iPhone UI design process - <AUTHOR> http://www.taptaptap.com/blog/the-design-session/

<comment><USER2> 'Groceries' could have easily stopped at the third iteration. Sure, it wouldn't have looked as unique or easily identifiable as a taptaptap product, but it would have looked simple and clean. Easy to scan, easy to read in a supermarket while pressed for time. Subtle, not busy textures. Personal preference I suppose.

</comment><comment><USER3> This is, by the way, [2008]. tap tap tap has changed a lot in the last two years. Groceries and Tipulator are no more sold by them, Sophia Teutschler, one of the two founders, sells those apps (among others) now on her own.

</comment><comment><USER4> "UI design & graphic design - it's not just about pretty pictures"

Correct. Clear, readable text plays an important part as well.</comment>


The Impatient Programmer's Guide to Learning - <AUTHOR> https://hackernoon.com/the-impatient-programmers-guide-to-learning-e2960d0516a <comment><USER2> "Since you are likely to use open source frameworks. Go to the Github repo of the respective framework. Search the error in the issues section and you are likely to find your solution. If not, open an issue."

Hopefully people don't misconstrue this to be "I got an exception (mis)using this framework, HALP". It's hard to search for real bugs if Github issues becomes a help desk.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thank you for pointing that out. I will refine the sentences.

<comment><USER3> A few more:

>Now to build these smaller modules, your first goal must simply to make it work.

Try 'is simply' or 'must be simply'.

>half baked

I believe, but may be wrong, that this should be hyphenated.

>Now compare your code with their's.

Him, His. Her, hers. Their, theirs. No possessive apostrophe needed.

>It would be some errors or things just don't work. In those case google the error or the solution you are trying to achieve.

Try 'might be' or 'could be', instead. Also 'case' needs to be pluralized, because you're referencing multiple 'errors'. Even better is probably to just use 'In this case...'

I hope you take this as constructive feedback, and not any sort of criticism. Iteration, right?

I enjoyed the article, thanks for sharing it. Lots of points in there that resonated with me, and a couple of good reminders on how not to get discouraged or bogged-down.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thank you :) . Can you recommend any books which can improve my grammar? I tried plugins.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Read It Aloud and Weep: Controversy Surrounds Kindle Text-To-Speech (2009) - <AUTHOR> http://sunsteinlaw.com/read-it-aloud-and-weep-controversy-surrounds-text-to-speech-feature-of-amazons-kindle-reader/ <comment><USER2> Code's potential power expands over time, and that will always be a source of friction, for a whole class of similar problems.

Building software that can scan and elegantly read any text is somewhat complex now, but it's not inconceivable that a few years down the line it becomes as simple as "import simonprebble" or "import scottbrick".

The consequence is that the lucrative audiobook industry becomes obsolete overnight.

But preventing it, like banning crypto, or DVD burning, means banning people from jotting down a few magic phrases. It's weird either as a really odd overreach for government, or just obviously unenforceable.

It seems a fair legal principle that simple helpful things anyone can do in the privacy of their own home should generally not be illegal.

On the other hand, that set of things simple code can do, thus sectors code threatens, expands every year. These become awfully high minded principles for the people whose livelihood are threatened. So there's reason to feel at least a little conflicted.

</comment><comment><USER3> Shouldn't text-to-speech fall under an accessibility feature? Computers have had the ability to do text to speech for decades. The quality of the computer voice should not be an issue unless the voice is designed to mimic a specific human voice. The argument that voices are no longer robotic falls short, as there is no, "this sucks" legal requirement for accessibility features.

I believe I have made a similar argument about hearing aids here. If a hearing aid alters/filters sound and "rebroadcasts" it so that the person can hear you'd have to be spawn of the devil to argue that this constitutes copyright infringement.

</comment><comment><USER4> This is why we can't have nice things.

</comment><comment><USER5> Ahhh, another one from the Authors Guild</comment>


The Space and Freedom Party in light of the crisis of 21st century capitalism - <AUTHOR> http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2014/04/the-prospects-of-the-space-and.html

<comment><USER2> I really hope this idea of colonizing Venus catches on. I've held this view for some time now. I just don't see how colonizing Mars could possibly be practical.

<comment><USER3> Why not try both? There's nothing like a bit of competition.</comment></comment>


BYOD: One phone, one number for business and personal - <AUTHOR> https://www.line2.com/press/2015/line2Everywhere

<comment><USER2> What does this headline have to do with the linked article?</comment>


Show HN: Hadlock – X window manager written in rust - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/AdaShoelace/hadlock <comment><USER2> This is actually pretty good, do you plan to support wayland ?

<comment><AUTHOR> For now I focus on getting it as complete as possible for X. I'll consider wayland support more in the near future.</comment></comment>


Agile is the new Waterfall  - <AUTHOR> http://blogs.agilefaqs.com/2009/04/29/agile-as-practiced-today-is-the-new-waterfall/ <comment><USER2> Pretty good.

Nice observation that organizations are simply taking the old command and control and factory mentality and trying to make Agile fit into it. But, of course, it's not vague "organizations" that do this, it's all of us. As technical people, we naturally drift towards wanting to define more and more exactly what something is -- we want to program the people. We think that by continuing to define exactly what is agile that we're helping more than harming.

I also take issue with the discussion at the beginning that pits "Software Engineering" versus Agile. This is broilerplate agilista bullshit. If you're converting a conversation into something useful you're using Engineering techniques. That's the whole definition of Engineering - moving from spec to value in some kind of organized way. And that way can be formal, informal, conversation-based, etc. Duh. Now what you might _think_ of as heavy engineering is a different subject -- but those are just deployed flavors, not the true thing. You can't argue that agile is cool but the way organizations are doing it suck without (hopefully) realizing that software engineering is _also_ cool but just done in a really sucky way at times by those same organizations. It's the same difference. So I think making this false choice shows a real immaturity/lack of deep applied knowledge on the part of the presenter.

Maybe it's just me, but I'm also getting tired of seeing that same old manifesto crap with every agile presentation I see. It's not the Ten Commandments. Get over it. If you're spending 60 slides to explain what agile is, then that's your presentation topic, not how agile is being applied. I guess I liked the conclusion but thought the build-up was overly done.

Overall it was worthwhile to see.

</comment><comment><USER3> This part is interesting (from slide 65):

 _Ziv's law - specifications will never be fully understood.

Humphrey's law - the user will never know what they want until after the system is in production (maybe not even then)

Wegner's lemma - an interactive system can never be fully specified nor can it ever be fully tested._

... though Google reveals that it was obviously lifted from [http://jeffsutherland.com/scrum/2007/07/origins-of- scrum.htm...](http://jeffsutherland.com/scrum/2007/07/origins-of-scrum.html) (and in neither place are citations given).

</comment><comment><USER3> The fact that agile would be overrun by bureaucrats and vendors and thus turned into the same old bullshit was not only predictable but predicted from the outset. The new bullshit may not be quite as bad as the old, but it will take decades if not centuries for the real principles of software development to be worked out at a macro level.

A big part of the problem is the myth of "organizational change" that is endlessly propagated by consultants and enthusiasts. I've seen fathomless amounts of time and energy spent on trying to do this. It is largely poured down a drain. Inefficient, anticreative organizations don't change, except by dying. The idea that they can somehow go through an enlightenment experience and become productive places that are good at making software is extremely seductive. People are willing to put a lot of money into it and there's a steady supply of gurus happy to take the other side of that bargain. Note that the gurus don't produce software themselves, they just talk (at high hourly rates) about how _you_ should do it. From what I observed (and I saw a lot of it) this is mostly mutual self-deception.

The way we will get better at software overall is not by "organizational change" in the places that suck at it, but by starting new organizations (e.g. startups) to provide new outlets for creative energy, some of which will succeed and render the old ways obsolete.

Happily, the situation at the individual level is not as gloomy as at the macro level. We are free to do things differently if we want to.

<comment><USER2> I produce software on a regular basis. And I'm also one of those high-priced gurus you mention.

It's not black or white. Organizations are full of good, intelligent people who want what's best for both the people and the organization. It's just that everybody has a different idea of what that is.

I wish it were as simple as "adapt or die" but many times it's "adapt enough and survive" which means big companies do a little bit of everything.

And it's the agile true believers that are many times behind this make-agile- just-another-heavy-process movement. Take a look at the various lists for defining if a team is "really" doing scrum or not. Read up on what some of the practitioners want to do. The agile community is doing a lot of this to itself, large organization or not.

So big companies pay us gurus to come in and try to change everything. And then nobody wants to change. And nobody gets fired if people miss a sprint. And everybody wants to perfectly define what agile is. And upper management wants to start tracking what metrics make "good" teams and what make "bad" agile teams. If you're lucky, you improve productivity by 5-8 percent using whatever generic agile principles the teams can accept.

That's a winning preposition for everybody. Doesn't feel great, and there is no break in the clouds with sunlight streaming in and music playing, but from a cost-benefit perspective it's a worthwhile cause.

Yes, agile is full of wonks preaching TDD that haven't coded in 20 years. Or analysts with 2 years of experience apply agile with a checklist. But that's where the movement is at right now -- it's spread from emphasizing delivery to being a little bit of something for everybody.

I wish it were as simple as you say.

<comment><USER3> I didn't say it was simple; I said it was mutual self-deception. That being said, I did find a simple solution: I got out. The effect is comparable to what I imagine someone would feel if they were cured of athsma and able to breathe.

<comment><USER2> Once again, I don't think it's mutual self-deception. People see that agile principles work. Some don't understand how it applies to their job. Some, quite frankly, view agile as a bunch of new age, feel-good crap. In a big organization, life is about compromises. That can look like self-deception, but it's not.

I'm not a big corporate guy, even though I work with them, so I understand the freedom of getting out. When I'm in startup mode I'm about a hundred times more happy and productive than working in a large group.

But corporations still exist, and people still need to work in them. Some people _want_ the imagined security that things will not change -- that they can punch a clock every day and work at the same place for 30 years.

Now you and I know that stability is an illusion, but it's one that people cling to.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: Please stop hijacking onclick on HTML links - <AUTHOR>

I do not know why it is "en vogue" now to hijack the "onclick" event on links. From Google (which changes the href-attribute in search results to their redirector - yay for loading times on mobile) to Twitter (adding their own URL shortener on already shortened links) to news and porn sites preventing the middle click from opening in a new tab!<p>Please, stop messing with the way I browse the web, be it for marketing or whatever other reason. <comment><USER2> Congratulations, you have found one of the things I would remove from the javascript features of a browser if I had the skills to do so.

</comment><comment><USER3> You need to make sure your click handlers detect meta keys:

            navToThing: (e) ->
                if not (e.ctrlKey or e.metaKey)
                    e.preventDefault()
                    @navigate e.currentTarget.pathname

If someone is holding down a meta key when they click a link, get the hell out of the way and just let the event happen. If they click without a modifier, feel free to prevent the event and continue updating the state of your fancy one-page app.

Sadly, most sites just copy/paste javascript from ten year old beginner PHP tutorials and will never detect meta keys to allow for open-in-new-tab.

<comment> martin-adams As someone who hasn't explored this much, why is a meta key problematic?

<comment><USER3> I think most people open-in-new-tab by command or control clicking on a link. The event handler can detect the key being held down while you click a link.

We're basically guessing their intent and not running preventDefault if they are trying to open things in a new tab.

<comment><AUTHOR> Exactly... and we're already "guessing intents" way too much! It's all Apple- style, leave the user with as few choices as possible.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Ofsted: Maths teaching must improve - <AUTHOR> http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukpress/article/ALeqM5j6I3mwrDpNuVyaRzkje1laLYZmlQ?docId=N0225381337564810780A <comment><AUTHOR> Here's a link to the OFSTED report.

(<http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/resources/mathematics-made-measure>)

A cultural note: OFSTED is the "Office for Standards in Education, Children's Services and Skills" - a quango responsible for inspecting schools and children's social services.</comment>


500,000 iPhones sold over the weekend - <AUTHOR> http://crave.cnet.com/8301-1_105-9738446-1.html <comment><USER2> Good news, everybody! Now you have to make sure your site works on another platform!

But seriously, that really is good news. There are half a million people in the US who are excited enough about good new technology to throw down some serious cash as soon as it comes out.

Plus they all have the first phone with desktop-grade web browsing capability on a great browser. They can be the core of the next great mobile app, which doesn't need any carrier approval. Did I mention what a great demographic this is for advertisers?

This is awesome.

<comment><USER3> "Good news, everybody! Now you have to make sure your site works on another platform!"

The iPhone ships with Safari, doesn't it? So if you're app works on Safari it should work on the iPhone

<comment><USER4> No not really. Netvibes is a bit off as are things that work advanced JavaScript. I'm sure they'll release some updates but it seems that it's got a couple holes here and there.

<comment><USER3> The TV commercials gave me the impression that Google maps works. That's about as advanced as javascript gets.

<comment><USER5> it's not the browser based gmaps. it's a "native" app.

<comment><USER6> Hm, that's cheating :-(

<comment><USER7> Just like reencoding _select_ Youtube videos and calling it "Youtube" with zero flash support.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Most people are lucky to innovate once in a lifetime. Steve-o has done it over and over again.

\- original apple

\- macintosh

\- iPod / iTunes

\- os x mac

\- Pixar

\- iPhone

A big piece of innovation is knowing what people to trust, and he's definitely been a good picker.

<comment><USER4> Don't forget NeXT. I loved those things.

<comment><USER8> Next is wrapped up in the os x line item.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> So Apple just made $0.25-0.3 billion in three days... not too shabby, I would say.

</comment><comment><USER10> I do wonder what the revshare AT&T; \- Apple might be. What percentage of the total $2040 price is Apple getting?

<comment><USER7> Easy way out is that Apple gets the phone profit from sales in the Apple store, plus AT&T;'s monthly/yearly/(customerly?) tax paid to Apple for the privilege of being the only service, plus AT&T; probably buys the phones from Apple. That leaves, for AT&T;, the subscription fees, and maybe a little profit from phones sold in store?

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> I can't wrap my head around the price. I'd seriously rather blow 600 dollars on a bottle of wine. At least it would be a _real_ status symbol.

<comment><USER12> \+ Video player for my commute and travel ($250+).

\+ WiFi device for remote admin/reading news ($300+).

\+ A good phone that doesn't crash ($200+).

It's the best available option in the three categories I actually want. It's a good deal if you use its features and probably a bad deal otherwise.

<comment><USER6> We don't know yet that it doesn't crash, or do we? Here's waiting for Rev 2.0...</comment></comment></comment>


Show HN: ReactiveSearch – UI components for building Amazon / Yelp like search - <AUTHOR> https://opensource.appbase.io/reactivesearch/ <comment><AUTHOR> We're launching a React UI components library for building Amazon / Yelp like search experiences.

For context, we launched a React UI components library for building interactive maps ~2 months ago. Today, we are extending this to include search UIs. We have gathered 25+ components that are typically used in popular search UIs: lists, range sliders, search, calendars, feeds, cards.

We've also got an interactive tutorial for building a Hacker News search app in 5 mins.

Check out the examples built with it: [https://opensource.appbase.io/reactivesearch/examples/](https://opensource.appbase.io/reactivesearch/examples/)

Or read up more on the launch blog post: [https://medium.appbase.io/reactivesearch-ui-components- for-b...](https://medium.appbase.io/reactivesearch-ui-components-for-building- amazon-yelp-like-search-29a170dfa843)

\---

Direct github link to the project: [https://github.com/appbaseio/reactivesearch](https://github.com/appbaseio/reactivesearch)

<comment><USER2> Did you integrate some external javascript on the page? I see these fake malware warnings redirecting you to a real malware site on my iphone.

<comment><USER3> It looks like unpkg was compromised, but they believe it is now resolved: [https://twitter.com/unpkg/with_replies?lang=en](https://twitter.com/unpkg/with_replies?lang=en)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> The linked site has been hacked and replaced with a JavaScript payload that tries to attack the user's browser. The Show HN sounds interesting but this is not the link you were looking for

<comment><USER5> Sorry about that, this should be fixed now.</comment></comment>


Migrating Applications to Kubernetes - <AUTHOR> https://insights.sei.cmu.edu/sei_blog/2020/08/migrating-applications-to-kubernetes.html <comment><USER2> Before starting to migrate, make sure that you need to migrate and that you are aware of the added complexity, all the new kind of issues, and the cost of the migration.

It's very likely not worth it.</comment>


Crisis Looms in Antibiotics as Drug Makers Go Bankrupt - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/25/health/antibiotics-new-resistance.html <comment><USER2> > The problem is straightforward: The companies that have invested billions to > develop the drugs have not found a way to make money selling them

I call BS. I would like to see the subsidised govment sponsored investment that was made for the research. I don't have a recent study but in 2009 is was found apprix 1/3 of investment was federal funded.

2017 ~50% _EDIT_ : [https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/03/data-check-us- govern...](https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/03/data-check-us-government- share-basic-research-funding-falls-below-50)

With the cost of pharma in the US, the larger companies just pillaging insurance companies, it's no surprise that smaller companies just get trashed.

But that's not because of the R&D costs so don't try sell that nonsense.

But hey, once any pharma company can complain about not being able to stay afloat, in-come medicare because the antibiotics are considered required by the WHO, and then wow, the price to then suddenly sky rocket. At the cost of the Tax Payer.

Pharma companies are both some of the greatest, noble and at the same time, others in the industry are the most disgusting people in the world.

<comment><USER3> Even if government subsidizes are half of all r&d, that doesn't mean it isn't one of the largest costs for these companies. Additionally, I'd wager the biggest pharma companies are getting the lionshare of the subsidies.

And if it isn't r&d spend what else is it? Marketing costs aren't nearly as front loaded as r&d. In other words, if marketing isn't paying off, you can cut back. If r&d isn't, you already spent it and you are in trouble.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Hell no! Try paying fewer hundreds ofillions to execs and divert that savings to research, sales and marketing.

Everything will be magically financially viable again</comment>


Robot Operating System - <AUTHOR> http://wiki.ros.org/ <comment><USER2> What about ros? Its fairly well known.

<comment><USER3> I was wondering the same thing.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Jeff Barr (AWS) is a keynote speaker at HashiConf (possible acquisition) - <AUTHOR> Just noticed that Jeff Bar from AWS is a keynote speaker at HashiConf 2018[1]. This is purely hand-waving speculation, but could Amazon possibly be announcing an acquisition of HashiCorp?<p>> Keynote by Jeff Barr, VP and Chief Evangalist for Amazon Web Services. More details coming soon.<p>[1] https://www.hashiconf.com/schedule?day=Conference%20Day%20Two#jeff-barr <comment><USER2> I'd be astounded if they did. Random acquisitions aren't generally Amazon's style, and there isn't a big strategic story behind them buying Hashicorp that I can see.</comment>


Ask HN: Looking for cofounder for face recognition startup - <AUTHOR> Hi,
I'm looking for a business development cofounder for a face recognition + AR startup.
I have a technical background and have built a prototype. I'm doing customer development at the moment but feel that it's time to bring someone else on board.
Website is atlasreality.xyz
Thank you in advance!
[EDIT]: Feel free to email me firstname.lastname@example.com or reach out on twitter @jordanNZ_AR <comment><USER2> I'm not a potential co-founder, but was curious and visited your site. I had a strong, visceral, negative reaction. I've probably never gone from calm to angry so quickly on a non-ideological site before.

Why don't you explain what "begin" will do? What is the site for? Is it just a dark pattern to feed an algorithm and invade people's privacy?

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for your feedback. You're told what 'begin' does when you click begin.

The website is simply a demonstration of how face login can be simple and unobtrusive - it's not actually part of the app and is going to be changed to reflect the rest of the application.</comment></comment>


Young? Gifted? Foreign? Bugger Orf.  Britain's immigration policy. - <AUTHOR> http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21564841-britain%E2%80%99s-immigration-policy-crippling-business-and-economy-wake-up-mr-cameron

<comment><USER2> Anyone who has lived, worked, or traveled to London in the past 15 years, would probably observe quite a bit of successful immigration impact on the culture and overall health of the Capital. So, I don't know if that implies the headline is insightful or disregarding the reality on the ground (vs the Policy debate). The openess of any society (or firm, or clique, etc) is almost never on Economic grounds per-se. There is, for example, in every new-business hire (a purely economics decision) a great weight placed on 'fit' which is code for 'cultural fit' and more abstracty, 'fit in the hierarchy of power and ambition' that is this firm. Public policy on immigration (while it is a mess in the UK and the US) seems it would be better off to at least table this important consideration as legitmate, rather than otherwise not address it directly. What follows from that, is perhaps another discussion.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> The title is from the front page of the Economist, and is the most eye- catching I have seen in ages.

A little surprising to see the economist so directly critical of a Tory-led policy, and I am interested in how much we are reflecting a similar debate in the US.

On a personal note, I work for a US company right now. And I do so in Kent, England. Not so long ago I would have had to migrate to the USA and deal with visa and other issues. If inward migration is falling, is that actually reducing the number of people working for the host country, or are we simply seeing jobs going to people who just don't relocate?

Edit: added personal note</comment>


Startup cofounder lives with his website users - <AUTHOR> http://www.crashtheinauguration.com/living-with-our-users-part-i/

<comment><USER2> AirBedandBreakfast has done a pretty impressive job of capitalizing on the inauguration. It's been surprising to see HomeAway, with its half a billion dollars of funding and existing marketshare in the vacation rentals space, completely miss the boat.

<comment><USER3> Corporate bureaucracy is a creative vacuum.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> this is awesome. never knew there was a market for spaces under tables! i am completely inspired and have now decided to list the space under my desk. :)

</comment><comment><USER5> what do ya'll think about couch surfing? <http://www.couchsurfing.com/> "creating a better world, one couch at a time"

not entrepreneurial enough?

<comment><USER6> I used it to visit the south of japan and it was a really nice experience... I kind of like the more voluntary less commercial atmosphere of the community at couch surfing.

<comment><USER5> same here. the community is awesome. when we have couch surfers we lend them bikes and take them to local hacker spaces. it's a great way to meet interesting people.

the cs website is community driven in its infrastructure, too, not just web 2.0.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> For what it's worth, I am looking for a place to stay and Youth Ball tickets... have parade tickets to trade.

<comment><USER8> As far as I know the youth ball tickets aren't available yet. The ticketing process for the balls is quite mysterious. I received an e-mail earlier from the Obama campaign to pre-order ball tickets but the youth ball wasn't listed. Currently I'm under the assumption that tickets will be at door, or available for purchase a day or two in advance.

<comment><USER7> Interesting... I suspect that some people have them based on Craigslist listings. I do wonder if it won't be open bar based on the $75 rather than $150 ticket price and the 18+ age requirement.

Did you end up buying tickets for one of the other balls?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Does anybody older than me remember if there was this much hoopla around the 2000 inauguration?

<comment><USER8> There was not this much hoopla for the 2000 inauguration. This is likely due to the dragged out election ultimately stolen by the supreme court, and that it was yet another white guy assuming the role of the presidency.

This inauguration is historic for severeal reasons, the most obvious one being that it's the first time the United States has elected an African American. Second, it's hopefully a clean break from the devastation of the past eight years. Finally, this is the first election where the electorate has an intimate role with the election process whether it be through web 2.0, or unprecedented volunteer efforts. Because of this it's likely that millions of people feel as if they played a significant role in helping to elect Barack Obama.

<comment><USER9> The 2000 election was "stolen" by the Supreme Court? I don't usually expect conspiracy theory on Hacker News.</comment></comment></comment>


Ripcode, Server Side Flash for iPhone and iPad - <AUTHOR> http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/ripcode_brings_streaming_flash_video_to_iphone_ipa.php?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+readwriteweb+(ReadWriteWeb)

<comment> mike-cardwell I followed that article to <http://www.ripcode.com/news/newsRelease.php?id=42> and the page looks completely corrupt and messed up in Firefox on my Mac.

If they can't even generate good html, why should I believe they can handle transcoding flash?</comment>


Ask HN: Why is there almost no part-time jobs? - <AUTHOR> I'm a web dev, and I'm working on my own projects. It would be very easy to me to get a full time job, but I almost don't have options for part-time jobs, freelance or fix.<p>Any ideas? <comment><USER2> There are no part time jobs in tech because it's cheaper and less coordination required to hire 1 person full time than 2 people part time.

Your projects are probably not valuable, you should just get a full time job and do your hobby in your own time.

</comment><comment><USER3> Because most tech jobs expect substantial free overtime?</comment>


Lemur CATTA - reading comprehension instead of CAPTCHAs - <AUTHOR> http://lemurcatta.org/

<comment><USER2> Problem is, if the questions can be automatically generated from publicly available information (the contents of a blog), so can the answer. It will work as long as the system is not commonly available, because spammers won't care - but that's true for any new anti-spam system.

Manually creating three options and selection one as the "right answer" won't work either, a spammer will just try three times, until he gets it right.

I don't like the affinity test - it may work for certain types of sites, but consider the case where you criticize a company on a blog, and a rep wants to reply and participate in the discussion. If he has to do a "nontrivial amount of research" to post, he's probably not going to, which would be a shame.

</comment><comment><USER3> Oh, I've come across this commenting system on mike lee's blog. Very awesome idea. Takes a bit longer to reply (and sometimes I think twice about it and don't at all), but that probably raises the quality of comments on his site. :P

</comment><comment><USER4> Had me thinking it was serious for a moment. I particularly liked level 3 - Affinity - but there again where would all the good arguments come from.

</comment><comment><USER5> It annoyed me that he said "feel free to correct my math," yet there is no way to contact him.

There aren't 504 ways (P(9,3)), but only 84 (C(9,3)), since order is irrelevant.

</comment><comment><USER6> Defeat by answer permutation from a pool of IP addresses.

</comment><comment><USER7> it sucks.. i wont do this kind of torture to my users...</comment>


Twine: The First Mainstream Semantic Web App? - <AUTHOR> http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/twine_first_mainstream_semantic_web_app.php

<comment><USER2> I have heard the Semantic web story since 1998. And I am very, very skeptical. Description logics (e.g. OWL) have been a solution in search of a problem since the 1980's. Really 99% of the effort on the semantic web goes into 'building' vapor-ware. I call BS on these folks and the only way they are going to prove me wrong is by actually doing something that solves a real problem.

In academia the 'group think' among the semantic web folks has been astounding. Try asking them to represent customer-supplier-product type relationships and you will get a vapid or angry stare. Ask them to do anything with time or measure and they start babbling about yet another upcoming and crytic standard. Anything beyond binary relationships gives them major headaches. It takes a database/logic weenie like myself to point this out to them... And I am never satisfied with their answers.</comment>


Be your own VPN provider with OpenBSD - <AUTHOR> http://networkfilter.blogspot.com/2015/01/be-your-own-vpn-provider-with-openbsd.html <comment><USER2> If anyone's ever looking for an even quicker hack, ssh has built-in the ability to act as a SOCKS5 proxy, tunneling your traffic over ssh to whatever remote machine you might have access to:

$ ssh -D 1080 myserver.myhost.net

Then configure Chrome or Firefox or whatever to use a SOCKS5 proxy on localhost, port 1080. (N.B. that this does _not_ tunnel DNS lookups by default.)

The OpenVPN-based route is the way to go for something used regularly, but the above is sometimes super-convenient!

<comment><USER3> I think the fact that this leaks DNS lookups is really quite key because that gives away a huge amount about what you're looking at over your "vpn", not to mention services like netflix that are pointing you to different responses based upon the source of your dns lookups.

In firefox you want to go to about:config page and turn on network.proxy.socks_remote_dns

<comment><USER4> I'm using the latest stable release of Firefox (34.0.5) and I see a "Remote DNS" checkbox under my SOCKS proxy configuration. Isn't that the same option in the GUI? No about:config tweaks needed?

I would think so, but everyone seems to be giving the about:config business, so maybe I am missing something.

<comment><USER5> Yes, that is the same option. Toggling the option in the GUI toggles network.proxy.socks_remote_dns in about:config. As default it is, is still off though.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> We made this really easy, on Ubuntu: [https://www.tinfoilsecurity.com/vpn](https://www.tinfoilsecurity.com/vpn) will generate you a private VPN on your own box with a single click.

If you don't trust us and prefer to do it on your own, that's fine too, it's open source: [https://github.com/tinfoil/openvpn_autoconfig/blob/master/bi...](https://github.com/tinfoil/openvpn_autoconfig/blob/master/bin/openvpn.sh)

<comment><USER7> How about a 'start this with Bitcoin' button? :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> The disadvantage of this over a shared VPN that doesn't keep logs is that there's now a unique IP address that can be tied back to you. A cool feature for a VPS would be to have a shared IP address between a bunch of customers.

<comment><USER9> I suppose you could always come up with some script that recreates the whole VPS and thus get a new IP address... but that makes it overly complicated for most people.

<comment><USER10> AWS does not charge for first 100 IP addresses.

They also have OpenVPN AMI.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Another approach: [https://github.com/jlund/streisand](https://github.com/jlund/streisand)

"Streisand sets up a new server running L2TP/IPsec, OpenSSH, OpenVPN, Shadowsocks, sslh, Stunnel, and a Tor bridge. It also generates custom configuration instructions for all of these services. At the end of the run you are given an HTML file with instructions that can be shared with friends, family members, and fellow activists."

</comment><comment><USER12> Another solution I'd recommend is SoftEtherVPN[1].

It's a bit easier to configure and supports multiple protocols, including OpenVPN.

[1] [https://github.com/SoftEtherVPN/SoftEtherVPN/](https://github.com/SoftEtherVPN/SoftEtherVPN/)

<comment><USER13> Back when I tried SoftEther several months back, by way of VPN Gate, the connections seemed pretty unreliable compared to OpenVPN. I think the VPN Gate software locked down the options in SoftEther, though. Packet loss affected gaming and video streaming in particular. Casual web browsing was OK.

<comment><USER12> If you are talking about VPNGate, the public VPN gateways, VPNGate can be a mixed bag. As far as I know, those connections are maintained by varying network environments; some are probably better than others.

I use SoftEther server/client for LAN access for work and home, and it works decently well. (Only thing is things like compression and certificate based authentication only works over SoftEther client, although support for certificate auth for other protocols are on its roadmap.)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Cool guide, makes me want to learn more about BSD and pf. I've been doing this but with a Linux VPS, iptables and EasyRSA3[0][1].

[0][https://github.com/OpenVPN/easy-rsa](https://github.com/OpenVPN/easy-rsa)

[1][https://community.openvpn.net/openvpn/wiki/EasyRSA3-OpenVPN-...](https://community.openvpn.net/openvpn/wiki/EasyRSA3-OpenVPN- Howto).

</comment><comment><USER15> If you aren't partial to OpenBSD, I've had good success with this:

[https://github.com/Nyr/openvpn-install](https://github.com/Nyr/openvpn- install)

You can turn off logging on the server with

/etc/openvpn/server.conf

        log /dev/null
        status /dev/null

Remember to restart the openvpn service after that.

That said, this wouldn't deal with the VPS provider's logging etc.

</comment><comment><USER16> I use Debian + UFW + OpenVPN + Digitalocean for my US Netflix needs. I get 10Mbit downstream and 20Mbit upstream from NY3 to my 60/60 fiber connection here in Zurich. I could also configure it to use DNS only, but open dns servers are not so welcomed at the moment. Since I do quite a bit of roaming it's easiest to just configure OpenVPN.

</comment><comment> stephen-mw If anyone is interested, here's a script that will install openvpn on a raspberry pi in one command[1].

I use it along with the openvpn ios app on my phone when I'm on corporate wifi, or I connect to it with my laptop any time I'm in a coffee shop. Just note it's meant to tunnel traffic to a "safe" network, not anonymize you on the internet.

1\. [https://github.com/stephen-mw/raspberrypi-openvpn-auto- insta...](https://github.com/stephen-mw/raspberrypi-openvpn-auto-install)

</comment><comment><USER17> Why would you trust a VPS more than a VPN? They still can log or intercept your traffic, can't they?

<comment><USER18> Because then you can use public Wifi with less paranoia.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> I've been considering running all my mobile data through a VPN for better security, and saving all of it so I can analyze anything after the fact. Anyone doing anything like this?

<comment><USER20> Keeping a VPN connection alive doesn't do the battery any favors, and bringing up a VPN connection isn't that fast to do it on-demand.

<comment><USER21> I am often dependent on a high-latency GPRS link, and the overhead of establishing a tunnel using OpenVPN or SSH (e.g. sshuttle) is prohibitive. OpenVPN is very likely to timeout before it can negotiate a TLS session. This is one of the major reasons why I wrote my own VPN software[1] using NaCl. Deterministic public-key encryption means that there is no negotiation required at startup. The tunnel is therefore ready to use as soon as the program is started. To me, that's the difference between a usable connection and nothing at all.

[1] [https://github.com/amenonsen/tappet](https://github.com/amenonsen/tappet)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> By far the fastest and easiest setup I've done of a VPN was with Pritunl, an open source and OpenVPN compatible VPN server that has installable packages for the big distros. It has a great web based admin interface for managing the server as well.

[https://pritunl.com](https://pritunl.com) [https://medium.com/pritunl- tutorials/pritunl-tutorial-ed50a5...](https://medium.com/pritunl- tutorials/pritunl-tutorial-ed50a5d2a4eb)

</comment><comment><USER23> These days there's a working OpenVPN client for Android but there were times when IPsec[1] VPN was the only good way to connect many different clients like Windows, Mac OS and iPhone to your VPN server.

Which is why I had to mention IPsec VPN and link to a good article on how to manage it on OpenBSD.

[1] [http://www.kernel-panic.it/openbsd/vpn/vpn3.html](http://www.kernel- panic.it/openbsd/vpn/vpn3.html)

</comment><comment><USER24> Why go through all those hoops when there are plenty of open source VPNs installed with one line. eg [https://github.com/sockeye44/instavpn](https://github.com/sockeye44/instavpn) <\- works with mac, ios, android etc

</comment><comment><USER25> Why not just use npppd, which is in the base install, and then use L2TP/IPsec?

[http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/man.cgi/OpenBSD- current/man8/...](http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/man.cgi/OpenBSD- current/man8/npppd.8)

</comment><comment><USER26> What I really want to do is set up something like the "UnblockUs" proxy servers, where it's all done through DNS or something similar. The key reason is for Netflix access here in Australia, through my Apple TV. Ideally it'd be at my router level, to require no config on the boxes themselves, and be able to have a filter list where certain hosts on that list are proxied and others aren't.

Last time I checked there were some nascent projects to do this in a FOSS way, but they weren't complete and most seemed abandoned. Any ideas?

<comment><USER27> What these services do is spoof the DNS replies -- redirecting your apps towards their reverse proxies.

Eventually this will break due to a) DNSsec, and b) encrypted netflix traffic.

Better come up with a more robust VPN solution. DNS hacks will work until Netflix actually cares enough to stop them.

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> Please everyone keep in mind that if you're using a tutorial to set this up you're probably not an expert, so in the future you could suffer security issues (inherent to any service) without even knowing.

That's why I pay for services, not because I can't follow a tutorial to set them up :)

</comment><comment><USER29> SSH over socks 5 would be a better option than OpenBSD

<comment><USER30> Since you need a secure server on the other end to ssh into, why not just go with OpenBSD anyway?

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> Does this work on iOS?

<comment><USER32> Yes, there is an OpenVPN client on the App Store.

</comment></comment><comment><USER33> Why not use SigmaVPN over OpenVPN? From what I gathered from the CCC talks OpenVPN can fall pretty easily to NSA.

[http://frozenriver.net/SigmaVPN](http://frozenriver.net/SigmaVPN)

Last talk on HN about it: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7599091](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7599091)

There seems to be this similar project as well:

[https://github.com/zerotier/ZeroTierOne](https://github.com/zerotier/ZeroTierOne)</comment>


Ask HN: Please provide feedback for androidsnippets.org - <AUTHOR>

Androidsnippets.org is a new website to share and review snippets of source code for Google's Android platform.
The project is based on the djangosnippets.org source code, updated for Django 1.0, extended by some features (OpenID, search, ...) and released under BSD the other day [1].
Currently we are working on the user interface and to make it easier to browse snippets and find interesting ones. Another idea is to display "related snippets" (eg. snippets with overlapping tags).
What do you think about it? <comment><USER2> I like the idea and i wish someone will do the equivalent for iPhone ;).

Although, i think that styling the links with something like Arial instead of Monospace would enhance the readability. Espacially since its the prevailing content.

<comment><USER3> Agree with the use of monospace. Looks clunky. But otherwise really nice.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for your feedback!

I'm trying Arial fonts instead of monospace now.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> <http://www.androidsnippets.org>

[1] [http://www.4feets.com/2009/03/androidsnippetsorg-source- code...](http://www.4feets.com/2009/03/androidsnippetsorg-source-code/)

</comment><comment><USER4> I like it very much and have already linked to it from <http://learningandroid.org>. If your happy with it, I'd also like to add the feed to the site to show the latest items.

<comment><AUTHOR> hey! thanks for adding <http://androidsnippets.org> to your links! please feel free to add the feeds as you like! i will find a spot to link back to you :)</comment></comment>


Show HN: TimerBit – track tasks and projects with cloud-based timers - <AUTHOR> https://timerbit.com <comment><USER2> Why would I use this over the many other time trackers out there with exactly the same feature set?</comment>


ACLU sues Palo Alto over 'unconstitutional' restrictions at residents-only park - <AUTHOR> https://www.mercurynews.com/2020/09/15/aclu-sues-palo-alto-over-unconstitutional-restrictions-at-residents-only-park/ <comment><USER2> One thing not yet mentioned here is that the 'exclusion' ordinance was drafted after the neighboring towns of Portola Valley and Los Altos Hills refused to chip-in when Palo Alto purchased the land.

This park is in the hills, literally across the street from Los Altos Hills, and a windy drive or strenuous bike ride up the hill from most of Palo Alto.

The exclusionary ordinance is really aimed at these neighbors, rather than at the e.g. East Palo Alto residents who live ten miles away.

There's definitely a nasty history of racism in California, the Bay Area, and Palo Alto, but it's not quite accurate to attribute this particular ordinance on racist exclusionary policy. Los Altos Hills and Portola Valley are even more affluent and white than Palo Alto is...

<comment><USER3> It's probably a factor but to be the only factor you'd have to believe that right around the time Palo Alto was constructing itself a literal 'wrong side of the tracks' minorities ghetto, it also put together an exclusionary 'public' park but that exclusionary intent was really just aimed at other affluent white people.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> California has a shameful past of adding racist restrictions into real estate through title documents and other means (ex. "no person of any race other than the Caucasian or white race" may use or occupy the property, with the exception of "domestic servants of a different race domiciled with an owner or tenant."). This meant as neighborhoods built up and out, people were excluded from them on the basis of race. Home values go up, and the wealth of those allowed to purchase property goes up along with it.

After some time, those restrictions became legally unenforceable, and then over more time more and more of those restrictions have eased and now things are a lot more egalitarian on the surface, but the racial discrimination of the past has already done its harm and contributed to white wealth and black and brown poverty and now these neighborhoods maintain their racial disparities without having to have it encoded in law. So, having residents- only restrictions on parks are, intentionally or unintentionally or accidentally on purpose, a way of keeping people out of the park based on race, and thus, unconstitutional.

<comment><USER5> You can argue that historical actions have caused unequal outcomes, but that doesn't mean that today this decision [to make access to a park based on residence] is racist. That doesn't logically follow.

<comment><USER4> People are still being excluded because of their race, it doesn't matter if you changed the rules once that exclusion was locked in or not. That's a bait and switch justification.

<comment><USER6> Your logic doesn't follow. I'm white. I don't live in Palo Alto. I wouldn't be allowed in.

<comment><USER4> Something can be racist by affecting some races more than others, it's not binary.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I dislike this restriction, but it's hard to see how it's unconstitutional. Cities often exclude non-residents from many resources. It's quite common for parking permits, libraries, and schools to be exclusively for residents. The main reason for this is that residents pay taxes and non-residents don't. If you give non-residents the same privileges as residents, it incentivizes free riding. People would be encouraged to live in a place with lower taxes while taking advantage of the resources and services of a nearby city.

<comment><USER8> As far as I'm aware, you can certainly enter a library outside of your city of residence and read the books there. You just can't borrow them out, presumably because if you then stole said book, they wouldn't be able to fine you.

<comment><USER9> Why would they be any less able to fine you than your local library? They would still collect your personal information to set up a library card.

<comment><USER8> True! In fact, I now saw that others have pointed out that it's even possible to buy library cards as a non-resident in various places.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> For those asking abstract questions about how this is different from access restrictions on various other kinds of public facilities - it's probably worth reading up on a bit of Bay Area history for context with 'East Palo Alto' and 'blockbusting' being two good initial search terms. There's a long history of, to put it very mildly, efforts to keep the wrong sorts of people out, all across the Bay Area.

<comment><USER10> Facebook as well as other later tech companies have done a lot to improve both the perception and land value of East Palo Alto by placing their offices there. What are your thoughts on this?

<comment><USER3> I don't have any deep (or shallow, for that matter) knowledge or expertise in this, I do wonder a bit if these are the sorts of problems we want to rely on IKEA or Facebook to address. There's no question East Palo Alto today is a much safer place than East Palo Alto in the 90s or 2000's and that can't be a bad thing.

I did mean 'context' because without it, it's quite reasonable to ponder what could possibly be so bad or 'unconstitutional' about Palo Alto having its own version of Gramercy Park. Grody, but maybe not actually illegal?

With the context of 'policy-ied their way to creating an actual ghetto which went on to become the statistical Murder Capital, USA by 1992', one might think of it somewhat differently.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> There are tons of public facilities, parks, etc. that have restrictions for non-residents that have never been seen as an issue. The argument being that local taxpayers are the ones paying for the facilities and maintenance, etc.

For example, for my wedding reception we rented a barn in a park that's often used for weddings and other events. Since my sister is a resident of the city she was able to rent the barn at a discount, while non-residents would have had to pay significantly more. Never crossed my mind that such a thing might be "discriminatory" or "unconstitutional." I've seen plenty of similar things with public pools, out of state hunting licenses, library cards, and much more.

"Public" doesn't mean "free access for all," and that's independent of any alleged racial discrimination claims the ACLU is making.

<comment><USER12> Similarly: town landfills, school districts, etc. No access is available to non-residents at any price.

Which is not to say that Palo Alto is being reasonable here, just that there is a lot of precedent and I'm not clear on the distinction.

<comment><USER8> You can certainly get into a school without being a resident. They might ask you to leave if you are disrupting classes or whatever, sure, but there's nothing that says you can't come from out of state and pick up your grandchildren after school, for example (provided that the parents have provided prior permission). Or just talk to the faculty, etc. Journalists do that.

Another example: before Covid, my kid's school provided parking spots in school grounds for a nearby festival as a fundraiser.

And in many schools, events like science fairs are open to the public.

As for landfills, I'm not sure there's a distinction between residents and non-residents. AFAIK, they're treated in similar ways to preservation areas, where mostly everyone is forbidden from entering, except the people who are working there (and happen to live nearby by proxy)

<comment><USER13> > You can certainly get into a school without being a resident.

in my city you cannot do this unless you have a really good reason. the doors are steel and controlled from a central office. the administration may choose to let a journalist in if they feel it is beneficial to the school, but they can absolutely choose not to.

<comment><USER8> So, for security reasons, right? Then, I imagine a random resident would also be denied entry based on the same criteria as a non-resident, no?

It still is similar to preservation areas, in that entry is restricted for some logistical reason rather than proof of residence.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> For context on why this park restriction comes across as racist, East Palo Alto is a different city from Palo Alto, and these are the demographics:

Palo Alto[1]: 60.6% White, 27.0% Asian, 6.2% Latino, 1.8% Black, 0.2% Pacific Islander

East Palo Alto[2]: 64.5% Latino, 15.8% Black, 7.4% Pacific Islander, 6.2% White, 3.6% Asian

It comes across as a law that prevents Latino, Black, Pacific Islander people living in the area from visiting their local park.

[1] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palo_Alto,_California#Demograp...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palo_Alto,_California#Demographics)

[2] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Palo_Alto,_California#Dem...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Palo_Alto,_California#Demographics)

<comment><USER15> That's as of the 2010 census. The demographics of EPA have shifted pretty dramatically since then -- Facebook moved into the old Sun campus around 2011, making the area highly desirable for their employees. Combined with the growth of Google (a few exits south on 101) and other tech companies in the area, EPA has seen some significant gentrification.

(This is a relatively recent effect, of course; the "residents only" limitations on the Foothills Park are _much_ older.)

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> This reserve is ___California State Owned_ __.

If it was owned by the city, restricting access would be different.

^^^^Appears incorrect. It's city owned! Thanks for digging!!

<comment><USER7> Where'd you find that information? It's not mentioned anywhere in the article, and Wikipedia says it was purchased by the city from a private owner[1]:

> Most of the land for the park was bought from Russel V. Lee, a founder of > the Palo Alto Medical Clinic (now Palo Alto Medical Foundation), who > offered, in 1958, 1,294 acres of his land at $1,000 an acre ($1.3 million > total) to the city to preserve as open space.[9] The total cost was high so > Palo Alto put it to a citywide vote in 1959 which passed with 62% of the > voters supporting buying the land.

1\. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foothills_Park](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foothills_Park)

<comment><USER17> This dispute is ostensibly about a rights issue. But am I wrong, isn't this really about preventing homeless and other itinerant people from entering the park? And as a side effect, Palo Alto harasses visible minorities trying to enter the park?

It's interesting, the main way many parks in San Francisco avoid the former problem is by simply being inhospitable - the tops of hills, slopes, the cold, the lack of facilities. In Pacific Heights and the Presidio the parks are hard to use with dignity because of their geography, climate, etc, not necessarily by design. But it goes a long way obviating the need to deploy the law to keep homeless and crunchy people out.

Compare to the Mission, which is a very habitable, sunny and flat part of town, with most services accessible by short walks, that has many small parks that itinerant people use, sometimes pretty intensively.

If it could, would residents in the Mission restrict its parks? I don't know if it's possible to restrict public access to things, have a positive experience of gentrification as a net seller of homes / existing resident, and not harass visible minorities all at the same time.

Palo Alto residents are so confident in their belief they will never someday be harassed, that the demographics of their town will not change. And maybe when it does change there will be both homeless people and a visible minority family, unmolested, in the park.

In this sense the confusion about, who owns the park - it doesn't really matter. If Palo Alto wants to prevent itinerant people from using the park, and if it doesn't care that that also means every black and Hispanic person is asked if they are residents and white and Asian people are not, they will get their way. The solution is through hearts and minds - through empathy and selflessness really. If the ACLU could get people to see that anyone's family member could be homeless, anyone could have mental illness, that those very same East and South Asian immigrants almost certainly had relatives who were beggars, you could maybe move the needle.

<comment><USER18> I don't see much reason to think it's actually about preventing homeless encampments in the park. There are plenty of parks that control homelessness without being closed to anyone from out of town.

<comment><USER17> That was the only reasoned justification I could think of.

<comment><USER18> Isn't it just the same justification why some individual might want a private garden? It's nice to have peaceful nature areas that don't get too crowded.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> While I agree with the idea that parks shouldn't be restricted in spirit, what's the difference (other than scale) between this park and other resources such as libraries or pools that require you to be a member of the jurisdiction that pays for them?

<comment><USER20> I have a feeling that as a Canadian, I really cannot cross the chasm between our society and America's, but I'll try.

Here in Toronto, the libraries are open to the public. Borrowing material or using their online facilities requires membership, still known as "having a library card," and for that you need to live, work, or study in Toronto.

(Update, courtesy xatt: There are also paid memberships available for those who don't qualify for free membership, approximately CAD10/month: [https://www.torontopubliclibrary.ca/using-the- library/your-l...](https://www.torontopubliclibrary.ca/using-the-library/your- library-card/). But physical access to the library is free to everyone.)

I also think there are other allowances, such as if you care for a relative who lives there, but the gist is:

1\. Anybody can walk in and use the physical library, and; 2\. There are additional resources for those who have a connection to the jurisdiction.

There are similar things around community centres. During public swim, everybody can swim. During certain programs, you may need to be a member of the facility. I am aware that some physical parks have special programs, and you may need to register with the city and be a resident to use them.

But the park itself is public, and anybody can go there. You just may not be able to drop into an outdoor yoga program.

So clearly, we have a two-tier system, and the broadest tier is literally "everyone." The second tier is the size of a municipality.

In a certain very generous sense, Toronto's libraries, community centres, and park programs are similar to "gated" parks for a neighbourhood, as they have some features/programs that require membership and/or some connection to the municipality.

But in another, they are manifestly different. Neighbourhood parks are usually set up to exclude "the wrong people." They're about constructing gated communities, with all the classist and racist implications associated with these structures.

Whereas, public libraries are exactly what they say on the tin: They're for the public. Rich, poor, from near, or far.

<comment><USER21> Nearly all parks and libraries and other public places & services in the US are exactly what you describe... there is no such chasm. The reason this article was written is because of one single ugly exception to what is a vast system of public access to community centers, libraries, parks and other open spaces. Please don't make assumptions and jump to the incorrect conclusion that a single example suddenly means that's how it works everywhere.

<comment><USER20> I have been to excellent public facilities in the US. Excellence is not evenly distributed anywhere, but the discrepancies of available public services between rich and poor neighbourhoods, between predominantly white and predominantly black neighbourhoods have been stark in my (n=1, granted!) observation of the US.

I think that the reality for the underclass in the US is that in theory, public services, voting, parks, community centres, education, jobs, and so forth are equally available, but that is not how it works in practice.

<comment><USER21> Excellence is not evenly distributed anywhere in the world including Canada, right? But the goal post seems to be walking away from me a little here. I'd agree that the US has social issues between rich and poor. Weren't we discussing actual stated policy restrictions to public access above? That's what the article is reporting on, and what @Arainach was talking about, isn't it?

What would be the solution to the much bigger problem you're bringing up? Perhaps the problem is that we allow our citizens to become poor in the US, not that we have some of our public facilities located near rich people?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> I lived in PA for a bit. A local who worked for the city told me about this park. I couldn't believe it was residents only. Sure enough they won't let you in when you walk up unless you can prove you live there. I was blown away because I felt that wasn't really possible in this area. This was 2009. Long time coming I guess.

</comment><comment><USER23> I got in with my hotel key card when I was staying for a week or two.

There's an argument about limiting the number of people who visit in order to preserve the natural environment, and residents who pay for it should have first priority, but an outright ban probably isn't best.

I'm surprised that the state doesn't just buy it off the town.

<comment><USER24> Get a maintenance fee from non-residents then.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> Sounds like a good fight. Hope they succeed.

</comment><comment><USER26> What does this do to "residents only" beaches?

What Palo Alto might do is what other cities do and it's charge some ridiculous entrance fee. There are a few of these in the Bay Area.

<comment><USER27> Residents only beaches are illegal in California since the entire coastline is public land.

<comment><USER28> As a non-resident, I love this. I really wish we would do the same thing for rivers here in Utah (we've gone back and forth on that).

I visit California every couple years and it's one of my favorite vacation spots. My favorite beaches are the small ones with tiny walkways between residential homes. You feel like you're trespassing, but you're not.

I've also made use of dozens of parks in CA as my son was a professional BMX rider for a time and we went on a tour of as many CA skate parks as he could ride. It was a good time and we were allowed access to every park we visited.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> Similarly, Lake Oswego OR restricts non-residents from a public lake through a combination of public and private partnerships. [https://www.wweek.com/news/courts/2018/05/04/the-oregon- supr...](https://www.wweek.com/news/courts/2018/05/04/the-oregon-supreme- court-will-soon-decide-who-can-swim-in-oswego-lake/)

</comment><comment><USER30> Charging a nominal usage or parking fee and discounting for residents seems fine. Whatever the moral weight of the original purchase price only being born by Palo Alto was, it's long since expired.

</comment><comment><USER31> Palo Alto is very racist. One other thing they do: they have "below market rate" housing, but it has to be for the "right kind" of poor people. They build special BMR housing for teachers and firefighters. Wouldn't want dishwashers, janitors, or home-health workers living nearby.

[https://lahstalon.org/affordable-teacher-housing-to-be- built...](https://lahstalon.org/affordable-teacher-housing-to-be-built-in- palo-alto/)

</comment><comment><USER32> A reasonable fee for maintenance and security seems reasonable. Perhaps only allowing reservations of certain facilities to residents. But an outright ban of every non-resident is, well, mean.

</comment><comment><USER32> Probably legal, but antisocial.

The only logical remedy is to card everyone going into any other city park in California. If they are a Palo Alto resident, no entry. If they are from anywhere else, come on in.

</comment><comment><USER33> 1,400 acres none the less. The ACLU is right to sue, this seems absurd.

<comment><USER34> There's a park near me in Southern California that is 400 acres and was recently converted to be de facto residents only. Technically anyone can get in, but all of the parking spots are "residents only" except for legally mandated handicapped spots. The street parking was also converted to "residents only", allegedly to reduce COVID risk which IMO is total bullshit. Hopefully there's more of these lawsuits in the future!

</comment></comment><comment><USER35> Curious what this means for public facilities (like libraries, universities, schools) that are either only available to city/state residents, or offer preferential pricing for residents.

<comment><USER36> I would be interested to see some examples of libraries / universities that you cannot enter if you're out of state

<comment><USER35> Universities offer preferential pricing (in-state tuition) for state residences. University libraries typically disallow non-students from entering. It's an important example because it raises the question of where we draw the line as to what extent government institutions can restrict access to public property.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> To clarify, Foothills Park isn't strictly residents only but parking there is. You can hike in from neighboring land.

<comment><USER38> That's wrong.

Here is the ordinance: [https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/paloalto/latest/paloal...](https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/paloalto/latest/paloalto_ca/0-0-0-20448)

Here is the complaint: [https://www.aclunc.org/sites/default/files/Final_Complaint_f...](https://www.aclunc.org/sites/default/files/Final_Complaint_for_filing_0.pdf)

> Only residents of the city and regular or part-time city employees, members > of their households related by blood, marriage, or adoption, and their > accompanied guests are entitled to enter on foot or by bicycle or vehicle > and remain in Foothills Park.... Upon the request of an authorized city > employee or a member of the Palo Alto police department, a person seeking to > enter Foothills Park at the main gate or a person within the boundaries of > Foothills Park shall provide identification or information to satisfy the > requirements of this subsection.... No person shall enter or remain in > Foothills Park in violation of this subsection. Violations of this > subsection shall be a misdemeanor.

<comment><USER37> You can read the ordinance: "Foothills Park may be accessible to the general public for the purpose of using the Bay-To-Foothills trails."

[https://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2008/07/29/from-the- bay-...](https://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2008/07/29/from-the-bay-brto- skyline-ridge)

<comment><USER38> I did read the ordinance. You've suggested as long as people don't park there, they are fine. That's wrong and anyone who takes your advice could be looking at a misdemeanor. They are restricted to using the Bay-To-Foothills trails (and entering and exiting at those specific points).

> Only residents of the city and regular or part-time city employees, members > of their households related by blood, marriage, or adoption, and their > accompanied guests are entitled to enter on foot or by bicycle or vehicle > _and remain in Foothills Park._ (emphasis added)

<comment><USER37> Except that literally doesn't occur. No one is getting cited for deviating from the most direct ridge trail through the park or entering from Portola Valley. The residency restriction is ridiculous, but this isn't how it works in practice.

<comment><USER38> Enforcement can change at any time and on a whim. If violations of this sort are infrequent, that combined with difficulty of enforcement may result in a lack of enforcement. If, suddenly, many people illegally entered the park this way, enforcement may increase both to curb the behavior and because enforcement is a lot easier when there are a lot of violators. Additionally, not everyone is able to be so cavalier about committing a misdemeanor because in practice it might not be enforced.

In any case, this is just moving the goalposts. The fact of the matter is that as the ordinance is written this behavior isn't allowed and can net you up to six months in jail and a $1000 fine.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER39> What the sign really say is "Dogs and Colored not admitted"

</comment><comment><USER40> public vs private services. ticket 10$.

</comment><comment><USER41> Just adding that non residents can come into the park during weekdays. The restriction is only for weekends.

EDIT:I think the park should be opened, but I think this context should be added.

<comment><USER24> That's not true. [https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/depts/csd/parks/preserves...](https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/depts/csd/parks/preserves/foothills/default.asp)

<comment><USER41> Anyone who takes a trail from Arastradero Preserve can enter Foothills Park, Councilwoman Liz Kniss noted Monday. The city was required to make this trail open to the broader public as part of an agreement with Santa Clara County, which contributed the funding the city needed to purchase 13 acres of open space next to Arastradero Preserve.

In addition, even though non-residents are banned from driving into Foothills Park on the weekend, many arrive during the week, Kniss said.

[https://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2019/05/10/residents- onl...](https://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2019/05/10/residents-only-policy- for-foothills-park-sparks-fresh-debate)

<comment><USER24> Yes, you can take a 45 minute hike and reach there, there is no on site security anyway, only at the front gate. It's no way a workaround for driving there by car and carrying picnic supplies. Palo Alto residents can happily do that.</comment></comment></comment></comment>