to
           | "Association For Retarded Citizens." There was an article in
           | one of the newspapers saying that donations dried up because
           | nobody knew who they were or what they did anymore.
           | 
           | Just an interesting anecdote.
        
           | Karsteski wrote:
           | Your offense offends me. What do we do about Thai situation
           | now?
        
             | canadianfella wrote:
             | Thai?
        
           | StavrosK wrote:
           | While I agree, the word _itself_ doesn 't seem to be
           | particularly offensive, no? It's a matter of using it in an
           | offensive manner, which means that even if we move on to
           | "disabled" now, that's soon going to meet the same fate. I
           | think we should strive not to use mental disability in a
           | derogatory manner, no matter the word.
        
             | wizzwizz4 wrote:
             | This word has gained hurtful and harmful connotations.
             | Usually you can wait long enough and cycle them back in,
             | but increased access to old books and - now - the internet
             | has given us longer cultural memories, so it might never
             | lose its slur connotations.
        
               | g63wchueuo wrote:
               | tho shalt never name their child karen, until such
               | connotations have absolved.
        
               | Firehawke wrote:
               | Well, you certainly won't choose names with nary a Karen
               | the world.
        
             | g63wchueuo wrote:
             | thats just it tho. no retards were harmed in writing that
             | sentence. any retards here disagree? instead what we have
             | is a group of people offended on behalf of retards, which
             | is itself retarded
        
               | craftinator wrote:
               | Dead.
        
               | g63wchueuo wrote:
               | i stand corrected
        
           | Ajedi32 wrote:
           | Don't necessarily disagree with you, but seeing as "the r
           | word" is no longer used to refer to mentally disabled people
           | it seems a little late to be campaigning to end its use as a
           | pejorative _now_. If anything, these efforts should be
           | directed towards ending the use of "autism" in a pejorative
           | context, as if that trend isn't stopped then that term is up
           | next on the euphemism treadmill.
           | 
           | I also wonder if perhaps these sort of concerted efforts to
           | treat certain words as unacceptable to say might actually be
           | giving those words _more_ power than they otherwise would
           | have. After all, "idiot" used to refer to mentally disabled
           | people and few would consider that word to be particularly
           | offensive today.
        
             | Jiocus wrote:
             | The word "idiot" predates the brief medical use for a
             | mentally disabled individual.
             | 
             | Originally an ancient greek insult, suggesting that someone
             | doesn't understand politics. Such was life debating at the
             | agora. At least it was one example given by several
             | teachers on English, Swedish.
             | 
             | Returning to the use in medicine; I imagine the label was
             | used verbatim to mean "lacking comprehension" or "ability",
             | so also describe a condition.
        
             | CabSauce wrote:
             | Don't necessarily disagree with you, but seeing as "the r
             | word" is no longer used to refer to mentally disabled
             | people it seems a little late...
             | 
             | That is a hilarious take. You must be a lawyer.
        
             | alisonkisk wrote:
             | We can attend to more than one abuse of language at once.
             | "Idiot" and other discourse-terminaring slurs have no place
             | on HN.
             | 
             | It's not the word that's the problem, it's the intended
             | meaning. The euphemism treadmill is when people keep
             | changing words instead of communicating better.
        
               | nate_meurer wrote:
               | Except GP didn't use the word "retard" to terminate
               | discourse, or to shortcut debate or insult anyone in this
               | thread. The word was purely descriptive, and this
               | context, quite appropriate and illustrative. I can think
               | of no other single word that better describes the
               | behavior of the E-Ink patent holders.
        
               | Karawebnetwork wrote:
               | > I can think of no other single word that better
               | describes the behavior of the E-Ink patent holders.
               | 
               | This is the central point of this issue.
               | 
               | This person uses a word that used to mean "person with a
               | mental health problem" to describe a situation where a
               | company "lacks intelligence and awareness".
               | 
               | People who have been and still are the victims of this
               | insult do not want to be associated with the concept of
               | "lack of intelligence".
               | 
               | Write the same sentence without using the slur as a
               | crutch. "The company that holds the patents for
               | electronic ink has an [intellectual disability]".
               | 
               | In this format, it is very clear that this wording is
               | problematic.
               | 
               | In any case, it is simply bad writing. There are many
               | other ways to describe what this company does without
               | using a word that comes with a heavy medical and social
               | history.
        
             | 6gvONxR4sf7o wrote:
             | I wonder if this is an age thing? Up until very very
             | recently, "retarded" did mean what we now refer to as
             | mentally disabled. It was a slur that people pushed back on
             | just like the words that preceded it, but the pejorative
             | figurative use won out. But it's too recent to say that's
             | definitively not what it means anymore. It's hard to date
             | these kinds of things, but the first document I found was
             | the social security administration changing their
             | terminology in just 2013.
             | 
             | It seems pretty clear cut that while maybe "retarded" has a
             | different meaning for younger people than it does for my
             | age group, the phrase "literally retarded," is clearly
             | contrasting against the figurative use. It seems clear that
             | it's pointing right back to mental disability, even if
             | "literally" is figurative here.
             | 
             | Maybe the lesson here is that for quickly shifting words
             | that mean something different to different generations,
             | sensitivity is a worthwhile thing in a forum whose users
             | span a few generations.
        
               | reaperducer wrote:
               | _Up until very very recently, "retarded" did mean what we
               | now refer to as mentally disabled_
               | 
               | When I was young, it meant children who were not
               | developing either mentally or physically to the timeline
               | of a statistically average child.
               | 
               | It was not necessarily a pejorative. It was just a fact.
        
               | PartiallyTyped wrote:
               | I would like to point towards urban dictionary and
               | different definitions of literally [1] that I found quite
               | amusing, please excuse the language.
               | 
               | > a word with no meaning in today's USA. Person 1: I am
               | literally going to have a stroke if I see another tweet
               | about fake news. Person 2: Are you really? Should I call
               | 911?
               | 
               | ---
               | 
               | > Who fucking knows anymore? First, it meant factual, and
               | now it means fictional. What the fuck, internet... what
               | the fuck?
               | 
               | ---
               | 
               | > a much misused adverb, often for emphasis
               | 
               | > "I literally died of embarrassment."
               | 
               | > "Really? How was reincarnation, you fucking illiterate
               | dipshit?"
               | 
               | ---
               | 
               | > A good way to show that you are a total drama queen
               | twit is to use the term 'literally' to describe every
               | mundane thing that you do in life
               | 
               | ---
               | 
               | All of this begs the question, when does a definition of
               | a word change? I suppose it happens when we collectively
               | agree on it, or perhaps when a large enough segment of
               | the population agrees. Perhaps at this point, literally
               | can mean figuratively if we consider the misuse, in the
               | same way we accept irregardless and regardless as being
               | one and the same. But I suppose then a new word would be
               | necessary to literally mean literally and avoid
               | confusion.
               | 
               | [1]
               | https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Literally
        
               | iguy wrote:
               | "begs the question" is another phrase whose meaning is
               | now in the uncertain zone, by the same process.
        
               | 6gvONxR4sf7o wrote:
               | > All of this begs the question, when does a definition
               | change of a word change?
               | 
               | (This is a perfect context for "begs the question")
               | 
               | I think that form of the question isn't a useful one and
               | that's the issue in the broader discussion. A definition
               | is a useful yet leaky abstraction. If you take the
               | viewpoint that a dictionary is merely descriptive, then
               | "the" definition isn't really a thing. "A" definition is
               | more appropriate. If a definition is an attempt to
               | capture one of the common ways people use and understand
               | a word, your question becomes this:
               | 
               | When do the ways people use and understand a word change?
               | At what point is there close enough to nobody left using
               | a word in a given way?
               | 
               | The distinction is crucial here because a word can mean
               | many things, and it can mean different things to
               | different people. I'd answer your question by pointing to
               | that phrase about science: It progresses one funeral at a
               | time.
        
               | michaelt wrote:
               | _> the phrase "literally retarded," is clearly
               | contrasting against the figurative use._
               | 
               | There is a current fashion to use "literally" as an
               | intensifier, rather than to mean "not figuratively".
               | Google "literally misuse" for a wealth of hand-wringing
               | articles.
               | 
               | I'm pretty sure RicoElectrico is using "literally" as an
               | intensifier - after all, companies don't have thoughts or
               | minds, cannot be IQ tested, and therefore cannot have
               | intellectual disabilities.
        
             | [deleted]
        
             | sdenton4 wrote:
             | Think through the usage of a few other slurs. I think
             | you'll find many of them are used both as a slur /and/ to
             | describe some negative stereotype of the targeted group as
             | it arises anywhere else. The 'generality' is just
             | reinforcement of the stereotype, and doesn't make the slur
             | acceptable.
             | 
             | Finally, the 'r-word' has been on the outs for /decades/
             | now. I tend to associate it with clueless teenagers - the
             | same ones typically spewing lots of homophobic slurs - and
             | anyone I hear using it will typically get a BIG discount in
             | my perception.
        
             | reaperducer wrote:
             | _After all, "idiot" used to refer to mentally disabled
             | people and few would consider that word to be particularly
             | offensive today._
             | 
             | And a "geek" used to be the guy in the carnival sideshow
             | who would bite the heads off of live chickens.
             | 
             | Think about that the next time you see a Geek Squad van in
             | your neighborhood.
        
             | dillondoyle wrote:
             | It is still used as both a slur and a legitimate term.
             | 
             | But even if #1 is false it's not up to neuro-typicals to
             | decide if that word is 'fair game.' It is up to that
             | community.
             | 
             | And if they do reclaim the term like BIPOC we still have to
             | understand and listen and not inject ourselves. Just like
             | BIPOC use racist pejoratives - for many complex cultural
             | reasons - it is not up to me/us a white guy to dictate or
             | judge.
        
               | inb4_cancelled wrote:
               | People of color can use their racist pejoratives all day
               | long, but so will I. Because not allowing different skin-
               | color people say the same things you can say is, well,
               | racism.
        
             | schwartzworld wrote:
             | > After all, "idiot" used to refer to mentally disabled
             | people and few would consider that word to be particularly
             | offensive today.
             | 
             | Sure, if your friend lovingly jokes that you're an "idiot"
             | you won't be offended, but the same can be said for most
             | insults or slurs.
             | 
             | However, insults that previously were medical terms can
             | carry particular heft for some people. Try telling the
             | women in your life they are being "hysterical" when they
             | are unhappy with you. Both law and medicine stopped using
             | those words for a reason.
             | 
             | Personally, I wouldn't like being called an idiot, and I
             | would take issue with that word being used to describe my
             | loved ones.
        
               | Ajedi32 wrote:
               | In those examples it's the statement that's offensive,
               | not the individual words used to express it. If I'm
               | having an argument with someone and they imply I'm
               | mentally deficient, it doesn't matter what words they use
               | to say that; the statement itself is inherently
               | offensive.
               | 
               | Here however it's not the statement people are objecting
               | to (most even seem to agree with that part), but one
               | particular word that was used in expressing that
               | statement. That's a different thing entirely, and it's
               | what I mean here when I talk about a _word_ being
               | offensive.
        
             | mumblemumble wrote:
             | Except that it _is_ still used to refer to people with
             | developmental disabilities. Typically as a pejorative term.
             | 
             | Edit: Thinking on your 2nd point, I suspect that you've got
             | your arrow of causality backwards.
        
               | Ajedi32 wrote:
               | > I suspect that you've got your arrow of causality
               | backwards.
               | 
               | I think there are two arrows of causality here actually,
               | and they form a cycle. A word is offensive, therefore
               | it's taboo. The word is taboo, therefore it's offensive.
               | Why is "shit" vulgar, but "feces" not? Language is weird
               | like that.
        
           | wizzwizz4 wrote:
           | Language isn't inherently offensive; it _offends people_. In
           | this instance, you1 're hurting, offending and low-level
           | ostracising a _totally different group of people_ to the ones
           | you1 're trying to offend.
           | 
           | If you1 want to use a slur, choose a better one.
           | 
           | ___
           | 
           | 1: "you" means the grandparent comment (GP)
        
             | graeme wrote:
             | I genuinely can't tell who you're referring to. The parent
             | to your comment is the one you're replying to, but it
             | sounds like you're addressing the grandparent?
        
               | wizzwizz4 wrote:
               | I am; thanks. Corrected.
        
         | inb4_cancelled wrote:
         | Too afraid to post this on my main account.
         | 
         | I don't mind you using that word. It's a generic slur stripped
         | of its original meaning. I use it all the time.
        
         | anfractuosity wrote:
         | I wonder why electrowetting based displays aren't more
         | prominent?
         | 
         | They presumably wouldn't be covered by the e-ink patents, as
         | they seem to work on a different principle.
        
         | StavrosK wrote:
         | Didn't the OLED patent expire this year? Am I misremembering?
        
         | arsome wrote:
         | Are those $2 Chinese modules really paying to license the
         | patent?
        
           | RicoElectrico wrote:
           | I have to say: I don't know, but royalties may be also paid
           | by upstream suppliers, as there are patents on specific
           | chemicals. There's a chance these chemicals are made e.g. in
           | Japan.
        
           | 2Gkashmiri wrote:
           | why do i care if they don't ? for for that matter anyone
           | here? its not like we are owners of e-ink
        
       | corytheboyd wrote:
       | I remember buying my first LCD display in the CRT era. It was
       | tiny, thick, ugly, and of course expensive. Now they're cheap and
       | everywhere. The same will happen with e-ink in time.
       | 
       | Honestly I would rather have the iPad for note taking. Response
       | times are important for rapid idea translation, and e-ink systems
       | are very lacking here, whereas the iPad is not. Probably an
       | unpopular opinion, but it's my own experience.
        
         | pidg wrote:
         | Response time (i.e. pen touch to pixel appearing) on the latest
         | generation of e-ink devices is literally imperceptible, though
         | I believe they've had to cut a few minor corners to get it to
         | that level.
        
           | ComputerGuru wrote:
           | Drawing a pixel where none exists is not too bad. The trouble
           | is drawing when there is already something on the screen.
        
         | PurpleFoxy wrote:
         | The iPad also has a massive library of software. There is an
         | app called "Concepts" which provides an infinite canvas in all
         | directions and it seems really useful for engineering and
         | design type people where you can just draw an idea in the
         | middle and move outwards with notes or alternate revisions. All
         | in color, with pressure sensitivity.
        
       | toyg wrote:
       | Beyond patent issues, TBH I would not have a problem paying for a
       | reMarkable this very day, if I could be 10000% sure that there
       | wasn't some shitty SaaS service involved in using it at any
       | stage.
       | 
       | These days, whenever a new gadget comes up, my first reaction has
       | become "I wonder how they try to screw you into a SaaS later".
        
         | habitue wrote:
         | I have one, and the cloud service is actually completely
         | replaceable if you want. Since the device is running linux you
         | can compile to arm7 and just run a sync cron to whatever server
         | you want if you don't like their cloud service.
         | 
         | Edit: I think people may have the impression this is like
         | Android where the process is "ok, first reboot, hold all the
         | buttons but not that one button and then unlock root, then
         | flash the rom with a custom version of the OS from this sketchy
         | site and ... bam! You're in control now"
         | 
         | Actually it's like: sign into wifi on the device. It's now
         | running an ssh server available on your network. The password
         | to log in as root is in the settings. You can ssh in right then
         | and write a bash script to do what you want.
        
           | sq_ wrote:
           | Does that still hold for the reMarkable 2?
        
             | hcs wrote:
             | Yes, and the filesystem is still mostly the same.
        
             | habitue wrote:
             | yeah, I have the reMarkable 2 myself. It's an amazing
             | device. The only downside is really the cost. It's premium
             | quality like an Apple device (the unboxing is a trip) and
             | it's hackable on day one.
        
               | hauget wrote:
               | That, and the lack of documentation on repairability. I
               | mean, I don't want to invest $450 on a device I can't fix
               | or change the battery down the line.
        
         | dec0dedab0de wrote:
         | I'm sure one of the people who own one will chime in, but i
         | think the whole device is hackable, you can get into a linux
         | shell as root and do whatever you want.
        
           | syats wrote:
           | Out of the box, the SaaS thingy is not really needed, you can
           | just signup and use the device without ever logging in or
           | downloading their mobile app. They're just kind enough to
           | keep all your notes for you and thus, by default, need a
           | bunch of battery power for the sync process.
        
             | jmholla wrote:
             | You don't even need to sign up.
        
           | neekburm wrote:
           | I have one, thus far their cloud service is free and
           | hopefully will continue to be so. Every ReMarkable comes with
           | an 8gb cloud account, which is the same amount of storage on
           | the device.
           | 
           | Hopefully this doesn't change, because it's really a pain to
           | put things on the tablet without using their app.
        
             | codethief wrote:
             | > Hopefully this doesn't change, because it's really a pain
             | to put things on the tablet without using their app.
             | 
             | Have you tried Syncthing[0, 1]? I'm actually considering
             | buying a ReMarkable 2 right now and the fact that Syncthing
             | seems to be working on it is playing a major role in my
             | decision process.
             | 
             | [0]: https://syncthing.net
             | 
             | [1]: https://github.com/evidlo/remarkable_syncthing
        
         | chrismorgan wrote:
         | You can easily disable software updates, and don't need to set
         | up the cloud sync service. The device is completely usable with
         | no internet connection, and you get ssh access that you can do
         | what you like with, and they provide a Qt SDK to build anything
         | against. But I do wish xochitl (their UI) was open source.
        
         | charlesdaniels wrote:
         | I was under the impression that ReMarkable in particular was
         | pretty good about this. I believe they just run a custom Linux
         | variant and you can even ssh into them.
         | 
         | I was really considering getting one, but I think the bigger
         | issue for me is the LiPo battery. You can't take the thing
         | apart without a heat gun because it's held together with
         | adhesive, so in a few years when the battery doesn't hold a
         | charge, you have an expensive paperweight. I would pay a
         | premium for a thicker device that used normal screws so that
         | consumables such as the battery can be replaced easily.
         | 
         | (Many devices these days are similar, so it's not only
         | ReMarkable doing this.)
        
           | PurpleFoxy wrote:
           | The iPad is much better at it. You just install Nextcloud on
           | it and now all apps have support for saving to your own
           | server
        
           | bloodorange wrote:
           | A thicker device would be more comfortable to hold as well.
           | It feels heavy and it is slim. So, it "digs" into the palms a
           | bit depending on how you hold it and that is not comfortable
           | for extended periods of handheld use.
        
       | daniellarusso wrote:
       | Economies of scale?
        
         | ip26 wrote:
         | Yeah, niche products feel like an education in how powerful
         | economics of scale & competition really are. It's easy to
         | understand conceptually without having a grasp of the
         | magnitude. But take apart a $300 food dehydrator, and it's
         | basically 1940's technology. The market just doesn't have
         | competition or scale.
         | 
         | Gives me a new appreciation for why access to goods was so
         | limited in the past.
        
         | mariusor wrote:
         | I'm pretty sure you don't need a question mark.
         | 
         | reMarkable is a small company that is now shipping their second
         | device. Apple has shipped iPads for 11 years, even if they
         | updated the hardware at every step, they still can rely on a
         | well established supply chain.
         | 
         | It feels off-putting to see people get into this entitled
         | mindset that requires that small companies price their products
         | in the same low ranges as well established ones can afford to -
         | either through unethical production practices, or, like you
         | mentioned, economy of scale - or they're not worth it.
         | 
         | PS. Sorry to rant at OP in your replies.
        
       | cameron_b wrote:
       | Not E-ink, but alternative tablet - Repaper:
       | 
       | https://www.iskn.co/repaper/shop/repaper
       | 
       | I got my wife ( a non-techie painter ) one for Christmas and just
       | set it up last night on our iMac.
       | 
       | Adoption -> volume -> buying power -> lower component prices,
       | better feature implementation
       | 
       | I think most of the alternatives suffer from adoption challenges,
       | but I personally love Unix-model physical devices [ which do one
       | job well and work well with others ]
       | 
       | So vote with your dollars, and feature requests
        
         | hmottestad wrote:
         | Is that just a paper clipboard that can digitize your notes?
         | What I like about note-taking on an ipad is that I can move
         | stuff around, copy paste, figure-mode, undo button and camera
         | for quickly grabbing a picture of the whiteboard or a slide.
        
           | cameron_b wrote:
           | it works the same way as a Wacom-type screen-less tablet for
           | interacting with a phone, tablet computer or desktop -- with
           | or without paper. It has a stylus for use in screen-only
           | interactions, but you can also use it away from a computer
           | with pencil [ with "ring" ] and paper, and pull up your notes
           | later.
        
       | dominotw wrote:
       | low scale niche products. obviously.
        
       | luplex wrote:
       | I suspect an additional reason: their customers are not very
       | price-sensitive. They obviously can't compete with paper on
       | price, so they don't even try.
        
         | m-p-3 wrote:
         | I'd be a customer if the price was lower..
        
           | PurpleFoxy wrote:
           | Well, wording the OP alternatively. They know they can never
           | beat the iPad on price so they don't try to squeeze their
           | price as much as possible and instead choosing to make the
           | device more premium and keep the business sustainable.
        
           | anigbrowl wrote:
           | 'Veblen goods' are items that are desirable partly because
           | poor people can't afford them. They're a way for better-off
           | people to signal to each other. Of course, e-ink devices are
           | not so fancy that _only_ well-off people can carry them. But
           | if you see someone with an e-ink device and they also have
           | nice shoes, clothes, and accessories, it 's reasonable to
           | assume somewhat high social status.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-02-15 23:01 UTC)