Bernie Sanders Intros 'Stop Bad Employers by Zeroing Out Subsidies (BEZOS)' Bill - <AUTHOR> https://techcrunch.com/2018/09/05/bernie-sanders-intros-stop-bad-employers-by-zeroing-out-subsidies-bezos-bill/ <comment><USER2> It's dumbfounding how something so obviously fair about how we treat people as a society becomes controversial... a trillion dollar company's employees shouldn't have a hard time getting food and need government assistance. Period.

<comment><USER3> Taxes aren't as simple as "take from A, give to B." People respond to incentives, and greedy evil megacorps do too.

Also, categories are complicated. One reason Amazon is the target of discussion here, and not Google for example, is that Amazon operates warehouses, and warehouses hire low wage employees. If Google was running as many warehouses as Amazon, would they pay better? Maybe they would, but how much better? If Google's low wage workers are in factories in East Asia run by third parties we've never heard of, instead of actual employees on their payroll in the US, is that better?

<comment><USER2> No society has collapsed due to their sociopaths feeling un-incentivized, but they have when there are huge disparities in income that cause suffering. So I can't see how dividing the revenue of companies up so that you don't cause your entire society to collapse and no one has anything should be rocket science is my point. Obviously their leaders should have but they didn't.

<comment><USER3> > No society has collapsed due to their sociopaths feeling un-incentivized

I don't want to sound like my side of the argument is "deregulate Amazon or else society will collapse." Especially when the original topic was a single specific bill and not really an entire political worldview. But making those sorts of arguments is certainly a lot of fun so :)

I think the last two hundred years of history and politics should leave us _exceptionally_ worried about how to incentivize people in the extremes. Stable political systems that aren't some kind of hereditary monarchy are relatively rare, not that hereditary monarchies are fantastic places to live either. Of the stable systems we have, a disproportionate number of them seem to be some offshoot of English law. I didn't study history, so any generalizations I want to make after that point are kind of worthless, but my totally biased take on it is that the whole "the poorest man may in his cottage bid defiance to all the forces of the Crown" part of the system is a really important part for stability. (Whether that take even ends up having anything to do with the BEZOS Bill is anyone's guess; maybe it doesn't.)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> So the bill just calculated how much federal benefits their low wage workers get, and sends that bill to the corproate entity?

That is not at all what I thought when it said ending subsidies, this is nothing, its not the punishment that this article suggests it is. This is a great way to balance welfare budgets in a national spending debate, or get companies to raise their employee's salaries above eligibility for federal programs.

The actual cost for companies though? Still negligible, but that only matters when it is improperly framed as a punishment.

<comment><USER5> The second step should be to then raise federal eligibility requirements to levels that allow somebody to survive on.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> If congress is good at one thing it's making an acronym for proposed bills.

<comment><USER7> The best example of this imo is the "USA PATRIOT" act, or:

"Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism"

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> > The bill is designed to create a "100 percent tax on corporations with 500 > or more employees equal to the amount of federal benefits received by their > low-wage workers."

Not all low wage workers are equal in terms of the benefits they receive. If the new rule were as simple as this, employers would have an incentive not to hire e.g. parents with dependent children. Or not to hire people who are more likely to receive benefits in the future for whatever reason. I get that Sanders wants to enact transfers from the wealthy to the poor, but there are ways to do that that aren't a mismash of bad incentives.

Edit: Not to mention that this would give low wage employers a huge reason to _oppose_ any new legislation to raise benefits. It just seems really poorly thought out. (Maybe no one expects it to pass, so it doesn't matter what the actual effects would be?)

<comment><USER8> Agreed, it would be far worse if Amazon were discouraged from exploiting desperate workers. No social cost is too high for cheap and fast order fulfillment.

<comment><USER3> It's easy to be sarcastic, but it's hard to measure social costs. "Stopped exploiting desperate workers" could mean paying people more, or it could mean firing desperate people and hiring people who are less desperate. If we're encouraging some mix of those two things, it's pretty important to figure out exactly what mix it is. And if there are alternative policies -- like say just giving people money -- that don't have the same complicated issues, it's pretty important to compare them.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> > Meanwhile, thousands of Amazon workers rely on food stamps because their > wages are so low

I'd be interested to know if this is actually true/where they're getting their numbers from, and if these are full-time, or seasonal employees.

<comment><USER5> "The Median Amazon Employee's Salary Is $28,000. Jeff Bezos Makes More Than That in 10 Seconds" \- Time

<comment><USER9> So...are those people on food stamps? And is this adjusted for part-time or seasonal workers?

<comment><USER5> Depends on the state, but a family of 4 with one working at Amazon is eligible for food stamps.

Not sure why part time and seasonal workers don't count since that's often the only way to even start working at Amazon.

<comment><USER10> It's not that they don't count, but rather that employers probably shouldn't be on the hook for benefits received while the employee wasn't actually an employee. If that employee is working two part-time jobs, for example, then both employers should be contributing.

Same for switching between seasonal jobs; if I'm working for Sunshine Ranch as a ranchhand April through September, and I'm working for Powder Bowl Ski Lodge as a custodian October through March, those two companies would need to be taxed proportionately.

<comment><USER5> Doesn't sound very difficult to simply prorate the amount of taxes by the number of hours worked.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17919329](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17919329)

</comment><comment><USER12> Remember when all of Sanders' supporters said he wasn't just another politician? Well he's certainly pandering to his base like one.

</comment><comment><USER13> What a moron. The idea Amazon is the problem... is he too much of a wimp to take on the actual subsidy recipients (ie Agriculture - particularly in livestock, Finance, and Oil/Gas).

Bezos is rich because he had a huge position the company he started and presided over taking to a $1T market cap. He pays himself relatively little in salary and stock grants on an ongoing basis. You might as well go after Warren Buffett.

Oracle stands out among tech companies, if anyone wants to create a cutely acronymed bill for them: [https://www.asyousow.org/reports/the-100-most- overpaid-ceos-...](https://www.asyousow.org/reports/the-100-most-overpaid- ceos-2018-are-fund-managers-asleep-at-the-wheel)

edit: _" This brings me great sadness, as Sanders' career has been to improve the lives of his constituents, and American people as a whole. I think this is uncalled for."_ It brings me great sadness, too, because I think it's opportunistic grandstanding on his part, and far beneath the standards he has set. And what saddens me more is that it appears to be part of a trend for him in the past 3 years.

<comment><USER14> > What a moron.

This brings me great sadness, as Sanders' career has been to improve the lives of his constituents, and American people as a whole. I think this is uncalled for.

> Bezos is rich because he had a huge position the company he started and > presided over taking to a $1T market cap. He pays himself relatively little > in salary and stock grants on an ongoing basis.

Then tax his stock grants at wage based levels. Your argument is that there are "bigger fish to fry". There's no reason not to start with a trillion dollar company.

<comment><USER13> Do you give him a refund if AMZN drops, then? Taxing change in mark-to-market wealth is a huge change in tax code and probably shouldn't be done reactively. His grants are probably taxed as W-2 income, as is his salary. Maybe he has accounting tricks for it and I won't speculate, but at issue is his longstanding, large position in AMZN that goes back decades because he was the sole founder and they only took two funding rounds.

<comment><USER8> > Do you give him a refund if AMZN drops, then?

I hope you're aware that investors already get to write off their losses.

<comment><USER13> Unless you know something I don't, this is when they sell a position. If you tax the delta in wealth on the way up (absent an exit that creates a taxable gain), what do you do if wealth decreases? I.e. If I hold 100 shares of AMZN at $1,000 and it doubles to $2000 without me selling, and I owe taxes on the increase in net wealth from $100k to $200k.. what happens if AMZN drops by 25% the next year. Also, what does this do to the predictability of tax receipts for federal budgeting?</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Show HN Again: Automated email newsletters, social media sharing for any website - <AUTHOR> http://cansend.com/?

<comment><AUTHOR> Apologies for the re-post, my original topic is here: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4130935> However, the feedback I got was that there was not enough information about what the app actually does, how it works, and how to get started. I've put some work into addressing this now and am really excited about getting some feedback from the HN community and so am re-posting it so soon after. Plus my original post got me ONE new user (@carRapide thanks for trying us out!) which has got me real excited as well.

I look forward to hearing from all of you.!</comment>


Deliver With Me – Helps you send or receive shipments via passengers - <AUTHOR> http://startcup.in/deliver-with-me-helps-you-send-or-receive-shipments-via-passengers/ <comment><USER2> That will be a legal nightmare. Couriers and post offices has so much paper trails for a reason. They are also absolved of the contents of the packages.

It could work in country but the moment you are out of the border you can be in deep fecal mater fast.

<comment><USER3> Indeed. If you're a courier and somebody gave you drugs to deliver, that could land you a death sentence in countries like Saudi Arabia or Thailand.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> We are aware of the consequences that could arise from security glitches. We already have a few things in place to improve security and we are coming up with many more. We are setting up a semi automated way to filter suspicious packages. Also, We plan to have people stationed at airports who can handover and pick up packages to inspect them before giving to/taking from travelers. We have also teamed up with ecommerce retailers to help deliver to places they dont normally delivery. When an ecommerce company is delivering stuff through you, you have more reason to trust the package contents. Travelers have an option of rejecting packages which they are uncomfortable delivering.

<comment><USER2> I am not talking about security. Fedex being the scumbags they are allow you to deliver 4 pounds of anything legal, anywhere in the world for a 100$. That is the price you have to compete with. Also post has some more rigorous privacy protections than a real human at the border.

IANAL - so check this things on your own

Thing of the top of my head that could go very wrong with ease:

1\. Brown guy bringing anything into the US - the non racially profiling DHS and TSA seem to have random generators that are very good at avoiding WASPs and catching persons with high amounts of melanin in the skin. Also at the US border you don't have reasonable expectation of privacy and the federal government can detain you indefinitely. (check EFF) How much do you expect as a compensation to take that kind of risk?

2\. Child porn - the eternal scare. The problem arises from that the definition for CP in most of western Europe and USA and Canada is "anything that the procecutor think is CP". You will be able to filter the real disgusting stuff (lets hope so) but what about family pictures where the mother is playing with her 5-10 year old on the beach. You need just an overzealous prosecutor that needs bodies for the sex offender list and your courier can be in very long and expensive legal battle. Will you pay for that?

3\. Anything encrypted in UK or Russia - in UK you are obliged to decrypt anything that the authorities think is encrypted information and in Russia it is just illegal.

4\. Anything that could be considered blasphemous in the Arab world and the Muslim parts of Asia.

Should I go on?

<comment><USER4> We have experts in our team who know what's not allowed in certain countries. There's a Google Adwords like system in place where once you post a package it is reviewed to check whether it's legal to take that thing to the destination city. The traveler is also intimated about any suspicious activity. I understand that this is just a preliminary check an that it's impossible to make the system completely bulletproof considering people find crazy ways to ship cocaine and drugs. But this is a chance we are willing to take. We try to do everything to ensure transparency and will plug all holes one at a time.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> "Has anyone given you anything to take on board with you?"

"Yeah, this guy I met on the internet gave me a box. Why?"</comment>


At work do you be allowed to read the technical books related to your work? - <AUTHOR>

<comment><USER2> Hi, I suggest you start your question with Ask HN: .

Also, the question is not properly phrased, it would be more understandable if you put it this way:

"Are you allowed to read technical books at work?" or "Are you allowed to read task-relevant technical books at work?"

I'd appreciate it if a native English speaker helps me with a better phrasing :) .</comment>


The dirty industry of fast fashion is causing an environmental "emergency" - <AUTHOR> https://qz.com/1222569/fast-fashion-is-causing-an-environmental-emergency/ <comment><USER2> Having worked in the supply chain for companies producing fashion clothing for popular western brands, it is eye opening and terriying the amount of work/energy/inputs which goes into making clothes.

To give a denim example:

Cotton growing wrecks the land, farmers gets peanuts.

I'll give a pass on the actual fabric making and sewing process, but what really got me was the amount of energy and robots used to destroy denim to make "distressed" jeans.

In some processes you have many hours of fabric being distressed, in wheels, in drums filled with different types of pebbles, giant presses, even lasers to slice them up... the jeans spent more energy and way more time getting ready for fashion then they did getting produced. (not considering cotton growing time).

All this work to produce something which lasts a lot less then it could, and probably will get thrown away soon. Clothes need an environmental impact label.

I have a new found respect for man-made fibres like polyester, polypropylene etc as producing those fibres is so much cleaner than natural goods, and instead of having to spend a lot of energy getting the fabric to "feel" right, you just modify the properties of the fibre by changing how its produced.

Edit: Fashion is one of the few remaining industries where obsolutely zero consideration is given to environmental impact when designing and producing clothes. This isn't just a poor country thing where they make clothes in a enviornmentally destructive way, the design of the clothes involves IMHO a lot of un-necessary production steps for an extra minuscle percentage of improvements.

Other industries, like say car parts, think about things like the energy inputs to their production process from the design state onwards, fashion doesn't. Even in sevice industries like making web apps, people think about inputs, and design to use as few of them as possible.

<comment><USER3> Hemp is a good alternative to cotton that has similar advantages - biodegradable, non-toxic, allows skin to breathe, but does not require input of toxic chemicals to produce.

One major drawback of synthetic fabrics that is recently coming to light is the tiny particles they constantly shed, which are too small to be filtered by most municipal water systems and are now found all over in lakes and rivers: [https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jun/20/microfib...](https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jun/20/microfibers- plastic-pollution-oceans-patagonia-synthetic-clothes-microbeads)

<comment><USER4> Talking of hemp, hemp "concrete" blocks are also considered good for buildings.

<comment><USER5> Hemp-lime aggregate is good insulation, but cement-fiber aggregates do not have the characteristic properties of more famous composite materials. Additionally, Portland cement is highly basic and tends to weaken wood, so the hemp is not really acting as a reinforcement in this case, but a filler which reduces density. Hempseed shells (the indigestible portion of hempseed) are often preferred here. See:

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiber- reinforced_concrete](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiber-reinforced_concrete)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> The documentary The True Cost [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OaGp5_Sfbss](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OaGp5_Sfbss) covers many of the problems with fast fashion -- the pollution, exploitation, and more, but especially the pollution.

I stopped shopping those stores since watching it. I recommend it.

</comment><comment><USER7> There's also a looming huge problem right now with recycling. Traditionally old, worn-out clothes could have their fibres reused. But the cost of new textiles has been pushed so low that it is destroying the market for recycled textiles. And so we're producing ever-the-more of this stuff and recycling ever-the-less of it. An environmental catastrophe in the making.

<comment><USER8> From Wikipedia, we are recycling more-and-more: 2.8% in 1960 to 8% in 2011: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Textile_recycling](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Textile_recycling)

Also we recycle low-quality clothes as isolation for example.

<comment><USER9> I don't know the numbers so I'll use some made up ones as an example.

2.8% of 10 tonnes of textile waste leaves 9.72 tonnes to landfill.

8% of 1000 tones of textile waste leaves 920 tonnes to landfill.

Herein lies the problem.

<comment><USER10> Garment production doubled 2000 - 2015.

[https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2018-01-15/no-one- wa...](https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2018-01-15/no-one-wants-your- used-clothes-anymore)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Tried starting a company to connect big brands with manufacturers. It was not a pretty picture. The brands made it almost impossible for the factories to make a decent profit without cutting corners.

<comment><USER12> From my understanding (mainly from reading this article[0]), it's almost impossible to find all of the original producers of most clothes. The manufacturers usually have subcontractors, who themselves have subcontractors, etc. and it will often go as far down as just being made by some woman in her home while she is minding her children.

[0] [http://highline.huffingtonpost.com/articles/en/the-myth- of-t...](http://highline.huffingtonpost.com/articles/en/the-myth-of-the- ethical-shopper/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> We have been lately going "Organic" when it comes to food. Hopefully, we will do the same for our clothing too.

</comment><comment><USER14> This is why I prefer buying ecological clothing, its more expensive but also better quality: [https://www.vatter-fashion.com/](https://www.vatter- fashion.com/)

</comment><comment><USER13> This is the ultimate reason why my friend started this and they have been getting a good traction. [https://aprl.la](https://aprl.la)

</comment><comment><USER15> Does anyone know where to buy their clothes ethically?

My girlfriend and I always try to buy resale if possible, but we still end up buying resale clothes which qualify as "fast fashion".

<comment><USER16> I try to buy from Patagonia.

They were one of the first major brands to popularize the environmental impact of their clothing, especially cotton. They made a major push 25 years ago to educate consumers on the impacts of cotton, and switched to entirely organic cotton to help reduce those impacts.

They also helped create 1% For The Planet, were an early adopter of Bluesign, early adopters of recycled polyester for their clothing, and most recently have been promoting reselling and repairing used clothing.

I don't think its hyperbole to say that Patagonia was one of the very first companies that started the line of thinking you see in this QZ article.

On a personal note, most of my Patagonia clothing has been very durable. I have Patagonia stuff that is 20+ years old that I still use every year.

<comment><USER17> Patagonia is great but obscenely expensive - a solution that does not scale at all.

$300 sweater jacket [http://www.patagonia.com/product/mens-down-sweater- jacket/84...](http://www.patagonia.com/product/mens-down-sweater- jacket/84674.html?dwvar_84674_color=RGBY&cgid=mens-jackets- vests#tile-3=&start=1&sz=24)

<comment><USER18> Isn't that inflation adjusted pretty much a normal price for a down jacket 30 years ago? Something that you'd buy once every 3-4 years or so? At least that's how I'm still treating this. Also, I'm Swiss, so my sense of pricing may be off here. But winter shoes and winter jackets for us is something expensive that one doesn't buy often.

<comment><USER19> 300$ USD is ~25% of a entry level workers monthly pay (net) in the US. Housing frequently hits between 50-30%, transportation another ~20%. Which means buy a 300$ anything means not eating that month for a large % of the US. Obviously Patagonia is still running which means there are enough people who can spare that but it's not universal (see the Sam Vimes Theory of Economic Inequality).

ETA: 300$ = 25% => 1200 a month net => 1500 gross (if no state taxes) => 9.38 an hour IF we assume the completely unrealistic 40/week

<comment><USER20> That sounds like a problem with depressed wages, not the price of the coat.

<comment><USER18> Exactly. Again, I will use Switzerland as an example and give a few typical salaries:

Banker in Zurich with 10y experience: 12k USD/M

Engineer in Zurich with 0y experience: 8k USD/M

so far it probably sounds pretty normal for people used to SF / NY levels right?

Here's the difference:

Mc Donald's cashier in Zurich: ~3500 USD/M

 _Median_ Salary in Zurich: ~6000 USD/M

 _Median_ Salary across Switzerland: ~5600 USD/M

These give you the low and mid points of the salary spectrum. It's just much more compressed than in the US - this Patagonia jacket should be <10% of anyone's monthly salary, probably affordable for >90% of population. If it isn't, then it would be if you take social services into account that are designed to correct for such market mistakes that leave people behind in poverty.

And this is Switzerland, mind you, probably the most US-like libertarian and decentrally governed place in Europe. All of this would be affordable to Americans if your government wouldn't just pander to the big corporations and throw out money by the boatloads for insanely overpriced defence contracts.

<comment><USER21> Switzerland is a small country benefitting from being the hub of a disproportional amount of global banking and commodity trading. I think that props up the minimum wage at McDonalds. That being said, the pride that the Swiss - from a McDonald's worker to bus driver - show in their jobs is noticeable to this American.

<comment><USER18> Banking revenue is 7-9% of Swiss GDP, on par with many industrial nations. Commoditie Trades are disproportionate to Switzerland's size for sure, but I fail to see how that translates to salaries in McDonalds - their main target market is hardly bankers and commodity traders. I think it has much more to do with the social safety net which imposes an implicit minimal wage (companies have to offer something significantly above what one can get from the government).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> Only after reading "Let my People go surfing" by Yvon Chouinard I realized the potential scale of this issue. I now think twice before buying clothes and I'm willing to pay extra for better quality that will last me longer.

Anyone has an idea what would happen to economy if we stopped buying things we don't need? Would we see a total market collapse?

</comment><comment><USER23> Does anyone know which as companies make clothes for longevity? Choosing such clothing will help us move towards sustainability.

<comment><USER24> They have guides on here.

[https://www.reddit.com/r/BuyItForLife/](https://www.reddit.com/r/BuyItForLife/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> The GoodOnYou app takes a stab at evaluating a brand's ethical and environmental choices.

<comment><USER26> That does not sound profitable.

<comment><USER27> The popularity of "organic", "green" and such say otherwise.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> I always try to buy clothes that are made of heavy durable fabric, preferably american made.

<comment><USER29> But what would you do if you wanted to be fast fashionable? Presumably you either don't care about fashion, or only wear 'timeless' pieces, which while they don't go out of style, don't set you apart with your fashion choices.

<comment><USER28> I consider fashion to be a secondary concern to durability and wearability (comfort) - I'm a traditional geek in this way.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> I think I missed something in the article. What is fast fashion?

<comment><USER31> Fast fashion is when clothing companies quickly latch on to fashion trends and then manufacture quickly and often really cheaply clothing. H&M are famous for this, they are often out with the latest trends, selling super cheap and usually not of great quiality. And thus essentially making clothing disposable.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fast_fashion](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fast_fashion)

<comment><USER30> Thanks for filling me in!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> Sumptuary laws needed here.</comment>


Show HN: Browse, submit and rate interesting Wikipedia articles - <AUTHOR>

I saw that a lot of interesting Wikipedia articles regularly crop up on HN. So, just made a quick hack which lets you browse such interesting articles in a Stumbleupon fashion. This may be seen as a replacement of Wikipedia's own random article function which usually outputs stubs or other non-interesting links. I have seeded the existing database with 100 odd links, please feel free to submit new ones (only accepts Wikipedia links) or vote on existing ones.
Here is the link: http://wingify.com/arbid/
Even though this is super-simple at the moment, feedback and suggestions are welcome!
PS: arbid comes from arbitrary <comment><USER2> Would be nice to know how many goods, bads and skips there are for each article. Nonetheless, I love the concept. "Sort by category" might also be useful to people who want to only read about certain topics.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Clickable: <http://wingify.com/arbid/></comment>


(mini)Brains in space – Live at 6:01 pm EDT – CRS-18 mission - <AUTHOR> https://health.ucsd.edu/news/releases/Pages/2019-07-08-2019-a-space-organoid.aspx <comment><AUTHOR> The flight has been delayed a few times, and is scheduled for today!

If you have any questions ask away!</comment>


AngelSoft Launches First VC and Angel Investor Search Engine - <AUTHOR> http://angelsoft.net/startup-tools/investor-search

<comment><AUTHOR> It works just like Kayak.com, really easy.</comment>


Ask HN: Typography—How? - <AUTHOR> Beautiful websites nearly all share one common characteristic: amazing typography. I want to make beautiful sites, so I set out to learn typography, only to find it difficult to find quality resources.
If I wanted to learn a new programming language, I'd find a project and start hacking—is that a good method for typography? Should I look for classes/books/paid sites to teach me?
What do you HNers recommend to learn typography? <comment><USER2> IMHO you first need to understand design, its various sub fields (i.e. typography, colors, layout), user experience design/interaction design/usability, and finally how all of this applies to the web. You can learn the basics by reading books but the only way to truly understand and master is by study this things in the world and by practicing them. Start thinking about design, analyze it in your daily life, do your own makeovers of sites you use, design a blog theme, etc, etc.

As for web typography, you want to check of the latest generation of font embedding because that's where the real magic's at. The most known web font solutions are: CSS3 (font-face), typeface.js, cufon, flir, sifr, Google Font API, Typekit.

 _Here's a list of quality books on design and typography:_

        A History of Graphic Design
        Before & After Page Design
        Designing Brand Identity
        Emotional Design: Why We Love (or Hate) Everyday Things
        Graphic Design Solutions
        How Designers Think
        Information Dashboard Design: The Effective Visual Communication of Data
        Making and Breaking the Grid: A Graphic Design Layout Workshop
        The Complete Manual of Typography
        The Designer's Guide to Color Combinations
        The Elements of Graphic Design: Space, Unity, Page Architecture, and Type
        The Elements of Typographic Style
        The New Typography
        The Visual Display of Quantitative Information
        Thinking with Type: A Primer for Designers
        Typography Workbook: A Real-World Guide to Using Type in Graphic Design

_Books on web design:_

        About Face 3: The Essentials of Interaction Design
        Ambient Findability: What We Find Changes Who We Become
        Bulletproof Web Design
        Cascading Style Sheets: The Definitive Guide
        Designing Web Usability
        Designing With Web Standards
        Designing the Obvious: A Common Sense Approach to Web Application Design
        Designing the User Interface: Strategies for Effective Human-Computer Interaction
        Don't Make Me Think: A Common Sense Approach to Web Usability
        Homepage Usability: 50 Websites Deconstructed
        Information Architecture for the World Wide Web: Designing Large-Scale Web Sites
        Information Architecture: Blueprints for the Web
        Interaction Design: Beyond Human-Computer Interaction
        Rocket Surgery Made Easy: The Do-It-Yourself Guide to Finding and Fixing Usability Problems
        The Essential Guide to User Interface Design
        The Inmates Are Running the Asylum
        Thoughtful Interaction Design: A Design Perspective on Information Technology
        Web Form Design: Filling in the Blanks

<comment><AUTHOR> The book list in readable format:

        Before & After Page Design
        Typography Workbook: A Real-World Guide to Using Type in Graphic Design
        Thinking with Type: A Primer for Designers
        How Designers Think
        Information Dashboard Design: The Effective Visual Communication of Data
        Making and Breaking the Grid: A Graphic Design Layout Workshop
        The Designer's Guide to Color Combinations
        Emotional Design: Why We Love (or Hate) Everyday Things
        The New Typography

<comment><USER2> Fixed the original list. Had to look up HN's markdown syntax.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> The most immediate difference I noticed in design school was a Typography assignment. We were tasked with going out and looking at all kinds of signs and identifying what fonts the signs used. We had to collect 10 examples of each style of font (Sans, Serif, Slab, Transitional, Display, etc) and then identify the font and give critical analysis on each. How readable was the sign, did it convey the right message, was it appropriate for the brand / message, who was the target audience etc. etc.

This was a great exercise as it's something you can do as you walk about, or in your case, you can apply it to websites in much the same way. It gets you in the right frame of mind. By constantly being on the lookout, it starts to become ingrained, and you can start to identify fonts automatically. You judge what you like and dislike and what you would change to achieve a desired effect.

As with many things, critical constructive thinking is the key. And perseverance.

</comment><comment><USER4> Go read _Thinking with Type_ by Ellen Lupton [http://www.amazon.com/Thinking- Type-2nd-revised-expanded/dp/...](http://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Type-2nd- revised-expanded/dp/1568989695/)

Then go and get a Typekit account <http://typekit.com/> and start experimenting.

Good design (any kind of design, not just web design) requires time and iteration. It's a skill, you have to practise it.

</comment><comment><USER5> for a great quick and dirty: <http://www.typographyforlawyers.com/>

for long term understanding, it's just like any other skill/trade/art: keep researching, learning, searching, finding inspiration, figuring out what you don't know, so you know what you want to learn next, and if it's worth learning.

you can "start hacking" by mimicking (copying) certain styles, seeing how they work, analyzing their advantages and disadvantages in different situations (just like different programming languages)... etc.

I think you're already way ahead of the crowd just by knowing how important typography is to the successful design of site, best of luck.

</comment><comment><USER6> These kinds of things can't be taught with the kind of discreteness that I think you'd like. You need that design sense first and foremost; once you have that, you can sniff out the fonts that suit your design. The best way to get that "sense" is just to copy what you love - go find the most beautiful site you can and gratuitously steal design ideas. Do this until you can create by yourself.

Or, just use Helvetica with big sizes and good contrast.

</comment><comment><USER7> Great question. The web being text oriented - I believe that typography is one of the most important aspects of a great website (visualization being the other).

If there's one seminal book - that would be The Elements of Typographic Style: [http://www.amazon.com/Elements-Typographic-Style-Robert- Brin...](http://www.amazon.com/Elements-Typographic-Style-Robert- Bringhurst/dp/0881791326)

That's a deep dive into it though. If you're looking for a shortcut you can get a quick hold of them here: [http://www.amazon.com/Fundamentals-Typography- Gavin-Ambrose/...](http://www.amazon.com/Fundamentals-Typography-Gavin- Ambrose/dp/2940373450)

At Future Simple (<http://www.futuresimple.com>) we think about that a lot, sometimes agonizing over it. We still have a lot of work to do :) - as any designer will tell you - we are never satisfied with our work...

</comment><comment><USER8> It's a bit flaky, but I think that most fonts have a 'sweet spot' when presented on the web. For example, personally I think Georgia is great @13px or larger @60px but in between, it sucks. So try to pay attention to finding the right size for each font.

But I agree with aba_sababa - you can learn specific technical details about fonts and typography in books, but an overall sense for good design has to be assimilated over time. So, when you see sites that you like, use Firebug and copy their font settings. Or if you see a site that has crappy typography (eg. Hackernews) then use firebug and try to fix it.

</comment><comment><USER9> Maybe this isn't practical for you, and it's been a couple of decades since I read it, but I still have a fondness for Knuth's "The TeX Book". It's about TeX, but along the way, Knuth gives you a lot of background on publishing including typography. I also recall it as being one of those technical books that is fun to read -- truly engaging and interesting.

<http://www-cs-faculty.stanford.edu/~uno/abcde.html>

</comment><comment><USER10> I recommend 1 book on typography: Stop Stealing Sheep & Find out How Type Works [http://www.amazon.com/Stop-Stealing-Sheep-Find- Works/dp/0201...](http://www.amazon.com/Stop-Stealing-Sheep-Find- Works/dp/0201703394)

I'd recommend checking out OpenFontLibrary.org & Kernest.com (shameless plug) for you can download the fonts, use them, and understand how they work in all the work you do - not just web browsers.

</comment><comment><USER11> By all means learn typography, but always remember that not everyone is going to experience your site the same way. People with less than perfect vision(there's more of them than you might think!) will often change their browser defaults to enlarge the text. Some people use screen readers. And a few people will alter your design with their own custom CSS.

</comment><comment><USER12> +1 for Bringhurst, definitely. Plus, when you meet a cute designer somewhere, he or she will be impressed when you drop that name.

</comment><comment><USER13> Anatomy of a Typeface: <http://typedia.com/learn/only/anatomy-of-a-typeface/>

Typeface Classifications: <http://typedia.com/learn/only/typeface- classifications/>

</comment><comment><USER14> You may check this presentation from MIX11 "Fonts, Form and Function: A Primer on Digital Typography" <http://channel9.msdn.com/Events/MIX/MIX11/EXT02>

</comment><comment><USER15> Some great books in arkitaip's comment.

But start with this one: "The Non-Designer's Design Book" -- it'll teach you how much of "great design" is "great typography".

</comment><comment><USER16> <http://www.webtypography.net/>

check out this ebook</comment>


American 'killed in India by endangered Andamans tribe' - <AUTHOR> https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-46286215 <comment><USER2> He went to a quarantined area just to proselytize. These are endangered tribal who have remained practically un-contacted for thousand of years.

As someone who is not very familiar with western religions, can anyone explain the rational behind such acts?

<comment><USER3> Its basically one of the most selfish things a religious person can do. They spend their time trying to get people top believe in their god, so that they benefit personally because it makes god happy with them. They don't help people just to help them, there is an underlying reason which is the personal benefit of the preacher. This guy was no different.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> > "It's a difficult case for the police," says Mr Bhaumik. "You can't even > arrest the Sentinelese."

I'm interested in knowing how they word the "case closed" stamp on cases like this. Is there a special corner case selection for things like this? "Reason, Other: Sentinelese" or similar.

<comment><USER3> Death by misadventure. (if we want to be polite about it)

<comment><USER5> "Self Defense" if the curious guy could have infected them.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Major security lapse from Indian Navy and local authorities. Do such cases get investigated as 'national security lapse'?</comment>


Ask HN: What's a "Hacker News" for other topics? - <AUTHOR> I read HN almost every day, because of my interest in technology, startups, and geeky things in general.<p>Are there other sites that are equally good for other topics, that you like to read? E.g. is there a good one for architecture, or for games, or for languages, etc? <comment><USER2> Growth Hackers [0] is one I visit occasionally. It often has articles that mix technical skills with marketing at scale. It has a weekly digest, which shows lists the top X posts for the week, in which the there's usually 2-3 articles worth reading.

[0]: [https://growthhackers.com](https://growthhackers.com)

</comment><comment><USER3> I've been heavily considering starting my own message board like HN but about the North American recording industry. Now I just need to find a record label to partner/host it with. :)

<comment><USER4> I would use that site, if that offers any sort of indicator.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> For data: [http://www.datatau.com/](http://www.datatau.com/)

</comment><comment><USER6> [https://www.designernews.co/](https://www.designernews.co/)

</comment><comment><USER7> inbound.org - Marketing/SEM

</comment><comment><USER8> snapzu.com has a bunch of categories/tribes you can browse through.</comment>


Windows 7 to sell in UK for half the US price - <AUTHOR> http://crave.cnet.co.uk/software/0,39029471,49303374,00.htm <comment><USER2> Makes a change from yesterday's PS3 pricing:

      $299 in US
      €299 in Europe ($422)
      £249 in UK     ($408)

</comment><comment><USER3> UK users can save another £5 if you buy Vista Home Premium from Amazon before Windows 7 comes out as you get a free upgrade and Vista is cheaper. <http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/feature.html/?docId=1000321063>

<comment><USER4> I'm not sure why this keeps getting voted down. That's not an affiliate link and from what I can tell, pmjoyce is right.

The Amazon page states that Windows 7 in the UK is only available in a full, non-upgrade form BUT you can get a free copy even if you only buy a Vista _upgrade_ which you can get for £60.75. Admittedly this isn't a great savings over buying Windows 7 direct but if you really want to save a fiver, it might be worth a try.

<comment><USER3> Apologies if it wasn't clear. What I meant was UK users can get Vista HP (Upgrade) for £60.75, if you buy this now they'll give you Windows 7 for free when it comes out. As only complete versions (not upgrades) of Win 7 will be ship in the UK you could therefore save yourself a fiver on the full version.

As petercooper mentioned, it's not an earth-shattering saving but in these times it doesn't hurt to point it out. Plus it's definitely not an affiliate link. I ensured it was stripped of all the usual Amazon tracking data and only contained the URL parameters need to read that article, before posting.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> That makes for a change. In the UK Adobe CS3 sells for £1000 more than the US. It's possible to fly to New York from London for £230-280.

<comment><USER6> Macs are similarly much more expensive in the UK. Perhaps the difference is the UK has a greater percentage of the population involved in the creative industries (particularly ad agencies and visual effects companies) than the US?

<comment><USER7> It's often because $1 ~= £0.65, but prices transfer at $1 -> £1, so prices end up 50% higher than a currency exchange would lead you to expect.

Dell monitors do this too - a good 24" LCD is $550 (=£357) in the USA but £550 here (=$846).

<comment><USER6> Sure, but the question I'm wondering about is why they transfer at $1 -> £1, when this isn't the exchange rate.

<comment><USER8> It's not _quite_ so simple: don't US prices exclude sales tax? VAT in the UK's 17.5%.

<comment><USER5> VAT is currently 15%, will rise to 17.5% again in January 2010

<comment><USER8> Doh, yeah, right you are. Forgot about that cut.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Arbitrage opportunity, here I come!

</comment><comment><USER10> Assuming this to be true it showing that MS believe the buying power in the UK to have shrunk considerably, isn't it. I expect the price in Kenya, say, to be lower still.

</comment><comment><USER11> is it because people in the UK are half as dumb? ;-))

<comment><USER11> "only" half as dumb, I meant.</comment></comment>


Getty Images Sued Again for Trying to License Public Domain Images - <AUTHOR> https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20190329/15352641901/getty-images-sued-yet-again-trying-to-license-public-domain-images.shtml <comment><USER3> In the first listed incident, Getty sent a takedown notice over a public domain image. This is fraud, just as clearly as the scammers who call elderly people and tell them they need to pay some fake fee or bill they didn't know about.

People in this thread keep claiming that because it is public domain, they can do whatever they want with it including license it, which is not true. They can certainly sell it, but a license is a legal instrument that grants usage rights, and Getty cannot grant such rights. To claim to do so is fraud.

<comment><USER4> agree that this is a sleazy business practice, but (and not mentioned here, also, not a laywyer but), in music for example, there are typically 'artistic' rights and 'mechanical' rights - e.g. BMG can have the right to duplicate the recording of your song but not to record someone else performing it, or vice- versa where they cannot reproduce your recording but can record others performing it.

There are also nebulous cases involving sampling - some decided in favor of the one sampling, the others decided in favor of those who were sampled, depending on the particulars of the case / district / judge, etc.

I would suspect that getty is taking the public domain image, tweaking the file slightly (perhaps even in non-image related metadata), and thus creating a 'new work' to which they can make some sort of claim about.

so, while i think you are correct in that the 'visual image' (e.g. the visual object representation) is entirely in the public domain, the 'image' (e.g. the actual file) that they actually distribute is not, because they have modified it somehow and 'added value', etc etc etc. then, enforcement just becomes a fishing expedition. if you did your homework and used the public domain one and can refer to it, they don't press. if you didn't, and don't catch it, they have a reasonable claim/plausible deniability of mis-attribution, and you pay. easy (but unethical) money to them.

shady, dubious, etc, but probably not out-and-out fraud in the 'illegal' sense. still not good otherwise because it does facillitate them gaining market share (by having a bigger product base / collection) which in turn creates a cyclical effect/ barriers to entry/ etc (just like BMI/ASCAP and music, for example)

<comment><USER5> Copyright is not so easy to gain.

Sampling is at least nominally a creative act, where changing the resolution for example is not. You can gain copyright for a collection of say "Dog Photos" collected from public works. But, you don't gain anything over individual photos in that collection only over that specific listing.

<comment><USER6> I agree, it is thankfully somewhat difficult. One thing the US Copyright office pointed out to me on a request a number of years ago was that any changes need to be _themselves copyrightable_ to have any influence on the status of the final work. Little snippets of text/titles are for the moment still not copyrightable, changing hue or saturation etc would probably not pass the smell test, nor would any batch processing, purely technical changes like resolution or file type, etc. Unfortunately the larger players with standing are unlikely to push for these rulings so it is hard to find established case law.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> > "CixxFive argues that it has standing to sue because it licensed some of > these public domain images. But ... it's not clear how that's Getty's > fault."

Surely intentionally misrepresenting the images as being wholly owned and copyrighted by Getty makes it their fault. They're deceiving the customer outright even if they're trying to be subtle about it. Behaving as if Getty is totally free of responsibility from this is just playing make-believe where we all pretend that nothing ethically reprehensible is happening.

<comment><USER8> It seems pretty clear to me that they're talking about Getty's actual legal liability here, not making a moral judgment on whether what they're doing is wrong. In fact, two paragraphs later they say-

> I'm certainly sensitive to the slimy practices of Getty Images, and claiming > that public domain images are available for license (at very high fees) is > very slimy. But it's not at all clear that it's against the law.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> EEVblog and CodysLab come to mind on an unrelated but annoying scam that YouTube hasn't addressed sufficiently. Shouldn't there be a class-action against YouTube for the scammy gambit of allowing random people to claim content ID of works they don't own and then attack the original creators? This scam alone threatens to kick thousands of legitimate content creators off while enriching shady corporations and outright criminals. It seems like the only way to get YT to get their act together regarding measurably improving "who owns what."

<comment><USER10> > It seems like the only way to get YT to get their act together regarding > measurably improving "who owns what."

The problem is fundamentally that this isn't really possible. What you have is one person claiming they have a right to use something and another claiming they don't.

To know who is right you need to know who created the work, who they licensed it to under what terms, whether the copyright has expired, etc. YouTube has none of that information, nor any reasonable way to obtain it. They're not a court.

But they do have a bunch of large media companies who like to sue them over anything they can, wanting them to solve this by magic. So their choice is to either screw over their users or defend them in court. One of those is much less expensive.

The alternative would be to fix the law to put the dispute between the user and the claimant into court to begin with and only come to the intermediary once the matter has been adjudicated. The media companies _hate_ that, because it's slower and more expensive than immediately screwing over the users with no effective recourse, but it's what would be necessary for accurate/equitable determinations.

<comment><USER11> There are plenty of options for the law to fix this.

They could make it illegal or costly to make a false claim based on copyright. Content ID include the world "copyrighted content was found in your video", so just here we could make a first change to the law.

We could also make it illegal to disrupt someones income on advertisement through the means of copyright claim that negligent ignores fair use. You take a judge and have them look at those cases and allow the judge to fine obvious false claims. This create liability which trickle down.

You could create regulations that demand content provider to compensate lost income from false content id or they loose safe harbor protection. This would encourage YT to demand a deposit when a claim is made, and give this deposit to the accused if the claim is challenged.

All this without demanding that YT itself know if the claim is correct or not.

<comment><USER10> > They could make it illegal or costly to make a false claim based on > copyright. Content ID include the world "copyrighted content was found in > your video", so just here we could make a first change to the law.

You're not actually solving the underlying problem. So you make filing a false claim illegal -- great, that would legitimately be an improvement over the status quo. We should do that. It would reduce the number of fraudulent claims somewhat.

So after we do that and someone says that a claim is false, what happens then? You still need to adjudicate who is right, so you still need a court. Which means most of the time the victim won't have the resources to enforce it.

What really matters here is the default. What happens when neither party will spend the resources to initiate litigation? Because whatever happens then is what will happen in 99% of cases.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> [https://www.lw.com/thoughtleadership/using-public-domain- con...](https://www.lw.com/thoughtleadership/using-public-domain-content-in- new-media) mentions an interesting and potentially applicable precedent:

> Nonetheless, the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Dastar Corporation v. > Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation24 greatly restricted the trademark > claim of "reverse passing off"—when a person represents someone else's work > as his or her own—regarding works in the public domain, although a claim of > false advertising may still be viable. Dastar took a set of video programs > in the public domain, based on General Dwight D. Eisenhower's book > chronicling his European campaign in World War II, and edited them slightly, > including replacing the original credits and removing references to > Eisenhower's still-copyrighted book. The owners of the film rights to the > book and the expired copyright on the original video programs sued Dastar > for, among other things, reverse passing off by presenting the video > programs as a Dastar production.25 The Supreme Court held that Dastar's > actions did not constitute reverse passing off under federal trademark law > because the video programs were in the public domain and therefore could be > freely exploited by anyone. To hold otherwise would be to "create[] a > species of perpetual patent and copyright, which Congress may not do."26 The > Court did, however, leave open the possibility that Dastar might be liable > under other provisions of federal trademark law that prohibit false > advertising, such as misrepresenting the nature or qualities of the > advertised work.27 In light of the Dastar holding and the continued > viability of some trademark claims, those seeking to use a public domain > work should consider the prospect of liability for trademark infringement or > related state unfair competition claims.

(IANAL but I love this kind of stuff.)

</comment><comment><USER13> Count me as another "stop being so dismissive of these lawsuits, there's a plausible claim here" voice. Claiming some kind of ownership right in public domain images, and hence implicitly or explicitly representing to people that if they use those images without paying they can get sued, seems like straightforward fraud.

It's no different than if I set up a toll booth on a public sidewalk, with a big official-looking sign saying "I own this sidewalk, and you have to pay me a dollar to walk down it." People who reasonably believe my misrepresentations as to my ownership of the sidewalk and give me money have at least pretty plausible good old-fashioned fraud claims.

The argument of the linked article, transposed to the sidewalk toll booth context, seems to roughly be "Getty didn't put up a sign saying they OWNED the sidewalk, they put up a sign saying 'License for sale to this sidewalk which we have the rights to sell licenses to' and the silly plaintiffs shouldn't have read it like a normal person to be a claim of ownership; instead they'd should have read it in the unnatural way that Getty wanted to trick them into not reading it as." Or, in tort lawyer language, as the claim that their reliance on Getty's claim of ownership wasn't justified. Well, this sounds like a jury question to me.

</comment><comment><USER14> This is really a job for the legislature, not the courts. We all have an intuitive sense that _something_ about Getty's behavior is morally wrong. But _what_ is wrong about it isn't very well-defined. Creating those legal definitions is a big part of the legislature's job.

<comment><USER15> I don't have that intuitive sense. Other than believing copyright is wrong and that is ther biz model.

The legislature has already ruled. They have defined public domain. They (and everyone who knows copyright law) understands you can do anything with public domain. Including selling, licencensing. As the OA correctly state several times. Only the clickbait title implies otherwise.

Fraud has also been apropriately legislated.

<comment><USER16> > _The legislature has already ruled._

So? It's not like law is a _" define it once and never adjust or iterate it"_ kind of deal. A law is not correct just because it has already been defined and applied. That would be the moral equivalent to circular reasoning, and by that logic we should still stone people for taking the Lord's name in vain and in general go eye for an eye on each other.

<comment><USER14> > in general go eye for an eye on each other

Note the original "eye for eye" statute was setting a judicial penalty limit, not giving people license to brutal personal retaliation.

This was important in legal history because ancient justice prior to that tended to severely over-penalize criminal violence. "Eye for eye" would have read "if a person gouges out another person's eye, the penalty is (only) that their own eye should be gouged out" —- which would have seemed _very_ lenient given the existing legal climate in the ancient near-east.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> As far as I can tell, if they took a public domain image, modified it in some way, and sold that on their site, it would be copyright them. They could sue you for using it or whatever they wanted.

What would count as modified, I don't know. E.g. Maybe they put real man hours in on Photoshop to remove some artifact and to correct the color. I don't think anyone would argue they shouldn't deserve to be paid. But if all they did was crop it, resize it or even just compressing it as a JPEG they might be fine in legal terms.

</comment><comment><USER18> If the law is on Getty's side, the law should be changed. Selling public domain content should be illegal if it's a digital work, as opposed to a printed book. At the very least, it should be required that it's clearly labeled as public domain.

<comment><USER19> Disagree a bit: selling public domain content is OK, as long as you don't mislead the customer and claim that you own the copyright. It's essential that the customer knows what he or she is buying (for instance, the actual value is in finding the relevant PD content).

<comment><USER20> Nobody disagrees that you can of course ask for a delivery/handling/whatever bullshit fee.

But the law should require that you mark that as such and that you must make it known that it is not a fee on the photo. Additionally it should be required that if you are providing access to photos for a fee, you need to let the buyer know it's public domain.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> The problem seems to be that while it is deceptive and probably illegal to imply you have a copyright over a public domain image, the company who is suing doesn't have the "standing" to sue. Instead that is the responsibility of the FTC or an Attorney General. Although it seems unfortunate because those institutions have limited resources and/or might be captured and not willing to pursue such cases.

<comment><USER13> But this is not the case when the company suing has actually been induced by the fraud to purchase images. Then they have knock-down standing, because they have an individualized legally cognizable injury.

<comment><USER21> I don't have any legal expertise. The article just made it seem like they wouldn't win the case because of that reason.

<comment><USER13> No personal criticism meant! The article is badly written to suggest the standing problem is general when it's really a problem only for plaintiffs who haven't actually lost money on the scam. (One is the many flaws with the article...)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> See also:

[https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/694241?jou...](https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/694241?journalCode=adx)

Understanding Copyfraud: Public Domain Images and False Claims of Copyright by Chris Needham

Copyright fraud or copyfraud—when museums misrepresent or restrict rights in ways that go against public domain copyright law—continues to be a widespread practice even in the years following the 1999 Bridgeman Art Library, LTD. v. Corel Corp. court case. To help clarify this situation, the author first reviews the relevant copyright issues, then considers some of the problems that copyfraud creates in universities, publishing houses, and museums. In conclusion, he explores the ways museums, supported by their librarians and visual resources managers, have recently changed their approach to copyright and copyfraud, and the ways in which this is transforming scholarship and allowing scholars and librarians to better serve the public.

[However that article IS copyrighted and paywalled at that URL. doi: 10.1086/694241 ]

</comment><comment><USER23> I had to stop releasing music under creative commons because I noticed copyright trolls were trying to claim it was there's when some tried to use it as music in their youtube videos. The whole point of releasing under creative commons is so the exact opposite thing happens.

</comment><comment><USER24> Well, at least they didn't license gif's and left our precious memes alone. Oh wait... GIF.com

</comment><comment><USER25> I hate these guys so much. Give me back full functionality in Google image search.

</comment><comment><USER26> Isn't it required to accompany public domain images with their original license?

<comment><USER15> Nope. Not even maybe.

The public domain is utterly free. As in free to do anything with. One reason Copyleft and Creative Commons licenses exist. And they require copyright. Because no one can control what is done with public domain.

In the USA at leasr

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> considering banks during the financial-crisis got away without even a penalty, forget prison time, for automating foreclosures on people's homes that the bank didn't actually own or weren't behind on the mortgage, I suspect this crime-via-automation will also not be punished

</comment><comment><USER28> This is sleazy how? Getty has done the work of looking at images and screening them and putting them in a catalog. No more sleazy than Red Hat or Canonical selling support for software it didn't write. If people want free public domain images, they can search for them. Only problem is, that's work! Getty did it for you.

<comment><USER29> They are claiming copyright on the works something they don't own - even if you put something into the public domain you still can claim copyright - <USER2> can't go around licensing your copyright to others without your permission, much less demanding money because they claim that they own it.

What they can do is resell things in the public domain, what they can't do is shake people down for licensing fees

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> Getty has a model of convincing people to buy images available for free.

There's no crime, or damages, in ripping people off.

If Getty sues you for thinking you didn't have their license for an image in public domain, that'll be funny. But thats not currently what they are doing, and when their processes gets to that part of the funnel on occasion, their human lawyer looks at it and decides not to do anything.

<comment><USER31> Why doesn't it count as fraud? It's misrepresenting the truth in the context of a business transaction for your monetary gain and their monetary loss.

Is the deal that Getty doesn't know for sure that they don't own the rights, and therefore it doesn't legally count as deliberate / knowing deception?

Or is it that Getty says "You can buy a license from us" but does not say "We own the copyright for this" or "We are the exclusive licensors of the copyright for this," so they're not actually lying?

<comment><USER32> For the same reason you are allowed to sell open source software.

<comment><USER33> Are you allowed to claim that the software you're selling is proprietary, owned and copyrighted by you and then go after people that obtained them from the source (or are the original creator of said software)? Because that appears to be what Getty is doing.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Show HN: BuzMap – Global Unified Transit Map - <AUTHOR> http://buz-map.com/#7/52.416/-3.939 <comment><AUTHOR> I will try to present to GeoMob sometime next year. I have stumbled across an interesting/powerful way to render planetary sized vector tile sets, leveraging Agafonkin's amazing geojson2vector of course.

I am not having much progress selling the idea that people like to look at a map and discover stuff. I like to devise "excursions", daft train trips that last weeks, that kind of thing. The layout of any region's transit infrastructure., from metropolis, country to entire continental level is at the very least highly intriguing.

You obviously have to do this with vector tiles, but even then you need to rapidly simplify the network if you want it to be interactive obviously, the lines have to be merged and unique else you wont be able to interact with them. It's timetable driven we only paint where we know there's a service, not everywhere we can see railway track and not by crudely styling out road classifications, It's not a journey planner. it's a route finder though. You get to see every route in any context just by looking at it. it's a map. I am using graphhopper extensively behind the scenes obviously but a much closer integration with a multi-modal journy planner is required. Once you actually get down to asking what time the bus actually comes we are better off in a journey planner proper. Existing journey planners to my knowledge dont allow you to wave the cursor outside your hotel and instantly see where all the nearest buses go to.

They dont allow you to look at a country and instantly see there's an interesting wiggly line on some extremity of the network that will invariably turn out to be some kind of tourism target. They don't allow you to look at an entire continent and visualize all international ferries, arterial bus routes and essentially the entire rail network, in one blink.

I need to put back the whole of TfI buses and ferries as we have essentially comprehensive data set for ROI. And I have some bugs and thresholds to fix. I will update this thread if there's a significant step forward, Collaboration or just vocal support is sought.

</comment><comment> Mark-Lester_UK Thanks for the post, I am still playing with this, unless you are interested in republic of ireland or the UK national rail network, there's not a great deal of map yet to explore. I hope though that anyone knowledgeable about trying to do this kind of thing can appreciate where we ae going. I need to tweak the merging, and also get a lot more of Europe back on (I have rail stuff for western Europe and a few national bus networks) in order to demonstrate the merging better. The thing with this stuff is when it works you dont notice, but when it doesn't you end up with a big blob of uselessness. The point of blobbines and uselessness of the map comes very quickly with a metropolis as you can imagine. You cant even do a map of just Paris, which has a bus on seemingly every single backstreet in town, until you get this to work.

</comment><comment><USER2> Interesting concept, I would love to know more about your intentions with this.

I head up the development of a MaaS provider in the UK and always on the lookout for people doing anything new in the world of travel.

One of my wants for next year is to build a better discovery engine for finding routes from over travel content types.

I'd love to hear more about what your interested in building with this.

</comment><comment><USER3> I want to question the "global" a bit. I zoomed into Vienna and there was just the normal OSM tileset (showing lots of public transport) without any additional data.

<comment><USER4> Indeed, I find the following: [https://tracker.geops.ch/](https://tracker.geops.ch/) more complete.

<comment><USER5> Yeah, this reminded me of that project as well. What are the differences or USP's when it comes to using this BuzMap?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Nice.

Despite saying "It's a complete map of ALL transport networks, on a single map. ", it appears to be missing the London Underground which is probably the most important transport network in a major world capital.

</comment><comment><USER7> Small bug but something wrong with character encoding e.g. Busáras (bus terminal in Dublin) renders as Busáras in right column</comment>


GitXiv Is No More - <AUTHOR> https://m.imgur.com/gallery/oooYRmI <comment><AUTHOR> Text of image :

GitXiv no more! – Thursday, February 28th 2019

Today GitXiv has shut down.

The site was not maintained for 3 years, and was becoming increasinlgy unstable and slow.

While still serving around 5000 monthly users, we felt a much better and active service is being provided by [https://paperswithcode.com](https://paperswithcode.com). So for all your open science needs go there from now on.

Finally, please be an active participant in helping out uploading code and papers, as well as for the computer scientists out there: making your research available. If experiments are not replicable (this means "code" on GitHub) it isn't really science is it? =D

(this mailing list will seize to exist as well)

Best to you all! Roelof You can complain to me on twitter ;)</comment>