Does the user need to approve the recording of your face and screen? If not this could be a serious problem when someone with a mildly-nsfw app (but acceptable to app store) decides the record all the naughty stuff their users do and blackmail them.
The assumption made in this article is that startups with the "get shit done" mantra only say to "get shit done" when you're not performing. I feel like the entire article is based on a bad assumption..
Why? So long as there are proper repercussions against the person who did the deed, if that person wasn't a part of Disney, what could Disney have reasonably done? If there turns out to be nothing it could reasonably have done, then whence comes responsibility?
A lot of people give Twitter Bootstrap crap because everyone is using the design and they get sick of seeing the design on every website. A lot of people miss the whole point of Twitter Bootstrap. It's a design guide, it's for people to quickly create a website. It doesn't mean it's finished after that.
I think people shouldn't blame Twitter Bootstrap, but the people that are using Twitter Bootstrap. They shouldn't stop with styling and design after Twitter Bootstrap is implemented. They should make the design their own.
Note: I'm one of those people. Sometimes I make a design with Twitter Bootstrap at it's core, and not change the styling of the input fields etcetera to make the design not look like Twitter Bootstrap. But that's MY fault, not the creators of Twitter Bootstrap.
Great initiative but I do have some feedback. The first thing I notice is that the top menu is unusable. I have no idea what the links do, I only can guess when seeing the icons. The smiley icon is the most confusing.
The second thing are the icons besides the posts. I guess the goal is to help users categorize posts, with the current number of categories it helps. But when all posts match a category you will could have, in theory, 20 categories. This won't help categorize, this will only help confuse people.
The third thing is the text. The lack of dots between the timestamp, username and count of points completely confuses me. When I read the entire line, I will think that Benjamin F. added 3 points 28 minutes ago to the link above. When in fact there are a total of 3 points added to the link above, the post submitter is Benjamin F. and the link was submitted 28 minutes ago. Placing two simple dots helps users not get confused.
I notice a lot of designers want to design something visually attractive but completely don't think about UX/UI. This is a perfect example.
When I see stuff like this, I'm always puzzled how someone tested it and said, "Yeah, this works great." It took me about ten minutes to figure out how to close the drop-down panel after I opened it by hitting the "+" sign.
Also, the tooltips on the timestamps make no sense. I'm not a fan of the "x hours ago" style of relative timestamp, and much prefer to just know the actual date and time an item was posted. Some sites, such as reddit, give you an absolute timestamp in a tooltip when you hover over a relative one, e.g. hovering over "2 hours ago" on a reddit comment produces a tooltip that says "Mon Jan 21 12:15:37 2013 UTC".
But hovering over "about 2 hours ago" on a Designer News post produces a tooltip that says "20 minutes ago". What's going on here?