goorpyguy's comments

This is a good analogy, actually. You want a chance to do the work, and have people see your good work. You want that badly enough that you're willing to do the initial work for free.

Has there been an analysis done as to how the LOC exemptions with interplay with the TPP anti-circumvention requirements?

Will the LOC still be able to grant these? If not, the year-long delay may be just long enough that there is actually never an open window.

You'd probably have to check algorithmically. Starting from the top-left most piece, have they (reasonably fuzzily) covered the 6x10 grid proceeding down and right? If so, yay! You can also check for things like too much overlap, but checking if there is a piece covering each of the centers of the relative grid should be sufficient.

My first solution: http://i.imgur.com/rV2Ueow.png

edit: It also was not clear up front that I could click to rotate/flip the pieces, until I did it by accident.

I'll agree with you there, I like seeing the thought process that fed into this. We've had similar experiences having difficulty explaining why certain things are painful and then quantifying "how painful" and why. This seems to really try to address that, at least as a first step.

I've been thinking for a while that there need to be incentives put in place for companies who short-change their their employees (and by extension, the public as a whole) by hiring 3 part-time workers instead of one full-time.

This goes towards the "good job" / "American Dream" aspect of the article. People shouldn't have to work 2 or 3 part-time jobs to make a living if they don't want to, just because those are the jobs available. If somebody wants full-time employment (for which they are otherwise qualified), it would be better for them to have that.

Of course, it is cheaper for the corporations to use part-time, because it keeps them flexible with scheduling/substitutes and due to added costs like benefits etc.

I have been trying to figure out whether it makes sense to offer tax incentives/penalties which would push the balance towards more full-time jobs instead of part-time. One piece I have envisioned is forcing employers to offer the benefits a full-time employee would receive prorated to part-timers, with a penalty added for splitting it up. Make them want to offer a full-time job instead.

The part I am worried about is whether the effect is too strong and prevents somebody who actually only wants part-time work from finding employment (e.g.: a student, full-time parent, senior citizen or handicapped person). There needs to be some part-time work available, but generally a member of the workforce probably wants a full-time job.

HN was causing problems for me earlier (as seen by by duplicate replies above that I eventually put in as an edit...) but I wanted to say thanks.

Also I wanted to make two suggestions if you're looking for features to build: 1) Highlight "important" annotations in the console in some way. 2) Allow option for submitted notes/screenshots to be forwarded via email both as archive and for searchability etc.

Thanks for sharing!

I was digging looking for this too, and as far as I can tell it leverages html2canvas.js: https://github.com/niklasvh/html2canvas/releases

After some more testing, in Chrome I can make it work by just closing the Dev Tools windows, but Firebug gets caught up on it as long as it is enabled, even if not open currently. This means I have to disable Firebug entirely in order to use this on my page. I don't really want to do that, as I am using it in my workflow for otherwise debugging the code I manage.

In Chrome I can make it work by just closing the Dev Tools windows, but Firebug gets caught up on it as long as it is enabled, even if not open currently. This means I have to disable Firebug entirely in order to use this on my page. I don't really want to do that, as I am using it in my workflow for otherwise debugging the code I manage.

In Chrome I can make it work by just closing the Dev Tools windows, but Firebug gets caught up on it as long as it is enabled, even if not open currently. This means I have to disable Firebug entirely in order to use this on my page. I don't really want to do that, as I am using it in my workflow for otherwise debugging the code I manage.

In Chrome I can make it work by just closing the Dev Tools windows, but Firebug gets caught up on it as long as it is enabled, even if not open currently. This means I have to disable Firebug entirely in order to use this on my page. I don't really want to do that, as I am using it in my workflow for otherwise debugging the code I manage.

You have a "debugger;" call in addToFirebase that's making my Firebug angry. I can't seem to make the script panel ignore this line, even with a conditional 1==0 breakpoint.

Would you be able to take the "debugger" calls out of the production code?

edit: After some more testing, in Chrome I can make it work by just closing the Dev Tools windows, but Firebug gets caught up on it as long as it is enabled, even if not open currently. This means I have to disable Firebug entirely in order to use this on my page. I don't really want to do that, as I am using it in my workflow for otherwise debugging the code I manage.

Does it have a javascript engine? Because we had to abandon BeautifulSoup/Mechanize over this a couple years ago and switch to HTMLUnit (Java).