Why anything from MSNBC even makes it to HN, let alone the ridiculous content...?

Also on Google+ post editor

Never really used Facebook much, but I like and use Google+ regularly. A lot of my geek friends are already there, as well as many photographers. There's a thriving photography community on Google+, and it's very engaging.

The visual contrast between Metro's modern look and the vulgarity of the standard Windows GUI is nauseating.

I hope Apple won't be tempted, rather, I'm sure they will not. It looks incoherent: from the the Metro UI's concept of tiles, which I dislike, to the duality of the desktop as an app. Cool for geeks, maybe, horribly confusing idea for anyone else. It's stupid to force a full fledged desktop into a tablet. Yet again, anything with a fan is not really a tablet, that's a PC.

Yes, an RSS feed please. I liked what I've seen so far, and would like to follow...

Linkbait.

Really ? A Vista Moment? Microsoft puts ZERO innovation into it's products. They are boring and unimaginative. Stagnated metaphors and stale esthetics. Lion, on the other hand, is a natural progress for OS X, and form me, an amazing one.

It defiantly boosts my productivity. Not that Snow Leopard was bad, but I upgraded all of our computers while I was still beta testing Lion. It is simply a very useful upgrade,

That's the funniest thing I've heard all day. It's like FOX News, only tech fud.

It's even funnier with the OP's other post in context: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2933277

Well, is he really using G+ himself or is his stream empty because he never posts anything?

Anyways, I'm a tech guy, but also into photography (http://plus.google.com/104936988539783595605), and I must say G+ keeps me plenty busy, more then I've ever been on Facebook, where I sometimes cross post to, roughly, the same audience (non of my family members though are on G+ just yet). Actually, I like G+ for being useful, easy to use, and I give Google credit for listening and quickly adapting and evolving.

Is there a kernel extension involved ? What about blocking process e.g. from the terminal etc.

Yes, there is a kext.

Currently, it doesn't block non-app-bundle processes. The main reason for the app's existence is to block nosy apps that discreetly contact their home servers. I can't think of many (or any) terminal apps that do the same thing.

Why does it require/involves kext? I'm genuinely curious, since I thought OS X comes with powerful ipfw. Is it some stripped down version?

The main reason is to reduce the amount of dependencies to zero. I didn't want to enter the nightmare vortex of several applications managing a single firewall implementation.

Also, as I've lately been an embedded software guy, I saw no harm or fear in a little kernel code.

Is it possible to use ipfw / pf to control outbound traffic based on the process that is initiating the connection? I skimmed the man pages but didn't see anything that looked promising.

In addition to ipfw, Lion includes pf (off by default though, you need to modify a launchd plist to enable it).

Aren't kexts the main reason for upgrade issues between OSX versions?

Perhaps, but I'd say that it varies a lot. The kext here is more compatible with old versions than the UI.