fastfinner

This. I am continually amazed at how few people use Audible. It is an amazing and rich source for books recorded in very high quality (read by voice talents, no stops during audio). I finish a book every 2-3 weeks just by listening on my way to and from class.

Grooveshark is another service I use my phone almost daily for. Play virtually any song on your phone.

Myfitnesspal is yet another. Record daily caloric intake and exercise easily (since you always have a phone around and since you don't know all the calories in the food you eat, but a search-enabled website does).

I also play backgammon while waiting for the bus.

I never take maps to unknown destinations any more. I still remember the times we printed maps before going to tourist destinations in nyc.

I check my email.

I check my calendar.

I talk on skype (via skype mobile). I do international calls without being charged international rates.

I check the weather (mostly the temperature) to know how heavy to wear.

I occasionally take photos when I need to record something (on a blackboard, for example) but don't want to write it down.

the tech is great & the product is very cool, no arguments.

as a a photographer myself, i'm wondering why people actually buy this though? how many photos do people take that they wish they could refocus later?

The problem with this approach is that I would not want to auto-reply to every message, particularly not group lists or important people who expect their stuff to be read on time. I think smokesignal is a lot more subtle.

May I say I jumped at the excitement of seeing vanityfair.com as the source of one of the top 20 articles on HN?

Have you tried fizy.com? You can make playlists of songs from grooveshark, youtube (and possibly more, I haven't tried other sites). I'm not involved in any way with fizy.com, just love the site.

anybody know why spotify is mentioned so much more than grooveshark?

I actually think it's politer and more agreeable to use the asterisk. It's akin to presenting a photo of a bare-chest woman with the nipples striked-out with a black line. Everybody knows what is there, but it makes the picture a lot more agreeable and less obscene.

Are you middle eastern by any chance? :D

I am a photographer and I know I'd hate this feature. It makes street photography a lot more difficult.

I assume by sexual misconduct you mean someone taking pictures in the bedroom (as opposed to photographing women at the beach, which is public space - unless specifically prohibited). I feel that is too specific a protection to make the lives of legit photographers difficult. Instead, more severe punishments could be implemented to protect men and women whose sex videos are filmed without consent.

That's a really inviting email, I love it! Feels much more welcoming than info@ etc.

^Same here, I have taken countless tests using imaginary numbers, but it never went beyond a really pointless exercise in my mind. Now I get it.

IMHO, there should be some description/screenshots before asking a person to do fb-login.

on a tangential note - "This was not the easiest thing in the world for me to sign myself up for, seeing as how I usually tend to avoid going places where there are likely to be people (not a big fan). However, somewhat bizarrely, I do enjoy public speaking, so I decided to give it a whirl."

I thought I was the only one that behaves like that!

Yesss, finally I'll be able to get off Facebook! Even though I use Facebook lists, circles seems a lot simpler and functional. For me, photos, and comments and discussions generated off photos is really important, so I need a social network that my friends are also on. The only other service that all my friends share is GMail, so this is really great.

Great tool all these years, thank you.

Thanks for posting, but I don't understand something. Are these... important people? I've searched for a few president names and none seem to appear. I've also searched a few names on the list and couldn't really understand who they are.

I just don't understand why police officers are so antagonistic towards photographers. Even if they are thinking from a purely "I don't want my mistakes to be caught" point of view, aren't they aware that arresting people in their full legal rights garners a lot more attention than anything they might have been doing in the photos/videos of the person?

I am with you all about all the negative reasons why not to like GoDaddy and Bob Parsons. Just looking at the guy and his macho-posters I really do not feel like I would even want to hold a 5-minute conversation with him. It reeks of BS. That said, I do have (or force myself to have) a lot of respect for the guy. Earning money is not easy. Building and maintaining your company is not easy. Establishing a brand is not easy. Being a billionaire is... whoa. I do think we have a lot to learn from him, despite the fact that we may not like him.

This is exactly the type of rich person that I love. Contributing to public art and creating cultural value.

While it would reduce "fishing expeditions", it would make me feel less secure in the legal system, because I might be afraid of the financial risk to sue someone.

"foreign born citizens that worked hard through the system to get citizenship have a little to be annoyed about"

I'm from this group and I am annoyed. Yes, it sucks that being born on the right side of an imaginary line determines many of your future opportunities. Agreed. Let's change that. Agreed.

But meanwhile, there can't be anarchy. Just because you think it's unfair, you (or your parents) can't go ahead and break the rules, fake to be citizen of a place that you are not, and after enough water has passed under the bridge, come out and expect for everything to be the same, just because you lived your life in a commendable way after that.

I think it's unfair and insulting that he got the opportunity to attend schools in the US, get to do internships in the US, while thousands of children from the Philippines were not smuggled across the border and have to cope with life without such opportunities. Who knows all the great people they might have become if they had started a life in the US.

I guess I'm looking at this situation as if he were someone whose parents faked his admission to MIT, somehow the papers slipped to the right places and he began enrolling, midway through college he learned about the faking, and then he still kept going, graduated magna/summa cum laude ("Pulitzer" - and yes I know MIT doesn't have latin recognitions), and now the truth is out. Even though he did not began college in a criminal way, in my opinion he ended it as such and all his super achievements don't justify keeping the facade.

Of course all that fails if, like you say, there would be no "next in line" because there is no "line", but somehow I think there is. I tend to think there are a finite number of schools, colleges, internships, and jobs. But that seems to be the core of our argument and I may need to change the way I view opportunities in nations.

How is he cheating me? His family "cut the line" in building a life in the US, one of the best nations to be in, in the eyes of many on this planet. His chances of winning a Pulitzer would be severely diminished if his family had stayed in the Philippines. So he cheated me by not being subject to the same US immigration rules as I and the rest of the world. He cheated the many other aspiring college students, journalism interns, journalists by occupying a spot each time he was employed or given the opportunity to advance with fake documents.

Exactly. Paying taxes does not make the situation fair. All his life he has "filled a spot" of an opportunity that would have otherwise been available to someone else. His achievements ("the end") do not justify the means.

If a person's answer to this question is "no, I'd stay, even after I realize that I am breaking the laws of the country", I don't know how that person can expect sympathy after being busted (or "coming out").

May I learn the reason of the down-vote? I am answering to the issue of the fairness of citizenship-by-birth raised in the parent. I draw a distinction between entrenched inequality in world order and the more amenable inequalities.

Exactly. Many, many laws were broken to get this person in and let him stay in the US. I don't see how "feeling like an American" justifies all that.

"Kicking out the people who are already in the country doesn't achieve anything other than waste more money and ruin more lives."

It achieves fairness about who gets in. Rules may need to be revised, etc. No arguments here. But while the revision is taking place or not taking place the rules need to be followed.

"Absent a way to live legally, he has little other choice."

No he has a choice and he chooses to risk being busted and live in the land of opportunities. He can live legally. He can choose to go back to the native country of his parents and start a legal life there. He has graduated from a university in the US. He has done work in the US. He is much better off resume-wise than many of his peers.

Oh on a philosophical level it is quite unfair. It's not fair at all that all humans are not regarded as equals. It's really unfair that I should be withheld from visiting or living on a piece of the planet because there happens the be a group of people on it that made a "nation" and the "nation" has invisible "borders" and the "borders" are by "law" not penetrable by people from my "nation".

But such is the case. If Jose or anyone else wants to change this inherent unfairness they can do that.

Meanwhile, though, I have no sympathy for people who are trying to shortcut the established processes. The "hope for a better life" just doesn't justify bypassing all the other people that wait in line. It is extremely unfair to the people who are also trying to immigrate to the US, but do so by entering lotteries, applying for GCs and all.