Open letter to Google: free VP8, and use it on YouTube  - <AUTHOR> http://www.fsf.org/blogs/community/google-free-on2-vp8-for-youtube/ <comment><USER2> I'm nothing more than a layman what comes to things like these, but...

What's there for Google?

\- Google, Apple and Microsoft can afford the license and the fee is peanuts to them. Most likely Flash will be history no matter what codec wins. \- If Mozilla decides to stick with it's values and stay free (is anything else even an option?) while the web goes h.264, I'd say a significant part of people will migrate to other browsers. And come on who's going to migrate to IE and Safari isn't that popular on PC, so that's even better for Google and it's Chrome. How could a bigger browser market share be bad? One downside though would be that some smart people who would be really valuable employees and have strong personal values might get pissed off and not join Google.

\- "You owe it to the public" "if you care about free software". No matter how much it sucks, the only entities Google owes something is it's creditors and share holders. Sometimes same things benefit both the public and the share holders which is just super, but isn't it a bit naive to ask a publicly listed company not to take advantage of the situation just because it would be nice? Again though there's the possible loss of love, of which effect on the business as a whole I'm not competent to evaluate.

\- Mobile hardware support is important and it's going to get even more important in years to come. I might be talking out of my ass here, but isn't the world full of hardware support for h.264? If that hardware support is something really generic like doing ICT really fast and can be applied to VP8 then this might not be that important.

<comment><USER3> What if Google simply see a long-term strategic advantage in helping the web have a free video standard? Especially a standard where they have a significant amount of control over its codebase, tooling, and direction, as well as avoiding the prospect of unknown patent licensing fees on the distant horizon. I mean, Google likes web standards -- the fact they can easily search content allows them to exist -- and audio/video content will make the web more useful which will make their search engine more useful. If Google don't plan to open up the codecs, it certainly makes you wonder why they bought On2.

People act as though the H.264 video tag is a foregone conclusion, but it really isn't - it's still a long way from being viable. Web technologies have never been about what developers want or what sites use but rather what browsers implement, and today ~88% of web-browser marketshare doesn't support the H.264 video tag (58% IE, 28% Firefox, 2% Opera). This is worse than Ogg Theora where ~68% aren't supported, while Flash is unavailable on less than 1% of browsers. Of course, this may change if Microsoft decide one way or another.

Although mobile devices are going to be increasingly relevent in the coming years, it's still a rounding error and users regularly update their handsets, which means the current H.264 support isn't a particularly strong argument in its favour. I suspect that mobile devices will converge towards whatever is done by desktop browsers, as has been the historical trend.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> A similar approach would be to give a free pass to _software_ implementations (including FPGAs), while charging royalties for ASICs. When a product designer is already willing to pay for dedicated video silicon, a royalty just slightly increases the price.

If this model turned out to be profitable, it would be a good precedent for subsequent codecs seeking universal adoption while still paying for investment.

<comment><USER5> My understanding is this (correct me if I'm wrong...) is this is exactly the business model that has killed Vorbis. Xiph originally created a floating- point free reference implementation, and charged for the integer decoder. You pretty much have to use the integer decoder for any sort of hardware implementation, so the effect was the same.

With few users and a paid barrier to entry, few hardware vendors took the leap. No hardware support means fewer people bothered to encode to Vorbis... and the spiral to the bottom continued.

If you're trying to use the network effect to your advantage, you do exactly what the MPEG-LA has done: the first couple of years are free, then everyone pays. The only want to combat that is to do the same.

<comment><USER4> Or the lack of Vorbis encoded media failed to prime the pump for widespread adoption (whereas here, everyone is counting on youtube/follower adoption to do so). Surely the forever-free aspect of the software decoder isn't what held back widespread adoption - it was lack of Vorbis users (which was due to lack of users .. etc)

Still, I'll amend my above plan to include some period of royalty-free hardware. The real trouble is device manufacturers not wanting both On2 and H.264 hardware (it's unfortunate that MPEG-LA won't just step up to the plate with perpetual royalty-free software and make the whole issue moot)

<comment><USER6> What's the story with Flash 10.1 for mobile phones? Did they just drop support for all the VP6 encoded Flash video or are they decoding it in software?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I'm given to understand that the h.264 format is encumbered by patents from a number of different companies. This makes me wonder if VP8 is similarly confuddled. Does On2 own all of the VP8 patents in the clear, or would making the format completely unencumbered require coordination with, and permission from, other companies?

<comment><USER8> I thought that VP8 was basically On2's secret sauce, and that they had made all of it.

From their site: (<http://www.on2.com/index.php?599>)

         And with no patent-pool royalty hassles, VP8 licensing terms are flexible and affordable to ensure maximum ROI potential.

So, it'd seem like just them.

<comment><USER9> This definitely doesn't mean VP8 is free and clear. It just means that On2 doesn't have any patents that they were actively enforcing on VP8.

It's quite likely that any number of H.264 or other random patents apply just as well to VP8, especially given the USPTO's penchant for handing out patents that cover even the most basic of ideas. This is Apple's stated reason for refusing to implement Theora. In this vein, it should also be noted that there's no guarantee that licensing H.264 actually covers you for every patent.

<comment><USER10> >In this vein, it should also be noted that there's no guarantee that licensing H.264 actually covers you for every patent.

I'd assume that if someone would be foolish enough to sue a h264 licensee, MPEG-LA (or it's members) would be quick to counter-sue them to oblivion.

<comment><USER8> What would they counter-sue over?

<comment><USER11> They have the nuclear option -- refuse licenses of the in-pool patents to anyone licensing an out-of-pool patent. Most of the patents involved are unusable independently -- you have to license a chain of predecessors.

There's a reason why patent owners just join the pool when they discover they're eligible for a nice easy income stream.

<comment><USER12> MPEG-LA can't do that because the pool has a rule of non-discriminatory licensing. That's one of the (flimsy) bases for their antitrust exemption.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I thought open letters came after closed ones :-) Seriously, the merger just closed, we're only just starting the integration of the two companies.

</comment><comment><USER14> It's immature to expect Google/YouTube to provide two (or more?) copies of every video just to satisfy the open source community, particularly one that would only be compatible within their own browser.

They're probably moving in that direction anyway and will release the codec as an open standard. It is also likely Adobe will support it in Flash to maintain maximum compatibility. The real question is whether Apple will bite...

<comment><USER15> Google already maintains a large number of copies of YouTube videos, one for each quality level and now they've been adding h.264 and they may have some special ones for different devices I don't know about. Asking for one more in a codec that they own is not much to ask.

And this is not related to open source but rather open web. The internet has been successful because of open technologies, meaning technologies that can be freely implemented and worked with by anyone without asking for permission from someone.

Regardless of what direction Google is moving in giving them some developer feedback doesn't hurt and Flash supporting the codec would be a good thing as well (The more support the better).

<comment><USER16> _Google already maintains a large number of copies of YouTube videos, one for each quality level and now they've been adding h.264 and they may have some special ones for different devices I don't know about. Asking for one more in a codec that they own is not much to ask._

Not quite true. They have the following from what I've seen:

1) fmt=6 FLV with ffmpeg ~350kbps (legacy)

2) fmt=18 H.264 Baseline ~500kbps, now with x264 (iPhone support + current default)

3) fmt=22 720p H.264 High with x264, ~2.2mbps

4) fmt=somethingorother 1080p H.264 High with x264, ~4.5mbps

Note that options 3) and 4) don't exist for the vast majority of videos, and thus likely don't cost much disk space. Option 1) is being phased out. Their primary default is 2), a _single format_ that works in Flash, on iPods, on iPhones, and on many mobile devices. They could have saved 30-50% on bandwidth by offering an H.264 High stream for PC viewers, but _they didn't_ because it would have required they keep around a separate stream.

Any argument that Youtube should keep around a separate format for some Purpose X has to confront the fact that Google has thrown away staggering quantities of bandwidth explicitly to avoid offering a separate format.

<comment><USER11> Is it correct that (1) is VP6, not h.263?

<comment><USER16> No, it's H.263. As far as I know, Youtube never used VP6. See <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1132933> for some possible reasons why.

<comment><USER11> Yeah, at least that has multiple independent implementations.

All the On2 stuff just has the one, especially since they only ever released new incompatible codecs instead of improving their older products. Funnily enough that applies just as much to Theora (née VP3), which right now is a only an open standard in theory, not IETF-level reality. There's a few forks of the original On2 code and a transliteration of the decoder to Java for applets (Cortado). I guess people have been working on writing a new DSP decoder, but the whole thing feels like an even worse recapitulation of the ODF lie.

<comment><USER16> This is IMO the core problem with proprietary-based "standards": even if the formats _are_ opened, people rarely make independent implementations of them and bugs often persist for years before being found.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Google uses Flash outside of Youtube. Google Translate and Analytics are two that come to mind. I'm sure there are others.

<comment><USER11> The default file uploader widget in almost all of their apps.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> If they want to be taken seriously they should not make the claim that Theora is as good as H.264 when that is clearly false. Theora is better than H.263, but worse than H.264.

<http://web.mit.edu/xiphmont/Public/theora/demo7.html>

Check out the last graph on the page: when measured using PSNR, Theora tweaked to the max is roughly 50% worse than x264's default settings.

<comment><USER16> Keep in mind that x264's defaults have quite a few psy optimizations that dramatically decrease PSNR, since by default x264 optimizes for your eyes, not the benchmarks.

This now applies somewhat to Theora as well (in current SVN); they ported over a similar optimization to x264's Variance Adaptive Quantization, which dramatically increases SSIM but lowers PSNR.

<comment><USER19> I noticed too, that H.264 has some special threatment to improve encoding of uniform regions which frequently occur in artificial images.

Regardless of what video codec you use, the rate-distortion greatly depends on the encoder software and how you use it. When you use MEncoder's x264-compression for example you can tell it to do multi-pass encoding, more accurate motion estimation, use less keyframes, more frames for pixel prediction, ... . Many people don't even use multipass encoding when they convert their videos.

Update: Here's an interesting website about work on the theora encoder <http://web.mit.edu/xiphmont/Public/theora/demo8.html>

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Even if Google doesn't free VP8, Theora already exists and is used by another of the world's most popular websites: Wikipedia. As more video gets added to Wikipedia, developers of web browsers will have more incentive to support Theora natively. (Note: According to an earlier comment by halo, about 32% of web browsers support Ogg Theora already.)

<comment><USER21> Q?: Is Theory still improving much? Is it possible to improve it a lot without breaking backward compatibility, or would that require breaking legacy support?

I'm all for Theora, but the (admittedly limited) anecdotal evidence that I have is that it isn't quite competitive with h.264 (with a good encoder like x264) at higher rez 720p and 1080p). I might be mistaken on that, though.

<comment><USER16> _Q?: Is Theory still improving much? Is it possible to improve it a lot without breaking backward compatibility, or would that require breaking legacy support?_

The encoder still has a good bit of room to improve; it still lacks proper pixel-domain RD optimization and could use some psychovisual improvements as well. It is primarily crippled by the ancient VP3 specification though. In theory it may eventually be able to eke ahead of Xvid, as while Xvid was a very good MPEG-4 ASP encoder, it never had any significant psy optimizations, so even though Theora as a video format is probably slightly worse, the encoder should be able to surpass Xvid with psy optimizations in some cases.

The primary problem for adoption (not for quality) is its lack of _features_. For many many use-cases, one needs fine-grained control over various parameters, such as the buffer size, the maximum bitrate, the latency, and so forth. The encoder is currently very inflexible, and with no alternative encoding libraries, this leaves very little choice for many applications. For practical purposes, it only has one speed mode: "slow as hell", which makes it basically impossible to stream anything above SD.

<comment><USER21> So if I'm reading this correctly, Theora could compete with Xvid, but h.264 is out of reach?</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Universal TypeScript starter kit for Angular 2 and React - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/trixler/trixly <comment><USER2> Oh something useful for Angular 2. Even when this stuff is good I won't use anything from Google anymore, except Guava and Guice. But with GWT and Angular I learnend the hard way that Google tends to redo some things on a smaller time frame than a small team could come up with new stuff.</comment>


London City Airport Shut as WW2 Bomb Found in Thames - <AUTHOR> http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-43027472 <comment><USER2> There's a lot of this stuff around! About 10yrs ago, my dad caused a lengthy shutdown of the channel tunnel after a piece of metal (he'd assumed it was a machine gun barrel) he picked up on the Somme battlefield was found in the boot of his car during a random search. It was a live WW1 mortar. They closed the tunnel and detonated it at the terminal.

As farmers work on the fields in northern France they regularly find artifacts from the war and just toss them aside as an annoyance.

<comment><USER3> I am very surprised given how little machine gun barrels resemble a motar round!

Was your father prosecuted?

Edit: see stefanfisk comment, there is a surprising similarity between one type of wwi motar and wwi machine gun barrels.

<comment><USER2> He was, yes. He received a 9 month sentence suspended for 2yrs.

<comment><USER3> I am sorry to hear that. That must have been a terrible experience for him and you.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> There is a WW2 shipwreck [1] in the Thames estuary that apparently still has 1400 metric tons of explosives aboard. Remaining explosives include 286 2000lb bombs.

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

<comment><USER5> And also: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beaufort%27s_Dyke](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beaufort%27s_Dyke)

<comment><USER6> My father was in the Royal Engineers and after WWII he was part of the unit dumping this stuff. He claimed there were also tonnes of mustard gas and very dodgy dynamite dumped too. The dynamite was sweating and gave them all headaches. Terrible job dumping this stuff in the Irish Sea off of a heaving ship.

<comment><USER4> My father used dynamite in his work (geological exploration). He was susceptible to migraine headaches.

I could always tell when he'd been personally setting charges, because he'd come home with a killer headache on those days. Not because of overage 'sweating' dynamite, but because of his high sensitivity to headache triggers like minute amounts of nitroglycerine vapor.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> In Germany, around 5000 bombs from WW2 are discovered and disarmed or detonated each year still. Most of these don't make news. Some of them make it to regional news when they need to evacuate parts of towns or cities for safety. Other than that, this massive effort is mostly under the radar.

edit: the number I remembered was lower than the actual count.

<comment><USER8> The authorities had to detonate a bomb in Munich (Schwabing) back in 2012 which did not work out as planned:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kwjmf5wwLL0](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kwjmf5wwLL0)

<comment><USER9> In another video ([https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NRccXqD5KsY](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NRccXqD5KsY)) some of the people involved were interviewed and they all say that it went exactly as planned, because a detonation with a radius of 300 meters was planned.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> The last time that this happened in London was 2-3 years ago:

[https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/army-explosives- exper...](https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/army-explosives-experts- prepare-to-defuse-and-detonate-500lb-wwii-bomb-dug-up-under-bethnal- green-a2463316.html)

"The bomb is 10ft from my flat on the other side of a wall and I've had so many parties here if it was going to blow up, it would have done so by now."

<comment><USER11> They're pretty common. More like one every month or three and it's only the big ones that make the news. From a 2015 BBC piece[0]:

"A guide on dealing with unexploded devices was released by the Construction Industry Research and Information Association (CIRIA) in 2009."

"An estimated 15,000 items, ranging from unexploded bombs to small mortar rounds and grenades, were removed from UK construction sites between 2006 and 2008, the association said"

[0] [http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk- england-33861431](http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-33861431)

<comment><USER12> Given that there was no fighting on the ground in the UK during WW II, why are mortar rounds and grenades found?

<comment><USER13> Practise ranges on greenfield sites that are now being built over.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Here in Germany in an average large city we get this every other week or so. Luckily so far these duds don't seem to self-ignite after more than 7 decades in the dirt.

</comment><comment><USER15> There's a great book about this phenomena, "Aftermath: The Remnants of War." Apparently unexploded ordinance in Europe from WWI is very common because trench warfare lasted for years and, due to relatively primitive manufacturing techniques, mortars, bombs, etc. often failed to detonate. That explains a lot of the comments below about French farmers getting killed by ancient munitions

[https://www.amazon.com/Aftermath-Remnants-Landmines- Warfare-...](https://www.amazon.com/Aftermath-Remnants-Landmines-Warfare- Devastating/dp/067975153X)

</comment><comment><USER16> Here in Hong Kong last week, two different American 1,000 lb. bombs were found a couple days apart during construction on reclaimed land (Wan Chai), dropped during the Japanese occupation. Presumably, they fell in the shallow bay, sank in the mud, and were later covered by lasdfill as one of the densest populated areas on earth expanded.

</comment><comment><USER17> If you're in to this kind of stuff, I recommend "Aftermath: The Remnants of War," by Donovan Webster.

</comment><comment><USER18> A related recent post: "Bomb Sight – Mapping the World War 2 London Blitz Bomb Census"

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16141839](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16141839)

</comment><comment><USER19> This thing seems to happen once in a while and all the times I can remember the bomb is safely disarmed, which obviously is the best outcome.

Does anyone know how long ago it was that one of these things actually unintentionally exploded?

<comment><USER20> In Germany at least as recently as 2014: [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/105...](http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/10550492/Construction- worker-dies-as-World-War-II-bomb-explodes-in-Germany.html)

Unexploded ordnance is a sad thing, causing continued death and misery (mostly land mines) long after whatever war it was meant for has ended.

<comment><USER21> Cluster bombs are also horrific devices and should not be used by anyone including the United States.

[1] [https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/01/us/cluster-munitions- pent...](https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/01/us/cluster-munitions-pentagon- south-korea.html)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> During WW I, what is now American University in Washington, DC, had a chemical warfare station. Once the war was over, the unit disposed of the ordnance using standard operating procedures: they dug holes, rolled the shells in, and filled the holes. About 70 years later, when the fields around AU had been developed with expensive houses, people (including I think the Korean ambassador) started finding the shells in their gardens. A lot of money has been spent since on the cleanup.

</comment><comment><USER23> there's a lot of it about. We sometimes hear sea mines being blown up the Royal Navy, or hear about them being caught in fisherman's nets. Must be way worse in Germany.

<comment><USER24> Reasonably regular occurance in France, too.

<comment><USER25> According to Wikipedia "the French Département du Déminage (Department of Mine Clearance) recovers about 900 tons of unexploded munitions every year"

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

<comment><USER26> And, in the most heavily-impacted areas such as Verdun, they estimate that it will take not less than 700 years to clear the areas, at the present rate.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> Where I grew up in Scotland the problem was ww2 mines (the spiky kind you see in submarine movies).

</comment><comment><USER28> Maybe they should leave it shut.

This airport means that a good share of the east londonders have to live their lives under noise so the 1% can get to their meeting a little bit more easily.

To me it's an example of social oppression.

<comment><USER10> The Green party had a fairly good plan for London City Airport:

Close it down, replace with "thousands of new homes within easy reach of central London"

[http://www.sianberry.london/news/pollution/our-plan-to- redev...](http://www.sianberry.london/news/pollution/our-plan-to-redevelop- the-london-city-airport-site/)

Which seems fair to me - surely a better site for an airport would be larger, further out and well-connected by rail? This applies to Heathrow as well.

<comment><USER29> Not very Green, tho', is it? If it is closed it should be replaced with something, well, green, like a public park or a nature reserve.

<comment><USER10> > Not very Green, tho' ... green, like a public park

I refer you to the same site for actual green party policies

[http://www.sianberry.london/the-power-of-good- ideas/manifest...](http://www.sianberry.london/the-power-of-good- ideas/manifesto-for-london/) [https://london.greenparty.org.uk/assets/files/londonfiles/Lo...](https://london.greenparty.org.uk/assets/files/londonfiles/London_Green_Party_Manifesto_2016_Final_Web_Single_Pages.pdf)

I think their conception of what is "green" for the inhabitants of London is a little wider than just "public parks", though that is mentioned. But not specifically for that site.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Crema Coffee in San Jose Closes Due to ADA Lawsuit - <AUTHOR> https://sanjosespotlight.com/access-v-abuse-crema-coffee-in-san-jose-closes-due-to-ada-lawsuit/ <comment><USER3> This google review for the attorney mentioned in that article is heartbreaking

Dear Tanya Moore, you don't know me, but I've been following your exploitation of small business owners across the Bay Area for some time after you sued my parent's Mom & Pop copy shop for minor ADA infractions. They never recovered financially. From there followed a divorce and subsequent estrangement from both their children after unbearable drama and suffering. Our family has never been the same since you and Robert Kalani put a cloud over our lives. I want you to know what kind of chain reaction your actions and how you chose to use your law degree caused. Your aggressive tactics on small business owners who are already barely surviving is frankly despicable and your immoral decisions have negatively affected approximately 30+ people in just this one case. It looks like your day of reckoning has recently come in July '19 and I hope legislative changes follow as well.

[https://www.google.com/search?q=Tanya+E.+Moore&oq=Tanya+E.+M...](https://www.google.com/search?q=Tanya+E.+Moore&oq=Tanya+E.+Moore#lrd=0x808fcc999f6f1ed1:0xcc6de6b057e250b5,1,,),

<comment><USER4> Predators exist in many forms, not all of them masculine or violent.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> On one hand, this happens, on the other, I use hearing aids and I cannot get Apple to give me a receipt for my AppleCare payment because the only way to get that is to call an internal Apple department, and that department has no email, no TTY, nothing but a phone number. I cannot call phones.

And Apple doesn't care. What are you going to do, sue them for ADA violations? That's only for mom-and-pop coffee shops.

ADA has a purpose. However, it should be limited to corporations above a certain revenue (like how GDPR is limited) and the cost of non-compliance drastically increased. At this point, Apple can afford to be non-compliant while this coffee shop has to close, which is the worst of all possible worlds.

<comment><USER6> _I cannot call phones._

I thought it was possible for deaf people to call 711 and get an operator to relay the call. We get relay calls like that in our call center frequently.

<comment><USER5> Ideally this should work, but this involves the patience of other person to wait for you to type in, and the text that comes your way to be accurate. In my experience, unless you're calling a TTY-specific number of a company, neither will be in plentiful supply, and I've had people just drop the call once they realise what's happening.

<comment><USER7> Don't TTY operators explain what's happening upfront?

<comment><USER8> In my experience, yes, they do. I worked as tech support for an ISP and had customers call in for support using a TTY relay. The operator explained it up front, then started the conversation.

If I had dropped the call because of that, I'm sure my manager would have been very unhappy.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Here's the suit PDF if anyone wants to read.

[https://www.sanjoseinside.com/wp- content/uploads/2020/01/Cre...](https://www.sanjoseinside.com/wp- content/uploads/2020/01/Crema-ADA-Lawsuit-2018.pdf)

The message seems to be: this is a nice thing, I can't readily access it, so nobody should have it. Like the kid taking his ball away after losing at soccer. Except this is someone else's ball?

Open to changing my view

<comment><USER10> Comparing being in a wheelchair to losing at soccer seems reductive to me. Being in a wheelchair is completely life-changing and having public spaces being accessible is a very good thing for the quality of life of people being in this terrible situation.

The ADA has dramatically improved accessibility for those with mobility impairments:

" When asked whether access to public facilities had improved, 75 percent or more of respondents in 1994, 1998, and 2000 reported that they had perceived improvement. Not surprisingly, the percentage of people with disabilities going out to restaurants regularly has increased from 34 percent in 1986 to 57 percent in 2004."[0]

[0]: [https://ncd.gov/rawmedia_repository/f493e262_8a9e_49c8_ad84_...](https://ncd.gov/rawmedia_repository/f493e262_8a9e_49c8_ad84_404a1b91d7c3.pdf) pg 45

<comment><USER11> Having access to facilities _is_ very important, but that is not what was achieved here. Now the facility is gone and nobody can access it.

If the goal was to increase access to this facility, it failed miserably.

<comment><USER12> It's not the plaintiff's fault that the defendant preferred to close up shop vs comply with the law, even if they are the one who pointed it out.

<comment><USER13> The defendant is a small business = real humans you can talk to. Maybe they could have explained that they did not have the money yet but could gladly bring coffee outside with more service in the meantime. It's easy to hide being legalism (especially for us engineers who like logical systems) and ignore the human factor and individual moral choices. Yes legally the plaintiff has the right to ruin a small business. But it's not necessary the right choice.

<comment><USER14> Totally. For example, if your neighbors are having a party that's breaking noise laws, it's always better to go talk to them, then if they are jerks, report them to the police.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> We lost a great pizza place down here in Gilroy for the same predatory-ADA reason. The owners were/are great folks, and deserved better. I've known many small businesses that have had this kind of issue, too, and almost without exception the suit had no moral merit. It's infuriating, and I say this as someone who is very much in favor of ADA-style accommodations in general. But they way things currently work as written is fundamentally broken.

<comment><USER16> I see the topic getting covered in a local newspaper pretty frequently.

* [https://padailypost.com/2019/03/22/another-business-hit-with...](https://padailypost.com/2019/03/22/another-business-hit-with-an-ada-lawsuit-by-a-frequent-plaintiff/) * [https://padailypost.com/2018/01/05/2-local-restaurants-settl...](https://padailypost.com/2018/01/05/2-local-restaurants-settle-ada-lawsuits-brought-by-frequent-litigants/)

A lot more can be seen in this site search, they really follow these stories and do a good job raising awareness of the problem: [https://duckduckgo.com/?q=site%3Ahttps%3A%2F%2Fpadailypost.c...](https://duckduckgo.com/?q=site%3Ahttps%3A%2F%2Fpadailypost.com+ada+lawsuit&ia=web)

There's a real good in depth outline of the whole subject covered by Mark Pulliam who used to practice in CA. [https://www.city-journal.org/html/ada- litigation-monster-151...](https://www.city-journal.org/html/ada-litigation- monster-15128.html)

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> This is what is known in the common law as barratry: lawsuits filed not for justice but for profit.

<comment><USER18> There's a guy in NYC who does this and shuts small businesses down that can't afford to make the required changes. It's usually a small restaurant with a bathroom down narrow stairs that would cost a fortune to renovate to modern code. It feels like an exploitation of the law.

There's another guy recently who has been trying to shakedown small businesses by threatening a huge lawsuit if they don't pay him 50k to go away. He uses a wheelchair but it's a prop as he was found out to be able to walk.

Anything new, sure it should be accessible. Old building's where it would cost a fortune? It's not practical.

<comment><USER19> >He uses a wheelchair but it's a prop as he was found out to be able to walk.

I don't know anything about this guy specifically but I just want to point out many wheelchair users have some ability to stand and walk. Merely having the ability to walk doesn't necessarily mean someone's wheelchair is a "prop" or unnecessary.

[https://www.realsocialskills.org/blog/respecting- wheelchair-...](https://www.realsocialskills.org/blog/respecting-wheelchair- users-who-can-walk)

[https://www.dailydot.com/irl/ambulatory-wheelchair-users- exi...](https://www.dailydot.com/irl/ambulatory-wheelchair-users-exist-annie- segarra/)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Possibly relevant to the spirit of the lawsuit... the other Crema location mentioned at the end of the article is almost directly across the street. This second location is at street level and accessible by wheelchair. I'm all for enabling access, but in this case, I'm also left wondering if the plaintiff was actually denied access to Crema's products or services. The law is the law, but the spirit seems off here.

</comment><comment><USER21> A question, if there is someone that can answer this:

It said her options were either build a ramp for $100k or settle for $60k. Who can she settle with, and who agrees that she doesn't need to build a ramp anymore? What happens if someone else comes along and wants a ramp?

<comment><USER22> Can someone explain to me why a ramp costs $100k?

<comment><USER6> I don't know anything about the building, but I can easily see how that could happen.

Lawyers. Architects. Permits. Construction. Traffic control during construction. Environmental studies. Heck, even archeological studies if it's the right area. Maybe even soil remediation if it's determined there's anything below the ramp, like oil or radon, or who knows what.

Plus, if any of it touches the sidewalk, you might have to pay the city rent every month for as long as the building stands.

<comment><USER23> Or, put plywood over half those steps? Probably its not the steps - its the doorway being rebuilt. On a historic building.

<comment><USER24> Plywood over half the steps would be far too steep.

<comment><USER23> Yeah, but there's that long bottom step. Extend it all the way to ground level? Anyway, sad to lose this business.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> People get upset over this kind of cases but not being able to access a business is as discriminatory as the business shutting the door to someone because there's something the business does not like about that person. Discrimination is discrimination.

The ADA act has made a huge difference in people's lives since it's passage in the '90s. We see these stories over and over which, is important to keep in mind, the exception not the rule. The majority of buildings are built ADA compliant now and most older buildings can be modified relatively inexpensively.

Yes, this was the exception but even, in this case, the business was merged with another local building.

One thing people always forget is that we all get old and many of us will end up with mobility limitations and we will be glad that a business is ADA compliant and we have the ability to access it.

<comment><USER26> Like the ADA or not, this sentence is not true

> People get upset over this kind of cases but not being able to access a > business is as discriminatory as the business shutting the door to someone > because there's something the business does not like about that person.

There is a _huge_ difference, morally and legally, between

\- Not spending $$$ on accommodating people.

\- Not going out of your way to accommodate people.

\- Closing your door in the face of potential business because you don't like people.

It so happens that the ADA prohibits all of them (Edit: Language quoted below makes me unsure about whether or not it actually fully prohibits the first), many other anti-discrimination laws do not, and certainly I do not view someone who does the first the same as someone who does the third.

<comment><USER25> >I do not view someone who does the first the same as someone who does the third.

This is exactly why we have the law in the first place. If a group of people vs another can't access a business then it's discrimination. Which means a whole group can't get the services they need. If everyone felt like you did then stores, parks, schools and so many more services that are essential to life would be inaccessible to that group.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> Headline is misleading due to last paragraph:

"While the 950 Alameda location permanently closed Friday, coffee aficionados can visit the other Cafe Crema location at 1202 Alameda. "

One has to wonder whether this was anticipated given the new location is 2 blocks away.

<comment><USER28> I'm pretty sure that is not true, because (as someone who has been to both locations) the original location was too busy. The staff I talked to at the second location also told me that the second location was opened because the first location was so busy. And the article references this also:

"Over the years, the shop grew into a well-recognized brand, leading Tran to open another location down the street in 2017."

<comment><USER29> But she can't afford to comply with laws and regulations that all other business owners must? 100k for a wheelchair ramp? Come on.

<comment><USER27> I doubt the case is that the business couldn't come up with the money - <USER2> could have taken a loan, for example - but more likely it just wasn't worth the investment given the success of the much larger location within walking distance.

<comment> blaser-waffle As mentioned above, it may be a 60k to settle, 100k+ to build something compliant, or close down (and maybe move to another location).

It's not hard to see why it's not worth the investment. Shut it down, take the breach of contract hit on the rent, and then use that would-be-ADA-compliance loan to pick up at a different location.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> What I'm trying to figure out is how is this not the landlord's responsibility rather than the commercial tenant's?

<comment><USER31> Virtually all business leases are "triple net", with the tenant being on the hook for every expense from taxes to casualty to maintenance and improvements. Commercial landlords aren't some kind of essential component of American capitalism, they are just jerks who live at the beach and have no skin in the game.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> > But under California law, a disabled person cannot claim money if they send > the business owner a letter with their complaint first.

Seems like a decent thing to do to at the least raise an issue with a business owner and bring it to their attention, ideally face to face.

> ...businesses are not given warnings or a "grace period" to correct > violations. > > Plaintiffs can simply sue with little or no notice. That's > why law firms like Moore's can easily swoop in with a lawsuit.

Seems like businesses should be given a chance first. Seems like the barrier is too low to get these lawsuits dealt out. Give folks a fair chance. This may even be an opportunity for some civic body of volunteers or even a chamber of commerce to proactively approach businesses in advance and get them into shape.

<comment><USER32> Face to face? The issue is they can't get up the stairs to the door.

That said, I don't understand why sending a letter should cost you there ability to claim damages later.

<comment><USER16> Sure, a phone call should suffice to arrange some face to face discussion. They'd basically call to arrange meeting at a more accessible location, even if its only the sidewalk immediately outside.

I don't understand that restriction either about forfeiting damages. I'm not sure the details precisely, but I'm of the opinion of second chances and a three strikes you're out sort of deal here. Maybe not literally three but obstinate refusal to address the problem.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> ADA is not exactly a new law -- it was over a decade old when Tran set up shop.

It's entirely on her (and her real estate surveyor) for not doing the diligence to ensure that her coffee shop was accessible. I can't shed too many tears here, since she's got a profitable business; enough to expand.

ADA accessibility is great. Not just for the disabled, but for everyone with reduced mobility. Ever tried to get around old European cities? It's tough even for the able bodied. Imagine that, every day, for those who are permanently with reduced mobility, including the elderly, sick, pregnant, or otherwise handicapped.

<comment><USER34> Yes, I have spent quite a lot of time in old European and colonial cities. They have charm in exactly the way that US cities do not, and it's a shame. I wish US cities were a lot more like European cities and a lot less like corporate strip malls.

I would be wholly in favor of repealing (or at least seriously limiting) the ADA. Yes, it sucks to be mobility impaired, but we don't need to bring the whole world down to the lowest common denominator.

<comment><USER35> > we don't need to bring the whole world down to the lowest common > denominator.

... says the man who isn't disabled.

<comment><USER36> While I get what you mean, he's right: there's a line that's going to get drawn somewhere, like as not. Now where exactly is something beyond my ken but there are definitely things that will never be viable for the disabled.

In all honesty? I'd rather devote the resources to helping disabled people function fully (or near-fully) again. But that in of itself is sort of wishful thinking.

<comment><USER37> I would love to be able to walk just like anyone normal. Instead, I deal with major pain every day of my life because assholes like you refuse to build in basic, small things like a fucking chair to sit on while waiting, usually because "it would hurt the asthetics" or some dumb notion like it (ie: apple store, malls, amusement parks...).

ADA is the lowest common denominator. Its not asking for you to rebuild a whole building -- it asks for reasonable concessions to be made -- and its absolutely _amazing_ how business owners go _out of their way_ to make it harder on themselves and the disabled.

What I don't understand is this "line" that "must be drawn" I've seen from you and others: the point is to negotiate and find a compromise between the disabled and the owner within reasonable limits. The fact that businesses and public institutions are unwilling to play ball and throw their toys out of the pram every time this comes up is amazing and sad that it even comes to that point. Usually because upfront investment in the material/business is smaller and usually beneficial for everyone in the long run!

In TFA, crema bought the location _years_ after ADA was already law. The fact that it became a risk to them now is unsurprising, and the fact that they're closing that location is sad for both parties.

The fact that it's also possibly a predatory lawsuit is also sad, and I hope something that can be rectified -- but I'm also not surprised to hear of such high numbers of lawsuits over the problem, given how old the law is now, and given how many places I have been to in the valley that don't have ramps.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> I think you guys really ought to read about the lawyer that was only briefly highlighted in the article:

[https://www.almanacnews.com/news/2019/07/07/judge-finds- witn...](https://www.almanacnews.com/news/2019/07/07/judge-finds-witness- tampering-in-ada-lawsuit)

</comment><comment><USER39> Thirteen years ago ADA had been law for sixteen years. The owner ignored it from day one. The owner had 13 years to bring the cafe into compliance.

<comment><USER40> And in all that time they may have never been able to afford it. Perhaps the city should just demolish the building and build an ADA-compliant one on the taxpayer's dime.

<comment><USER39> Suppose the shop sells one item per minute, is open twelve hours a day, and six days a week. Allocating $0.10 per item is $6.00 per hour, $72.00 per day, and $21,000.00 per year. Over 13 years, that's more than a quarter million dollars and more than twice the claimed cost of the ramp. For context, we are talking a dime per item in Silicon Valley. Per this website, a small cup of coffee is $2.00. [https://zmenu.com/crema-coffee-roasting-co-san-jose- online-m...](https://zmenu.com/crema-coffee-roasting-co-san-jose-online-menu/)

<comment><USER40> 10 cents might very well be the margin on a cup of coffee. But from the little I know of the food service industry, that might be generous.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER41> I could have sworn that ADA had provisions to protect buildings that were older and where upgrades would be too costly to implement. This sounds like that is the case... What am I missing?

<comment><USER19> Seems complicated...???

[https://www.burnhamnationwide.com/final-review- blog/a-misund...](https://www.burnhamnationwide.com/final-review- blog/a-misunderstood-area-of-ada-compliance-existing-facilities)

>Title III also specifically states that for public accommodations discrimination includes "failure to remove architectural barriers . . . in existing facilities" unless it can be shown that removing a barrier is "not readily achievable" or accommodations cannot be provided through other means. (See 42 U.S.C. Section 12182(b)(2)(iv)&(v))

>The ADA defines readily achievable as "easily accomplishable and able to be carried out without much difficulty or expense." The statutory definition also provides factors to be considered in determining whether barrier removal is readily achievable and recognizes what may be achievable for one business might not be for another:

>The nature of cost of the required barrier removal;

>The financial resources of the involved facility or facilities;

>The number of people employed by the facility;

>The effect on the facility's expenses and resources;

>Impact on the operation of the facility;

>Overall finances of the covered entity;

>The number of employees in the covered entity;

>The number type and location of its facilities;

>The type of operations of the covered entity, including the composition, structure and functions of its workforce; and

>The geographic, administrative or fiscal relationship of the facilities at issue to the covered entity.

>(See 42 U.S.C. Section 12181(9))

</comment></comment><comment><USER42> Clearly the ADA lawsuits are weaponized by people looking for quick paydays via settlements, but on the other hand, this building is clearly not accessible, and it isn't just a "small, "technical violation" that can be easily fixed if a letter is sent to the business owner".

I think the real question is - why do purchasers not fold ADA costs into their asking price for old buildings? This building has not been ADA compliant since before the current owner bought it. She(or her agent) should have been aware that they should actually be getting a $100k discount on the building if she needs to install ramps there to make it legal to run a business.

<comment><USER43> Yes, but the best (most benefit to society) solution is likely building inspectors verifying compliance when buildings/business change hands. Not plantiffs demanding sums of money to be paid personally that could be put towards the remediation.

<comment><USER42> I completely agree. The fact that a complainant can demand money to drop the suit on a personal payment seems wrong - I would like to see either reasonable damages(I couldn't enter the coffee shop so my friend had to go in for me - $10 damages), or only allow payoffs to be put into a general ADA fund and not go to enrich the individual.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER44> I was one of the last artists to show there a few months back. It was a really cozy, laid back spot. These kinds of ADA lawsuits are malicious and the perpetrators should be themselves disbarred.

</comment><comment><USER45> This article shows everything wrong with America. Lawyers abusing laws and finding loopholes to satisfy their personal greed at the expense of small businesses and communities.

Current America really isn't small business friendly but more optimized for large corporations. This can't be good for the future.

<comment><USER32> What's the loophole? This establishment is breaking the law as it is currently written.

Perhaps you want an exemption for small businesses (which others might call a loophole).

</comment></comment><comment><USER46> Not an expert, but $100K claimed by the owner seems rather much. A third party assessment would be good to procure. Given the touted popularity, cost would be amortized, too. Maybe the owner derived what they had hoped out of the business.

<comment><USER47> She mentioned the building is old. Maybe there are other structural issues that would be brought up if a ramp was installed that would have to be delt with. I don't know though, it's just a guess.

<comment><USER48> Agreed.

"Crema Coffee owner June Tran said bringing her 100-year-old building up to code would cost $100,000."

Bringing a 100-year-old building up to code != installing a ramp.

<comment><USER49> But you need a building permit to install a ramp, and that may come with a requirement to bring it up to code.

<comment><USER37> Then she was already willfully ignorant of the law when she started, long before ADA got involved.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> This is the tradeoff of any regulation or law. Whether it's ADA compliance, minimum wage, environmental regulation, or even just ordinary property rights, there is always some break-even business somewhere that cannot afford $1 in incremental cost to trim the tree growing over the property line (or whatever).

There's no free lunch anymore, we are out of pareto improvements. Of course ADA enforcement will cause some coffee shop somewhere to close. That in itself doesn't tell you very much. You need a fuller cost benefit analysis to tell you if the ADA is good legislation or not.

</comment><comment><USER50> This always seemed very strange to me. If society deems it necessary for every business to be accessible, then society (the government) should pay for it out of tax revenue.

<comment><USER51> Sure, as long as you don't mind us raising the tax rates to get the extra money needed to support your proposal.

<comment><USER50> Well of course. It goes without saying that if I support the ADA then I should be willing to fund it along with everyone else.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER52> There has been a reform initiative proposed to prevent this, I can't tell if it was successful though: [https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house- bill/620](https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/620)

</comment><comment><USER53> I dont understand how it's a "predatory" lawsuit when it appears to actually be valid.

</comment><comment><USER54> The law calls for "reasonable" accommodations. They could argue that folding their biz is not reasonable. But, they'd probably need expensive lawyers to do such, which would cause similar problems.

</comment><comment><USER55> > The disabled man's attorney, Tanya E. Moore, for years has been the subject > of much scrutiny for suing thousands of small businesses across the South > Bay, filing more than 1,400 ADA cases in recent years.

</comment><comment><USER29> If her competitors have to spend money on ADA compliance why should this particular business get a free ride. That would set a terrible presence as it would penalize the good people and actually incentivize businesses discriminating against disabled people. Sanjosespotlight is pretty trashy too. The enquirer of South Bay clickbait journalism.

</comment><comment><USER56> Predatory? I don't see the problem with demanding these businesses, or their landlords, comply with the law to make them accessible.

<comment><USER57> Do you believe this person suffered $60k in damages by not being able to buy a coffee?

<comment><USER58> It's not necessarily about how much damages they suffered. Statutory damages also serve as a deterrent and a way of motivating plaintiffs to pursue ADA compliance suits.

In CA's cast it looks like statutory damages are up to 3x the damages, with a minimum of $4000. That minimum can apply multiple times, as in Hubbard v. Twin Oaks Health and Rehabilitation.

> _Plaintiff asserts that, because the minimum statutory amount is $4,000.00 > per violation, and she encountered the architectural barriers a minimum of > 15 times, she is entitled to damages in the amount of $60,000. Given that > defendant does not present any viable evidence to the contrary, plaintiff > will be awarded the statutory minimum of $4,000.00 per violation, totaling > $60,000._

[https://www.leagle.com/decision/20041331408fsupp2d92311235](https://www.leagle.com/decision/20041331408fsupp2d92311235)

<comment><USER59> The question is whether they were being predatory. Visiting 15 times to put a multiplier on statutory damages, which were already 500x the actual damage, is predatory.

$4000 is a nice kick in the pants but there should be a large delay before the same person can get a second instance of statutory payout, if ever.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER60> Lots of comments on the $100k price tag for a ramp.

I used to work for a small manufacturer in San Jose. We wanted to build a simple, 300 square foot room inside of a 27,000 square foot space that would be attached to one of the space's walls.

What I found most interesting about the estimation process was that no matter what type of structure (including pre-fab earthquake rated) we evaluated for, we couldn't get anything out of city hall for less than total $20,000 spent, with no guarantee that permits would actually be issued.

Then, for any contractor we hired (assuming they were available within the next two years), their hourly rate rivaled the rates of downtown lawyers.

After this experience, I've concluded that most people who pretend to know something about building something in Silicon Valley are just knowledgeless windbags. I know I certainly had no idea how bad it truly is.

</comment><comment><USER61> $100,000 to replace stairs with a wheel chair ramp? Were more fixes necessary than just this, or is that really how much it costs to create a wheel chair ramp?

<comment><USER62> Unfortunately $100K is not that much in the Bay Area. I had to spend $50K total 10 years ago to make my side walk ADA compliant (as it is front of a bus stop) when I bought my place in SF. They would not issue any further building permits otherwise. And that was a fairly simple job without any stairs.

<comment><USER63> "I had to spend $50K total 10 years ago to make my side walk ADA compliant (as it is front of a bus stop) when I bought my place in SF. "

You got had. That sidwealk is public easement and if they demanded ADA work for a public fixture (bus stop) it was on them to pay for it, not you.

<comment><USER62> I wish that this is how it worked. The sidewalk was in 'significant disrepair' and any repairs/replacements have to be ADA compliant: [https://www.sfpublicworks.org/services/permits/sidewalk- repa...](https://www.sfpublicworks.org/services/permits/sidewalk-repair)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER64> Seems like the building owner should be obligated to make the changes to the building.

</comment><comment><USER65> But wait, how does closing just this location resolve the lawsuit?

She has another coffee shop, and a restaurant, and says that she'll be incorporating the empty space into the restaurant.

So I guess that these are all incorporated separately?

<comment><USER65> TFA ends with this:

> While the 950 Alameda location permanently closed Friday, _coffee > aficionados can visit the other Cafe Crema location at 1202 Alameda_. > [emphasis added]

So Cafe Crema is not going out of business. Just the one location is closing.

And there's also this:

> Tran said she could not meet the lawsuit's demands to bring the entrance up > to code, claiming it would cost her upwards of $100,000 to tear down and > rebuild an ADA compliant ramp. The other option to opt for a settlement was > not in the cards either, added Tran, who said she could not afford paying a > massive $60,000 payout.

So if she didn't comply or settle, what happened to the lawsuit? From the complaint,[0] the defendant is:

       CREMA COFFEE COMPANY LLC dba
       CREMA COFFEE ROASTING COMPANY;
       ALI FARHANG

So who owns the second location?

I was wrong about the restaurant, however. From TFA:

> The original Cafe Crema will be consolidated on Feb. 1 into Tran's > restaurant, Pier 402, located at 238 Race Street.

So I guess that entrance will no longer exist, solving the problem.

0) [https://www.sanjoseinside.com/wp- content/uploads/2020/01/Cre...](https://www.sanjoseinside.com/wp- content/uploads/2020/01/Crema-ADA-Lawsuit-2018.pdf)

</comment></comment><comment><USER66> The landlord should not be allowed to rent this space out until it is ADA compliant. It has been THIRTY years since ADA was passed. Enough! It should not be the problem of the business renting the space.

</comment><comment><USER67> ADA, Americans with Disabilities Act. Not Ada the programming language.

I was expecting some bizarre coffee/Java riff with I dunno, TLD Systems or something.

<comment><USER68> Me too. But it turned out that "ada" was in a dictionary we use as part of title processing, which caused it to get re-cased. Fixed now.

<comment><USER69> I worked on a project once where a doodad like that cleaned up Toys "R" Us to Toys "R" United States.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER70> As someone with a relative who is handicapped I have little sympathy for businesses that aren't ADA compliant.

</comment><comment><USER71> It costs $100,000 to build a ramp? That sounds insane (or an outright lie - unless I'm just that out-of-touch with construction costs?).

<comment><USER72> Ramps are surprisingly space-consuming, and might involve reconfiguring doorways, gas lines or meters, water, electrical, mucking about with the sidewalk, building railings and supports, and so on. $100k seems entirely possible in a dense, expensive city. And you might be required to build a masonry ramp. On the other hand, building a compliant wooden ramp to the porch of a woodsy roadhouse might be far less costly.

</comment></comment><comment><USER73> The ADA is a terrible law that should be repealed. It is primarily used by these serial lawsuit trolls for their own payday.

New built businesses should be build to comply with the building code at the time, which can include disabled access.

Older businesses can be upgraded, at taxpayer expense, if that's what the government wants. It's insane and a violation of basic property rights to force business owners to upgrade older buildings at their own cost.</comment>


The most expensive coding font for free? - <AUTHOR> http://www.indiegogo.com/PragmataPro-the-ideal-programming-typeface-becomes-open-source?a=290841&i=addr There is now a fundraising project going on for PragmataPro to make it available for free under a Creative Commons license <comment><USER2> There are just so many wonderful monospace fonts already out there that either come with your OS (Monaco, Consolas, Ubuntu Mono) or are free that I don't know why I should bother.

People still pay for fonts instead of downloading cheap knockoffs because of ligatures, a wide amount of characters and meticulous kerning. All things that a monospaced font doesn't need.

The one thing this font seems to add is that it is supposed to look good without font smoothing. But then, why would anyone care about that in a world where we always render fonts with anti-aliasing anyway?

<comment><USER3> True. There are a lot good monospaced font but it's impossible for me working at screen with these cool fonts for this I designed PragmataPro. Tastes are tastes.

All the glyphs of PragmataPro are designed under suggestions of programmers. In the set there are many glyphs ignored by other monospaced font designers, because I designed this font with programmers for programmers.

PragmataPro are designed to work with and without antilaliasing. And it works

<comment><USER4> Could you give some explicit examples where you think PragmataPro is better than, say, Consolas?

(except for the APL glyphs, I'm not sure if Consolas has those)

Also, what possessed you to make a monospaced programming font _condensed_? Squeezing the proportions that way either allows you more characters on a line (bad programming practice) or less lines on a screen (also not good).

PS in your screenshot, the special ligature things such as the smiley and the (P), are partly cut off.

<comment><USER5> Still not sure if I like it, but squeezing proportions doesn't only allow more characters on a line: in editors that support split views, it allows you to view 80 characters per line side-by-side in two files on screens that aren't as wide, plus fit your file browser on the left (again, if your editor has one). There are definitely uses.

Not sure how the font being narrower results in less lines on a screen, though. I doubt the font height is greater.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> The font looks good. But does it really solve a problem most people need solved? I don't remember last time I though "Hmm, if only I had a better font, I would work so much faster/better...". I did think that when using Linux 10 years ago when my fonts were blurry and fuzzy but not now.

Another way to put it, even if that font was available for free now I don't know I'd bother installing it just because ... there is the step of installing it. I would just rather pick a font from my default OS font choices.

<comment><USER7> Remember that most of the time, people don't know what they want until they see it.

<comment><USER8> Yeah, I have tested this hypothesis on myself. I have tried lots of fonts touted as the best for programming and found exactly zero difference. Time wasted, chalked up to experience.

I think that anyone considering a donation should at least try the freely available fonts to see whether they make any difference.

<comment><USER9> Why are you so determined to damn this effort? Can you imagine launching a weekend web startup project and having someone on here to look elsewhere before considering a donation?

People starting businesses come here to be encouraged, and this guy isn't doing anything wrong. In fact, I wish more creatives would consider these sorts of alternative approaches to patronage.

<comment><USER10> > Why are you so determined to damn this effort?

It's important to give people honest and clear feedback. By blindly encouraging them, you are doing them a disservice. Perhaps he can fine-tune his effort. Perhaps his talents are best applied elsewhere. You simply don't know. If his skin isn't thick enough to accept honest criticism, he shouldn't be starting or doing anything on his own. Honest feedback is important.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Let's delay arguments about whether one should change fonts or not [0] and think about crowdfunding applied to design work. We should be more interested in whether this will work, and why or why not.

Last summer, Hyperakt [1] crowd-funded a beautiful radial depiction of the 2010 World Cup brackets [2]. I paid $25 for a great poster [3], and now Deroy has a new fan.

That project worked for the same reason all Kickstarter projects work: if the project succeeds, users and producers exchange money for goods. If the market doesn't validate your project, consumers aren't committed to pay and producers don't reap any benefits. This is a great model for project planning and idea validation.

On the other hand, this project extracts consumer rents _immediately._ If Fabrizio doesn't hit the $220k goal [4], users only get an _option_ to purchase a license for $100 minus their contribution. No repercussions for the producer--he gets paid regardless. This is fine for licensing an existing font, but it sucks for spec work or otherwise non-existent work.

I'm sure everyone has a few questions about the amount he's charging. [5] However, we should focus on how Kickstarter provides a consumer-friendly market while this project exists on a producer-friendly market. These are some great introductory economic concepts.

EDIT: actually, each market has its own benefits. With Kickstarter, you can obtain market validation for free (or cheap). With IndieGogo, you can guarantee payment on existing products.

\</comment><comment>-

[0] I took an hour to switch from Monaco to Anonymous Pro; now I wish I hadn't wasted that hour but at least I'm set for life.

[1] <http://hyperakt.com/>

[2] [http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/hyperakt/2010-world- cup-...](http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/hyperakt/2010-world-cup-radial- bracket-poster)

[3] Even more beautiful after La Furia Roja took the Cup!

[4] Btw: ouch.

[5] Are we paying for the 4 years of work he's put in? Hasn't he made money from other licenses already? There are probably some obvious answers I'm missing out on.

<comment><USER3> Dude, you are distrustful... it's not the case:

I'm at the 50% of the work with PragmataPro, anyone can realize it just by looking at the screenshots. If I wanted to escape with the loot I would not be so stupid to draw about 1600 glyphs spending 3 years of my life.

Revenue from sales of licenses are not sufficient to cover even 10% of the time I used to arrive here.

Then came the piracy that has stopped the sales.

My dream is to finish this project getting the appropriate reward for my hard work. Am I wrong to dream this?

<comment><USER12> "Appropriate" reward would be the reward the market decides you get, not what you hope for.

<comment><USER3> I seen. Pragmata is a "bestseller" in piracy market...

<comment><USER13> Don't mind the haters here. Good luck to you!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Just wanted to chime in: I paid Fabrizio for PragmataPro last year and haven't regretted it a bit. Maybe paying $100+ for a font isn't for everyone, but my entire life revolves around looking at fixed-width fonts and it's important to me. After trying almost everything else out there, Pragmata/PragmataPro feel much better and make me happier looking at lots of text.

<comment><USER15> Did you have a change to compare it to Bitstream Vera Sans Mono? How does it fare?

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> Having both Latin and Cyrillic scripts done well in a single monospace font is extremely rare. Even Ubunto Mono (which is brand-new and still in active development) is having trouble, and they're professionals who take suggestions from users very seriously. e.g. [http://blog.cosmix.org/2011/10/04/ubuntu- mono-the-gamma-trav...](http://blog.cosmix.org/2011/10/04/ubuntu-mono-the- gamma-travesty/) . No one has said publicly how much Canonical is paying Dalton Maag to make the Ubuntu font family, but I'm sure it's a lot more than $220,000.

<comment><USER3> FINALLY! A person that arrived to the heart of the problem!

I gave my best effort to achieve the perfect balance of symbols, letters Western, Cyrillic, Greek. And someone has noticed!

I tried financiers from Google, Canonical, Apple, IBM, SAS, Microsoft and many other companies with computer connection without success, knowing that these companies have funded other projects of the same caliber of PragmataPro.

I keep hoping to find greater understanding between professionals like you. Don't let me down!

<comment><USER17> > I gave my best effort to achieve .... And someone has noticed!

Perhaps if your campaign page had some verbiage about this font's special features and how it is really different than others, it would help more people to notice?

<comment><USER3> I'll do it. Thanks for this idea

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> 4 years and over 200k dollars seems like quite a bit. I understand being meticulous, but this is a bit absurd.

<comment><USER19> That's less than $ 25,000 / year, or around $ 120 / day. I don't think you can find a decent designer for $ 120 / day.

<comment><USER20> Nor would he _want_ to hire anyone to design a monospaced font for four years.

<comment><USER21> Nor is it very likely that he worked four years, every single day, on this font.

<comment><USER9> If you're genuinely interested, I'd suggest you check out the movie Helvetica.

Fonts often take thousands of man-hours to complete, and faces with extended characters are much more involved.

What this designer might lack in business chops he makes up in generousity. How many competent designers are willing to do something for $25k a year?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> I prefer the coding font Anonymous Pro (has nothing to do with the hacktivist group) - it's located here and it's for free.

<http://www.ms-studio.com/FontSales/anonymouspro.html>

Personally, PragmataPro looks too condensed for me. It is probably more "economical" to use condensed fonts, but to me, it is really not very readable.

</comment><comment><USER23> 43% in Italian taxes? That kind of sucks. He needs an accountant to give advice about (legally) reducing the tax burden to something more reasonable.

<comment><USER24> People engaging in tax avoidance in Italy and Greece are one of the reasons why these countries are balls deep in financial problems at the moment.

I saw a stat the other day that stated there were more Porsches in Greece than people declaring they earn enough to actually afford to buy them (by a significant amount)

<comment><USER25> Huge numbers of people engaging in tax avoidance in Italy and Greece is primarily the result of of a broken tax system.

<comment><USER5> If by broken you mean a catastrophic cultural failure to acknowledge that you should pay your taxes, and a resultant lack of enforcement, then yes.

<comment><USER26> I'd be considering avoidance too if I had to give just under half of everything I make to the government.

*edit And there are perfectly legal ways to reduce your tax burden. The point I'm laboring so hard to make here is that it's an absurd tax rate.

<comment><USER5> Indeed. And then you'd gladly take advantage of the social safety net if you became unemployed, or upon retirement, and of the roads the government built, and of the safety the police provides, etc.

Not paying taxes is great if you don't cost the government anything. All of a sudden, though, when you want the services but don't want to pay for them, you become the leech that people keep accusing the poor of being.

You may say, "but I never said I wanted any of those things!" Too bad. You live in a society, and a democratic one at that (or at least I assume as much—these citizens certainly do). That means if you want to pay fewer taxes, "all" you have to do is convince enough people that the government shouldn't provide a safety net, and then reduce taxes accordingly. In the meantime, just like you can't murder or steal because society says it's wrong, you shouldn't be able to dodge taxes.

And by the by, because these countries have VAT, when people don't pay their taxes, typically what they do is they ask the customer to pay VAT (because it's included in the price), _and then they pocket the resulting money_.

No, there really is no justification whatsoever for tax evasion. At least no more of one than there is for stealing. In the end, it is still illegal. When a government fails to enforce said illegality, you get a system that breaks.

<comment><USER26> The point I was trying to make is that giving half of everything to the government is rather unnecessary in order to have a "social safety net". The things you mentioned, unemployment, retirement, roads, police, etc, don't require giving up half my income.

And guess what? People recognize that. And when people think they're being jerked around..

<comment><USER5> Honestly? You'd have to show me the spreadsheets to prove that assertion. Not that the current system in any country is likely to be 100% efficient, mind you, but I suspect it's more efficient than you give it credit for. That said, that's hand-waving in both directions. I have no numbers to support my own suspicions, either.

Also keep in mind that it isn't half of everything. These systems are typically progressive, so it's likely because this will be a large sum ($220,000) all at once that the tax rate is that high.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> If the 800 days are work days this means 4 years of work. ~200000 dollars really is not much for this time frame - you could even call it a bargain :) Anyway, I think I won't donate since I feel like I might lose the money when the goal is not reached (I don't really want a discount on the license fee).

<comment><USER28> Yeah, I don't gamble. I'm willing to commit to kickstarter because I'll get my money back if the thing falls through.

But whenever they say my money will go towards a discount (or a charity) if the deal fails, I never go for it.

I'm not sure I've ever seen one succeed in that situation, actually.

<comment><USER29> What? You get your money back with Kickstarter? I've never heard of that... I'm pretty sure I've lost a few hundred bucks on failed kick-starters...

I mean, they meet the goal, but the person never delivers.

<comment><USER28> Well yeah, if the person doesn't deliver, you've helped fund them, but get nothing back. That's why kickstarter projects aren't supposed to supply actual value for the pledge. A lot of the latest one offer the product as a bonus, but don't tell you that you won't get the product if they fail.

<comment><USER29> Oh, I see. I guess I've only backed products or software or things where there was a deliverable... even a book once!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> I downloaded the screenshots of this font and have to admit I wish I could use it right now. Looks pretty good to me. That said, the monetary goal seems a bit lofty considering how many people this would really solve a need for.

Still, if the fundraising were arranged on something like kickstarter where I'd get my donation back if it fails to reach the goal I'd kick in a bit. Not terribly interested in a discount on the other license.

</comment><comment><USER31> I don't think this font is ideal for widescreen monitors. Vertical space is more scarce than horizontal space, so a font that increases the former at the expense of the latter doesn't use space efficiently. Leaving space usage aside, is there evidence that a narrow font is more readable?

</comment><comment><USER32> Fabrizio, have you thought about pitching this to Apple? Seriously. I personally don't get it, but it seems like the type of thing that Jobs would appreciate (if he liked it) and say it was worth the money. Ask Apple if they'd buy it for XCode, so all Apple devs could have it.

<comment><USER33> Apple just introduced a new monospaced typeface in 10.6, Menlo. (It's the default in Terminal and Xcode.) Seems unlikely they'd want to bother changing it again so soon.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> If anyone's wondering what the color scheme is, I believe it's Solarized <http://ethanschoonover.com/solarized> (on HN previously <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2393976> )

<comment><USER34> It is - it's actually my screenshot!

</comment></comment><comment><USER35> Why is it so narrow? It reminds me of doing things like "} else {" in code, packing lots of content onto the screen and removing all readability.

<comment><USER36> There are two opposing schools:

One (your?) school says readability is promoted by having _as much visible structure as possible_. The other (mine!) says readability is promoted by having as much visible context at the same time, as long as the structure is apparent.

so instead of

        if (test1)
        {
            do_something1();
        }
        else
        {
            do_something2();
        }

I write

        if (test1) do_something1();
        else       do_something2();

4 times as much context on in the same space. Similarly, where (I assume) you'd write:

        if (a == 1)
        {
             c = "hello";
        }
        else if (b == 2)
        {
             c = "goodbye";
        }
        else
        {
             c = "...";
        }

I write:

        c = a==1? "hello":
            b==2? "goodbye":
                  "...";

or even as a one liner:

        c = a==1? "hello":    b==2? "goodbye":    "...";

Even if you are _not_ used to this style, I don't think you can claim it is unreadable. Just different.

<comment><USER35> In that sort of situation I would definitely prefer the ternary, although nesting them sans (redundant, but explicit) parenthesis isn't something I would do. I also like the somewhat Rubyesque one liners for simplistic if/else pairs.

I just didn't want to write a bunch of nonsense code as an example.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> Folks have launched impressive projects with 10K there. I understand he wants to pay a salary retroactively, but there is no way this is going to make 3.5K per day.

</comment><comment><USER38> This method of project funding suffers from an unfortunate separation of "pain" and reward. I have to hand over my money now, knowing that it _might_ lead to the font being available in 800 days. That is a long time.

Compare this with two major alternatives to this model: Kickstarter and things like the Humble Indie Bundle.

In one, I pledge money now for some future benefit, but I do so knowing that I only end up paying if the project reaches enough support and funding. This feels safe: I can pledge however I think the result is worth, because I only pay if it succeeds.

In the other, I can get my reward immediately (instant gratification!), but I can choose how much to pay for it.

The problem of Indiegogo, is that I have to pay now, but I cannot be sure that I actually get anything in return (a discount on a license is not enough). This means the risk of investment is much higher. I did pledge some money, but not what I would pay for the font were it either in Kickstarter form or through a "Humble Bundle" kind of model. I am sure I am not the only one.

To turn this into some useful advice for Fabrizio: How about giving donators preview access to the unfinished font? This brings the reward closer to the donation :)

<comment><USER3> I thinked a lot of time at a solution to this problem and the best one I found it's this:

In case the campaign does not reach the objective, I will offer to every contributors the regular license of PragmataPro™ at €20 (instead of €170) also if the contributor donate also just $1 only. At the end of this campaign every contributors can claims this offer. But please don't offer anonymously if you want this discount.

It's now written in the fundrasing page of Indiegogo and for me it's like to be signed with blood...

</comment></comment><comment><USER39> I've been using one of the "Proggy" fonts from <http://www.proggyfonts.com/index.php?menu=download> for awhile now... I don't remember which one specifically, I think "Proggy Clean".

This one looks good too, and maybe it'd be better than Proggy or one of the others around, but I don't think it's $220,000 better.

</comment><comment><USER40> This is actually very expensive...

If I made a font like this, I would rather keep it as a donation, as the font was developed out of free will.

BTW I use Menlo...

</comment><comment><USER41> 800 days working without knowing whether or not there was actually a way to make any money?

Lets _not_ talk about whether or not this will work. Lets talk about how this is absolutely not, under any circumstances, a productive way to spend one's time.

187 people bought the previous version of this font. Do some sales projections, estimate market size, review the competition (such as the Ubuntu monospace fonts), talk to the existing customers about the features they actually _use_ everyday (hebrew characters? really?), and even I can conclude that the market isn't going to be viable for the given business plan.

I'm going to call Eric Ries, and ask him nicely if he can send you a copy of his book. Cause' you my friend, are doing it _wrong_ .

</comment><comment><USER42> While depth and ambition of this project is impressive (take a look at the screenshots in the .zip), I think the goal seems a bit lofty, particularly when there are many more-than-adequate free/open-source monospace fonts available.

</comment><comment><USER3> IMPORTANT UPDATE: In case the campaign does not reach the objective, I will offer to every contributors the regular license of PragmataPro™ at €20 (instead of €170) also if the contributor donate also just $1 only. At the end of this campaign every contributors can claims this offer. But please don't offer anonymously if you want this discount.

</comment><comment><USER43> Does anybody have any data on how many people program in greek, cyrillic, or hebrew characters? I suspect that 90% of programs that are out there could be written with 10% of the glyphs that he is proposing to hand hint. Why not focus on those and reduce the price accordingly?

<comment><USER44> There are, for example, comments and string literals, which may be non- english. Also, people use monospaced fonts for all kinds of things aside from programming (for example, my bash spits out errors in cyrillic). And if I pay for a font, I would expect to be able to use it everywhere.

</comment></comment><comment><USER45> PragmataPro looks good, but when ever this topic comes up I always end up going back to Bitstream Vera Sans Mono.

[http://ftp.gnome.org/pub/GNOME/sources/ttf-bitstream- vera/1....](http://ftp.gnome.org/pub/GNOME/sources/ttf-bitstream-vera/1.10/)

</comment><comment><USER46> 13% fees, 43% taxes: Shouldn't the 13% fees be tax deductible, because they were incurred as a result of earning the revenue?

</comment><comment><USER47> What was the program being used for designing the font?

</comment><comment><USER48> $20 RAISED OF $220,000 GOAL

Yeah, I think I'm going to pass on this one.

<comment><USER40> come on.. everyone starts at $0

</comment></comment><comment><USER47> Always wonder how a new user of hacker news get front page to h'm so easily. Seems to easy to game.

</comment><comment><USER49> Off topic: is it just me or why does indiegogo.com resembles so much like userscripts.org</comment>


Rubber duck debugging - <AUTHOR> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rubber_Duck_Debugging <comment><USER2> I used to do this to random things I had on my desk, then a rubber duck (that I lost...), and eventually My Little Pony toys - <http://pic.twitter.com/sijtDFZh> ...turns out that doing a question/reply in my head with a MLP toy with their respective in-show personalities would sometimes help me figure things out.

But I recently adopted a cat, and now my cat is who I talk to when I need to talk a problem over :D <http://www.flickr.com/photos/chix0r/8419684010>

<comment><USER3> I also like to use my cat as a rubber duck, but he tends to get distracted and tries to lie on my wrists while I type.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> My version's far more embarrassing. I go to a real life colleague of mine because I couldn't figure it out for the life of me, and as I explain it to them, I come to the answer myself in the middle of explaining it to them.

So I succeed in wasting my colleagues time and making myself look like an idiot.

<comment><USER5> If you try to explain the problem to your colleague in an e-mail instead of in person, you can avoid sending the e-mail if the answer comes to you in mid- explanation. I can't even count how many bugs I've solved this way.

<comment><USER6> Except a real person can ask questions, even naive ones, and still guide your mind towards the solution. The process is incredibly close to maieutics, with the "duck" playing Socrates.

<comment><USER7> No. Greenyoda is talking about the process where writing down just the initial description of the problem is sufficient to notice the solution. Happens to me all the time, and I also observe it happen to others. My more junior coworkers sometimes sent me IMs like this:

 _Coworker: Hey enraged_camel, I'm having an issue, I was wondering if you can help

It goes like this

<description of the issue, followed by a 10-15 second pause>

Actually I think I figured it out..._

Sometimes I read their problem description and don't respond for several minutes to allow them to have that internal conversation with themselves. And a lot of the time, it works.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Some of my personal favorites: [http://www.dodgycoder.net/2011/11/yoda- conditions-pokemon-ex...](http://www.dodgycoder.net/2011/11/yoda-conditions- pokemon-exception.html) "Pokemon exception catching" (Gotta catch 'em all!)

And in OOP, Spaghetti with meatballs. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spaghetti_code#Spaghetti_with_m...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spaghetti_code#Spaghetti_with_meatballs)

</comment><comment><USER9> Some breeds of dogs are very good listeners. I've heard of libraries where they occasionally have a dog around for children to read to: it apparently is a good experience to learn to read by reading out loud to a patient listener.

I've wanted to have a code dog for a long time. I'd invite the bug hound over and explain my code to it.

</comment><comment><USER10> I tend to do the same thing when I peel away from the screen and take a shower to think on a problem. Maybe instead of keeping it all in my head a rubber duck would be more efficient...

</comment><comment><USER11> A rubber duck HAL-bot would be cool, it would answer with some programming related jibberish from previous questions. You could even feed it some CS literature!

</comment><comment><USER12> Every time this pops up, I just _have_ to mention <http://developerduck.com>

</comment><comment><USER13> Could try talking to an actual bug.

<comment><AUTHOR> Time to get a pet cricket.</comment></comment>


Open-Sourcing Our Incident Response Documentation - <AUTHOR> https://www.pagerduty.com/blog/incident-response-documentation/ <comment><USER2> Interesting. I ran the support function for some of the world's busiest gambling sites' backends. A lot of this looks very familiar!

Probably the most significant thing I learned was the power of automation through Incident Models. I spent 7 months of my own time, full time, writing them for the previous two years' major incidents. This changed my life, as I simply stopped getting called, and juniors only escalated to me when the docs were faulty.

<comment><USER3> Any details you can share kind of things you automated and tools that used?

<comment><USER2> Oh, the automation I'm speaking of there was the automation of human behaviour through following a script/checklist. It helped everyone - the juniors felt more confident about escalating, and they learned from it too.

(I'd read The Checklist Manifesto, which I couldn't recommend enough, BTW).

In more trad automation, I got a little obsessed by automating the construction of environments, but in a human-readable way:

[http://ianmiell.github.io/shutit/](http://ianmiell.github.io/shutit/)

and Docker (wrote this book):

[https://www.amazon.com/Docker-Practice-Ian- Miell/dp/16172927...](https://www.amazon.com/Docker-Practice-Ian- Miell/dp/1617292729/)

See also:

[https://medium.com/@zwischenzugs](https://medium.com/@zwischenzugs)

I should really write up those experiences; the passage of time has given me more perspective on them. I don't work in ops anymore :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> That's a really well written, extensive guide. Thanks to the pagerduty folks for sharing this.

</comment><comment><USER5> That is an incredibly well documented guide. I develop monitoring software and am part of an active on call roster so I've seen both sides. I'm surprised how much information overlaps.

</comment><comment><USER6> Thanks for the documentation. Is is available in GitHub instead of a zip file?

<comment><USER6> Nvmd. After some digging found them here - [https://github.com/PagerDuty/incident-response- docs](https://github.com/PagerDuty/incident-response-docs)</comment></comment>


Yahoo Research Small World Experiment - <AUTHOR> http://smallworld.sandbox.yahoo.com/ <comment><USER2> Read the Terms and Conditions carefully:

        Dissemination of Personal Data. As a Sender, you
        explicitly opt-in to allowing Yahoo! to make available
        to third parties, including without limitation Facebook,
        any and all data that you make available to Yahoo!
        during the course of the Project, in a form which may be
        used to identify you personally. You acknowledge that
        Yahoo! cannot control the actions of these third parties
        with regard to your data.

As a graph-theorist with specific research interests in social networking, this is the sort of thing I'd usually be into immediately. But with those Ts & Cs there's no way I'm taking part.</comment>


Social Hack to Get Me Cast on Mad Men - <AUTHOR> http://diseyeder.com/blog/wordpress/?p=8

<comment><USER2> "You must log in to vote."

Sorry.</comment>