Instagram Asking For Your Government Issued Photo IDs Now, Too - <AUTHOR> http://idealab.talkingpointsmemo.com/2013/01/instagram-asking-for-users-government-issued-photo-ids-now-too.php <comment><USER2> The instagram TOS debacle some weeks ago was the straw that broke the camel's back for me. I recently stopped using Instagram, and requested account deletion from Facebook.

Graph search and its creepy implications were then nothing I needed to find personally objectionable anymore.

I no longer have to complain about the other sleazy, move-the-goalposts, amoral aspects of Facebook Instagram.

This latest one, I have to say, should not be surprising to anybody.

DELETE YOUR ACCOUNT if you don't like it. You will still have friends, I promise :-)

Before you file for account deletion, you might want to do two things:

1) use <http://www.picknzip.com/> to download the pictures of you from other people (I have a couple that I liked that I can use for other profile pics, etc.). (The other photos in my facebook albums that I uploaded myself, I already have elsewhere.)

2) associate your facebook account with a yahoo email address. You can download all the contact information of your facebook friends that way (I don't know if this still works, but it did last year)

This is, AFAIK, the only way to export your facebook friends' data

3) go to your full friends list, scroll down until the infinite scrolling loads the whole list. copy and paste this in an email to yourself.

These three steps should ensure that you don't "lose" any data about your friends on facebook, and will allow you to email them later.

<comment><USER3> I have friends who work at Facebook. I still don't know how they rationalize their employment.

<comment><USER4> I don't know about them, but I know someone from a different company who has it all figured out. Every time their company does something nasty, they just donate to the EFF.

Must be nice to have it wrapped up all tidy like.

<comment><USER5> It seems like a legitimate way to reconcile one's conscience with the _realpolitik_ of modern IT employment, engaged as we are in building the surveillance state/police state/nanny state we were all warned about by 20th century novelists and historians.

I try to do this when I buy an RIAA-published album or watch a Hollywood film. I make sure I donate an equivalent amount to civil-liberties orgs (EFF, ALA, and others) during that year.

"Carbon credits," basically.

<comment><USER6> Kinda funny, when I inadvertently buy a TV show or movie that features global warming propaganda, I donate the same amount of money to Climate Audit or Bishop Hill.

<comment><USER7> I have to admit it is quite astonishing to see someone denying climate change is a huge issue on a site dedicated to computer-logic based businesses that are future-focused, a site populated by many under 30.

Climate change is the primary challenge for the next few generations, and once we move on from 'debate' we see that there are a wealth of opportunities in mitigation, reduction of CO2 output and coping with the impact. Just ask Elon Musk.

<comment><USER6> I emphatically disagree with the "overwhelming judgement of science" when it comes to this issue. And I'm thoroughly disgusted by the profiteering that accompanies the global warming campaign. Let's see who is in denial 20 years from now.

Permalink For Great Justice: <http://woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut3gl/from:1990/to>

<comment><USER8> Permalink for Great Justice? Here's a graph from 1970 (rather than 1990), using a more up to date version of the database you referred to... <http://woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1970/to> Notice the upward trend?

Let's go back even further, to 1900... <http://woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:1900/to> The upward trend in temperature is clear, the question then becomes why it is happening. What is your theory on this?

<comment><USER5> _What is your theory on this?_

I don't have one, but what is your theory on this?

<http://i.imgur.com/5hPqZQh.png>

Now, here's the whole 12-hour graph, rather than just a three minute excerpt from the very end:

<http://i.imgur.com/npSuZd9.png>

Whatever your theory was, does it still hold up?

<comment><USER8> What data is plotted on these graphs? Phase difference of what?

<comment><USER5> In this case, a cesium-beam frequency standard (aka atomic clock.) The specific data source isn't as important as the noise processes that it exhibits -- in this case a combination of white and random-walk frequency noise. The latter noise type alters the phase slope over multiple timeframes at once, even though the slope is accurately known over the long term.

The usual metaphor is a drunk person looking for his lost car keys. He meanders around under the streetlight because that's the only place where he can see where he's going. He won't stray very far from the lamp post, but his direction at any given time has little or no correlation to either his past or future behavior.

It's easy to fool yourself into thinking you understand what's going on based on recent historical behavior, but in reality, the presence of random-walk noise means that it's impossible to infer anything about long-term trends _or_ short-term biases by looking at short-term trends. In climate science, even a hundred thousand years' worth of data is still a "short term" record. We need better data, we need better models, and most important, we need to give ourselves time to evaluate them on the basis of their predictive power.

Based on my own experience watching random-walk processes in real time, someone who expects me to take action based on the last 100 years of data from a multi-billion year timeframe is just going to get laughed at. I've spent so much time fooling myself (that's my software, and my cesium standard) that I probably _am_ erring on the side of too much skepticism.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Hey all,

Mike Krieger (Instagram co-founder) here. Just wanted to offer some clarification since there's some speculation about the reason & scope for the verification mentioned in the article.

When we receive evidence of a violation of our site policies, we respond. This isn't a recent change, but the way we've run our community from the beginning. In some specific cases, for verification purposes, we request that people upload a government issued ID in response. This is the case for a _very_ small percentage of accounts, and doesn't affect most Instagram users. The ID is used only for account verification, and not retained permanently.

Hope that helps clarify things a bit.

<comment><USER10> > In some specific cases, for verification purposes, we request that people > upload a government issued ID in response.

Verification of what?

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> I hate to play the paranoia card, but this reads like a push from the government for Facebook to start cataloging people. If it wasn't happening already, this is probably the missing piece in court evidence to show that a person is who they really are. This is really, really dangerous (especially when the majority of their users probably aren't bright enough to understand the implications).

<comment><USER12> You mean, they needed something other than your birth date, birth place, real name, current residence, work history, current job, name of your parents, cousins, grandparents, not to mention the rest of your graph, to correlate you to a database somewhere?

<comment><USER13> The only thing FB has from me that is real or accurate is my birthday. All the other things you listed are either totally false or out of date. (Then again, I don't "friend" my family… IRL or online.)

Until now-ish (or the near future), FB had no way of verifying that, or forcing me to!

<comment><USER14> How do you connect? If you aren't actively and intelligently taking precautions, they may well have enough network address history to be fairly definitive.

Also, do you block their widgets on other sites/pages?

Not that I disagree with the "Big Brother" concerns that this "Ihre Papiere, bitte." activity raises.

P.S. Aside from government(s), of what value is a proven identity to commercial interests? Being able to prove that you/they are targeting exactly who they want.

Hmm... Amongst other things, I understand that process servers are already attemtping to use FB as a accepted means of delivery. And I've read that debt collectors are using accounts having profile pictures of bikini clad young women, in order to successfully "friend" those they wish to hound.

 _All_ sorts of value to "proven" identities...

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> I don't think this is new. I abandoned FB about 2 years ago, and maybe a year ago I re-established my account just to setup a developer key using OAuth2 for an app I was building. I also got locked out of my FB account at that time, and it prompted me to scan my driver's license and upload it -- at which point I promptly said F U and scratched Facebook OAuth support off my list of features.

<comment><USER16> I had the same experience. I signed-up, then turned up all of the privacy settings just so I could use it to test oauth, then FB disabled my account. I guess it's suspect when you turn off all of the account features.

I tried to explain what I was using the account for to their account reps, but they wouldn't unlock it unless I sent them the ID scans. I can't believe that there is not a bigger uproar about a non-governmental, for-profit asking for government issued ID, in electronic format no less, that relies on the unwitting user to hide pertinent data prior to scanning it.

Fucking ridiculous if you ask me. Instagram should be equally ashamed of themselves.

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> What concerns me is that I doubt the average user will understand the potential ramifications of entrusting a copy of their ID to a third party. If these documents are not well-protected or the user does not bother to or is not capable of covering up information that can be used for the purposes of identity theft, this could be catastrophic for some users.

<comment><USER17> Users will not cover up their documents properly.

With business customers, even if we ask for ID to confirm larger contracts, they'll send everything. Full IDs, credit card scans, etc. Technical customers regularly just email root passwords to financially-valuable systems when they have the slightest problem.

Also, try this: run an ad on Craigslist offering $500 a day for whatever. Ask for personal info and photos. You'll be deluged with people ready to hand every detail over without second thought.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> Why add any of your data to FB? Why not just use it like an _idiot box_ where you never create content but only consume it? I rarely, if ever, upload/update anything on FB, using it only to view updates/uploads from FB friends. No likes, comments, replies, tags. If I see anything worth replying or writing in response to what someone posts on FB, I prefer to use side-channels like email/texting or the phone. Has worked great for the last 5 years. Clearly, mine may be a single data point/unique case :-)

</comment><comment><USER19> I like to imagine Mark Zuckerburg sits in his five star hotel strumming "career of evil" while he practices his smile in the mirror.

At some point you have to start attributing actions to malice.

</comment><comment><USER20> I wonder just how much friction Facebook users are going to put up with until we start seeing news of record account deletions. I doubt any Facebook executive wanted to do this. This is a decision made by lawyers. This is Facebook getting to big for its own good.

People, get off Facebook. I'm in college and haven't touched it in 11 months. I'm doing just fine. Nobody needs it.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> I wonder how this correlating data can be used in cases of copyright infringement where the alleged infringer is only identified by IP address. Could a correlation between IP address and real-world identification be made by subpoena of FB records?

Reference: [http://torrentfreak.com/court-throws- out-109-of-110-alleged-...](http://torrentfreak.com/court-throws- out-109-of-110-alleged-bittorrent-pirates-then-kicks-out-110th-too-130125/)

</comment><comment><USER21> A hundred bucks this is tied in with photo-tagging and facial recognition. The advantage of a government photo is that you're no longer allowed to smile and are expected to provide a neutral face, all the better for facial recognition. I wouldn't touch Facebook with a ten-foot pole right now.

<comment><USER22> Seriously? Fire up picasa or iphoto or Facebook and then tell me whether facial expression is any part of facial recognition all. Recognition works because it uses immovable bone structure.

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> Taking their words at face value, what does someone's identity have to do with whether they've violated terms of service? How would it fix any issue? (On Instagram; according to the article Facebook wants your true name as part of their TOS.)

<comment><USER24> It fixes the issue that you _still_ aren't as valuable to advertisers as facebook and instagram would like you to be.

Follow the money. Always.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> Ah, I can already smell the class action lawsuit for massive ID theft down the road.

</comment><comment><USER26> If social networks are so adamant, I will just create my website have all relatives and friends contact me via the said website. Or may be by email before social networks actually caught up.

<comment><USER27> This is the way it should be done.

I will say that social networks like Facebook have introduced some interesting dynamics and engagement that could have not existed otherwise such as Caine's Arcade.

I think we're all waiting for the social network we all want and pay the $10-$12/year for privacy, transparency and complete ownership over our data.

<comment><USER28> Isn't that what App.net is supposed to be? Or are there problems with it I can't identify (being too poor to deem $5 a month on a social network a valid expense).

<comment><USER29> For me, $5 is a lot of lentils.

The main issue is that the cost barrier stops people from signing up just to try it out, in in that sense that app.net really ought to have a 'free' tier. Even if it was particularly restive, it would let their users get a feel for it before paying.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> Did anyone read the purported FB message? "drivers liscense"

I trust FB to spell correctly and use the right apostrophe. Very interesting set of responses here though.

</comment><comment><USER31> The OP says Facebok asserts that I is requiring his documentation of certain users with a high number of subscribers...but it seems possible that they'll turn this on any one who has been flagged for having a non real name, or when there are similar accounts (I.e. nearly all the same friends, except one is the person's "fake" account) on the same computer

</comment><comment><USER32> If this is an official Facebook thing then the screen cap in the article where driver's license is spelled "Driver's liscense" doesn't do them a lot of favors. In particular one of the first hints that something is a phish is that the grammar or spelling is phonetic but incorrect.

</comment><comment><USER29> Got to wonder how long it will be until a Facebook account is a form of valid ID in itself.

<comment><USER33> This notion has been floating around for a while now and it seems less and less unlikely. I for one am not willing to accept a company taking charge of my ID. Actually, the day facebook asks me for my ID will be the day I quit it. It's total abuse.

<comment><USER29> A database that spans 1/7th of the worlds population. Facial recognition, relationships and locations. It really is the dream as far as fully validating an identity goes.

<comment><USER34> > It really is the dream as far as fully validating an identity goes.

It really is a dream as far as intelligence agencies (FBI, CIA and their less public counterparts) go. It used to be ridiculously hard to find the info about how to reach a person, or which buttons to push. Now, almost everyone offers it freely about themselves, and the few who don't get ratted on by their friends.

Validating identity might be a by product. But it's not anything that's hard to do anyway.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> On one hand, this is excessive. Really excessive.

On the other, at least it's still a reset option. That might sound silly at first, but I lost access to an old MS Live account that I had foolishly left on auto-login on my Xbox for years and eventually lost access to the old Hotmail account (yeah, I made this account a long time ago) it was tied to. No amount of offering to show that I was the credit card holder for the hundreds of dollars in games or anything would convince them it was my account.

For the people to whom their Instagram account is really important, this might be a nice option (even if it is rather invasive).

</comment><comment><USER36> Why on earth would they do something like this? The people at FB aren't insane, there must be some sort of reasoning for their decision to ask for ID

</comment><comment><USER37> Soon they'll ask for a blood sample, and perhaps your genome. It's laughable how privacy is not taken seriously anymore.

<comment><USER38> Well, it's not Facebook who's doing the asking, but Facebook's closer than you might think to having genetic information: <https://www.facebook.com/23andMe>

</comment></comment><comment><USER39> I never had a facebook account and they make it harder and harder for me to get one.

</comment><comment><USER40> I wonder exactly what violations they're dealing with. My son's junior high is full of kids using Instagram. They see it as an underage Facebook. That could be it. Or is there some wave of people using an assumed name.

<comment><USER22> Wow, does instagram illegally solicit and publish personal data from preteens?

<comment><USER40> Just to be clear, when I said:

> They see it as an underage Facebook.

I meant the underage kids, not Facebook itself. I wouldn't say Instagram solicits kids, just that there are lot of them on there.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER41> What next if you don't do this are they going to send round her flick and von smallhausen.

I am tempted to join instagram just so i can upload a picture of ian lavender - "Don't tel Him Pike"

</comment><comment><USER42> FB & G+ are pushing so much to have data on their users actual identities, I wonder what they want to do with that database. Considering the move polarises some users.

<comment><USER22> You wonder? They tell you every day. They want to show you ads and grow their network.

</comment></comment><comment><USER43> Now that it is (ostensibly) appropriate for web sites to ask for photo IDs, that opens up new opportunities for phishing and identity theft.

</comment><comment><USER44> Just when you think FB can't be any creepier.

</comment><comment><USER45> Another site which I will nevcer be a member of.

</comment><comment><USER46> HN, I will be disappointed if by this time tomorrow I don't see "Show HN: government id image generator (no numbers, so it can't be used as an fraudulent ID)"

For FB's, they have to excuse from making an open source client side pre- upload number-removing tool.

<comment><USER47> Terrible idea, you'll likely be a felon for distribution of fraudulent federal Identification.

Same for anyone who uses it.

<comment><USER48> If you're generating them with blacked-out DL number and address, that's not really a fake identification card, is it? Not to mention you'd be generating an image, not an actual ID. Creating real-looking ID cards is much more difficult than creating real-looking ID card scans.

The most difficult elements would probably be faking the font, and post- processing it to ensure the text looked real (pixel-perfect accuracy and color for text would be a dead giveaway of computer generation).

<comment><USER49> > If you're [...] that's not really a fake identification card

I'm not a lawyer, nor a law enforcement officer, nor a prosecutor, nor a judge.

While agree that something to allow you to use a website shouldn't be a serious criminal offence it's easy to imagine that it could be painted as such: unauthorised access to website services after a clear warning; fake id instruments; etc etc etc.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER50> LOL! This is surreal.

</comment><comment><USER51> People easily forget that Facebook was funded by the CIA and remains their biggest success in intelligence gathering.

<comment><USER29> [citation needed]

<comment><USER52> I think this is a reference to a story on The Onion:

[http://www.theonion.com/video/cias-facebook-program- dramatic...](http://www.theonion.com/video/cias-facebook-program-dramatically- cut-agencys-cos,19753/)</comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: Translating Academic papers - <AUTHOR>

I see a lot of academic papers which tackle everyday computing problems.Most of them are hard to read for the average person, let alone implement them.As a college student, I read a lot of these papers and feel there is a lot of wasted potential there. Do you think it is a worthy endevor to take some of these papers , dissect them and implement them? Are there any websites already doing this?
Also, do you think people would be willing to pay to have well documented working code for some of these papers? If yes, how much ? If not, why not?
Thanks! <comment><USER2> I run in to this every now and then, I really want to read a paper but either it is in a language that I don't have enough skills in, or, alternatively the paper requires so much background terminology that I can't work my way through it without spending half a day in dictionaries and reference material.

Whether I would pay for it or not would be dependent only on whether or not I was being paid to understand the paper. I read plenty of stuff that is interesting but outside of my main field of interest (IT), but since I won't be making any money on collecting that knowledge it is not worth more than my investment in time.

For those papers that I can't get through there are plenty of alternatives, the amount of interesting information out there is staggering. It isn't rare at all to come out of the week with a much longer reading list than going in to it.

HN is quite a large contributor to that :)</comment>


Month-Long Dive Into Web-Based Apps - <AUTHOR> http://www.wired.com/software/softwarereviews/news/2007/04/lavidagoogle <comment><USER2> It was an okay write-up, if not overly obvious. I hope he realizes that Google isn't the only source for desktop alternatives, webapps or otherwise. I (along with approximately everyone here, so I'll spare them the effort of listing the obvious candidates) can list several popular ones off the top of my head that beat Google, in my opinion. And not all of them are YCombinator startups either. Hooray for diversity!

GMail -- they aren't the only email provider, but certainly a leader. You can't really go wrong with using it, unless you have major privacy concerns. But then, why are you using email to begin with?

Google Reader -- There used to be feeds.reddit.com, but now that I check it seems to have been taken down; what a shame. I thought it was a really good idea, though it had been freaking slow when I last used it. Using Firefox or Opera, there are already means to just integrate feed-reading into the browser. I find that this has suffices. It's no more or less centralized than opening a webpage to use a reader when you're already in your browser in the first place.

Google Calendar -- kiko.com seems to still up and running, though of course they ran into trouble at the hands of Google Calendar. Then there's <http://www.30boxes.com> among several others.

Google Talk -- meebo.com doesn't suffer from problems he mentioned with Google Talk, so it actually beats Google in my opinion. There are others, but they don't seem to be as good as meebo, in my opinion.

Google Docs & Spreadsheets -- this is a tougher one when looking for actual online solutions, I think, just because the current online suites aren't as full-featured as the desktop equivalents. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_office_suites#Online_office_suites> seems to be a good place to start, though. Plus, I hear those zenter.com guys will be killing PowerPoint. ;) If, however, you're looking for interoperability then OpenOffice.org works wonders.

Google Page Creator -- not mentioned in the post, but weebly.com seems to excel in this field anyway, so they're (more than) worth a mention.

Really, I think a lesson to be learned is that just as there are different apps you could use on the desktop, there are a lot of webapps to choose from. I would think this would be particularly apparent as ubiquity in desktop applications seems to be flawed. If it weren't, people would be more inclined to use pre-bundled software on Windows instead of OpenOffice, AbiWord, The GIMP, Pidgin (still have to get used to that), Trillian, Firefox, Thunderbird, Opera, and so on. Moreover, if it weren't flawed then some webapps might not exist! That, and the thinking that somehow there has to be an ultimatum between desktop & online applications seems fundamentally silly. Not to say that what can be implemented in one can't be implemented in the other to some extent, but you don't need to have all of your applications be solely on one platform. Freedom of choice and all that fun stuff. Certainly the internet provides a platform that has several distinct advantages to the desktop, but that doesn't mean you absolutely must lock yourself into it; though, more likely than not, as webapps continue to become more advanced the preference shifts mostly towards them instead of the desktop.

In the meantime, he and I are stating what most people should already know. And if they don't, that's probably why he did this story (and why I'm commenting about it) in the first place. I didn't really mean for this to turn into a list, but proof by counterexample is a quick & easy method in this case.

Poignant Summary: webapps are immensely useful, and you don't need Google to prove it.

</comment><comment><USER3> That article made me try out Google calendar, but I am severely disappointed. It really is just a calendar - duh... I would have expected an Outlook replacement with task lists and stuff like that. The functionality seems to be the bare minimum. I haven't tried to share my calendar, though.</comment>


Spotify Finally Readies an IPO That's Not an IPO - <AUTHOR> https://www.wsj.com/articles/spotify-finally-readies-an-ipo-thats-not-an-ipo-1491476403 <comment><USER2> Active discussion here:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14057917](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14057917)

</comment><comment><USER3> I'm getting really annoyed with these damn paywall sites. Anyone have a suggestion for a good browser extension (preferably for Firefox) to solve this issue? I think a simple facebook, reddit or twitter referral injection would do the job...

Wondering how this sort of paywall stuff would hold up against a bot that produces a blogspam-y summary based on several news articles - just buy 1 account for the bot, push with a few ads to as many people as you can. Perfectly legal for a human to do it.

<comment><USER4> I think flagging paywalled articles if workarounds don't work is fine. Discussing paywalls is contrary to hn philosophy.</comment></comment>


A Roadmap for Eliminating Patents in Open Source - <AUTHOR> https://blog.hansenpartnership.com/a-roadmap-for-eliminating-patents-in-open-source/ <comment><USER2> The most important issue is buried in the middle. Patent exhaustion applies to _one specific instance_ of a patented item. The idea is that, when you sell a physical product, it should flow through the stream of commerce unencumbered by any patent rights held by the seller of the item. (Hence the landmark case _Lexmark v. Impression Products_ , which held that contractual arrangements between the seller and buyer could not limit the scope of the exhaustion as to downstream purchasers of that item.)

When applied to software, the question is what is the "item" to which exhaustion applies? In the closely related context of first-sale doctrine for digital files, the Second Circuit has held that the first sale doctrine does not apply to digital copies: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitol_Records,_LLC_v._ReDigi...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitol_Records,_LLC_v._ReDigi_Inc). By analogy, patent rights might be exhausted as to a copy of the software downloaded from the patent holder. But it wouldn't apply to copies of that copy, or to derivative works. (And that makes sense--the point of exhaustion law is to give you unfettered right to use and resell the thing you bought; not recreate it distribute it to more people.)

Open source licenses add an interesting wrinkle to that: what if making copies and derivative works is authorized by the copyright license? Does the exhaustion follow those copies? The article makes a case for "yes," and I'll make the case for "no." A copyright license is a _contract._ _Lexmark v. Impression Products_ tells you that the contractual arrangement between the patent holder and first buyer does not affect the scope of exhaustion. That's a double-edged sword. You can't limit the scope of exhaustion through license restrictions. ( _E.g._ "you can only use this software for personal use" may be enforceable as a matter of contract, but exhaustion probably applies to the first buyer even if they use that copy for commercial use.) But on the flip side, you can't broaden the scope of exhaustion--making it "viral"\--through the copyright license either.

<comment><USER3> A contract obviously can't contradict the law, but can grant rights that don't contradict the law. If the contract grants rights to copy, modify and distribute, then they are granted (usually irrevocably), the grant of rights doesn't contradict law.

<comment><USER2> Of course, as a matter of contract law, you can grant a license to use your patents to anyone who uses your open source product under the terms of your chosen license. The question here is whether, by making your software available as open source, your patent rights are exhausted in any copies of that software, even _in the absence of such a patent license._

What _Impression Products_ says is that the contractual arrangement between buyer and seller _doesn 't matter._ Exhaustion is something that arises _by virtue of patent law_ when a specific item is sold into the stream of commerce. In theory, that should work both ways. You can't use the software license to narrow the scope of patent exhaustion, and by the same token, just because the license gives you a broad right to copy the software, that shouldn't have any bearing on the scope of exhaustion.

(* This is all assuming that exhaustion even applies to software. _Impression Products_ has an interesting line, where it distinguishes patent licenses, where you can impose restrictions on the scope of the license, from sales of patented products, where you cannot: "Because the patentee is exchanging rights, not goods, it is free to relinquish only a portion of its bundle of patent protections." Patent exhaustion is really bound up in this ancient idea of the law disfavoring "restraints on alienation." That is to say, you can't sell someone a piece of land, but only on the condition that the land can't be resold. Software, however, is generally licensed and not sold, and that includes software under open source licenses. The GPL v.2, for example, states:

> However, nothing else grants you permission to modify or distribute the > Program or its derivative works. These actions are prohibited by law if you > do not accept this License. Therefore, by modifying or distributing the > Program (or any work based on the Program), you indicate your acceptance of > this License to do so, and all its terms and conditions for copying, > distributing or modifying the Program or works based on it.

If receiving a copy of GPL'ed software as considered a "sale" the above wouldn't be true. Under the first sale doctrine, you are entirely free to modify a purchased copy of a copyrighted work free of any further restrictions from the copyright owner. _E.g._ cases have upheld the right of buyers of art to create a derivative work by cutting it up and mounting the pieces on tiles. And, in theory, you should be able to resell your modified copy of the work too.

 _Impression Products_ strongly suggests that, where you're talking about receiving licenses to use, copy, and create derivative works of software, rather than sale of a physical good including software, there is no patent exhaustion.)

<comment><USER3> Exhaustion has too narrow scope anyway, you can safely assume that patent rights are not exhausted for the purpose of open source. But in addition to rights you have obligations per the contract, and if the contract grants rights to the consumer, those rights are guaranteed.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> > _The precedent for Open Source is quite clear: Patents cannot be used to > impose onward conditions that the copyright licence doesn't._

Does this mean that MongoDB and others who have changed their licenses to be "everyone but cloud providers can do this for free" is not able to do that because the work has been _presumably_ licensed?

I'm currently working on an externally modular keyboard with standardized modules. It relies on the _open source_ Arduino IDE, Visual Studio Code (Open Source), and the electrical designing was entirely done in KiCAD, but the mechanical bits themselves were designed in Solidworks and Inventor. Is _patenting_ my work okay? What parts? The individual parts themselves are nothing new (RS-485, microcontrollers, Cherry switches [patent expired], NeoPixels, and a _ton_ of adapted example code). I like the idea of Open Source, but at the same time I don't want to get stuck _maintaining_ the code forever without profiting from it (I would _love_ to do it for free, but like the analogy of paid-for LiveCD's, I still need a truck to move the sand around in, and lunch would be nice. What do I do?

<comment><USER5> Sell the hardware for profit, give away the design files under an open source license. Assembled ready-to-run hardware is a serious value add on top of an open-source hardware design. A strongly built brand should also be valuable in such a niche. So I'd look mostly towards trademarking of the brand as IP protection mechanism for such a project.

<comment><USER6> In hardware, the design alone may be worth next to nothing. The ability to produce something at volume with a constant quality often depends on knowledge, experience, tooling or other resources that are not present in any design documentation. Sometimes, it is not even possible to replicate these things.

<comment><USER5> You are right that manufacturing is tricky. Supply chain management and Quality Assurance are complex topics that alone can be full-time jobs to stay on top of, and can take a lot of work to replicate for potential competitors. It is an area that is vastly underestimated by most Kickstarters.

At least those that don't operate in a very similar space, and have already invested this time. But even then parts are often designed for a particular manufacturing process or supplier (though it is said that best practice is to always have multiple suppliers for any given part).

However for the PCB part of electronics, this has become a lot simpler the last 5 years. There are now many excellent and very affordable manufacturers that will do between 10-1000 boards (assembled & tested), available by just registering an account online.

But manufacturing of enclosures, cables/interconnects, final assembly is still a tedious, hands-on process for the buyer.

<comment><USER6> PCBs and CNC milled or 3d printed parts are a bit of an exception in that the processes and services are stadardized enough that replication is not that hard unless something really crazy is going.

But everything that relies on more traditional mass production methods (injection molding, casting, ...) is much more dependent on the actual execution of the manufacturing process and the part designs will generally accomodate that, for example by avoiding certain geometries or incorporating ways to account for manufacturing tolerances during assembly.

I am not an engineer myself, but I had to work with mechanical engineers occasionally and I learned that the amount of work that goes into making some seemingly simple parts manufacturable at scale and at cost can be surprising.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


How will spacecraft navigate between the stars? Intergalactic pulsar-based GPS - <AUTHOR> http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/156685-intergalactic-pulsar-based-gps-for-accurate-navigation-between-the-stars <comment><USER2> This is a really interesting approach but the downside is _"the need for a 150 m^2 antenna area or compact light-weighted Xray telescopes and detectors, which are currently developed for the next generation of X-ray observatories."_ This really limits it to very large spacecraft, not the type of spacecraft in use today.</comment>


Ask HN: How to handle being fired from contracted freelance work? - <AUTHOR>

About 6 months ago I started working with a friend (I no longer consider this person a friend) who asked me to build two websites for his law school. Eventually we signed a contract and began work.
As of today, the project has been cancelled/I have been fired because I refused to do an immense amount of non-programming work (100hrs by his measure) that would contribute to the project. For good reason to, by accepting the responsibility for this work I would had jeopardized any chance of successfully completing the projects in time.
Since he's a law student he has threatened me countless times about legal repercussions if I refuse to carry out his requests. And now that I am fired he is asking whether or not I will refund the money paid to me so far voluntarily, or if they need to consider options for involuntary reimbursement.
I'm looking for any guidance I can get with how I should handle this. Thanks in advance. <comment><USER2> _You need your own lawyer._

Best advice, from bhousel.

Gather up everything and anything that relates to the project. E-mail, text messages, project files. Take it to a lawyer.

FWIW (plus IANAL, etc.) people who make repeated threats tend not to act on those threats; they're bullies. That doesn't mean you shouldn't get a lawyer, but I think of you show that you are willing to fight fire with fire (e.g. show that you have legal representation) your so-called friend might STFU.

While you're at it, see if there's a case to sue your friend for more money.

</comment><comment><USER3> Tell your friend to take a chill pill. Then calculate how much work you did and what you think you should be paid for it. Give back anything over that amount and give him all the files you worked on. Then move on. If you're honest with yourself, it will seem reasonable to a judge. Above all, stay classy.

</comment><comment><USER4> Anytime someone threatens to sue you, things change. You need to be very careful with how you talk to this "friend" going forward. Save all old emails and correspondence, and avoid talking to them until you really understand the details of the contract that you agreed to 6 months ago.

You need your own lawyer. Find a good one (ask around other freelancers in your area) and go over the contract with them and explain the situation. The first meeting with a lawyer should be free.

</comment><comment><USER5> Just something to add going forward. I didn't always have great contracts. After a few hard lessons I've come to include an inflated hourly rate for work above and beyond the scope, a deadline extension. This doesn't leave them much wiggle room to throw curves. It also states that the deposit is forfeit and they are free to take possession of resources up to the value of the deposit amount. Any additional resources can be negotiated as needed.

</comment><comment><USER6> Sounds like you have a good case for suing him for blackmail.

That aside...

Does you contract state that you should have accepted non-programming work?

Were you given a reason for being fired, or did you part ways by mutual consent?

On the first point, if your contract states that you must accept work unpaid or paid outside of the scope of the development, then you should have accepted the work. If it does not then you have no reason to accept to do additional work, and it is not a reason for termination.

Without a reason for termination you have not much to worry about you could argue it was by mutual consent, but you could also threaten to sue him on other grounds if you feel that he has breached _your_ contract in any way.

Counter suit usually shuts people up, particularly as they know that the cost of going to court to defend something as well as trying to claim against you could be a case of throwing good money after bad.

</comment><comment><USER7> > _"I'm looking for any guidance I can get with how I should handle this."_

Read your contract.

</comment><comment><USER8> Going forward I would avoid working for lawyers...</comment>


Show HN: Git-recall – Simple and handy tool to easily recall what you've done - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/Fakerr/git-recall <comment><USER2> Nice tool</comment>


Google+ Users Are Nearly All Male - <AUTHOR> http://mashable.com/2011/07/14/google-plus-male/ <comment><USER2> Tell it to my wife and daughter-in-law. But the mix isn't so surprising considering that every person on Google+ was invited by (recursively) someone who works at Google only a few weeks ago. Male geeks know a lot of male geeks. Male geeks are early adopters. Frankly, I think requiring users specify sex was a mistake for many reasons, not least of which are premature conclusions like this article.

</comment><comment><USER3> "With around 60% of users identifying themselves as web developers or software engineers [...]"

That's probably the more interesting point

<comment><USER4> No, this is a god awful article. That's a new paragraph when it shouldn't be, that 60% is of the 25,000 single men (edit: No, it can't be even that, the author really messed up somewhere). There are not over 6,000,000 software engineers out of 10,000,000 on Google Plus.

<comment><USER5> Why not? Is it that hard to believe that 6 million of the people that joined Google Plus early on are software engineers? I could believe it. They probably signed up to try and get involved, and a developer would be more likely to sign up to beta software than a non-developer, I would imagine.

note: these are my speculations.

<comment><USER6> _Why not? Is it that hard to believe that 6 million of the people that joined Google Plus early on are software engineers?_

According to the BLS there are 3.2 million Americans in "Computer and mathematical occupations" (<http://www.bls.gov/news.release/ocwage.htm>), and there seems to be a reasonable consensus that 12 million is an upper bound for the world ([http://stackoverflow.com/questions/453880/how-many- developer...](http://stackoverflow.com/questions/453880/how-many-developers- are-there-in-the-world)). There's no way 6 million are on Google+ already.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> _Completely anecdotal counter-response:_

In many of the social circles I move in (including the preponderance of my college friends, an extended music crowd here in LA, friends from high school when my focus was primarily sports, etc.) I either am or have often felt like a (the?) nerd among normals.

I enjoyed the opportunity to observe as a large group of people—regardless of their personal affinity for technology—attempted to determine how they were going to make Facebook a part of their lives when it went live my freshman year of college.

I joined Twitter during sxsw 2007 when its first big buzz (among us geeks) happened, then waited for the better part of two years before almost anyone I know _IRL_ joined.

I've been watching closely the adoption rates on G+ within the confines of my unscientifically generated social network, and it's been interesting. No real observations yet, but in terms of raw numbers:

I've currently got over 100 people in circles, but less a cadre of internet personalities, there are 58 whom I know personally. 34 men. 24 women.

(ianastatistician)

</comment><comment><USER8> "* = Based on a sample set of 29,215 Google+ Profiles."

And <http://findpeopleonplus.com> has "947,996 Google+ users indexed".

Maybe we should consider the fact that Google+ has more than 10M users now ? Also, you can hide your gender so the stats might be off.

</comment><comment><USER9> As usual, flat wrong for my subset of Google+ Circles. Almost everywhere but on Hacker News (on Facebook too), my circle of online friends consists of married women with children, because a big part of my online communicating is about educating children, and that is a subject that skews to having more women than men follow it. I am seeing an exploding community of homeschoolers and teachers and parents whose children are in organizations for gifted children swelling my Google+ network.

I will agree that my networks, like most online networks, include more computer industry professionals by percentage than I regularly encounter in daily life in my neighborhood. It's not surprising that modes of communication that involve computers are more comfortable for people--male or female--who use computers to make a living.

<comment><USER10> It's definitely right for my circle of friends (and my Facebook is about 50/50 split).

To be fair, I know more tech-savvy (though not nerdy) men than women, so I could understand why most of my circle is largely dudes.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> Interesting stats, but this was also reported on the 8th by a different site:

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2742196>

</comment><comment><USER12> I would imagine if you looked at Facebook's signups shortly after it opened up to the public, it would probably look the same way (if you disregard the college students who were already on there at that point).

Just eyeballing the people in my circles who have actually created accounts, it seems like about a 60/40 male/female split. Most of my friends and classmates are pretty tech-savvy though (well, either that or I've browbeaten them into signing up for things so many times they just went for it this time).

</comment><comment><USER13> Findpeopleonplus is set to release a larger set of index and statistics report. It will be interesting to see if the trend is along the same lines or shifted.

</comment><comment><USER14> This is of no surprise to me, and I think we can all agree that its because of the technology oriented crowd. I'd actually be willing to bet the tech crowd is early adopters for most new software/services. The only reason we're hearing about it now is this information is accessible (mostly) to the public.

</comment><comment><USER15> Not surprising. Any girl would be saying "Why do I need a second Facebook?"

<comment><USER16> You may be joking (I can't tell), but it's true that early adopters skew sharply male. Some estimates on various projects put the male/female ratio at 10:1 or even higher. If Google gets better than 30% female in this early beta period, I will be very impressed with their making-tech-attractive-to-women skillz.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> Just like the people who bought Android phones specifically because they are Android phones.

</comment><comment><USER18> My wife isn't.

</comment><comment><USER19> Well if G+ is where the men are I expect you'll see a lot of women from Vancouver sign on pretty fast. Vancouver has _way_ more single women than men.

<comment><USER20> Is this supposed to be a joke on the nature of those adult dating website ads that always advertise "Single ladies in your area"? Being in Vancouver myself, I never found out until recently that some of the ads always said "Vancouver" no matter where one was. Quite strange.</comment></comment>


Simple and Boring - <AUTHOR> https://css-tricks.com/simple-boring/ <comment><USER2> That document does not itself follow their own advice (perhaps due to being part of another web site with their own CSS stuff), although a few web pages do, The example they give, like below (although I entered different text), is good way to make a web page, although a rather simple one. It is also rather readable even if you do not have a web browser (or won't open it just to view one document).

      <!DOCTYPE html>

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do
      eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.

"You can build a robust, reliable, and fully responsive web application today using only semantic HTML on the front-end. No images. No CSS. No JavaScript. It's entirely possible. It will work in every modern browser. It will be straightforward to maintain. It may not fit the standard definition of beauty as far as web experiences go, but it will work. In many cases, it will be more usable and accessible than those built with modern front-end frameworks." I agree with this. But, they say it is not the best approach; well, sometimes it is, I think (not always, but perhaps usually, especially for documents which are not "apps"). It is much more usable and accessible, and I also think it actually does look better too (especially considering, if the user configured their browser with the fonts and colours they want it, then the user will be satisfied, I think).</comment>


The Google Technology Stack [2008] - <AUTHOR> http://michaelnielsen.org/blog/lecture-course-the-google-technology-stack/ <comment><USER2> Probably should have a [2008] in the title. This is very out-of-date.</comment>


Ask HN: What would you do if your App idea exists already but looks ugly? - <AUTHOR> Especially if you're a developer and unexperienced in design. <comment><USER2> Find the weaknesses of the existing solutions and try to be better. There is numerous examples of companies that did it. For example, Zoom was founded by the former VP of engineering from Webex because he saw issues in Webex.

Having competitors is a good signal as it means there is a market.

However, I would not go against a super huge player as they have a development team that'll likely "patch" the product and corrects the weaknesses.

Out of curiosity, what's your idea ?

</comment><comment><USER3> As a developer you can use a theme for your initial version.

There are lots of reasonably priced frontend/backend themes out there that you can build on top of for your initial version.

Find a theme built on bootstrap or tailwind css both reliable frameworks.

Then you can focus on the app and ux to make a better solution.

You'll want to spend some time validating your idea, try to talk to existing users of the app.

Good luck.

</comment><comment><USER4> It's OK if the App exists but try to differentiate on something other than pure design and UX. This is pretty hard to pull off first time, especially when you're not a really experienced designer.

</comment><comment><USER5> You can do following things- If you can improve the solution by X factor, do it.

If your solution is same as there's then price it down by Y dollar than your competition.

If competitor takes N seconds to provide solution, see if you can provide in less than N seconds.

If onboarding to competitor product is difficult, you can make your product onboarding simplistic and write better documentation then there's.

</comment><comment><USER6> Talk to customers and potential customers of the existing solution, see if I can convince them to buy a prettier solution for more money, and when the answer turns out to be no (as it is in 99% of cases), move on to my next app idea.

</comment><comment><USER7> Check the reviews to compile a list of things where you can be better. The App Store makes user feedback very simple for the app, but also potential competitors.

</comment><comment><USER8> Email the founder with a proposal to work together.</comment>


Apple's New WebKit Policy Takes a Hard Line for User Privacy - <AUTHOR> https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/08/apples-new-webkit-policy-takes-hard-line-user-privacy <comment><USER2> The problem is that Google doesn't use webkit anymore so chrome will still bleed your private data..</comment>


2012 Independent Games Festival Announces Main Competition Finalists - <AUTHOR> http://igf.com/2012/01/2012_independent_games_festiva_3.html

<comment><USER2> My game POP made the Nuovo honorable mentions list.

<comment><AUTHOR> It looks great but how can I play it?</comment></comment>


"Browser X is using Y MB of memory with Z tabs open" is meaningless - <AUTHOR> http://blog.mozilla.com/nnethercote/2011/08/29/browser-x-is-using-y-mb-of-memory-with-z-tabs-open-is-a-meaningless-observation/

<comment><USER2> I wish I didn't feel this deserved voting up, but I've seen so many people make this mistake that it bears repeating.

</comment><comment><USER3> A really good read.</comment>


GitLab 8.1 released - <AUTHOR> https://about.gitlab.com/2015/10/22/gitlab-8-1-released/ <comment><AUTHOR> We've got the whole team of GitLab in Amsterdam, while releasing this.

8.1 brings, among other things, a commit status API, marking it possible for you to set the status of any commit and see it reflected in GitLab. This allows for any CI to report back directly to GitLab.

We're here if you have any questions.</comment>


Show HN: Magic K8s Ball – Answers to Your Kubernetes Questions - <AUTHOR> https://magick8sball.github.io <comment><AUTHOR> I cobbled this together from codepen snippets as a fun way to learn how to add static assets to a Go binary using go generate. Just something silly I made to show to my co-workers that I thought others might get a chuckle from.

P.S. - Pull requests welcome. I suck at CSS, etc. and there are text overflow issues I am not sure how to fix.</comment>


SF Supervisors Move to Ban Workplace Cafeterias - <AUTHOR> http://www.sfexaminer.com/supervisors-move-ban-workplace-cafeterias/ <comment><USER2> Maybe office workers prefer not to have to run the gauntlet of feces and hypodermic needles, just to buy a sandwich.

"San Francisco Man Steps on Hydodermic Needle, Demands Action"

[https://www.nbcbayarea.com/on-air/as-seen-on/SF- Businesses-W...](https://www.nbcbayarea.com/on-air/as-seen-on/SF-Businesses- Want-City-Hall-to-Take-Action-on-Diseased-Stre_Bay-Area-475616773.html)

"Junkies Take Over Corridors Of San Francisco Civic Center BART Station"

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5gT5NULvRSk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5gT5NULvRSk)

"SF Crime, Squalor Scares Away $40 Million Medical Convention"

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dLcoOIDJBsc](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dLcoOIDJBsc)

SF Mayor: 'There's More Feces ... Than I've Ever Seen'

[https://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/SF-Mayor-Theres- more-f...](https://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/SF-Mayor-Theres-more-feces- on-the-sidewalks-than-Ive-ever-seen-488156431.html)

<comment><USER3> Maybe those things will get addressed once people have to run a gauntlet to buy a sandwich. It's much harder to ignore in an ivory tower.

<comment><USER4> Unless you live and work in the same building, there is no ignoring this stuff in SF.

<comment><USER5> I don't see in FIDI. Not sure how SOMA is

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> To the extent that discouraging this practice is useful, a tax seems more sensible than a zoning ban; a zoning ban, by effectively grandfathering incumbents, is basically a barrier to new entrants competing (if on-site cafeterias didn't have a business function, firms wouldn't spend money on them) with incumbents (whether for talent, or on productivity if food in-house contributes to that.) A tax can internalize whatever negative externalities are seen from the practice in a manner which neither prohibits use of existing investments nor creates an unfair preference for incumbents.

<comment><USER7> Instead of quibbling about the choice of means in social engineering, maybe the first question to consider is whether such interference is a legitimate power of government.

<comment><USER8> It is a legitimate power if the people who form the government consented to give the government the power to write zoning laws. The real question is — when did we consent to be governed by these dopes?

<comment><USER9> Vote in local elections. If you want your voice heard, you have to take the time to speak.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> SF should ban private cars, because it deprives public and commercial transportation of customers.

SF should ban owning your own apartment, because it deprives landlords of rent.

SF should ban e-commerce purchases, because it deprives local retail stores of sales.

SF should ban cleaning your own home, because cleaning companies need more business.

<comment><USER11> The first three would create a pretty interesting urban space.

<comment><USER12> Banning home ownership so that landlords benefit is not interesting, it's extremely regressive and morally wrong.

<comment><USER11> There are other cities around the world that do 99-year leases or where the state owns the land and it seems to work okay.

<comment><USER13> In virtually every case those leases are "customary" only and can and are extended and renewed often on a rolling basis often without even charge.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> It seems that ultimately this just subsidizes the commercial real-estate owners.

1) Force companies to not have free cafeterias

2) Workers have to buy lunch from local businesses

3) Restaurant Location becomes more valuable given the large number of workers forced to find lunch and buy it.

4) Raise rents on restaurants because space is now more valuable, since it is basically subsidized by nearby tech companies.

5) Restaurants pay higher rent, landlords make more $$, due to California Property Tax policy, landlords do not have to pay proportional additional property tax on their now more valuable property.

The reason something like this is considered speaks to the power of commercial real estate to shape policy for their own benefit.

<comment><USER15> Regulations almost always cause some sort of rent seeking behavior. Sometimes they are negligible in comparison to the greater good gained from the regulation. I don't think this is the case here.

<comment><USER16> There would never be rent seeking behavior without regulations. The natural state of mankind is perfect harmonious cooperation without the spectre of rules agreed upon by communities.

<comment><USER17> > If Princes and Monarchs could but preserve this simplicity, every creature > in the world would submit itself to them; Heaven and Earth would be in > mutual accord, and shower down sweet dew; the people would need no laws, but > live in harmony of themselves.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> The bit about local restaurants losing business seems like a pretty thin fig leaf over a law that's really about taking tech employees down a peg.

I don't live in the bay area, so maybe someone can fill me in. How is it supposedly so gentrified that nobody but software engineers can survive, yet local politicians feel comfortable doing things like this? Who actually lives in the city?

<comment><USER19> Rent control has bifurcated housing costs. Those who have lived in the same spot for 15+ years and/or who own their property have housing costs much lower than people who have moved this decade. A new lease on a 1 bedroom probably costs $3500 now, but could be <$1000 if you've been here for a while.

"Progressive" SF politicians like Aaron Peskin pander to low-income renters and kowtow to NIMBY homeowners who don't want new housing built, while vilifying newcomers. "These evil techies are gentrifying your neighborhood - elect me to stop them."

(Of course, the cost of living isn't just housing, but it's also the biggest factor in your assumption that "nobody but software engineers can survive.")

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> Banning workplace cafeterias is a good start, but really the solution they should be discussing is banning workplaces.

The workers at tech companies like Twitter and AirBNB are known to have access to working in their own buildings, which deprives nearby cafes of the dollars they could be spending buying a single espresso and then working for 9 hours.

<comment><USER21> Don't joke. Local politicians can decide to take private land and buildings. See Kelo v. City of New London.

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

<comment><USER22> Further reading at that Wikipedia link leads to the fact that California has outlawed such takings covered in the Kelo v. City of New London case.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> > tech companies like Twitter and Airbnb, which are widely known to have > access to dining in their own buildings, depriving nearby restaurants of the > dollars usually spent by nearby worker

Only in Soviet Russia... and Silicon Valley can you see nonsense like that.

<comment><USER24> It's funny, but sad, watching people trying to kill the golden goose by a thousand cuts.

<comment><USER4> This is the thing. If they succeed in fixing the "problem" of tech workers, SF will end up like it did in the 1970's where people were more people moved out than moved in.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> Won't this make it harder for newer businesses to compete for hires? Ie ones that haven't already built kitchens in the office? It's a nice benefit to be able to grab a free lunch (saving thousands a year) or take a to-go box home.

<comment><USER6> Wouldn't be surprised to find if you dig deep enough you'll find this motivation behind the scenes promoting the proposal (though it probably originates in the restaurant industry.)

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> Isn't this the same as the Broken Window Fallacy?

They want to force people to use economically inefficient services, small restaurants versus large cafeteria, to create more economic "activity". Which would be analogous to celebrating the waste of breaking a perfectly good window, because fixing/replacing the window generates economic activity. Is that fair?

This is under the (I think reasonable) assumption that a cafeteria designed for 500-1000 people is probably more efficient than the dozens of smaller scale restaurants needed to match that supply.

<comment><USER19> I trust that I have access to higher quality, healthier food at work than I would if I had to buy lunch at a restaurant. Employers have a stronger incentive to prioritize long-term health in conjunction with short term satisfaction. Restaurants have an incentive to overuse unhealthy but addictive/inexpensive ingredients like salt/sugar/fat to maximize short term pleasure.

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> Get Aaron Peskin voted out in 2020, and half of this city's problems will go away.

[https://sfbos.org/sites/default/files/FileCenter/Documents/3...](https://sfbos.org/sites/default/files/FileCenter/Documents/33420-district03_map_lg.pdf)

If you live or work in that district, you should actively support whoever his opponent is.

<comment><USER19> I'm very much looking forward to his departure, but isn't he term-limited again anyway?

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> Will they also ban ziplock bags, to prevent workers from bringing their own lunch?

<comment><USER29> It is plastic waste, after all.

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> So, can a company buy/open a restaurant nearby and provide free food for employees while also being technically open to the public?..

</comment><comment><USER31> Do they think that workplace cafeterias summon fully-prepared meals from the aether? Those places employ cooks and purchase wholesale food just like restaurants do. FFS, San Francisco.

</comment><comment><USER32> Fist they came for the plastic straws and I said nothing because I don't use straws...

</comment><comment><USER33> also an effort to fuck catering companies or contingent workers who work in these large cafeterias. what an idiotic and arbitrary restriction of the fundamental human right to eat where/what we want

<comment><USER34> Who cares about them when we can vigorously virtue-signal by shitting on tech workers?

</comment></comment><comment> rm_-rf_slash Maybe San Francisco should consider banning restaurants to protect the jobs of cafeteria workers.

</comment><comment><USER35> This reminds me of the recent op-ed where the guy suggested replacing libraries with Amazon. Just a really dumb idea that is needlessly protectionist.

</comment><comment><USER36> I really wish someone challenges this all the way to the Supreme Court. Current composition of the court gives me hope that such stupid laws are struck down.

Because if this ban is allowed to stand, what is to stop the government from banning other perks - gyms, shuttles, massages etc.

</comment><comment><USER37> Sounds like a great way to drive businesses away from your city. Penny wise, pound foolish.

</comment><comment> a-dub I never understood the point of an on-site cafeteria in a centrally located urban office anyway. It makes loads of sense in the spread-out suburban 20m to the nearest Chili's hellscape that is the ever pleasant south bay, but you really don't need it in SF. I feel like a lot of it was a sort of "us too" copying of Google/Oracle without fully understanding why it was done in the first place.

</comment><comment><USER38> This is an awful idea. This will just hurt blue collar workers employed in those cafeterias. Why is our city government so ineffective and asinine?

</comment><comment><USER39> I wonder if they'll be allowed to order a pizza.

</comment><comment><USER40> What if I make my own lunch and bring it to work?

</comment><comment><USER13> They should just tax employees like any other benefit, most countries do that if you have subsidized meals you pay the value of the meal in tax.

E.G. if you ate $400 worth of meals in a month and you have an income tax of 25% you pay $100 in additional income tax. It shouldn't be any different than getting a company car or any other material benefit.

</comment><comment><USER41> Soon there won't be any housing here for restaurant employees anyway, so it won't matter. We've kind of already crossed that point with most folks commuting huge distances.

</comment><comment><USER42> When city's crab mentality meets corporate crab mentality...

<comment><USER43> Hey! I've been trying to get in touch with you (I'm doing some research on Retail). Can you drop me an email? My email: firstname.lastname@example.com, thanks!

</comment></comment><comment><USER44> Can't wait until they want to build a new hospital and they are barred from adding a cafeteria.

</comment><comment><USER45> from what I understand, there is a similar measure underway in Mountain View as well

<comment><USER46> Slightly different. MV measure bans cafeterias from being free, not from existing, They are just limited to subsidizing food cost to 50%. SF just outright bans cafeterias.

</comment></comment><comment><USER47> Seems absurd - Can I still bring my own lunch?

</comment><comment><USER48> Peskin is indirectly blaming "techies" for the fall of Retail.

This proposal reminds me of nationalism, in the way he talked about, "...the rest of us[.]"

We're seeing Trump trying to use protectionism, smothered with a thick gravy of nationalism, to solve the macroeconomic woes of the US industrial sector. Trump's foolish effort is failing.

Peskin also clearly does not have a viable solution. Someone needs to help him, and the City, get a grip on reality.

</comment><comment><USER49> WTF, I hope Breed nixes this nonsense. What next, ban me from bringing in my home cooked meal because it deprives some hole in the wall which uses subpar ingredients from making a living?

Ban buses, it deprives Uber and taxi drivers a job.

This is utter socialist nonsense.

</comment><comment><USER7> What are the effective limits on these local tyrants?

I've heard many people watch movies at home instead of going to the theaters. Surely these home screens could be eliminated with some clever zoning restrictions.

<comment><USER16> You're totally right. All of those movie theaters that were heavily subsidized by billions in public money or tax cuts based on the promise of providing foot traffic and value to adjoining businesses should have their day!

</comment></comment><comment><USER34> Incredible... a meaningful risk of doing business in SF is the exposure to socialist / progressive extremists in the city government.

<comment><USER3> Mountain View is doing the same.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> The responses to this are genuinely some of the funniest posts I've seen on this website. The amount of gymnastics people are doing to avoid mentioning that these large companies have gotten millions/billions of handouts from the state and city and are therefore in a different class/category of business than your average brick and mortar shop.

So I'll clarify 90% of the detractors comments here: "To the people of San Francisco: Fuck you, got mine. The fact that i lied about the nature and value of our economic contribution to the community and you bought it puts you at fault. I won my ivory tower through any means necessary, and therefore it's immoral to suggest that I in any demonstrable way cooperate to improve anything outside if it. Again. Fuck you. Got mine. "

You can skip all the comments now! :)

</comment><comment><USER50> But London Breed is amazing... right, .. guys?

<comment><USER6> What does London Breed have to do with this? It's like if in 2009, forty Republican senators proposed something and you blamed Obama for it.</comment></comment>


Most spectacular photography... ever? - <AUTHOR> http://www.flickr.com/photos/benheine/3994079347/ <comment><AUTHOR> I know this isn't exactly typical HN-type material, but when I accidentally stumbled across this guy's photo stream, my mouth literally fell open.

What's most impressive is that -- at least with his Eiffel tower panorama, and, presumably, others as well -- there is _no_ super-fisheye lens used. It's a massive montage that he took and worked on over two days.

Read the descriptions in the photos, and be very impressed.

Also, if you scroll down to the comments section, he has provided links to more of his favorite photos for quick and easy browsing.

</comment><comment><USER2> I am very impressed! I am always interested in the new ways that people find to reinvent old art styles. Kudos and hats off to this guy!</comment>


Egypt's Warning: Are you listening? - <AUTHOR> http://www.chrismartenson.com/blog/egypts-warning-are-you-listening/52575

<comment><USER2> Energy-constrained? Egypt? Only if you have an entrenched, hidebound investment sector that is uninterested in doing anything but seeking petroleum rent and ensuring the continuation of its own hold on power.

Mistaking "oil" for "energy" is rather short-sighted, isn't it?

<comment><USER3> Can you expand on that? I'm not familiar with Egypt's non-oil energy situation.

<comment><USER2> It's 97% sun-drenched desert. There's plenty of energy in Egypt, on average 12 hours a day.

<comment><USER3> Good point. Hopefully solar tech will get to the point where making use of that energy is worth the investment.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> No, nobody is listening. Try to convince a Tunisian 30 years ago, that if no economical and political changes are be done to save the country economy and stability, a disaster may happen and cost dearly to him, in the first place.

He may understand, but he is not _interested_. He won't move. The same is for people and the whole world working with this banking system. They may agree that the system is bankrupt and may fail them at any moment. But only few are bothered with it.

When the system collapse, they start complaining and protesting.

</comment><comment><USER5> No I think it's more about the corrupt and oppressive regime.

The people weren't chanting "give us food"; they were chanting "The people want to oust the regime".

<comment><USER3> I think it culminated in that, but as with every revolution in history, the causes of these things are far more nuanced and complex than they tend to appear at first glance. The American Revolution was about far more than taxes on tea for example.</comment></comment>


Maintainers Wanted, open source projects looking for new maintainers - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/pickhardt/maintainers-wanted? <comment><AUTHOR> A lot of projects end up abandoned because their maintainers wanted to move on but couldn't find anyone to reliably take over.

I thought it'd be useful to create a list of projects looking for new maintainers: Maintainers Wanted.

If you know of any projects that should be added, feel free to make a pull request or write an issue!

<comment><USER2> People who use those products are best maintainers, and they know about those abandoned projects.

A person from nowhere will never became a maintainer of any serious product.

<comment><USER3> I agreed to become maintainer of a project I knew nothing about.

<comment><USER4> Was it something you were interested in? Replaced an alternate you were working on?

I find it hard to believe that a project you didn't create became something you actively wanted to support. On top of that, if the old maintainer really walked away completely, and they don't answer questions, you're walking through the dark.

<comment><USER3> The project I'm talking about is Postgres.app. It's a GUI wrapper around a PostgreSQL server, so there wasn't a lot of code; maintaining it mainly means I need to make new binaries several times a year. I didn't need a lot of help from the previous maintainer. (But I have rewritten most of the code since I started maintaining it)

It just was a great fit; I work on a PostgreSQL client; so it seemed like a good idea to help people get a server running too.

<comment><USER5> Late reply (this has dropped to pg 6), but here's to you . Our team uses postgres.app, and I know of a number of others who do too.

From my standpoint, it is shocking that such a popular and great gateway into the PG world is in this situation. Complex, enterprisey software is now just drag-n-drop and develop. Postgres.app is really good stuff.

You don't have a donate link, but if you're selling your front-end, please promote it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Another earlier attempt, itself looking for a new maintainer:

[http://www.unmaintained-free-software.org/](http://www.unmaintained-free- software.org/)

</comment><comment><USER6> The Debian equivalent:

[https://www.debian.org/devel/wnpp/](https://www.debian.org/devel/wnpp/)

<comment><USER7> I don't understand. Ref: [https://bugs.debian.org/cgi- bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=634757](https://bugs.debian.org/cgi- bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=634757). This project was put up for adoption, and many people replied showing interest (even some creating PPA's) but ownership was never transferred and it is still listed for adoption.

<comment><USER8> That bug should probably be closed, because the person who published the PPA uploaded a version to Debian just a month later [1]. From the package's tracker page [2], you can see that the same person became a co-maintainer, and has been preparing most of the uploads ever since.

[1] [https://tracker.debian.org/news/180171](https://tracker.debian.org/news/180171)

[2] [https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/lyx](https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/lyx)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Would be useful to have a version of this for projects looking for contributors (which I suppose would align more with students and recent grads looking to beef up their experience with someone guiding them, but who don't necessarily want take on a lead role for a project)

<comment><USER10> Relatedly, I really wish Github had some sort of point system to further incentivize contributing to projects. It would also be nice to have a standardized way of marking an issue as "help wanted" rather than having to search on any of the following labels:

      help wanted
      help-wanted
      good first bug
      Help Wanted
      contribution welcome
      HelpWanted
      first time contributor
      Contributor Friendly
      Good First Task
      beginner friendly
      good first contribution
      Good for New Contributors
      pull request wanted

<comment><USER11> [https://openhatch.org](https://openhatch.org)

<comment><USER12> Good idea, but not currently maintained!

<comment><USER13> Why do you say that?

<comment><USER12> [https://github.com/openhatch/oh- mainline/graphs/contributors](https://github.com/openhatch/oh- mainline/graphs/contributors)

But mostly because I know them (in particular paulproteus who is hard at work on sandstorm.io). It's a _great_ project that I've done some volunteer (non development) work for but would need a big infusion of money or contributors to be made useful again in 2016 as a project finder.

Same goes for OpenHatch's 'open source comes to campus' outreach program. At least many other organizations are doing substantial and scaleable work in that vein.

Not sure there's any large scale effort at building a project finder, but every small thing like Maintainers Wanted is good and helpful.

<comment><USER13> Ah, thanks. I know him as well (though the handle was unfamiliar). I was under the impression it was running under new management.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Great idea, I just opened up a PR for my project. Before this I had no idea how I was going to find a new maintainer and felt pretty guilty for moving on. Hopefully this gains some traction!

</comment><comment><USER15> This list needs to be categorized by technologies involved in each project, such as we see at OpenHatch - [https://openhatch.org/search/](https://openhatch.org/search/)

<comment><USER16> Only if it gets big enough that reading through all of them is too much work. They could curate it instead.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> [https://helpwanted.apache.org/](https://helpwanted.apache.org/)

</comment><comment><USER18> Off the top of my head, this[1] is unmaintained, though in a stable-ish state.

[1]: [https://github.com/yeoman/grunt-usemin](https://github.com/yeoman/grunt- usemin)</comment>


Paul Graham on Twitter: We're trying to figure out... - <AUTHOR> http://twitter.com/#!/paulg/status/51047251040157697 <comment><USER2> _"... We're trying to figure out why this YC batch did so well. One theory: they all used Convore ..."_

With no other information other than the tweet, I'm somewhat confused. Is this an 'in-joke'?

<comment><AUTHOR> Hoping for clarification from PG, as well.

<comment><USER3> I think Paul's point was that they all had something impressive to show off by Demo Day. Perhaps the reasons the batch did so well was because they had a good system to exchange information (Convore). But also because Paul has enough experience mentoring startups to know what needs to be done and when.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Is this a pretty up IRC?</comment>


The World Spent $112 Billion On 205 Million TVs This Year - <AUTHOR> http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/12/29/tvs-2009/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+Techcrunch+(TechCrunch)&utm_content=Google+Reader

<comment><USER2> I think the TC headline (as usual?) is wrong. From the post: Worldwide TV revenues fell an estimated 10 percent to $101 billion, from $112 billion in 2008.</comment>


Microsoft U-turn sees Start button back on Windows 8 - <AUTHOR> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-22714048

<comment><USER2> It's like MS is being obtuse on purpose. People complain about having the entire focus of the system switch to tablet mode, just to find a document or launch a program. Not because of the few pixels representing the start menu. They obviously know this.

At first, I thought Win8 start screen would be nearly equivalent to the start menu. It is not. First, on RDP, it is an utter and total nightmare. Whoever thought Windows Server should use the start screen should be sacked. Last week I lit up 2012 servers for a client, and they thought the shell was a joke, literally. Even MS TechNet admits that doing things might be a bit of a hassle.

On normal desktop, it's extremely distracting to flip to start screen instead of opening the start menu. Also, the search feature is broken. Instead of having one global search, you need to type the query, then arrow down a few times to select the kind you wanted (like settings).

Finally, even when you get results, they're in tablet-tile mode, which is an annoyingly cartoonish way, and in case of long names (as MS likes), you get the name clipped.

If MST3K was reviewing it, this would be a part they just sorta chuckle and say "They really did that."

<comment><USER3> I second this. Main reason I switched back to Windows 8 was broken search. MS just broke something for sake of change.

In Windows 7, to change proxy settings, I just write proxy and hit enter.

Windows 8, write proxy, hit down/move mouse and then do it.

For someone who routinely changes system settings, this is a nightmare.

<comment><USER4> That said, the settings search did actually become much better. You can search not only for the names of control panel screens, but for _what_ you want to do. I've been pretty impressed, they've had somebody enter giant lists of weighted keywords somewhere.

<comment><USER5> Searching for what you want to do seems to work pretty well on Windows 7.

<comment><USER6> I think the difference is that Windows 7 has easy search for what you want to _execute_ , where 8 allows you to search for _intent_.

<comment><USER2> Searching for things like "Change network" in Windows 7 seems to work just fine - you get a list of common tasks. They might have added more aliases in Windows 8 based on feedback or research. I don't think it's anything fundamentally new.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> The Start Button is just a symbol for the larger issue, which is the shafting of Desktop users. There were only a small handful of things in Windows 8.0 that I felt offered an improved Desktop experience, whereas there were tons of things that I felt required more buttons clicks, more steps, etc

I hope 8.1 addresses the Desktop users in more ways than just the Start Button.

<comment><USER8> What requires more steps?

<comment><USER9> Powering down

In Windows 7: Start > Shutdown In Windows 8: Charms > Settings > Power > Shutdown

<comment><USER10> Who uses power down anyway? Just close your lid or press the power button once. The type of power down can be configured for both these actions.

I maybe shut down fully or restart once every second month and then i actually don't mind if it takes one click more.

<comment><USER11> Desktop users.

<comment><USER12> Press the power button.

<comment><USER11> Madness!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> "In the 8.1 update, the area will be more visible. A left-click on the tip will bring up a tile-based Start Screen - formerly known as the Metro interface - designed for touch-screen users, while a right-click will display a small menu of other options such as Event Viewer, Device Manager and Disk Management."

It already behaves that way.

Also, searching to launch an app isn't that much different than the old start menu. Mouse to the bottom left, left click, start typing.

<comment><USER5> I don't run Windows 8 at home (still on 7) but I did encounter an eye-opening experience when I visited my father-in-law last weekend. He used the start screen to launch the apps that were immediately there, but when he needed to find a non-obvious application he opened explorer and navigated to the Program Files folders!

I thought Microsoft always heavily user-tested their UI changes but I can't see how that was possible at all with Windows 8 and Metro.

<comment><USER14> Same way as before, open start screen and type the program name.

<comment><USER5> You know that and I know that but I know a lot of people who never thought to type in program names even on Windows 7.

The big flaw in Windows 8 is that you have to already know how to use Windows 8 in order to use it. It gives you almost no hint on how to do anything or where to find anything.

<comment><USER14> True. A tutorial other than two screens at the beginning would have saved a lot of hassle. I learnt a lot of shortcuts through Yash Tolia's blog. Regarding programs, every program installed leaves a clutter of things on the Start Screen, that is one major annoyance for me too. Among the main shortcut will be, read me's and other nonsense.

<comment><USER5> If you need a tutorial, you've already lost.

<comment><USER14> What is this kind of thinking? Really? It is better than fiddling around. Let me not read books/manuals on how to make iOS apps, general relativity, and how to set cruise control on KIA Forte since wvenable says I have already lost. There is an adaptability curve, and it is important to list all the improvements in one place through a tutorial rather than finding new things after two months of using OS in old way.

<comment><USER5> You might need a tutorial to build a nuclear reactor but you shouldn't need a tutorial just to launch applications on a desktop OS that has been around for 20 years.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> >However, it will not offer all the functionality previously associated with the feature. Instead it will bring users to the recently-introduced "Metro" interface.

I don't understand how bringing users to the Metro interface is not offering all the functionality of the previous start button. The old start menu was a list of shortcuts. The Metro interface is a list of shortcuts. It might look different, but where is the loss of functionality?

<comment><USER16> You could argue that the disorientation and loss of context caused by completely replacing the entire desktop with a list of shortcuts is a loss of functionality. Previously the start menu was kind of like looking at the index in a corner of a map that gives grid references for every location, in that you still could keep your location on the map (and thus understanf the context of your surroundings) in view. The new start menu is more like having to completely flip off the page with the map on to look at the index on another page. It's vastly more disruptive to a continuous workflow.

Edit: real-world example: I'm on a web page with a list of prices and want to do a quick sum. On 7, I'd hit win-key, type 'calc' and then enter the prices, all the while keeping my eyes on the numbers I want to add so I don't lose track of them. On 8, it will flash my entire screen full of icons. I lose view of the numbers and therefore may lose track of the numbers I want to add up.

<comment><USER15> I wouldn't consider that to be "not offering all the functionality" like the article suggests. It's merely a different way of getting around.

If your anecdote is true in the spirit of the original complaint, then Windows 7 doesn't offer all the functionality of Windows XP. I recently got upgraded at work from Windows XP to Windows 7. I've been so used to hitting the windows key, pressing R to open the run menu, then typing 'calc'. Now when I do that, I get distracted when a window pops up searching for something names 'rcalc'. In 7 I don't need to hit 'R', which breaks my workflow and I guess that is a loss of functionality.

<comment><USER17> Hold WIN and press R to bring up the Run menu (Win+R). Win+D, Win+E, Win+Left, Win+Right, etc. are all global shortcuts I use all the time.

<comment><USER15> I'm not being serious in my complaint, I'm trying to highlight the absurdity of "breaking workflow" being linked to "removing functionality".

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> This is still less than optimal. Just give the desktop users what they want. To me Windows 8 is a half baked attempt at striking a balance between desktop users and tablet users. Combining these interfaces is not going to work well no matter which way you try it. Its actually awfully reminiscent of using an old windows phone that essentially brought the desktop user interaction of Windows to mobile.

</comment><comment><USER19> The first thing any technical person I know that uses Windows 8 on a desktop does is install Classic Shell: <http://www.classicshell.net/>

I still can't get used to that metro interface and switching between the modes in desktop mode.

<comment><USER20> I prefer <http://startisback.com/>

<comment><USER21> Why do you prefer it?

<comment><USER20> I look at start 8 too... I choose start is back because it uses as much of the ms api that are already installed, so is the one that produces the closest start button... now they even have a xp mode with the cascade menu... I missed that, I really don;t like the scrolling because the cascade allows me to point and click without having to search first.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> I love Windows 8 and hope they leave the option to keep the task like it currently stands. The negativity is bloggers, using Macbooks, trying to rekindle the Vista days for page views.

<comment><USER23> Bloggers, regardless of what of laptop they have, have a platform to voice their legitimate gripes about an operating system, where consumers only have the power of their purse, and can choose to not buy - which is happening. It's not like their making up their grievances, and many are in alignment with my usage of Windows 8, despite my lack of status as a blogger.

<comment><USER15> >can choose to not buy - which is happening.

Except that Windows 8 is selling in massive numbers.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> I wouldn't hate re-learning the Windows interface if they had actually improved the experience.

</comment><comment><USER25> The Start Button wasn't a big issue to me, as I long ago moved to a keyboard- centric workflow -- using the Windows key, typing a few letters of whatever I wanted to open and hit ENTER.

The big problem here is that this no longer works in Windows 8. Now you hit the Windows key, type a few letters of whatever you want to open and you have to arrow or tab a few times to get to the actual item you cared about.

For those complaining about the cumbersomeness of getting to system settings, I agree. That's why I urge users to learning about the Windows key+x keyboard shortcut.

More excellent tips from Scott Hanselman at: [http://www.hanselman.com/blog/Windows8ProductivityWhoMovedMy...](http://www.hanselman.com/blog/Windows8ProductivityWhoMovedMyCheeseOhThereItIs.aspx)

</comment><comment><USER26> It's funny to see two threads on the front page contrasting 'continuing the Windows 8 vision' with 'Microsoft u-turn'. I doubt many outside of Redmond are going to conform to the former viewpoint.

<comment><USER27> On the other hand "returning a single visual affordance" is a hell of a cry from a u-turn.

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> My grandpa and grandma bought a Win8 machine. Worst day of my life - trying to explain to them how EVERYTHING worked was/is impossible. They don't even understand basic navigation since they switched computers. I've been using computers for roughly 20 years and still haven't found an effective way to make use of Metro. I just go win+d and use keyboard commands.

Metro is okay on mobile devices but laptops and other computers should have the option to boot directly to desktop.

<comment><USER29> My grandma loves her new Windows 8 computer. She hasn't called me for help at all since she got it--a vast improvement over her old Mac laptop and XP desktop.

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> I don't get it. Why are they doing this? This is not what people have been asking for. Are they just doing this so the headlines say "Microsoft brings back the start button" and trick people into buying Windows machines again?

Because it's clearly just for show, and doesn't resolve any of the issues people have had with Metro on a desktop PC.

<comment><USER31> Everyone is asking for it. The entire Metro UI is one gigantic design mistake. Hell people were complaining about it an entire year before Windows 8 was released. Since then it's been like watching a train wreck in slow motion.

<comment><USER9> This isn't exactly what people are asking for. While showing the start button at all is an improvement, most people would prefer that the mode shift from desktop to metro didn't happen.</comment></comment></comment>