Show HN: I redesigned the Microsoft employee badge - <AUTHOR> http://alp.im/blog/microsoft-employee-badge-redesign <comment><USER3> * The circle makes it hard to see at a glance if the face matches the badge, this is a big deal.

* The employee number should be on the front, because this is often needed for identifying people who security cant stop (for whatever reason), but are doing bad things.

* Printing on the back is expensive, the badge printers that do this cost often twice as much. Printing color is even more expensive, your talking increasing the cost of the badge by about a third. This also leads to other problems like heavy head wear because of the smart card contact, having to define avoidance areas because of the same and jamming issues with the added complexity of using the card flipper.

* Employment classification (Employee, Intern, Vendor Name, Partner, etc) should be printed in text on the front.

* Smaller companies would be encouraged to avoid printing the company logo or name on the badge, as this tells people where it will work.

* Same with the address, and the cost of replacement and expedience means returning the badge is useless. This wasn't true when Motorola Flexpass badges were first rolled out at MS, but its true now.

* Badge photos need to be standardized for various security reasons.

* Your current badge does already emphasize your first name, its not as prominent on yours as it was on mine, but it changes from time to time as they much with the access control software.

Where I'm coming from: I am a security engineer, I previously worked on physical security management and had started out in the industry at Microsoft. I work on systems that print hard cards for a paying hobby.

PS, I was fired from MS for posting an image of myself online where my badge was clear enough to copy. Might be something to check on.

<comment><USER4> OK, I'll bite.

\- Why does the circle make it harder to see at a glance? This doesn't seem to be true at all.

\- If you can't stop someone, you're not going to be able to read the number on the badge. I don't see any reason why your employee number should be on the front. It definitely doesn't enhance security at all. People faking badges can fake numbers too.

\- I'm not sure about your points re: cost or smaller employers, I mean, sure, but I can't imagine that cost would be a huge barrier - more likely changing out equipment would be.

\- Badget photo backgrounds probably need to be plain, but as long as it's a photo you can be reasonably recognised from, I'm not sure what it matters. Simply by growing a beard you can become pretty hard to recognise from your badge photo from 5 years ago.

\- I agree that the employment classification is probably good to have on the badge, but only because of annoying BigCo obsession about it. In practice, I'm not sure why it would matter much. When I worked at a big company it was just a political tool to remind consultants they were inferior.

<comment><USER5> > \- If you can't stop someone, you're not going to be able to read the number > on the badge.

Ever heard of cameras?

<comment><USER6> Ever seen security camera footage?

<comment><USER7> Ever seen CSI? Enhance!

<comment><USER8> Sometimes I have to upvote sarcasm :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Well I'll be the constructive voice. _I_ like it.

You should be able to find email address in the corporate directory services, it's not like people are going to memorize them from looking at a badge. We already have business cards or mobile devices w/ NFC if it's necessary to transfer the email address in a persistent form.

Plus having names instead of email serves the more-important purpose of allowing people to more easily socially interact in meetings, social gatherings, etc.

Since it would almost be impossible to completely anonymize the purpose of the badge (especially with the request to return to Microsoft) using the current visual branding certainly beats using the 1988 visual branding.

I can't speak to "Former Metro" branding but it certainly _looks_ pleasing enough.

<comment><USER10> > We already have business cards or mobile devices w/ NFC if it's necessary to > transfer the email address in a persistent form.

Probably not with NFC itself--it'd be somewhat physically awkward to tap a card on a lanyard around your neck against someone's phone.

But since a conference is exactly the sort of situation in which you _want_ to leak contact information promiscuously, putting RFID chips in the cards would work well. Or just putting QR codes on them.

(Doing it with QR codes would actually serve a great double-purpose, if you got the app for it right: you'd say "hold still for a contact photo!" and then get a record of their face _and_ their contact information, associated together.)

<comment><USER11> One issue with QR code on the badge, you train people to allow others to take a close up high resolution picture of their badges. And possibly getting close enough to get the RFID code off the badge so it can be completely cloned. Sounds like a security nightmare to me. Of course, the RFID can probably be read at a distance, but if so, why do the door plates need me to hold the badge right next to them to open the doors?

<comment><USER10> > Of course, the RFID can probably be read at a distance, but if so, why do > the door plates need me to hold the badge right next to them to open the > doors?

RFID chips depend on the sensor sending the power for the reply. Low-power sensors require closer contact; high-power sensors can operate from a distance.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> A lot of designers make one big mistake. They design the content too. But content can't be designed.

For example the name. All his designs use short names because they look beautiful. But in real life names can be much longer.

And ofcourse the pictures. It's nice to have round pictures but it is almost impossible to get nice round pictures from every employee.

So when you are designing (and this doesn't only apply to graphic design): test your design using a lot of different content:

      Will it still work with longer names?
      Will it still work with middle names?
      Will it still work with bad / rectangle pictures?

<comment><USER13> Why is a circle for cropping so controversial? Do some people have square heads?

<comment><USER12> Its controversial because it takes a lot of effort to get it right. For 50 employees it can be done by hand but not so for over 10.000 employees.

Maybe you could use face detection to get the right crop center but even then there will be a lot of errors and waisted cards.

Most people have a valid ID picture so it's easiest to use that one.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> One suggestion when doing address-book related design work is to add names such as Jet Li, Arianna Stassinopoulos, Ho Chi Minh, Ludwig van Beethoven, and Prince (or more appropriate real names) that are annoyingly short or frustratingly long, or otherwise non-standard, such as consisting of three or one components instead of the more conventional two. Better to know in advance of any layout problems you'll face ... :)

</comment><comment><USER15> Great job putting together a prototype. Although I'm going to list specific complaints, I appreciate the effort in creating and risk in sharing, so good job and thanks.

\- I don't follow the circle photo fad. It seems like an unnecessary complication (implementation and design element)

\- By moving information to the back, you're assuming that the facilities which create these badges have the ability to do double-sided prints on the badges, and if they have the technical ability that it won't increase the time or work required to print a badge.

\- You're assuming that the badge printer can print completely to the edge.

\- Removing the "Employee" text and relying on the blue color is an accessibility problem (color-blind people need this information)

\- Customizing your badge photo adds security policy complications.

<comment><USER3> * Almost every badge printer in modern existence prints to the edge. * Printing on the back does present a costly proposition, not only does the printer need a flipper, but you have to use more costly ribbons to do it with.

<comment><USER16> > Printing on the back does present a costly proposition, not only does the > printer need a flipper, but you have to use more costly ribbons to do it > with.

Not necessarily. I done some badge printing for a very large organisation about 8 years ago. Our office alone had >2,000 people. I bought both single- sided and duplex card printers. The ones with the duplexing units were only marginally more expensive than the single-sided ones. They all used the same dye-sub ribbon (if it has a duplexer - "flipper" \- it doesn't need a special ribbon, it prints one side, flips, then prints the other).

Granted, double sided printing meant each card used twice the ribbon. The dye- sub ribbon was laid out in 5 consecutive panels - C, M, Y, K and UV coat (with an optional sixth foil/fluorescent/hologram panel).

Ultimately, we had our card supplier (a very large smartcard/USIM supplier) pre-print our card backgrounds before cutting the cards and personalising (writing the card certificate) so our remote branch offices could use very cheap printers to print only a low-res photo and text content.

Our printers were <£1k each. They had integrated magstripe encoders and smartcard+contactless interfaces.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> I'm fascinated by a separate point that this badge raises: the "Microsoft" logo is now the "Windows" logo.

<comment><USER18> ...and to someone in tech who isn't intimately familiar with the Windows logo's color scheme these days, it could be easily mistaken for some Google thing (though at closer inspection I can tell that the colors are slightly different - but what I'm describing is not a close inspection).

<comment><USER19> I don't think many people would recognize Google's color theme but not Microsoft's logo.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> The photos have two examples of employees with their face at an angle - <USER2> can see only one ear of the woman with red hair and one ear of the man with grey hair.

Since these photos serve a purpose (identifying the bearer, not making the bearer feel good about the photo) they probably need to be standardised and use something like passport photo criteria. (Although perhaps gently relaxing those standards).

There's no accessibility or diversity information either. It'd be nice to at last think about the needs of visually impaired users, for example.

But the cards are nice! Nicer than the original example.

<comment><USER21> i think they were just stock / random photos not straight on photo that they will do in the security office

and what diversity info would you need to show?

<comment><USER20> Consider the use of braille for the tiny number of people who use it? Use evidence based fonts and colours for readbility?

What happens to people who wear face coverings for religious reasons?

I'm not asking designers to solve all these problems, just to show that they've at least considered them.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> Oh god, what is with the stupid "face in a circle"? I get that everybody's following the circle trend, but how does putting a face in a circle make your design more functional?

Also, there's a reason why badges photos are taken from the same angle. It makes it easier to identify you from your photo. It's harder to recognize someone from an odd angle. Same goes for photographing on a white backdrop. Your personal photos have all this distracting scenery to impede identification.

This is not design. Design makes things work better. This is just decoration.

</comment><comment><USER23> On the note of minimalism the actually Apple badge looks like this. [http://cdn-static.cnet.co.uk/i/c/blg/cat/mobiles/jordan-id.j...](http://cdn- static.cnet.co.uk/i/c/blg/cat/mobiles/jordan-id.jpg)

<comment><USER24> Apple didn't invent the ID card. They just reintroduced it and made it sound like the invented it.

Seriously, though, the first thing I thought when I clicked the link was, "Oh, Apple's badge flipped, with iOS 7's circular image mask."

<comment><USER25> Apple definitely didn't invent circular image masks with iOS 7 either. :)

<comment><USER24> They're all derivative of caveman wall art where profiles were drawn in circles for others to see.

<comment><USER26> Nah, that's just what the cavemen wanted people to think, and all the hipster caveman fanboys ate it up. It was the Neanderthals who came up with the idea, they just never commercialized it. But walk around the Mission and ask random hipsters about it and they'll all be like, "the cavemen invented this" and "the cavemen did it first." What a bunch of sheeple!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> I love it, but I have one suggestion: show the employee's name on both sides.

For some reason, I have a hard time remembering names (but never forget faces), so I often glance at badges to try and remind myself what the person's name is. It's always a bummer when the badge is flipped around and I can't tell who it is.

</comment><comment><USER28> Remarkable how much the old badge [1] resembles the original Nintendo Game Boy [2].

[1] [https://ahmetalpbalkan.com/blog/static/images/2014/02/old- fr...](https://ahmetalpbalkan.com/blog/static/images/2014/02/old-front- promo.jpg)

[2] [http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c6/Nintendo_...](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c6/Nintendo_Gameboy.jpg)

</comment><comment><USER29> I don't like it. Its look is too reminiscent of Google's design language, especially their 'circles' in Google+. The look is very soft, while Microsoft's design language (formerly metro) is much more modern.

</comment><comment><USER30> FWIW the IBM badge has:-

* The 8-bar company logo

* The country of issue

* Name

* Photo

On the back is a magstripe (not really used any more) and central return address in case it is found.

It has an RFID for door access and to store cash for vending-machines and the restaurant.

No employee number anywhere. I have to remember that (along with the passwords for seventy-six different systems.)

Contractors have a yellow background for the name.

ID cards have to be on display at all times, so many wear them on a lanyard or clipped to a belt loop.

<comment><USER31> As an employee that has never been to a large IBM facility I had no idea it worked in stores or for vending machines. The only use it has is opening the front door. I don't wear it in the office and now one has complained yet.

<comment><USER30> Should have said that all of it will vary by site/country.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> First names aren't necessarily the 'most important' \-- especially for names that aren't of European origin.

Employee number isn't sensitive information.

</comment><comment><USER33> I'm a fan of the colors and typeface, but doesn't Microsoft's design style push for more of a rectangular/angular look all around?

</comment><comment><USER34> Cool, but they probably won't be able to adopt that design. Badges like this are made with special printers which have a minimum margin which is why most/all badge you see out there have that ugly white margin around them.

<comment><USER35> I'm fairly certain that Microsoft can afford full-bleed printing for badges.

<comment><USER36> They already use them - OP didn't show an example badge where they're used. If you have single-person access to secure areas, the white area around the background color will be red.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> I like Google's badges:

* Dual-sided, so it's never facing the wrong way out. (No dual-sided printer required, they are glued onto the underlying RFID card.)

* RFID, so there is no sensitive information on the badge.

* The face takes up most of the badge, so it's easy to check if it looks reasonable when someone is following you through the door.

* The face is 3D, which is just plain cool.

* The first name is larger than the last name, making it a little easier to glance over at someone's badge when you've forgotten their name. (This happens to me with frightening regularity.)

</comment><comment><USER38> I was an intern at MS in 2001, and this weekend when I was going through my box of old memorabilia, I found a badge identical to the "current" badge.

Probably time for a redesign...

</comment><comment><USER39> I'm sure a badge redesign is in the works. I'd be surprised if there isn't a new badge (at least with updated logo) by this time next year.

Depending on how much it ends up changing, old employees might not be forced to get a new badge. In that case, it'll eventually be a funny way to differentiate employees from before/after the "Reorg/Satya Epoch" haha.

<comment><USER36> we kept the old mag-stripe badges for a year or so until the current system was rolled out everywhere, so you had to carry both.

</comment></comment><comment><USER40> This makes me think large companies like this should invest just a tad bit more in taking quality photos. Ditch the DMV backdrop, on-camera flash and low quality photo and invest in a couple umbrellas and just an entry-level dSLR. As often as they are seen, you should make people feel good about it.

</comment><comment><USER41> Did you consider left aligning the name? By centering the name, you're not letting the eyes get trained on where to look instinctively. Someone named "Jim" has a much different starting point than "Mohammed".

Also, I'd have made the last name much smaller.

</comment><comment><USER42> Trying to "think like a user", with the exception of updating the logo, the badges are identical. Nobody would really notice the change, let alone care about the text alignment on their security badge.

Take this as constructive criticism, this is the kind of thing that you can waste a lot of time on without scoring any points with your users/customer/management.

<comment> grey-area Thinking like a user, one badge says to me this company doesn't take design or their image seriously and is probably a terrible place to work. The newer badge does just the opposite and acts almost as an advert for the company.

</comment></comment><comment><USER43> Not to be a contrarian, but am I the only one who finds the entire concept of badges antiquated to begin with. With today's technology, why not use RFIDs or a smartphone that automatically signs you in, alerts security if your tag is invalid etc. Wouldn't that be a lot easier to use, more secure, and probably cheaper too?

<comment><USER6> With phones being constantly upgrades, lost, replaced, and coming in a variety of operating systems, not to mention forgotten at home, left uncharged/requiring power, can't be easily inspected in a standard manner by security... smartphones are definitely not the way forward.

And an RFID is just another thing to carry, same as a card (ID cards often have RFIDs in them anyway)

</comment></comment><comment><USER44> Microsoft employees obviously need to spend more time rafting. That's what I'm getting from this.

</comment><comment><USER45> So what you've changed is to center the information (not a big deal, move a whole load of useful information to the rear and use a more up to date logo.

Seems pointless. Microsoft have updated their logo four times in the past four years. People update their favourite photo once every couple of months. It also require that corporate directory services allow updating of photos significantly more often, just so people can have a photo of themselves they like. Finally you've ignored practicalities of printing logos. Sounds like a typical design with no understanding of the limitations involved or requirements.

Most of the offence here seems to be because you didn't like the photo (because it's passport / security style instead of Faceboook / Instagram esque?) and the 8 bit colour printing. Both of these are intrinsic to the requirements caused by printing badges.

By the way, the logo was valid in 2012, not just 1998 - [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft#Logo](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft#Logo)

</comment><comment><USER46> \- The photo is the most important feature of the badge; for security reasons, it should be as large as possible.

\- First and last names are not as important as one's email address

\- The logo is a security risk; should a badge go missing, it's a clue as to where to (mis)use the badge.

<comment><USER47> It's already there on the current M'soft badge.

</comment></comment><comment><USER48> The only thing I don't like here is the way the last name is printed. I'm all for emphasizing first names, but there's something about the way it's printed that make me read it as a title. Like Ahmed is a Balkan at Microsoft.

</comment><comment><USER49> So why is the employee id sensitive information?

Why do you care that your badge picture is ugly? Seriously? Do you also expect to take a picture of you kayaking at the lake to the DMV?

</comment><comment><USER50> Great job! I'm a big fan of minimalistic design which unfortunate to say most of MS products aren't. Looking forward to more design ideas from you :)

</comment><comment><USER51> God I hate badges.

Cattle wear numbers on their ears. Prisoners too, in some prison systems (but not all). How can people accept to wear a _number_ on them, I don't know. Even a name; what's a name? I resent being defined by my birth name. I have many names, pseudonyms, handles, etc.

I'm not an employee so I never get a badge with my picture on it; when I go to clients' sites they usually give me a "guest" badge that I promptly put in my coat's pocket, only to give it back at the end of the day.

It's never happened that I needed it for anything anyway (and that includes Microsoft (France)).

<comment><USER37> The alternatives are:

Letting random people wander your building, including competitors.

Funneling everyone through some centralized reception area, so most doors become exit-only.

Being small enough so that everyone knows everyone, and everyone knows "the new guy" immediately.

<comment><USER51> Not true. Access control is different from having people _wear_ badges.

Access control may be a necessity (although in most companies here in France if you can tell a good story to the receptionist she'll let you in without even checking for an id; and if you show an id that's been obsolete for over 15 years, such as mine, and which would be, for this reason, trivial to fake, she'll also let you in with a big smile and a joke about how different you look from your picture).

But wearing a badge? Voluntarily? At all times? In nuclear reactors, perhaps (I've never been there); but in most other businesses, I find this ridiculous and insulting.

<comment><USER37> It sounds like your company is happy with my first or second alternative. Many aren't. Hence badges.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER52> I don't understand why a badge is necessary in the first place. Won't NFC on a phone suffice?

<comment><USER53> In many settings where it is unlikely that everyone will know everyone else, badges are used so that the absence of a badge signals someone who probably doesn't belong. This is why you're typically required to wear them in a visible place i.e. on a shirt pocket, lanyard, or on your waist.

Smartphone NFC is also orders of magnitude more complex and fragile compared to traditional RFID tokens for opening doors. Saying that NFC would "suffice" is nonsensical given that blank RFID-enabled badges run approximately $3 when you're buying in bulk.

NFC requires that everyone who uses the system (incl. cleaning staff, contractors, etc) has a compatible smartphone. It is braindead stupid to assume that all of the people who need to open doors in your building:

1) own smartphones which are 2) not iPhones 3) always charged 4) not experiencing a glitch 5) never left on a desk or in a bag

Keyfobs are a common alternative to badges and similarly cheap. Because they are extremely simple single-purposes devices, they are, like badges, many times more reliable than smartphones as access tokens.

However, most large corporations are going to use badges because 1) no need for separate name tags, 2) quick and easy visual indication of who belongs and who doesn't, and 3) you're not as likely to take it off and leave it somewhere where it could get stolen or you might not have it when needed compared to keys or a phone.

<comment><USER49> >However, most large corporations are going to use badges because 1) no need for separate name tags, 2) quick and easy visual indication of who belongs and who doesn't, and 3) you're not as likely to take it off and leave it somewhere where it could get stolen or you might not have it when needed compared to keys or a phone.

There's no reason you can't use both. I've also never worked anywhere that didn't have RFID tokens to open the doors, they can't be very expensive and they are reusable.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER54> Every Microsoft employee is now on the Windows 9 development team?

That doesn't seem right.

</comment><comment><USER55> I literally couldn't care less about the design of a MS employee badge.

</comment><comment><USER56> I'd make the name larger. Not everybody has 20 year old eyesight.

</comment><comment><USER46> This particular design doesn't take a lot of skill to create, and I'm not sure the author knows what problem to solve. The triviality of the redesign should be embarrassing to the creator.

</comment><comment><USER31> Spending time to redesign something that doesn't matter. There is an MS joke in here somewhere.

</comment><comment><USER57> The badges wont look like this with the standard security camera mugshot that security offices use and the picture is probably too small to make them happy as well.

Other than that nice job. I don't think it will be implemented.

<comment><USER58> remember those OLD sites MS HAD - they got a lot of heat on HN and they got removed...

</comment></comment><comment><USER59> Nice! Now put some QRCodes on it so people can get bitcoin donations.

Oh, and NFC tag for auto check-in, computer log in, cafeteria, snacks, etc.

</comment><comment><USER60> Just as an off topic, not even microsoft employees use outlook.

</comment><comment><USER61> This is a real company man, holy crap!, spending your own time redesigning the your employers badge is really quite sad.

Microsoft is known for hiring young gullible people and indoctrinating them with the idea that MS is a good company rather than the reason the software industry was held back for decades, using illegal tactics. If it could have killed open source it would have.

</comment><comment><USER62> It's a pretty badge, but unfortunately it's a security risk. Putting identifying information on there is an opening for social engineering attacks. The employee name and anything tying it to Microsoft shouldn't be on there. Really, just the photo and badge id (not the employee ID) should be there. If there's a "return to" address, it should be a nondescript PO box that's not in Redmond.

Edit: Also, the employee number shouldn't be on there for the same reason.</comment>


Understanding the Microsoft Surface (a sort of Review) - <AUTHOR> http://hal2020.com/2012/10/28/understanding-the-microsoft-surface-a-sort-of-review/

<comment><USER2> A4 paper is 210 by 297 millimetres and that aspect is very, very far from 16:9 ratio. iPad ratio: 1.33, A4 ratio: 1.41, wheras 16:9 is 1.77.

</comment><comment><USER3> Very nice analysis, and a good antidote to some of the other reviews floating around.</comment>


Content Security Policy - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/blog/1477-content-security-policy

<comment><USER2> Its great to see a large site like GitHub start work on deploying CSP. I don't know how many times I've had to argue with people about bad practices like inline event handlers. With CSP there's a way for a site to prevent them from being used.

</comment><comment><USER3> You can also specify a CSP using a document's meta tags:

      <meta http-equiv="Content-Security-Policy" content="default-src *; script-src https://assets.example.com; style-src https://assets.example.com"></meta>

I'm not sure if that introduces any additional attack vectors (other than somebody modifying the document in an unencrypted connection) but it's useful for when hosting statically.

EDIT: updated to mimic example in post

<comment><USER4> > it's useful for when hosting statically.

You can configure your webserver to add those headers, when hosting statically. There is no need to include it in all your pages.

nginx: add_header Content-Security-Policy "...";

<comment><USER5> If your site is a simple static blog or whatever, there probably is no XSS vector. So you probably don't need CSP.

</comment></comment></comment><comment> mh- This entire post is like a "why CSP is broken in the real world", yet they're going ahead with deploying it?

<comment><USER6> Their feedback is very useful to us as we iterate on the specification and implementation of CSP. (Disclosure: I'm an editor of the CSP specification.)

<comment><USER2> Thanks for your work! I'm a fan of CSP's goals.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> CSP is great stuff. I'm using it to view RSS/Atom posts without having to go through the usual hoop-jumping to sanitize content. Why sanitize content when it's unable to do anything evil in the context of a page?

I would recommend using some kind of test in your scripting to see if it's actually working. I purposely attempt to inject a <script> tag to fiddle with a variable. If it works, I know CSP isn't functional in the browser and avoid the dangerous stuff (rendering user-generated content). Otherwise, it's full speed ahead, detailed here: <http://rachelbythebay.com/w/2011/10/31/csp/>

</comment><comment><USER8> This change broke our chrome extension a few weeks ago. We were able to workaround it using a trick inspired by this blog post: [http://brianmayer.com/2012/12/defeating-chromes-content- secu...](http://brianmayer.com/2012/12/defeating-chromes-content-security- policy-header-via-a-chrome-extension/)

Hope it help someone.

<comment><USER9> Does a page's CSP break your extension in Chrome Canary? We've done quite a bit of work to allow extensions to transparently bypass a page's policy, and I'd much prefer to fix the bugs in Chrome than for you to kill a page's policy via the WebRequest API.

I'd very much appreciate it if you could point me at things that aren't working in Canary. :)

</comment></comment><comment> lone-star Here is an easy way to bypass it when you have a Chrome extension: [https://www.planbox.com/blog/development/coding/bypassing- gi...](https://www.planbox.com/blog/development/coding/bypassing-githubs- content-security-policy-chrome-extension.html)</comment>


The Pmarca Guide to Personal Productivity - <AUTHOR> http://blog.pmarca.com/2007/06/the_pmarca_guid.html <comment><USER2> Reminds me of _Getting Things Done_...I should really finish that book ;)

<comment><USER3> I could recommend my soon to be published book "How to finish reading 'Getting Things Done'". If only I would finish writing it one of these days...</comment></comment>


Understanding Japan's Nuclear Crisis - <AUTHOR> http://arstechnica.com/science/news/2011/03/understanding-japans-nuclear-crisis.ars

<comment><USER2> Interesting article, clear explanation. One minus : in the conclusion it is assumed that the problem of pursuing nuclear power is about risk assessment on nuclear plants. This is partial truth biased by current events, in fact many side effects are at stake (the plundering of uranium producing countries like Niger, centralized energy production and its consequences…)</comment>


Private Blockchain or Database, Whats the Difference? - <AUTHOR> http://intrepidreview.com/private-blockchain-database-difference/ <comment><USER2> The key point is the admission that a "private blockchain" is not a blockchain at all, it's just a shared ledger with a Merkle tree. The only purpose of the word "blockchain" would be buzzword compliance.</comment>


Forget the A-List After All - <AUTHOR> http://blog.guykawasaki.com/2008/01/forget-the-a-li.html

<comment><USER2> Very good insight</comment>


Buffer's Secret to Killer Customer Service - <AUTHOR> http://howtobuildarocketship.com/podcast/ep-46-carolyn-kopprasch/?utm_source=hacker_news&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=carolyn_buffer

<comment><USER2> I've never used Buffer. Not sure if I've ever met someone who uses it. But holy moly their content marketing strategy is top notch. I have seen more articles and interviews out of that company on HN than any other startup I can think of.

Hats off to the Buffer folks for just killing it, I mean they even have their customer service person doing podcasts its amazing</comment>


Startup Lessons from Roger Bannister - <AUTHOR> https://myarthaus.com/blogs/building-arthaus/start-up-lessons-from-roger-bannister <comment><AUTHOR> In 1954 Roger Bannister became the first person to run a mile in under 4 minutes. At the time such a feat was thought impossible. 46 days later another runner, John Landy, did the same. 46 days was not long enough for Landy to become a significantly better runner. The change was a mental one. Once he'd seen Bannister do it, he knew it was possible. Start-up founders face similar mental challenges when creating new products and services. In this post I discuss how we can emulate Bannister and overcome the fear of uncertainty to break new ground and create truly original products.</comment>


Introducing "Playing" – A simple command for displaying song info in terminal - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/primis/playing <comment><USER2> If you're seeking feedback, this might make a good "Show HN".

Guidelines: [https://news.ycombinator.com/showhn.html](https://news.ycombinator.com/showhn.html)</comment>


Google Profit, Sales Top Estimates on Robust Web-Traffic Growth - <AUTHOR> http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-10-22/google-profit-sales-top-estimates-on-robust-web-traffic-growth <comment><USER2> Google is finally returning cash to shareholders via buybacks.

<comment><USER3> A buyback seems like a statement that the best use of google's cash-on-hand is to increase the value of the stock directly; that there is no other investment that would give a better ROI.

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

<comment><USER4>
      I think it is mostly to pay and retain talent. They are giving employees stock options and those are not worth as much if stock prices do not go up.
       Anyway Alphabet stock is still undervalued specially with their investments in Uber(google fund), Magicleap, Google Fiber, Google self driving cars, Nest, Renewable Energy, Health Sciences. Once Alphabet starts reporting all these separately it stock prices are going to hit $1000 or more.</comment></comment></comment>


Reason Renewables Can't Power Civilization Is Because They Were Never Meant To - <AUTHOR> https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelshellenberger/2019/05/06/the-reason-renewables-cant-power-modern-civilization-is-because-they-were-never-meant-to/#15fef5e3ea2b <comment><USER2> The author merely repeats the current costs of renewable energy. He makes no argument that would support the statement that "they were never mean to sustain society." That's a huge leap.

A good book on this subject (despite several errors and gaps in honesty) is _The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels._

While I agree that fossil fuels will and probably should rule the roost for quite a while, it's a bit extreme to suggest that we will never develop a cheaper, non-polluting form of energy. Tesla (Nikolai) thought we would.</comment>


APPLE COMPUTER INC. Preliminary Confidential Offering Memorandum (1978) [pdf]  - <AUTHOR> http://archive.computerhistory.org/resources/text/2009/102712693.05.01acc.pdf

<comment><USER2> Awesome, this will be very interesting reading. Can you provide the full url from which this pdf is referenced? I understand it is from the computer history museum site, but knowing from what specific article/page would be helpful to read about the context.

<comment><AUTHOR> > Can you provide the full url from which this pdf is referenced?

[http://www.computerhistory.org/collections/catalog/102712693](http://www.computerhistory.org/collections/catalog/102712693)

<comment><USER2> Thank you very much.</comment></comment></comment>


Steve Jobs: Apple owns the trademark on 'Pad' - <AUTHOR> http://www.9to5mac.com/steve-jobs-pad-trademark-app-3450386433

<comment><USER2> What's interesting, unless I'm missing something, Siemens owns the trademark on iPad:

Word Mark IPAD Goods and Services IC 007. US 013 019 021 023 031 034 035. G & S: ENGINES, NOT FOR LAND VEHICLES; ELECTRIC MOTORS FOR MACHINES AND ELECTRIC STARTER MOTORS, NAMELY, DRIVING GEARS IC 009. US 021 023 026 036 038. G & S: PROGRAMMABLE ELECTRICAL DRIVES FOR CONTROLLING MACHINES USED IN THE FIELD OF MEDICAL, AUTOMOTIVE AND AEROSPACE TECHNOLOGY, BUILDING SERVICES, ENGINEERING AND INDUSTRIAL AUTOMATION; LOW VOLTAGE AND MEDIUM VOLTAGE VARIABLE FREQUENCY DRIVES FOR CONTROL OF MOTORS

Mark Drawing Code (5) WORDS, LETTERS, AND/OR NUMBERS IN STYLIZED FORM Trademark Search Facility Classification Code LETTER-3-OR-MORE iPAD Combination of three or more letters as part of the mark SHAPES-MISC Miscellaneous shaped designs Serial Number 79023888 Filing Date March 20, 2006 Current Filing Basis 66A Original Filing Basis 66A Published for Opposition December 11, 2007 Registration Number 3389082 International Registration Number 0885058 Registration Date February 26, 2008 Owner (REGISTRANT) Siemens Aktiengesellschaft Aktiengesellschaft FED REP GERMANY Wittelsbacherplatz 2 80333 München FED REP GERMANY Attorney of Record LAWRENCE E ABELMAN Priority Date February 28, 2006 Description of Mark Color is not claimed as a feature of the mark. Type of Mark TRADEMARK Register PRINCIPAL Live/Dead Indicator LIVE

and Pad:

Word Mark PAD Goods and Services IC 007. US 013 019 021 023 031 034 035. G & S: ENGINES, NOT FOR LAND VEHICLES; ELECTRIC MOTORS FOR MACHINES AND ELECTRIC STARTER MOTORS, NAMELY, DRIVING GEARS IC 009. US 021 023 026 036 038. G & S: PROGRAMMABLE ELECTRICAL DRIVES FOR CONTROLLING MACHINES USED IN THE FIELD OF MEDICAL, AUTOMOTIVE AND AEROSPACE TECHNOLOGY, BUILDING SERVICES, ENGINEERING AND INDUSTRIAL AUTOMATION; LOW VOLTAGE AND MEDIUM VOLTAGE VARIABLE FREQUENCY DRIVES FOR CONTROL OF MOTORS

Mark Drawing Code (5) WORDS, LETTERS, AND/OR NUMBERS IN STYLIZED FORM Trademark Search Facility Classification Code LETTER-3-OR-MORE PAD Combination of three or more letters as part of the mark Serial Number 79023831 Filing Date March 20, 2006 Current Filing Basis 66A Original Filing Basis 66A Published for Opposition December 11, 2007 Registration Number 3389081 International Registration Number 0884875 Registration Date February 26, 2008 Owner (REGISTRANT) Siemens Aktiengesellschaft Aktiengesellschaft FED REP GERMANY Wittelsbacherplatz 2 80333 München FED REP GERMANY Attorney of Record LAWRENCE E ABELMAN Priority Date February 28, 2006 Description of Mark Color is not claimed as a feature of the mark. Type of Mark TRADEMARK Register PRINCIPAL Live/Dead Indicator LIVE

[Edit: Didn't realize uspto links timeout]

<comment><USER3> Interesting find! Note that Siemens owns the word marks only for specific goods and services:

      IC 007. US 013 019 021 023 031 034 035. G & S:
      ENGINES, NOT FOR LAND VEHICLES;
      ELECTRIC MOTORS FOR MACHINES AND ELECTRIC STARTER MOTORS,
      NAMELY, DRIVING GEARS

      IC 009. US 021 023 026 036 038. G & S:
      PROGRAMMABLE ELECTRICAL DRIVES FOR CONTROLLING MACHINES USED
      IN THE FIELD OF MEDICAL, AUTOMOTIVE AND AEROSPACE TECHNOLOGY,
      BUILDING SERVICES, ENGINEERING AND INDUSTRIAL AUTOMATION;
      LOW VOLTAGE AND MEDIUM VOLTAGE VARIABLE FREQUENCY DRIVES FOR
      CONTROL OF MOTORS

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Well, according to a whole bunch of comments recently, this is fine. Steve owns the App Store, he sets the rules.

If you want to be allowed in then you have to follow the rules.

And keep up to date with them when they change.

And be happy to change your apps name, language and design if Steve doesn't like them.

That's just the price you pay for being permitted to write Apps for Steve.

</comment><comment><USER5> "In the end, it really doesn't matter, because in Apple's little App Store world, they don't even need to pretend they have a trademark. They've given themselves every legal right to pull an app for no reason at all."

Crazy yes, shocking no. They did the same with the "Pod" in iPod. If you develop for Apple's devices you play by their rules. I wish Apple would embrace developers and their apps because they are the reason why people have stayed with the iPhone.

<comment><USER6> What makes this worse is the fact that "pad" is a very commonly used word both within and outside technology circles. Notepad, Launchpad, Scratchpad, etc.

This makes me wonder how they can even claim rights on a term so widely used already in the same domain. As the article notes they don't list "pad" as a trademark in their own web page!

<comment><USER5> I agree, I don't think that Apple will go after products that have nothing to do with the iPad. Unless you make an accessory or app for the iPad I think your safe.

However, it would be fun to watch Apple go after Notepad and ask Microsoft to change the name because they now own "Pad".

<comment><USER6> That would be funny and indeed is of very low probability. But my point was how can a company claim rights on a term already in wide use within the same domain/industry. Trademarks and patents are getting weirder everyday.

<comment><USER7> They don't have a trademark on the word "pad". What they have is the ability to deny people access to the only market available for the iPhone. The language they use is slanted towards making that seem legitimate, but in the end, this is not a "trademark" issue in the legal sense, it's Apple owning the company store.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Anyone defending Steve? Anyone with a Stockholm syndrome?

<comment><USER9> I'll take a crack.[1]

 _… a trademark is a distinctive sign or indicator used … to identify that the products … with which the trademark appears originate from a unique source…_ [wikipedia:trademark]

The developer clearly chose their name to associate their product with the source of the iPad and bask in that trademark owner's glow.

The angry mob here is vomiting "*pad" strawmen, but "ContactPad" is not a generic word. Notice the capital 'P', notice the absence in any dictionary.

Now google "apple trademark pod" and tell me the developer shouldn't have seen this coming a mile away.

[1] I have great sympathy for anyone that has to name a product. In the past I've had to resort to a wordlike sequence of 5 letters for a major product because the lawyers kept waving us off of (and billing us for) anything we could think of that was the slightest bit descriptive. We even got waved off of a particular kind of quark because there was a software firm half a world away using it in their name.

<comment><USER10> > strawmen

Speaking of strawmen: I don't see anyone claiming that "ContactPad" _is_ a generic word. What I see is the claim that it's a non-generic name made from generic elements none of which is owned by Apple, containing no bits that are owned by Apple.

(That doesn't mean Apple aren't in the right here. I don't know whether they are. You can certainly infringe on a trademark without using the exact mark, and if someone brought out a tablet computer called the EyePad then the absence of the "i" would be no defence. But "ContactPad"? "JournalPad"? Not being a lawyer, I have no more than a guess. But my guess is that Apple's trademark on "iPad" is not in fact enough to make it illegal for someone else to sell a program that runs on an iPad and has "pad" in its name.)

> tell me the developer shouldn't have seen this coming a mile away.

Now, _that_ I can certainly agree with. (And, also, of course it doesn't matter whether Apple have any sort of credible trademark claim; they can control what gets sold on the App Store without one.)

> a particular kind of quark

The quarks are: up, down, top, bottom, charmed, strange. (For a while T,B were called truth and beauty). Those are all common English words. Why would the fact that they're also names of quarks stop your lawyers worrying about them? -- Or do you mean that your product was called something like BottomQuark? You do realise that there's a _really quite big_ software company whose name is Quark, right?

Or were you talking about soft cheese?

<comment><USER9> My physics eluded me. It was actually a pair of quarks.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> "Says Jobs, on his personal heliPAD that floats on a private lake like a lilly PAD, while eating an APPLE he's slicing on top of a PAD of paper, standing on PADded shoes, while his dog limps on an infected PAD nearby, while listening to 80's synth -pop music using string PADs, while PADding his bank account with iPad revenue."

</comment><comment><USER12> We had the same problem. Launched initial app with pad in the name, it was approved without any problems, but the update was not approved because of the 'Pad' name. But to me it's not a big deal, I just changed it and reuploaded, I doubt having 'pad' in the name caused a big difference in sales.

The existing *Pad apps are still in the store.

</comment><comment><USER13> What the frak? I guess over time we'll just have to invent new words for everything, because so many words are forbidden.

<comment><USER9> Did you think Solutia and Cingular were first choices?

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> Could someone claim a trademark on "Phone" too? This is ridiculous.

I had various app ideas for which a "Pad" suffix would be very appropriate. The form of the device just lends itself to apps that _act_ like a pad of paper.

<comment><USER7> Anybody can _claim_ anything they want. In reality, should something go to court, it would quickly be revealed that Apple does not and cannot have a trademark on a word as generic as "pad".

But what would you have for it? The court is probably not going to force Apple to put your app in their store. An antitrust class action might be plausible, but that's not what we're talking about when we talk about trademarks.

It's misleading on Apple's part to call this a trademark issue.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> jrockway: jrockway owns the trademark on "Fuck Apple".

<comment><USER16> You are lame

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> Steve's not talking about a US trademark. Trademark law is different in the Democratic People's Republic of AppStoria.

I'm picturing a 'Being John Malkovich'-esque court scene, where everyone except the plaintiff is Steve Jobs. "Case Closed!"</comment>


84% of the largest exits in tech in 2013 have been of enterprise companies - <AUTHOR> http://www.cbinsights.com/blog/trends/enterprise-tech-consumer-exit

<comment><USER2> Consumer projects are much harder to really master... only a few relly shine. But boy, when they do, you hear about it!

<comment><AUTHOR> Very true. They're just much easier to comprehend so they get more media attention as they ultimately appeal to a larger, non-specialized audience.

Like you said, they're hard to get to that point of scale but when you do, they can be massive.

Enterprise is perhaps "safer" as you build something people pay you for. For startups who might need VC, the sentiment and shift towards enterprise is stark. We knew the enterprise exits would be a larger share of the total tech exits, but it's much larger than we'd have imagined to be honest.

<comment><USER2> Well, then again, an enterprise exit might be a lot earlier in the game, and a lot cheaper. Enterpirses can make offers that a startup can't refuse (corleone's way)</comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: Why is Smashing Magazine so successful?  - <AUTHOR>

I have previously tried my hand at blogging, and though the focus wasn't design, but more technology based stuff. This was back in 2006-07. My projects never took off / gained traction.
Smashing Magazine started in 2006, Tech Crunch started in July 2005, and Mashable was launched in July of 2005 as well. These sites became pretty well known by 2008 to a wider audience than just design and news enthusiasts.
There are literally millions of people churning content, so what is it that is making these <and some other> sites so successful, besides content & being early players in the market ? <comment><USER2> They wrote a ton of top X lists about things that are highly relevant to their audience when top X lists were the thing to do. They have excellent SEO, and being an early player and highly linked to gives great Page Rank. They leverage social media quite well (I'd wager a significant amount of traffic comes from SM sites like Reddit/Digg/HN/etc). They produce a lot of content. Their content seems to be edited well, meaning it is well-written, well formatted, and usually not terrible. (I don't particularly care for it, but can see its appeal.) Lots of internal linked to and from related articles and a somewhat well organized site. They allow for readers to comment and they respond to the comments.

On top of that, they don't make any fatal mistakes. Their site does not take forever to load. They don't serve too many ads. They aren't on bad terms with any search engines.

</comment><comment><USER3> "Top 10 reasons why Smashing Magazine is successful". They do write link-bait titles, but I rarely regret reading their articles as they are well-written and usually link to a lot of good, free resources.

I see a lot of sites that take SEO, Link-bait and frequent-posting of articles to the extreme and I think SM has done well to stay away from the stinky end of that market.

</comment><comment><USER4> I follow Smashing Magazine.

They are successful because their content is helpful. Helpful to the point where people will link them on other sites to help other people. That's where the multiplier effect kicks in.

And they also publish their articles very frequently as well, which is why they can grow so fast.</comment>


Homemade GPS Receiver - <AUTHOR> http://www.aholme.co.uk/GPS/Main.htm <comment><USER2> If anyone is interested in GPS, we're looking for a software engineer ready to learn about it. (Full Time, Austin)

<comment><USER3> Totally off topic but I'm seeing a lot of hiring going on in Texas. What is going on down there?

<comment><USER4> Tax incentives, lower cost of living, and pro business local governments are driving larger companies to relocate headquarters or major research ops to Texas en-mass.

<comment><USER5> Please don't take this the wrong way, but Texas is a pretty terrible place to live:

[http://pastebin.com/Vt6vNgeS](http://pastebin.com/Vt6vNgeS)

[http://web.archive.org/web/20150401050939/https://www.texast...](http://web.archive.org/web/20150401050939/https://www.texastribune.org/2011/02/14/texas- is-on-the-brink-legislative-study-group-says/)

<comment><USER6> Sounds like a great place to live, if you're privileged and don't care about the environment or the poor.

<comment><USER7> Or, perhaps you move there because you care about the environment or the poor, and that's how change happens.

<comment><USER5> Gonna need a whole lot more people to move there before any change occurs.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> "The best fix so far was ±1 metres at a very open location using 12 satellites; but accuracy is typically ±5 metres in poorer locations with fewer satellites."

That seems very good accuracy. The off-the-shelf GPS I have ([https://www.adafruit.com/products/746](https://www.adafruit.com/products/746)) is always >= ±5m, even with 360 degree view of the sky.

(the specs for my GPS claim < 3 meters, and also say "(all GPS technology has about 3m accuracy)").

<comment><USER9> That MediaTek chip is capable of better. Do you have WAAS (SBAS) enabled? 5m is about what you'd expect without the improved orbit/clock/ionosphere corrections.

It also pays off to use a good antenna, or at least put a ground plane beneath a mediocre one to block multipath reflections from the surrounding ground objects.

<comment><USER8> I just used the default settings. Didn't know about WAAS - thanks for pointing me to it.

From reading some forum posts, it seems you have to explicitly enable WAAS - I'll give that a try and see how much it helps.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> A while back I was interested in building a DIY GPS after watching Lost. I day-dreamed about being stranded somewhere remote and building myself a GPS out of spare parts like MacGyver or something.

After finding this article, I realized that would be an impossible task without an engineering degree.

Has anyone found a more "For Dummies" version of this?

<comment><USER11> I don't know if "For Dummies" is possible for building a GPS system from first principles.

If you want to really learn by building, I recommend "Fundamentals of GPS Receivers: A Hardware Approach" by Dan Doberstein, and building the analog GPS system described in the first few chapters.

If you simply want to play with GPS, I'm sure there are many breakout modules from Adafruit et al.

<comment><USER12> _GPS system from first principles._

To be fair, that would probably be navigation by naturally observable indicators such as the rising or setting sun, shadows over the day, locally / seasonally reliable stars for your area, and knowledge of local fauna/wave patterns.

After getting interested in sailing again (after 20 years) last year through multihull vessels, I started reading about the evolution of multihulls in the Pacific and then began looking at traditional navigation techniques. Following that, I was wondering for fun whether it would be possible to plot one's position given a rough time, rough position guestimate, and perfectly measured horizonal inclination, lens property and visible to 'the naked eye' star positions (ie. visible to the naked CCD at evening time = high ISO, noise and short shutter speed to failitate clarity in rough seas). My conclusion was yes, it's possible, with sub-GPS accuracy but accuracy which would be good enough to get you reliably between certain locations in certain seasons even on a sailboat.

I was surprised to read that some ICBMs allegedly used astronomy and pre- loaded landform navigation to avoid issues with jamming, and that fat databases of precise naked-eye type visible star locations are widely available, indeed so is software for reducing them to identities from an image input.

<comment><USER13> The SR-71 had an automated celestial navigation system that could get a lock in daylight: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_SR-71_Blackbird#Astro-...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_SR-71_Blackbird#Astro- Inertial_Navigation_System)

(The big disadvantage is that it can't see through clouds, of course)

<comment><USER14> Didn't it fly above the clouds?

<comment><USER13> It was a surveillance aircraft, so it would need line of sight with the ground as well, which might require flying under cloud cover. Also, having a gyroscope component, I'm guessing that it would need to calibrate while stationary, on the runway.

<comment><USER15> It didn't fly under cloud cover. It flew Mach 3.3, which it couldn't do in dense air. Also, flying at 80,000 feet makes it much more difficult to shoot down.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> The author got a lot further than my attempt! [0] I was attempting to make a Python-based GPS signal generator for later use in testing a pure VHDL/FPGA (no embedded CPU) receiver.

[0]: [https://github.com/jevinskie/jevps](https://github.com/jevinskie/jevps)

</comment><comment><USER17> I would be bit careful. GPS is military technology and commercial versions must have limitations, to be non-usable in rockets (max speed, max altitude...).

<comment><USER18> Came for this. This allows someone to build GPS-guided missiles, artillery, etc.

The laws need to be changed, because consumer-programmable things like FPGAs and SBCs like BBB/RPi have made weaponizing with even commercially-available, off-the-shelf products super easy.

For instance, building gps-powered drones with thermite self destruct and an explosive/incendiary payload is fairly straight forward and extremely dangerous with little ability to investigate the violator. ICBMs and fast- flying missiles are much harder.

<comment><USER19> I'm not sure how you think changing laws would protect anyone, anymore than they currently do?

Sure lots of things can be used for both good/evil.

Personally I think it's a fascinating project.

<comment><USER18> I'm saying the laws need to be changed because it doesn't protect anyone. Better to just make it legal and work to protect us in other ways.

<comment><USER19> Aha sorry, yes definitely. I wanted to get a thermal sensor a while ago and would have to fill-in paper work to say it wouldn't be used for malicious purposes (I didn't end up getting it because it was too expensive anyway), I'm really not sure the idea of such bureaucracy.

<comment><USER18> I'm convinced Vogons run the government.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Service as a SKU (2012) - <AUTHOR> https://a16z.com/2018/08/17/service-as-a-sku/ <comment><USER2> The most interesting thing about this article is how Amazon has moved into this space, and how their current offering diverges from the article's suggestions. Amazon does offer services as products that you can buy, with all the trimmings, including reviews. The part about one-click, normalized sales is pretty close to what Amazon does too. The interesting difference, though, is how Amazon treats the service providers as commodities. Although the Amazon services have ratings, the providers do not. This is different from the author's predictions, and a little strange to me, because it seems like different providers have so much variance and nuance that they really aren't interchangeable. I wouldn't ever use "Amazon Home & Business Services"[0] because I have no idea what I'm really buying, but this must be an intentional choice on Amazon's part. It'll be interesting to see where this goes; commoditizing a huge swath of the working population might not be so great.

[0]: [https://www.amazon.com/b?node=8098158011](https://www.amazon.com/b?node=8098158011)

<comment><USER3> That's because Amazon exactly wants to downplay the supplier aspect. If supplier A won't fulfill your order, supplier B will and in the process they will drive each other's prices down. The last thing Amazon wants is the supplier standing at the front.

I have a theory that in all markets, the last link to the customer will win. Anything happening upstream will be commoditized away, either by obscuring the source, slapping a private label on, product placement and promotion, etc. It used to be that physical stores took pride on carrying prestigious brands, but it's no longer the case online.

This is the worst things that could happen to brands such as Nike or J&J; on Amazon, their products are just more items in a never ending category, sitting alongside rivals, knockoffs and copycats. They don't get preferential treatment. Those brands will be pressured to move to direct sales to differentiate and control their destiny. Furthermore, Chinese manufacturers are coming out of obscurity with their own brands and through AliExpress and the likes try to get directly in front of the consumer too.

Same thing with the TV market and how Netflix, owning the very link to the customer, is commoditizing and cutting off everyone upstream, and in the process it's pressuring Disney and others to move to their own platforms.

The consumer world of the next 10 years will be all about brands trying to differentiate and survive, exclusive distribution channels, direct to consumer and market fragmentation.

<comment><USER4> Ben Thompson coined "Aggregation Theory" to describe this.

[https://stratechery.com/2017/defining- aggregators/](https://stratechery.com/2017/defining-aggregators/)

<comment><USER3> Good read, thanks. However it looks at the eminence of aggregators as a given. I'd argue that at least in the retail space, aggregators provide a very lacking experience and that there is way too much inertia with the established brands for aggregators to work long term. As Amazon commoditzes everything, brands will fight back. So right now, you'd see a Nike shoe on Footlocker window or on a TV ad and perhaps buy it on Amazon. But what happens in few years, when your local mall shuts down, together with its Footlocker, and what happens when you don't see the TV ad any longer because you only have Netflix which doesn't air ads? How does Nike get to you?

I think the next wave in the ecommerce space is a class of backstage services providing direct to consumer logistics and infrastructure while letting the brands control the shopping experience. Brands will be more global and more accessible. No more territorial distribution limits; anyone anywhere could log into Nike and buy their stuff direct. This will call for enterprise-grade Shopify like tools.

While Amazon does the backend stuff amazingly well, their frontend and product discovery is on the verge of unusable and I don't think it's by mistake. They want to put all sellers on an equal and interchangeable playing field and let them spiral down towards oblivion.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


How Bad is DOM Interaction Really? - <AUTHOR> http://andyshora.com/how-bad-is-dom-interaction-javascript.html <comment><USER2> The real hits to performance do not come from "I did X writes" or "I did Y reads", but rather from situations such as "I did X writes interleaved with Y reads, which caused Z reflows". Or "I needed to update a tiny part of the screen but triggered a full-page repaint". Or "I'm doing complex animation X, but am not triggering hardware acceleration."

Reflows are very expensive. So are repaints. Chrome dev tools will allow you to detect issues with both of those.

<comment><USER3> There are a couple of excellent videos on developers.google.com that dig into this a little bit. I highly recommend watching the following video where two Google developers analyze some real world sites and fix the performance issues: [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0_jD8nO5Zw](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0_jD8nO5Zw) There are some great tips in it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I mean no offense to the author, but speaking of the DOM as if it is uniform in terms of performance seems silly. Pretty much every piece of API in the DOM has its own semantics and performance expectations (even if it's presented as a JavaScript property). Reading Element.offsetLeft, for instance, is a whole different world from reading Node.nodeType.

Just looking at their implementations in WebKit should tell you why:

[https://github.com/WebKit/webkit/blob/master/Source/WebCore/...](https://github.com/WebKit/webkit/blob/master/Source/WebCore/dom/Element.cpp#L638)

[https://github.com/WebKit/webkit/blob/master/Source/WebCore/...](https://github.com/WebKit/webkit/blob/master/Source/WebCore/dom/Element.cpp#L327)

<comment><USER5> Also, the code doesn't call into DOM directly but uses jQuery .html() for "reading" and .html(Math.random()) for "writing".

The case is extremely misrepresented indeed.

<comment><USER6> The DOM is a failed institution trying to grab on the the ledge before it falls into the abyss. W3C should be disbanded and HTML5 abandoned. JavaScript and it's ilk should be boycotted by users as well. This kind of complexity should exist on the server, not in the browser. I understand that people want to run complex apps in the browser. It's a bad idea in general but where it's needed, it should be PLATFORM DEPENDENT, implementing the tools that keep that platform safe. ie iOS, Windows, whatever. We are still in the browser wars, why are we so keen to adopt standards that aren't standard?

DOM Lvl 4 even features GC! Can we not see why this is a bad idea?!? Keyboard bindings also do not belong in a "standard". I wish this would get more attention by serious developers, but I think that most people who know better wouldn't care and aren't interested in understanding and digging into a lame standard. It's a land grab, only enterprises can and will ever be able to implement it correctly and completely, as the standard spreads to consume more of the user's space.

Here are some people who agree with me:

[http://www.adamcrume.com/blog/archive/2009/12/23/the-java- do...](http://www.adamcrume.com/blog/archive/2009/12/23/the-java-dom-api- sucks)

[http://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/147451/whats-...](http://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/147451/whats- so-bad-about-the-dom)

<comment><USER7> WTF is this? I don't even know where to begin with this crackpot of a post. You suggested nothing of value and just spout a bunch of FUD.

To your friends that agree with you from 2009, use `querySelectorAll` for a non-live NodeList, assuming he has kept up with JS actually having evolved and converging on standards.

I bet you flip your lid, too, to learn your server-side-only dystopia is running on top of JS (Node) services.

<comment><USER8> Can you please not be so abrasive on HN? Your points may be correct, but your tone is exactly what we're trying hard to avoid here.

<comment><USER9> Ah the white knight. Please please I beg you be nice.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> No discussion of repaint and reflow? You can't leave a discussion of those out when talking about the cost of DOM manipulation.

You absolutely can touch the DOM, but should do so through and interface that manages or eliminates repaint and reflow.

<comment><USER11> I have same feeling,

Making single frame of JS code to run fast is cool and dandy, but eventually browser will have to make freeze and do reflow+repaint. Eventually it will make profiling harder, think about caching .offsetHeight etc. properties. It does decrease script execution time, but it does not make your app to work faster.

<comment><USER12> The important trick to know is, don't mix DOM modification with DOM measurement. Measuring the DOM is what triggers the DOM modification queue to get flushed.

if you do something like

       $('a').each(function(k,e){
          $(e).append('<span>' ...);
          var width = $(e).width()
          // do something with the width;
       }

If you have code like the above, it is going to cause a repaint on each iteration. If you unroll it into three separate loops, one that does dom modification, one that does dom measurement, and another that does modification, then you will drop the number of repaints from potentially 100s to just 2.

<comment><USER11> It does not trigger repaint on each iteration.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Most DOM performance issues arise from jQuery (mis)usage, and fortunately there is documentation for that:

[http://learn.jquery.com/performance/](http://learn.jquery.com/performance/)

It's brief and quite informative.

</comment><comment><USER14> After 10+ years as a performance leaning C++ desktop app developer I'm looking for any and all tips to make JavaScript (jQuery too) work in _perceivably_ faster ways. I'm use to threading database calls, using message queues, and views updating themselves from caches. It's a new world for me and feels somewhat like a step backwards.

Here I come html5!

<comment><USER15> You can use queues when creating a large number of elements. Use requestAnimationFrame and each frame pop some elements off the queue to render them. This will help prevent the page from locking up during render events.

<comment><USER16> Also, when adding many elements (or not so many, but over and over), add them to a DocumentFragment [ [http://developer.mozilla.org/en- US/docs/Web/API/DocumentFrag...](http://developer.mozilla.org/en- US/docs/Web/API/DocumentFragment) ] first, and then attach that to the DOM in one piece (one big DOM update is better than many small ones).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Caching jQuery selectors may result in a speedup, but as with all caching systems I've run into nasty, hard to trace bugs that were the result of stale cached jQuery selectors.

So I'd add the caveat to caching jQuery selectors that standard premature optimization rules still apply.

<comment><USER18> Caching them in local fucntion scope should be harmless. For instance: grabbing #x, using it inside a decision structure and iterator. Caching #x as a global constant is probably setting you up for some fun debuging later.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> These timings are all remarkably random, even with 10k repetitions.

<comment><USER5> In both selector tests, the code calls `.html()` as well. It also uses a direct #id selector, I.E. does not "search the entire DOM" like it says.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> TL;DR: Writing is slower, debounce resize event handlers, cache references to dom nodes or jquery selections.

Really the resize thing is sort of bs also because it is such an incredibly rare thing to handle (99% of all apps will never ever require handling resize except to _test_ responsive designs)

</comment><comment><USER21> Did not know Underscore comes with a debounce function. I always implemented my own.

<comment><USER22> There is also a _.throttle</comment></comment>


What fits tighter? A round peg in a square hole, or square peg in a round hole? - <AUTHOR> http://datagenetics.com/blog/september22012/index.html

<comment><USER2> Are you guys as turned on by this question as I am?</comment>


Joyce in Court and the Ulysses Trials review – the law, murder and obscenity - <AUTHOR> https://www.theguardian.com/books/2017/jul/06/joyce-court-ulysses-trials-law-murder-obscenity-adrian-hardiman-joseph-hassett-legal-cases <comment><USER2> I always thought it ludicrous, even given the era in which it was published, that Ulysses was banned in places and on trial for obscenity. "Look at Joyce, look at those glasses, he is probably the furthest thing from an indecent pervert that you can find!" I thought, considering him to be a meek-looking, probably inoffensive individual.

Then I discovered some of his love letters to his wife, Nora Barnacle. I have seen lots of things in this age of the internet, but I blushed and read them twice in disbelief. Made me respect him even more as a human and writer for some reason...don't know what that says about me.

<comment><USER3> >I blushed and read them twice in disbelief

Just googled some of the letters and... damn you're not kidding.

Wonder what they'd feel about us having this conversation now, over a hundred years later. Mortified or unashamed?

<comment><USER2> >Wonder what they'd feel about us having this conversation now, over a hundred years later. Mortified or unashamed?

For some reason, I feel like Joyce would probably be nonplussed. I don't really know enough about Nora to form an opinion. In a way having someone talk about that aspect of your life over 100 years later is so surreal I just cannot even imagine.</comment></comment></comment>


Should This Logo Be Illegal? - <AUTHOR> http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2012/05/16/freedom_and_intellectual_property.html?wpisrc=obinsite

<comment><USER2> Um, yeah? Blatant trademark infringement, commercially trading on the mark, etc.</comment>


Kino by Haruki Murakami - <AUTHOR> http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/02/23/kino <comment><USER3> Murakami has always been one of my favorite writers...

Fundamentally, he explores the space between a person and the greater society, loneliness and alienation and the way people connect with each other like two sparks in a vast darkness.

If you're just reading the comments, go ahead and read this short story :)

<comment><USER4> Murakami is one of those authors that has good enough style, culture and influences that at first they come of as quite profound, and at the same-time are pleasant to read in a way that say Kafka or Dostoevsky are not - <USER2> about half-way through the novel you realize it's a cheap knock-off to sell profundity to the general public.

<comment><USER5> That's a rather negative way to look at his writing. Sure, he still has plenty of room for improvement in his writing, but it definitely doesn't qualify as a "cheap knock-off." Is there anything specific you can point to, or do you just not like the writing?

<comment><USER6> I would say it's a realistic way to look at his writing. It probably seems negative to you because you believe Murakami has more merit than the GP does. Personally I am in agreement with the GP's estimation.

<comment><USER7> One oftentimes hears arguments along these lines about Murakami. That his writing is just pop commercial stuff. I am not sure I ever really grokked what these complaints were all about. Can you say more about what makes his writing like a "cheap knock-off"? At the very least what is the argument that it is a knock off at all (deferring considerations of its valuation)?

<comment><USER6> I can't speak for everyone who makes these arguments. My problem with his writing has nothing to do with its status as a knockoff.

That said, if I had to guess, the answer to your question would be that faux profundity is always a knockoff of the truly profound.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> A further sampling of non-paywall Murakami short stories from The New Yorker:

Yesterday (Jun. 9, 2014 issue) [http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/06/09/yesterday-3](http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/06/09/yesterday-3)

Scheherazade (Oct. 13, 2014 issue) [http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/10/13/scheherazade-3](http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/10/13/scheherazade-3)

Samsa In Love (Oct. 28, 2013 issue) [http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2013/10/28/samsa-in- love](http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2013/10/28/samsa-in-love)

Town of Cats (Sep. 5, 2011 issue) [http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2011/09/05/town-of- cats](http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2011/09/05/town-of-cats)

U.F.O. in Kushiro (Mar. 28, 2011 issue) [http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2011/03/28/u-f-o-in- kushir...](http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2011/03/28/u-f-o-in-kushiro-2)

</comment><comment><USER9> When I started reading Murakami, I couldn't stop. He weaves a world which seems so surreal without feeling absurd. Eventually, I read 4 of his books back to back and then bought the rest.

But, then I read the 5th one. And for some reason it felt like I've read it before. The protagonist in his novels has some very common characteristics - they like being alone, they cook and like to run. More often than not, a cat is involved (probably owing to the crazy high ratio of cats/people in Japan).

The last thing I read by him was actually a short story in New Yorker called 'Town of Cats'. I am now reading 1Q84. After a few pages, I felt like I had read some of it before. Even the character's jobs were the same. Peculiar details were common. And then I realised that I had read this in the short story.

<comment><USER10> IQ84 turned me off Murakami for a long time. Count how many times he recounts the same incident in almost the same words (narrator, mother). Count how many times he mentions breasts and the shapes of them (it's likely the same number of times he mentions any female). I read book one and two and realised at the end of it that I couldn't bear to buy the third book just to discover what happens to the protagonists.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> Time for Murakami Bingo:

[http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/06/01/books/review/0...](http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/06/01/books/review/03snider.html?_r=0)

<comment><USER12> I count: mysterious woman (?), cats, old jazz record, urban ennui, cooking, weird sex, Tokyo at night, unusual name, and vanishing cats -- no bingo!

Is Murakami really this predictable though?

<comment><USER13> Yes.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I studied Japanese lit as well as CS in college so I've read a bunch of his stuff in english and japanese. This is one of his better short stories in a while. If anyone is looking for something international by him I recommend Hardboiled Wonderland and the End of the World ( [http://www.amazon.com/Hard- Boiled-Wonderland-End-World-Inter...](http://www.amazon.com/Hard-Boiled- Wonderland-End-World-International/dp/0679743464) ). Read it in your first language: you're missing nothing. It's one of the best Japanese -> English translations I've ever seen.

<comment><USER15> Partially because Murakami i very involved in the Japanese to English Translation. He cares a lot about translation, he's actually a very accomplished English to Japanese translator himself, he's translate F. Scott Fitzgerald and Truman Capote among others. Plus he has an excellent series of English translators, like Jay Rubin and Philip Gabriel. He's noted that he really learned to love novels by reading imported English language dime novels as a teenager in Kobe.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> Ever since I found a tattered copy of "A Wild Sheep Chase" at a used bookstore in Bangkok, he has been my favorite writer.

</comment><comment><USER17> This was a great short read for a Sunday morning, thanks for posting this.

Just yesterday, I read Sputnik Sweetheart, and convinced myself to read more Murakami. In the process, I've noticed his works tend to be subtle, and yet are very good at making me feel all sorts of emotions in the process.

<comment><USER18> _Wind-Up Bird Chronicle_ is amazing. My two favorites by him are that and _Afterdark_ which is very short but incredibly fascinating...I think it's his best work, pound for pound.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> "Kino" is the protagonist's name as well as the name of the bar he run. It may be interpreted as an identfity, an armor and a comfortable place hidden in a crowded world. It provides a perfect hideout for Kino where he doesn't have to face the reality. I wonder if he has been suppressing his feelings when he found out about his wife and his colleague or she left a void in his heart and he is incapable of having any emotions until that rainy night.

</comment><comment><USER20> Super cool! One of my favorite contemporary writers.

<comment><USER21> I just started "The Wind-Up Bird Chronicle", and was instantly hooked.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> Can anyone offer an explanation for why Kamita needs to specify that his name is not pronounced 'Kanda'?

<comment><USER23> His name would be written as "神田". Those two symbols are refereed to as kanji. The reading of a kanji depends on what word it is used in.

Kamita is literally the combined readings of the words "神"(god- _kami_ ) and "田"(field- _ta_ ), not their readings for when used in a name, or when combined with other kanji. Additionally, the "t" sound at the beginning of a kanji often becomes a "d" when it is placed in the middle of a word (although it is hit or miss for when this happens).

Out of curiosity, I looked up "神田", and it turns out that it is an (archaic) word, pronounced _kamita_ , meaning "field affiliated with a shrine (the tax- exempt proceeds of its harvest going to pay for shrine operations)" [1]

[1][http://jisho.org/words?jap=%E7%A5%9E%E7%94%B0&eng=&dict=edic...](http://jisho.org/words?jap=%E7%A5%9E%E7%94%B0&eng=&dict=edict)

<comment><USER24> It's interesting to note that in the original, a reader would also be reading his name as Kanda until the first explanation pops up.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> I didn't know Murakami's short were published in the New Yorker. Thanks for sharing. :)

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> I love this short story

</comment><comment><USER26> [SPOILER ALERT]

I don't quite get it.

Who is Kamita? Why did he tell him to shut the bar and go far away? Who was knocking on the door and how did the knock suddenly start coming from the outside window of an 8-story building?

<comment><USER27> To me, Kino is a portrayal of the emotionally inert, of those who will not risk. The longer I live, the more of these persona I recognise (myself included). Come on, look about you, the computer profession is replete with this personality type. The "tap, tap" of rain on a window is Nature's message to Kino: Let life, with all its sweet sorrows, in.

<comment><USER26> Ah .. it was the rain tapping the window? That makes more sense now.

I think I did get the part where he's repressing his emotions, etc. Not even properly "crying" over his ended marriage.

Still the setting and the narration hit me as pretty dark. If this was made into a short anime film, I can't help but imagine it would be one of those dark silent films.</comment></comment></comment>


Show HN: Symphosis–Hand-Picked Resources for Startups, UI/UX, Crypto, JS - <AUTHOR> https://symphosis.com/ <comment><AUTHOR> Hey there, I am Keshav and I bootstrapped Symphosis. I have been working on a small project and I wanted to share and get feedback from this community.

My goal with Symphosis is to streamline knowledge & resources. It's a way for a kid in Kentucky to learn about Startups or a college student to learn about Cryptocurrency or UX.

I built this because people usually ask me resources for Design, UX, and JS and so I thought if I could build a repository of my favorite hand-picked resources that I can easily share with anyone, it would be a great way to streamline resources.

I would appreciate any feedback to improve this and ways I can expand this idea! Thank you!</comment>


Reverse Engineering Muxtape with a 5 Line Script - <AUTHOR>

[code]
#!/bin/bash
ARRAY=( `curl $1.muxtape.com | grep var | grep Kettle | sed "s/.\+Kettle//" | sed "s/\[//g" | sed "s/\]//g" | sed "s/;//g" | sed "s/'//g" | sed "s/(//g" | sed "s/)//g" | sed "s/,/\n/g"` )
let num=${#ARRAY[@]}/2
for ((i=0; i<$num;i+=1)); do
wget "http://muxtape.s3.amazonaws.com/songs/${ARRAY[i]}?PLEASE=DO_NOT_STEAL_MUSIC&${ARRAY[i+num]}"
done
[/code]
use it by typing ./muxtape.sh username
or use my online version: http://nopq.net/muxtape/ <comment><USER2> As you saw its simplicity in your process, the goal wasn't specifically to prevent everyone from doing this. The idea was to make it abstracted away just enough to not be obvious (maybe legal reasons or the general case scenario?).

I'm sure the author knows that anyone half-competent can get those links, but as the link asks to not steal music, I'm sure he is just betting on the good will of people.

Publishing these little "reverse engineering" (quotes for good reason) instructions for layman how to rip music from a good service is morally wrong, imho.

<comment><AUTHOR> The music industry thinks it is morally wrong to do what muxtape is doing. If you are going to share music on the internet though, I don't think it should be crippled to only work for people that can figure out how to get past the interface.

The music should be free or it shouldn't. There shouldn't be a gray area.

The faster any laws about this get resolved, the better. That's why I want this to be public.

<comment><USER2> You are only making it harder for muxtape, not the RIAA.

There is no question that RIAA is no angel, I'm just saying you're complicating it for muxtape and the direct result might be them not being able to provide an awesome service or them having to make it much less attractive.

If this is public, muxtape potentially shuts down; RIAA does not change its unethical practices. Think about it.

<comment><AUTHOR> Why should muxtape get to do something unethical when everyone else has to follow the rules? You're basically saying this is ok because no one knows about it. Is it ok for me to steal something from a store as long as no one catches me doing it?

Perhaps a better way of going about this would be to contact the muxtape developers directly, however like you said before, they already know about this.

Also, in this situation, the RIAA would not necessarily be doing anything unethical to shut down this site. They are hosting free music on the internet. Can you think of a more straightforward way to break copyright law?

<comment><USER2> That reply goes under the false assumption that I think legality == good ethics. I never said the m.o. of RIAA is ethical, however legal it may be.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> nice reverse engineer there mike. let's take bets on how fast it takes muxtape to change something like their JS array so that this doesn't work, and let's take bets on when muxtape gets shutdown for being.. illegal

</comment><comment><USER4> lame. yes, everyone realizes muxtape is at risk, but that doesn't mean you need to hurry along the eventual shutdown.

muxtape is doing something very cool, and I think eventually some smart record label will understand that and release something like it. The future is here, its just in a grey zone legally (muxtape) or struggling and handcuffed (pandora, last fm).</comment>


Unlocked Android G1 for developers - $399 - <AUTHOR> http://code.google.com/android/dev-devices.html

<comment><USER2> Wish apple had this sort of program for devs in their iphone program.

<comment><USER3> Cannot the iPod touch be used for such purpose?

<comment><USER4> No microphone or GPS. Not to mention that the OS isn't open source.

That being said, the iPhone/iPod Touch platform is pretty awesome. It would be cool to have "Developer" iPhones with less restrictions too.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> When I talked to T-mobile, they said that in order for them to sell me the phone without contract (this was also $399) they would still need to have data plan added to my ongoing account. They said the phone will simply not operate without the data plan. This seems to support a recent report on excessive G1 roaming bill overseas, even though when the user did not even use the internet. I guess the G1 phone is pinging incessantly.

Anyways, this new Android G1 sale is great. But, my question is, can I use this phone with an on-demand data access. Or would it be restricted to use 3G, and without a data plan I would not be able to access Internet outside of wi- fi?

T-mobile's data plan is $35 a month. Very expensive...

<comment><USER6> Actually, in the US, the t-mobile data plan is $24.99/month and includes 400 messages. Be careful though. Apparently, the 400 messages includes both SMS as well as IM.

[http://www.breakitdownblog.com/massive-confusion-over-t- mobi...](http://www.breakitdownblog.com/massive-confusion-over-t- mobile-g1-data-plan-messages/)

Also, right now Walmart is selling the g1 for $200 with only a _one_ year contract. They are also throwing in a $50 gift card.

<comment><USER4> Only certain IMs are counted in that 400; and only when you're using the default IM app.

Google Talk IMs are included for free. And if you want to use something else, there are other IM apps out there that don't use T-Mobile's gateway.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> The $399 unlocked phone is listed as a "Android Dev Phone 1" not as an Android G1. That doesn't mean it's _not_ a G1, but it doesn't say it is. Does anyone know for sure?

<comment><USER4> G1 is a T-Mobile trademark. These phones are from Google and HTC, so they can't use the G1 name.

<comment><USER8> But is it the same phone?

<comment><AUTHOR> They point you to the TMobile site to get more details about the hardware, so I think it is safe to say it is the same phone.

I bought one and asked for overnight shipping. So you can wait a few days and as me :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Quick note: Android's been ported to the OpenMoko phone. As a phone it's got a long way to go, but it's fully free from vendor interpretation.

<comment><USER10> The OpenMoko phone doesn't just have "a long way to go", it's simply _not viable_.

And it isn't fully free, the crappy ancient GSM chip is not open, barely works at all, and has no power management.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> $399 + $25 Android dev signup is still cheaper than eBay. :]

<comment><USER12> ...plus 171 USD shipping to the UK - I couldn't stop myself, I wanted one.

<comment><USER13> Is that shipping cost due to customs/VAT/not-really-shipping?

171 seems a bit...unexpected to me ;)

<comment><USER14> The shipping fee just stopped me.

USD 171 = GBP 116

£116 to ship something from the USA to central London is an extremely bad deal. Next day before 9am UPS or Fedex would cost significantly less.

When I feel I'm being ripped off and taken for a mug, I get off the ride.

<comment><USER15> You can get one way passenger flights for close to that price. Shipping typically doesn't include and customs fees.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Important point: "Since the devices can be configured with system software not provided by or supported by Google or any other company, end users operate these devices at their own risk."

<comment><USER4> Well yeah; if you modify the OS, compile it and load it on your phone, you can't expect Google (or any other company) to support it for free.</comment></comment>


US Spaceforce.mil Goes Live - <AUTHOR> https://www.spaceforce.mil <comment><USER2> While the idea that space would forever be a shared, international region akin to Antarctica, the militarisation of space was bound to happen eventually.

While there are some downsides, I actually think this is a net positive. War- time, or at least the preparations for potential war-time (as all military endeavours actually are), usually lead to the greatest scientific and technical advancements. Just looks at WW1, WW2, the Cold War. I think we are now entering a "space cold war". Hopefully it can stay a "cold" war. But it is exciting to see what developments may come along.

The other upside, is that if the US achieves space superiority (which it already has, but if it develops the means to properly enforce it - which it is trying to do with this space force), it will open up the potential for proper commericialization. The US will be able to enforce space trade law, customs law, private property in space will be made possible. This will enable companies like SpaceX to have a proper legal framework within which to operate.

<comment><USER3> The downsides are millions of dead people. There is never a "net positive" situation here.

<comment><USER4> On the one hand millions vastly underestimates the possible death toll.

On the other hand kinetic bombardment is much better than than nuclear exchanges for the people left alive and makes nuclear weapons pretty close to obsolete.

<comment><USER3> The long term effects... Yes. Short term ... No benefits I guess.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> It's hard to imagine how any possible benefits from this god awful expensive saber rattling is going to outweigh the world wide hit to American's reputation. But I don't imagine that was any part of the calculations solely weighing political contributions with pork barrel pay back.

<comment><USER6> I don't know, if you're putting money into the MIC that's mostly going into research I'd say that's better than the alternative

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Goodbye international treaties on the peaceful use of space.

<comment><USER8> The militarization of space was going to happen eventually no matter what. It's a necessary precursor to colonization but also national security as the cost of access to space plummets.

<comment><USER9> Several countries have shown the capability of destroying satellites, not to speak of spy satellites and gps, and the fact that the spaceshuttle and its military sibling was designed to scoop up satellites and bring them back to earth.

Space was never not militarized.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> United Nations Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space Treaties and Agreements...

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Committee_on_th...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Committee_on_the_Peaceful_Uses_of_Outer_Space#Treaties_and_agreements)

<comment><USER11> > _The Outer Space Treaty does not ban military activities within space, > military space forces, or the weaponization of space, with the exception of > the placement of weapons of mass destruction in space._

Let's just hope that they won't deploy nukes in space in the next few decades...

<comment><USER12> Heinlein showed us the don't need nukes - just rocks.

0: [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Moon_Is_a_Harsh_Mistress](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Moon_Is_a_Harsh_Mistress)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Elon and NASA have a better taste in space fonts.

<comment><USER14> Not to mention the color scheme. Squeaky white text on pitch-black background is a cardinal design sin. Given that they're literally aiming for rocket science, this doesn't bode well.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> And how are we paying for this sixth branch of the US military?

<comment><USER16> Taxes and debt.

<comment><USER17> Until a corresponding increase in taxation is made to pay for a new expenditure. The new expenditure is paid for entirely by debt.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> The website looks a bit amateurish at best

<comment> lame-robot-hoax Looks like shit tbh. Seen way better websites come out of an Intro to Web Dev class in uni.

<comment><USER19> As long as it provides useful information and doesn't have a 100MB homepage, I don't see any problems with the site.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Kind of off-topic, but it's interesting to see they're using Google Analytics on a government website. Not surprised though, pretty sure they may use it on other gov websites (although I haven't checked).

</comment><comment><USER21> Been wondering ... what is the situation around Mars ???.

Now suppose the indian space program improves by leaps and bounds and they start to colonize Mars and claim it as part of the greater Indian Republic ???.

</comment><comment><USER22> Let's see the uniforms, please. No! NOT ENOUGH MYLAR!!</comment>